[OFFICIAL]Bitfinex.com first Bitcoin P2P lending platform for leverage trading

[dscotese]

I have a strange error.

I sold on margin some 10 LTC on LTCBTC pair.
Then I sold 10 more.

But I am holding a long position on 20 on LTCBTC pair.

WTF?!?!

Did the buttons malfunction or something?
Is this error related to the one where you click sell, while "Market" is selected and your order gets placed as LIMIT instead?

Actually, I checked the history and it says "LTCBTC    -10.0    0.007852"
Is that a sell order? then why am I holding a long position?

I checked the last 12 days of offer history and yep... only negative numbers in LTCBTC, yet, I hold a positive position.

You little rascals!

The math says that you must have had 40 LTC to start with.  But I wouldn't doubt that the problem is with the display and that you started at zero and now have a short position.  They recently fixed a problem I mentioned with "available balance", so there might be some residual display errors.  Hopefully they aren't math errors!

[1715138147]

1715138147

[1715138147]

1715138147

[1715138147]

1715138147

[1715138147]

1715138147

[Bagpipe]

Is it better to do Margin trading in fiat or btc? You can do both right?

If you hold 1 BTC, you can sell that one and another one, so you gain the difference of 1 BTC movement on the way down.
If you hold 1 BTC worth of USD, you can sell 3 BTC, so you gain 3x BTC movement on the way down.

Do not ask me why it is done this way on bitfinex. But you see how holding BTC in bear markets is a bad idea.

[Bagpipe]

I have a strange error.

I sold on margin some 10 LTC on LTCBTC pair.
Then I sold 10 more.

But I am holding a long position on 20 on LTCBTC pair.

WTF?!?!

Did the buttons malfunction or something?
Is this error related to the one where you click sell, while "Market" is selected and your order gets placed as LIMIT instead?

Actually, I checked the history and it says "LTCBTC    -10.0    0.007852"
Is that a sell order? then why am I holding a long position?

I checked the last 12 days of offer history and yep... only negative numbers in LTCBTC, yet, I hold a positive position.

You little rascals!

The math says that you must have had 40 LTC to start with.  But I wouldn't doubt that the problem is with the display and that you started at zero and now have a short position.  They recently fixed a problem I mentioned with "available balance", so there might be some residual display errors.  Hopefully they aren't math errors!

Nope. I had 0 LTCUSD and saw it will be going down, so I went short. and I ended up with a long position, even if my history says -10 LTCBTC (and another -10 in smaller fractions). When I saw it yesterday when I sold, I just thought it was only a display thing. But today I sold 1 LTCBTC more and ended up with 19 LTCBTC.

So there... it explains a LOT about all the complaints people have been having about them.

[Bagpipe]

.......

Is this error related to the one where you click sell, while "Market" is selected and your order gets placed as LIMIT instead?

.........

How often does this error happen? How do you place a market order, is the only way to click sell, while "Market" is selected?

Almost anytime you return to the tab with bitfinex and click buy/sell when the "MARKET" was selected previously. Also: market orders use to throw up random message of "selling under/over ticker price, you you really want to do this?!" That one happens so often it makes my ulcers laugh at me!

[Creaxy]

Hi

maybe stupid question, but I have entered BTC swap, offering BTC for 5 days. Can I somehow cancel this transaction?
on other exchanges it was possible

thanks

[Sukrim]

Hi

maybe stupid question, but I have entered BTC swap, offering BTC for 5 days. Can I somehow cancel this transaction?
on other exchanges it was possible

thanks

As long as the offer was not taken, you can cancel it. If it is already taken, it will be used up to the 5 days you offered, as intended.

[adaseb]

How does the maintenance margin work exactly? Its at 15%

If you use maximum leverage, your initial margin is 30% - out of your total position size, you pay for 30% yourself and take out swap to pay for the other 70%. The amount you owe to the swap provider remains fixed, so as the price goes against you and the total value of your position shrinks, the percentage of it that's marked as "owed" increases, and the amount that you own "yourself" shrinks. If that part shrank to 0% you'd have a position worth exactly what you owe and would absolutely have to be liquidated immediately to avoid loss. For safety, the margin call comes when 'your' portion is 15%

So if you started out with the price at $200, with $100/0.5BTC of your own, you'd be able to borrow and sell another 1.166BTC to get $233, bringing you up to a total of $333 of which you provided $100 (30%). You'll continue to owe your swap provider 1.166BTC, so your position remains open until the position as a whole is worth 1.372BTC - at that point you have 1.166 owed and 1.372-1.166 = ~0.2BTC owned, (and 0.2 is 15% of 1.372, or at least it is when you use the exact numbers rather than these rounded versions)

Since you have $333, the specific price point where that's worth 1.372BTC is $242/BTC, but the maximum distance from your starting price will vary - it'll be the same percentage difference each time, so long as you always use the same degree of leverage, and it'll be more "forgiving" (further away) if you use less leverage, since you then start out owning a larger percentage of your position, so it takes longer to shrink down to 15%

tl;dr: Your margin call comes when (Position value - Swap debt)/Position value ≤ 15%

Or to rearrange that a bit, when Position value = Swap debt/0.85 (since your swap debt is a fixed quantity you can calculate that one ahead of time and work out what pricepoint implies that position value)

Yes thanks for the explanation. I was used to margin and initial margin when it came to stocks but here its confusing because it BTC. Thanks for the formula it makes sense.

So if I start out with a price of $200. with $100/0.5BTC of my own and I only sell another 0.5BTC in swap. So my total sell order is 1.0BTC

I currently have 0.5BTC and I borrow another 0.5BTC. So my swap dept is =0.5BTC

Position Value = 0.5/0.85 = 0.588 BTC

So with a starting price of $200, the margin call would occur at $200 / 0.588 = $340 ?

[noggin-scratcher]

Is it better to do Margin trading in fiat or btc? You can do both right?

If you hold 1 BTC, you can sell that one and another one, so you gain the difference of 1 BTC movement on the way down.
If you hold 1 BTC worth of USD, you can sell 3 BTC, so you gain 3x BTC movement on the way down.

Do not ask me why it is done this way on bitfinex. But you see how holding BTC in bear markets is a bad idea.

I thought they changed that a while ago, so that if you go short against a deposit of BTC or long against a deposit of USD you "borrow" (without any fees) from your own funds before you take any swap. I remember an announcement saying that they'd realised that the way it was set up you effectively got more leverage by holding your deposit in the same currency as you were borrowing, and that the change had evened it out so that it didn't matter which one you started out holding.

[Bagpipe]

Is it better to do Margin trading in fiat or btc? You can do both right?

If you hold 1 BTC, you can sell that one and another one, so you gain the difference of 1 BTC movement on the way down.
If you hold 1 BTC worth of USD, you can sell 3 BTC, so you gain 3x BTC movement on the way down.

Do not ask me why it is done this way on bitfinex. But you see how holding BTC in bear markets is a bad idea.

I thought they changed that a while ago, so that if you go short against a deposit of BTC or long against a deposit of USD you "borrow" (without any fees) from your own funds before you take any swap. I remember an announcement saying that they'd realised that the way it was set up you effectively got more leverage by holding your deposit in the same currency as you were borrowing, and that the change had evened it out so that it didn't matter which one you started out holding.

This is the status after the change, or at least it worked that way a month ago? Maybe they corrected the errors, but I still have a long ltcbtc position after selling that pair, even if history shows a sell. Their platform is criminally insane...

[slacknation]

Is it better to do Margin trading in fiat or btc? You can do both right?

If you hold 1 BTC, you can sell that one and another one, so you gain the difference of 1 BTC movement on the way down.
If you hold 1 BTC worth of USD, you can sell 3 BTC, so you gain 3x BTC movement on the way down.

Do not ask me why it is done this way on bitfinex. But you see how holding BTC in bear markets is a bad idea.

I thought they changed that a while ago, so that if you go short against a deposit of BTC or long against a deposit of USD you "borrow" (without any fees) from your own funds before you take any swap. I remember an announcement saying that they'd realised that the way it was set up you effectively got more leverage by holding your deposit in the same currency as you were borrowing, and that the change had evened it out so that it didn't matter which one you started out holding.

This is the status after the change, or at least it worked that way a month ago? Maybe they corrected the errors, but I still have a long ltcbtc position after selling that pair, even if history shows a sell. Their platform is criminally insane...

if you could provide the relevant order history, we can figure out why you have a positive balance when you said you have sold the pair. I don't think there are these type of errors in the platform as you have claimed

[camolist]

unless I am missing an option somewhere this is feature request:

so i put a "Receive swap" order in at say 1000 USD at "Flash Return Rate" for 30 days

i use it in a trade where i bought btc at 240 and sold at 245

I would prefer to have an option that the swap goes back into "unused swaps" instead of just closing it outright

i want to be able to guarantee 30 day rates for my loaned swaps but these 30 day loans are usually hard to obtain so having them close after every trade is a pain when i have to wait for someone new to accept my receive swap bid

[qxzn]

I thought they changed that a while ago, so that if you go short against a deposit of BTC or long against a deposit of USD you "borrow" (without any fees) from your own funds before you take any swap. I remember an announcement saying that they'd realised that the way it was set up you effectively got more leverage by holding your deposit in the same currency as you were borrowing, and that the change had evened it out so that it didn't matter which one you started out holding.

Is this and other swap behavior subtlety documented somewhere?

[Bagpipe]

if you could provide the relevant order history, we can figure out why you have a positive balance when you said you have sold the pair. I don't think there are these type of errors in the platform as you have claimed

Why should it be or any surprise when other people complain about magically disappearing orders and other things... I heard quite a lot of various complaints, so this one is a drop in the ocean that forces me to be deeply distrustful of that site. Also, the story is much the same os the one of the Gox. "We are upgrading."

[Bagpipe]

Is this and other swap behavior subtlety documented somewhere?

I asked about their order filling policy and got none, I HAD PERSONALLY TO DEVISE that STOP orders get filled first, then your market order gets filled last. (cutting in the queue) I received no link or answer on the order matching, only a vague response of "an upgrade".

[noggin-scratcher]

I thought they changed that a while ago, so that if you go short against a deposit of BTC or long against a deposit of USD you "borrow" (without any fees) from your own funds before you take any swap. I remember an announcement saying that they'd realised that the way it was set up you effectively got more leverage by holding your deposit in the same currency as you were borrowing, and that the change had evened it out so that it didn't matter which one you started out holding.

Is this and other swap behavior subtlety documented somewhere?

https://www.bitfinex.com/pages/announcements -- Ctrl+F for "Leverage", should find it.

It's not exactly "documentation", but it is at least on record... in that one not-easily-found place.

[TheXpert]

I have negative balance without any margin trading.
Has anyone seen something like this?

[Sukrim]

It would have been nice to announce beforehand (or at least somewhere after the fact/at all) that you changed the date format in the CSV files...

Ah well, it was only a minor change in the end (and is now anyways much better to parse) - still a heads-up would have been nice.

[TheXpert]

How is that possible?
Anyone to explain?

[unclescrooge]

How is that possible?
Anyone to explain?

Hello TheXpert,

I will write you a PM for more details on whats next, but for everyone here is what happened. We are currently testing a new trading engine on DRKUSD and DRKBTC pairs only. Initially this engine used a feedback loop to confirm new balances after exchange execution. Problem was when you inserted the same type of orders for the same account in between this loop, like your bot was doing by sending the same marketable orders over and over, the exchange balance checking would be screwed and allow for a negative balance before catching up with your actual balance.
This wasn't such a serious problem anyway as there was a circuit breaker in place that would limit any possible negative loss to a maximum of 1,000 usd.

Anyways this has now been corrected (this was the purpose of testing on very small volume pairs like DRK). Your bot has been very useful in this regard.

Have a good day
Raphael
Bitfinex team

[dscotese]

How is that possible?
Anyone to explain?

Hello TheXpert,

I will write you a PM for more details on whats next, but for everyone here is what happened. We are currently testing a new trading engine on DRKUSD and DRKBTC pairs only. Initially this engine used a feedback loop to confirm new balances after exchange execution. Problem was when you inserted the same type of orders for the same account in between this loop, like your bot was doing by sending the same marketable orders over and over, the exchange balance checking would be screwed and allow for a negative balance before catching up with your actual balance.
This wasn't such a serious problem anyway as there was a circuit breaker in place that would limit any possible negative loss to a maximum of 1,000 usd.

Anyways this has now been corrected (this was the purpose of testing on very small volume pairs like DRK). Your bot has been very useful in this regard.

Have a good day
Raphael
Bitfinex team

Compensate him.  Each member of the community will decide whether or not the amount of your compensation is worth the risk of allowing a negative balance.  Many of us figure that once we run out of the money a bot can spend, we'll just leave it until we get around to adding more.  It looks like you allowed it to continue losing when reason suggests you should have stopped it.

I suspect that you already decided to eat his losses, so why not publish that fact?  It would encourage us to test your exchange :-)