Margin maker/taker fees: do they apply on collateral or total?

[JeanThon]

Hi,

I can't figure out how margin maker/taker fees work.

Say I have 100$ on my margin account and want to trade Bitcoins. I use all my available dollars (100$) to open a long position, with leverage 1:3, with a market order. According to the leverage 1:3, I now have an open position of 300$. This amount can be divided in two parts, 100$ comes from my money, the collateral, and 200$ comes from a loan from the broker.

Now, suppose the taker fee is 0.2%. But 0.2% of what?? On my 100$, or on the total 300$ that include the loan?

Many thanks.

[DaMut]

Your case is 0,2% from your capital($100) or from your total($300) ?
of course you need to pay the Taker fees from your open position,
why ? because for every trade that you make you're using margin,which mean your profit and lose increased.
you need to pay 0,2% from your total open position because you will use it to take the profit.
loan have their own interest and Taker fees only work if you make any transaction in the market.

my own experience it should be like this for example :
i am using 3x leverage while i have $100,which mean my total capital with the loan would be $300.
everyday i need to pay the fees for the loan around 0,2%.

afterward i made the trade,and need to pay the Fees based on trade :
every trade that i made i need to pay the fees around 0,2%.
i traded it wholly($300),which mean i need to pay the fees around 0,2% from my $300 which is around $0.6(approximately)

[TheQuin]

It's the same answer that the fee is calculated on the full $300, but I'll just phrase it a little differently. The fee is for executing the trade irrespective of whether it is using margin or not. So if you trade $300 you pay fees on trading $300. If you are using margin then you have the additional cost of funding that added on as well.

[JeanThon]

@DaMut @TheQuin

Ok that's clear thank you.

So if I have have 300$ available and I want to buy Bitcoins for 300$. I would rather not use leverage and put all my 300$, rather than putting only 100$ with margin at leverage 1:3. Right? Because as long as taker/maker fees are concerned, both actions are equivalent, but with leverage, I would also pay interest fees. So leverage ends up being more expensive.

As far as I understand, the only two situations where margin makes sense, is 1) I want more buying power than what I have available, 2) I predict a Bitcoin drop and would like to sell but I have no Bitcoins.

[TheQuin]

So if I have have 300$ available and I want to buy Bitcoins for 300$. I would rather not use leverage and put all my 300$, rather than putting only 100$ with margin at leverage 1:3. Right? Because as long as taker/maker fees are concerned, both actions are equivalent, but with leverage, I would also pay interest fees. So leverage ends up being more expensive.

Absolutely. There is no reason to borrow something you already have.

As far as I understand, the only two situations where leverage makes sense, is 1) I want more buying power than what I have available, 2) I predict a Bitcoin drop and would like to sell but I have no Bitcoins.

That's right, maybe add 3) You want to keep some buying power in hand if you see another trade, like buying some ETH or LTC, and wouldn't want to have to exit the BTC long trade to do it.

[JeanThon]

All clear. Many thanks