When people talk about liquidity provision in DeFi, it’s often framed in abstract terms: “earning fees,” “providing depth,” or “supporting the market.”When people talk about liquidity provision in DeFi, it’s often framed in abstract terms: “earning fees,” “providing depth,” or “supporting the market.”

What LPs Are Actually Getting Paid For on Stabull

2026/03/31 06:35
5 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

By Jamie McCormick, Co-CMO, Stabull Labs

The 12th article in the 15 part “Deconstructing DeFi” Series.

Over the past few weeks, the Stabull team has been reviewing non-UI trading activity flowing through our pools across all three chains we support — Base, Ethereum, and Polygon. These behaviours are equally easy to trace on each network, and we see the same or very similar execution patterns repeating across different pools, assets, and chains.

For this series, many of the concrete examples focus on Base not because it is unique, but because the acceleration in transaction volume on Base going into the New Year was what initially triggered the investigation. Once we began tracing those flows, it quickly became clear that the same dynamics are present across the rest of the protocol as well.

What we found across all three networks is that liquidity providers are not just being paid for “being there.”

They are being paid for reliability inside execution paths.

Understanding that distinction is key to understanding why non-UI volume matters, and why it often represents higher-quality yield than traditional retail-driven trading.

Liquidity as infrastructure, not inventory

In many AMMs, liquidity behaves like inventory sitting on a shelf. It waits for someone to come along and trade against it.

On Stabull, liquidity increasingly behaves like infrastructure.

It is:

  • embedded into automated execution flows 
  • selected by solvers and routing engines 
  • relied upon as a stable conversion step 

This means LPs are not just facilitating discretionary swaps. They are enabling systems to function.

When a bot, aggregator, or solver routes through a Stabull pool, it is doing so because it expects:

  • predictable pricing 
  • low failure risk 
  • consistency across market conditions 

That expectation is what LPs are compensated for.

Why non-UI volume is often better volume

Retail UI swaps tend to be:

  • sporadic 
  • sentiment-driven 
  • sensitive to incentives 
  • highly cyclical 

Non-UI volume looks very different.

It is:

  • repeatable 
  • programmatic 
  • strategy-driven 
  • indifferent to marketing or UX 

From an LP perspective, this matters because non-UI volume tends to:

  • occur more frequently 
  • arrive in smaller, repeatable trade sizes 
  • persist across market regimes 

That translates into steady fee accrual rather than bursts of activity followed by long quiet periods.

What LPs are being paid for, concretely

Based on the transactions we reviewed across Base, Ethereum, and Polygon, LPs are effectively being compensated for:

  • Execution certainty

    Trades can complete atomically without reverting. 
  • Price alignment

    Oracle-anchored pricing keeps pools aligned with off-chain reference prices. 
  • Low slippage at practical trade sizes

    Especially important for automated strategies. 
  • Composability

    Pools can be dropped into multi-leg execution paths without bespoke logic. 

Every time a transaction chooses a Stabull pool instead of an alternative venue, it is making a trade-off in favour of those properties.

Fees are the reward for providing them.

The “toll booth” model revisited

As described in the previous article, liquidity provision on Stabull resembles a toll booth.

LPs are not:

  • lending assets 
  • underwriting credit risk 
  • relying on borrower repayment 

They are:

  • enabling transactions to pass through 
  • charging a small, predictable toll each time 

Importantly, this toll is paid regardless of whether the end user knows Stabull exists. LPs earn fees whenever liquidity is used, not when attention is captured.

Why fee quality matters more than fee size

A single large trade can generate more fees than dozens of small ones — but it can also be unpredictable.

What we observed instead was:

  • many small to medium trades 
  • routed repeatedly through the same pools 
  • as part of ongoing strategies 

This kind of volume is less exciting to look at on a per-transaction basis, but far more valuable over time.

It compounds.

How this fits into the broader LP picture

For LPs on Stabull, yield typically comes from two sources:

  1. Swap fees

    Generated by real transaction flow and paid in liquid output currencies. 
  2. STABUL incentives

    Distributed via the Liquidity Mining Program through Merkl to support early growth and attract liquidity. 

The key distinction is that swap fees reflect actual usage. Incentives help accelerate adoption, but usage is what sustains yield long-term.

As non-UI volume grows, the balance shifts naturally toward organic fees.

Why this is still early

The transactions reviewed represent a snapshot, not an endpoint.

Many execution systems:

  • gradually test liquidity 
  • start with small trade sizes 
  • increase routing only after reliability is proven 

That means today’s non-UI volume often precedes larger, more consistent flows later.

From an LP perspective, this is often the most attractive phase: when utilisation is rising, but liquidity depth has not yet caught up.

What LPs should take away

The important takeaway is not just that LPs are earning fees.

It’s why they are earning them.

Stabull LPs are being paid for:

  • providing stable execution infrastructure 
  • enabling automated systems to function 
  • sitting quietly inside the plumbing of DeFi 

As Stabull becomes more embedded in execution paths across multiple chains, LPs benefit not from hype, but from repetition.

Looking ahead

In the next article, we’ll zoom out again and look at who is actually driving this non-UI activity — breaking down the roles of bots, solvers, and aggregators, and how each one interacts with Stabull in different ways.

About the Author

Jamie McCormick is Co-Chief Marketing Officer at Stabull Finance, where he has been working for over two years on positioning the protocol within the evolving DeFi ecosystem.

He is also the founder of Bitcoin Marketing Team, established in 2014 and recognised as Europe’s oldest specialist crypto marketing agency. Over the past decade, the agency has worked with a wide range of projects across the digital asset and Web3 landscape.

Jamie first became involved in crypto in 2013 and has a long-standing interest in Bitcoin and Ethereum. Over the last two years, his focus has increasingly shifted toward understanding the mechanics of decentralised finance, particularly how on-chain infrastructure is used in practice rather than in theory.

Market Opportunity
ConstitutionDAO Logo
ConstitutionDAO Price(PEOPLE)
$0.006213
$0.006213$0.006213
-2.44%
USD
ConstitutionDAO (PEOPLE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Rachel Maddow spots terrifying trend for GOP as Trump rocked by 'Red State spring'

Rachel Maddow spots terrifying trend for GOP as Trump rocked by 'Red State spring'

MS NOW's Rachel Maddow identified a fascinating trend in this month's No Kings protests against President Donald Trump — and one that should leave the Republican
Share
Rawstory2026/03/31 09:52
China’s NBS Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing PMIs return to expansion in March

China’s NBS Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing PMIs return to expansion in March

The post China’s NBS Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing PMIs return to expansion in March appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. China’s Manufacturing Purchasing
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/03/31 10:11
The Fed Just Changed Everything For Crypto, Says Top Trader

The Fed Just Changed Everything For Crypto, Says Top Trader

The Federal Reserve’s first rate cut of 2025 has landed—25 basis points on September 17—and, in Trader Mayne’s telling, that removes the last macro “X-factor” hanging over the crypto market. In a video analysis posted the same day, the veteran price-action trader argued that with the policy move now in the rear-view mirror, crypto can “just focus on the charts,” sketching a roadmap in which Bitcoin posts one more leg higher into new all-time highs before a pullback ushers in a classic altseason blow-off. “We had FOMC today and the rates got cut finally… It’s 25 basis points,” he said. “Now the market’s going to digest it.” Where Is Bitcoin Price Going Next? The policy backdrop he’s reacting to is straightforward: the FOMC lowered the fed funds target range by a quarter point to 4.00%–4.25% on Sept. 17, with Chair Jerome Powell describing the move as a risk-management response to weakening labor dynamics and leaving the door open to additional easing this year. The decision drew an 11–1 vote, with newly appointed Governor Stephen Miran dissenting in favor of a larger, 50 bps cut—an unusually hawkish dissent in a dovish direction—while the Board’s implementation note reset key administered rates effective Sept. 18. Markets read the statement and projections as signaling scope for further cuts into year-end. Related Reading: Crucial Ten Days Ahead For Crypto: Will They Ignite Mega Altcoin Season? From here, Mayne’s framework is unapologetically technical. He characterizes Bitcoin’s most recent upswing as corrective relative to the prior impulse and expects price to “push above the mid-range” toward a range high around $120,000–$121,000, where he will watch for rejection at a higher-time-frame confluence defined by a weekly swing-failure pattern (SFP) and an H12 breaker. If momentum stalls there, he plans to short into a washout to clear out built-up leverage—“HYPE made another all-time high today. PUMP has tripled in the last two weeks… there’s some leverage in the system”—and then buy the dip for what he calls the last parabolic leg of the cycle. “Any sort of dip on BTC, I want to be looking for a long,” he said, adding that a shallow retest in the $110,000–$111,000 area or a deeper sweep of recent lows would both be acceptable springboards if the rebound is decisive. If, instead, price grinds through the $120,000 s with no signs of exhaustion, Mayne says he has “no problem” flipping to breakout longs above the all-time high once strength is confirmed intraday—an approach that mirrors his playbook from prior expansions (“Once this thing broke out aggressively… you’re looking for longs”). He emphasizes sequence over prediction: the short he’s eyeing is counter-trend—“a pullback in an uptrend”—and the prime objective remains to position for the next impulsive advance. When Will The Crypto Market Top? Timing-wise, he situates the prospective cycle top in Q4 2025 or Q1 2026, describing a pattern in which Bitcoin’s final vertical leg into the $150,000 to $180,000 region is followed by distribution while altcoins reprice higher—the archetypal altseason. “This parabolic leg I think would be the last leg of the bull run,” he said, before outlining notional alt targets consistent with a late-cycle melt-up: Ethereum $5,000–$7,000, Solana $300–$500, Dogecoin $0.50–$0.70. The mechanics, as he narrates them: a last BTC push, a corrective wash, a V-shaped reclaim of the 2024 ATH “very quickly,” then Q4 “mania” with breadth shifting to large-cap alts as Bitcoin distributes. Related Reading: December 2024 Crypto Crash Signal Returns As Altcoins Go Wild The technical scaffolding behind that view leans on concepts familiar to discretionary price-action traders. Weekly SFPs (failed breaks of prior extremes) set the trap line at range edges; H12 breakers and order blocks frame high-probability reaction zones; and fair-value gaps guide where liquidity vacuums might fill during a corrective flush. On structure, he insists the weekly trend remains up, so any short is tactical and any deeper dip must resolve in a swift V-bottom and reclaim of the former highs to keep the cyclical script intact. His invalidation is equally clear: “If we spend any significant time back below [the 2024 all-time high], it’s really bad… I’m probably going to reassess my thoughts.” Macro, in Mayne’s view, now recedes to the background. The rate cut may have helped pull forward some September strength—“you could argue… the up move we’ve seen on Bitcoin… is in anticipation of this rate cut”—but with the decision made and Powell hinting there “could be another one… there could be two,” his emphasis is squarely on execution: wait for price to trade into the $120,000s and signal weakness for the clean counter-trend short; or, absent weakness, wait for the breakout continuation and ride it. Either way, he’s explicit about the north star for the coming weeks: “Focus on Bitcoin… Any sort of dip on BTC, I want to be looking for a long… Then altseason.” At press time, BTC traded at $117,176. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 20:00