Source: variant.fund

Compiled by: Zhou, ChainCatcher

If the core value of cryptocurrency lies in providing new financial rails, then the lack of popularity of on-chain options is perplexing.

In the U.S. stock market alone, the daily trading volume of individual stock options is about $450 billion, accounting for approximately 0.7% of the total market capitalization of the $68 trillion U.S. stock market. In contrast, the daily trading volume of cryptocurrency options is about $2 billion, only 0.06% of the approximately $3 trillion market capitalization of cryptocurrencies (which is ten times lower than stocks). Although decentralized exchanges (DEXs) currently account for over 20% of cryptocurrency spot trading volume, almost all options trading still occurs through centralized exchanges (CEXs) like Deribit.

The difference between the traditional options market and the on-chain options market stems from early designs that were constrained by the original infrastructure, failing to meet two essential elements of a healthy market: protecting liquidity providers from adverse order flow and attracting quality order flow.

Today, the infrastructure needed to address the former has already been established—liquidity providers can finally avoid being eaten away by arbitrageurs. The remaining challenge, and the focus of this article, is the latter: how to formulate an effective go-to-market strategy (GTM) to attract quality order flow. This article argues that on-chain options protocols can thrive by targeting two distinct sources of quality order flow: hedgers and retail investors.

Trials and Tribulations of On-Chain Options

Similar to the spot market, the first on-chain options protocol borrowed the dominant market design from traditional finance—order books.

In the early days of Ethereum, trading activity was sparse, and gas fees were relatively low. Therefore, an order book seemed like a reasonable mechanism for options trading. The earliest options order book can be traced back to EtherOpt in March 2016 (the first popular spot order book on Ethereum, EtherDelta, launched a few months later). However, in reality, on-chain market making is very difficult; gas fees and network latency make it challenging for market makers to provide accurate quotes and avoid losing trades.

To address these issues, the next generation of options protocols adopted automated market makers (AMMs). AMMs no longer rely on individuals for market trading but instead derive prices from the internal token balances of liquidity pools or external price oracles. In the former case, when traders buy or sell tokens in the liquidity pool (changing the pool's internal balance), the price updates; liquidity providers themselves do not set the price. In the latter case, prices are updated periodically when new oracle prices are published on-chain. From 2019 to 2021, protocols like Opyn, Hegic, Dopex, and Ribbon adopted this approach.

Unfortunately, AMM-based protocols did not significantly improve the popularity of on-chain options. The reason AMMs can save gas fees (i.e., prices are set by traders or lagging oracles rather than liquidity providers) is precisely because their characteristics make it easy for liquidity providers to suffer losses from arbitrageurs (i.e., adverse selection).

However, what truly hinders the popularity of options trading may be that all early versions of options protocols (including those based on order books and automated market makers) require that short positions must be fully collateralized. In other words, sold call options must be hedged, and sold put options must have cash backing, which makes these protocols capital inefficient and deprives retail investors of a crucial source of leverage. Without this leverage, when the incentive mechanism disappears, retail demand diminishes as well.

Sustainable Options Exchanges: Attracting Quality Order Flow and Avoiding Adverse Order Flow

Let’s start with the basics. A healthy market requires two things:

• The ability for liquidity providers to avoid "adverse order flow" (i.e., to avoid unnecessary losses). Adverse order flow refers to arbitrageurs earning nearly risk-free profits at the expense of liquidity providers.
• A strong source of demand to provide "quality order flow" (i.e., profitable trades). Quality order flow refers to trades from price-insensitive traders who earn profits for liquidity providers after paying the spread.

A review of the history of on-chain options protocols reveals that their past failures stemmed from the failure to meet both of these conditions:

• The technical infrastructure limitations of early options protocols prevented liquidity providers from avoiding adverse order flow. The traditional method for liquidity providers to avoid adverse order flow is to update quotes for free and at high frequency on the order book, but the delays and costs of order book protocols in 2016 made on-chain quote updates impossible. Transitioning to automated market makers (AMMs) also failed to solve this problem, as their pricing mechanisms were relatively slow, putting liquidity providers at a disadvantage in competition with arbitrageurs.
• The requirement for full collateralization eliminated the options functionality that retail investors valued (leverage), which is a key source of quality order flow. Without other on-chain options usage scenarios, quality order flow becomes a moot point.

Therefore, if we want to build on-chain options protocols by 2025, we must ensure that both of these challenges are addressed.

In recent years, various changes indicate that we can now build infrastructure that allows liquidity providers to avoid adverse order flow. The rise of specific application (or industry) infrastructure has significantly improved the market design for liquidity providers across various financial applications. The most important of these include: speed bumps for delayed execution orders; priority for order publication; cancellation of orders and price oracle updates; extremely low gas fees; and anti-censorship mechanisms in high-frequency trading.

With scalable innovation, we can now also build applications that meet the demands of good order flow. For example, improvements in consensus mechanisms and zero-knowledge proofs have made the cost of block space low enough to implement complex margin engines on-chain without requiring full collateralization.

Addressing the issue of adverse order flow is primarily a technical problem, and in many ways, it is a "relatively easy" problem. Indeed, building this infrastructure is technically complex, but that is not the real challenge. Even if the new infrastructure can support protocols in attracting good spillover flow, it does not mean that good order flow will appear out of thin air. On the contrary, the core question of this article, and its focus, is: assuming we now have infrastructure that supports good order flow, what kind of market promotion strategy (GTM) should projects adopt to attract this demand? If we can answer this question, we have a chance to build a sustainable on-chain options protocol.

Characteristics of Price-Insensitive Demand (Good Order Flow)

As mentioned above, good order flow refers to price-insensitive demand. Generally speaking, the price-insensitive demand for options is primarily composed of two core customer categories: (1) hedgers and (2) retail customers. These two types of customers have different goals and therefore use options differently.

Hedgers

Hedgers are those institutions or businesses that believe reducing risk is worth enough to pay an amount above the market value.

Options are attractive to hedgers because they allow them to precisely control downside risk by choosing the exact price level at which to stop losses (the strike price). This is different from futures, where the hedging method is either/or; futures protect your position in all cases but do not allow you to specify the price at which protection takes effect.

Currently, hedgers account for the vast majority of cryptocurrency options demand, which we expect primarily comes from miners, who are the first "on-chain institutions." This is evident from the dominance of Bitcoin and Ethereum options trading volumes, as well as the fact that mining/validation activities on these chains are more institutionalized than on others. Hedging is crucial for miners because their income is denominated in volatile crypto assets, while many of their expenses—such as salaries, hardware, and custody—are denominated in fiat currency.

Retail

Retail refers to individual speculators who aim for profit but are relatively inexperienced—they typically trade based on intuition, belief, or experience rather than models and algorithms. They generally prefer a simple and user-friendly trading experience, and their demand drivers are quick wealth accumulation rather than rational consideration of risk and return.

As mentioned above, retail investors have historically favored options due to their leverage. The explosive growth of zero-day options (0DTE) in retail trading underscores this—0DTE is widely seen as a speculative leveraged trading tool. By May 2025, 0DTE accounted for over 61% of the trading volume in S&P 500 index options, with most of the volume coming from retail users (especially on the Robinhood platform).

Although options are popular in trading finance, retail acceptance of cryptocurrency options is effectively zero. This is because, for retail investors, there is a better cryptocurrency tool available for leveraged long and short trading, which is currently not available in trading finance: perpetual contracts (perps).

As we see in hedging trades, the greatest advantage of options lies in their granularity. Options traders can consider going long/short, time, and strike price, making options more flexible than spot, perpetual contracts, or futures trading.

While more combinations can bring higher granularity, which is what hedgers desire, it also requires making more decisions, which can often overwhelm retail investors. In fact, the success of 0DTE options in retail trading can largely be attributed to the fact that 0DTE options improve the user experience of options by eliminating (or greatly simplifying) the time dimension ("zero days"), thus providing a simple and easy-to-use leveraged long or short tool.

Options are not viewed as leveraged tools in the cryptocurrency space because perpetual contracts (perps) have become very popular and are simpler than 0DTE options, making leveraged long/short operations easier. Perps eliminate the time and strike price factors, allowing users to continuously engage in leveraged long/short trading. In other words, perps achieve the same goal (providing leverage to retail) with a simpler user experience than options. Therefore, the added value of options is significantly diminished.

However, there is still hope for options and cryptocurrency retail. Beyond leveraging for simple long/short operations, retail investors also crave interesting and novel trading experiences. The granular characteristics of options mean they can provide entirely new trading experiences. One particularly powerful feature is allowing participants to trade directly on volatility itself. For example, the Bitcoin Volatility Index (BVOL) offered by FTX (now closed). BVOL tokenizes implied volatility, allowing traders to directly bet on the magnitude of Bitcoin price fluctuations (regardless of direction) without managing complex options positions. It packages trades that would typically require straddles or strangles into a tradable token, enabling retail users to easily and conveniently speculate on volatility.

Go-To-Market Strategies Targeting Price-Insensitive Demand (Good Order Flow)

Now that we have identified the characteristics of price-insensitive demand, let’s describe the GTM strategies that protocols can use to attract good order flow to on-chain options protocols based on each characteristic.

Hedgers GTM: Meeting Miners Where They Are

We believe that the best market promotion strategy to capture hedging capital flows is to target hedgers, such as miners currently trading on centralized exchanges, and provide a product that allows them to own the protocol through tokens while minimizing changes to their existing custody setups.

This strategy is similar to Babylon's user acquisition approach. When Babylon launched, there were already a large number of off-chain Bitcoin hedge funds, and miners (some of the largest Bitcoin holders) likely had the ability to leverage these funds to provide liquidity. Babylon primarily built trust through custodial institutions and staking providers (especially in Asia) and catered to their existing needs; it did not require them to try using new wallets or key management systems, which often necessitate additional trust assumptions. The choice of miners to adopt Babylon indicates that they value the autonomy to choose their custodial solutions (whether self-custody or selecting other custodians), gain ownership through token incentives, or both. Otherwise, Babylon's growth would be difficult to explain.

Now is an excellent time to leverage this global trading platform (GTM). Coinbase recently acquired Deribit, a leading centralized exchange in the options trading space, which poses a risk for foreign miners who may be reluctant to store large amounts of funds with U.S.-controlled entities. Additionally, the improved feasibility of BitVM and the overall quality enhancement of Bitcoin bridges are providing the necessary custodial assurances to build an attractive on-chain alternative.

Retail Marketing: Offering a New Trading Experience

Rather than trying to compete with the tactics commonly used by criminals, we believe the best way to attract retailers is to offer them novel products with a simplified user experience.

As mentioned earlier, one of the most powerful features of options is the ability to directly observe volatility itself without considering price movements. On-chain options protocols can build a treasury that allows retail users to engage in volatility trading through a simple user experience.

Previous options treasuries (such as those on Dopex and Ribbon) suffered losses easily due to inadequate pricing mechanisms that were prone to arbitrage. However, as we previously noted, with recent innovations in application-specific infrastructure, we now have clear reasons to believe that you can build an options treasury that is not plagued by these issues. Options chains or options aggregators can leverage these advantages to enhance the execution quality of long/short volatility options while promoting liquidity and order flow on the order book.

Conclusion

The conditions for the success of on-chain options are gradually coming together. The infrastructure is maturing enough to support more efficient capital utilization schemes, and on-chain institutions now have genuine reasons to hedge directly on-chain.

By building infrastructure that helps liquidity providers avoid adverse order flow and constructing on-chain options protocols around two price-insensitive user groups—hedgers seeking precise trades and retail investors seeking new trading experiences—it will ultimately be possible to establish a sustainable market. With these foundations, options can become a core component of the on-chain financial system in unprecedented ways.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。