Why is funding rate for some RWA tokens are 0?

[ObeyKnock]

You posted that the RWA coins have funding rate, that they are never free. But funding rate is not a fee that all traders are charged. There are some traders that earn the funding rate that are deducted from other traders. This could be off-topic, but you might not know, that is the reason I posted this.
No perpetual future pairs that has no funding rate.

Yes, and this needs stressing. Funding is not a charge by the exchange, it is a charge from longs to shorts (or vice versa) based on price vs. index. If it says "zero", it simply means that both the sides are level and not the mechanism is not working. RWA has to have it, every perp does by design.

[nelson4lov]

You're looking at funding rate when the market was stable, when the price of future market the same as spot, funding rate become zero + baseline rate. Funding rate isn't fixed, it changes and volatile.

I tried to look at past data of weighted funding rate for several RWAs including SPCX through coinglass, https://www.coinglass.com/currencies/SPCX almost all of them have funding rate. They were never free, but they often have zero percent funding rate when market is calm.

Yes, I just confirmed that:



Even though they still have funding rates (positive or negative) from time to time, I think it is much better for someone that wants to swing trade it compared to crypto tokens that have either positive or negative funding rates at all times.

But I don't pay attention to them much because when I traded those tokens, they still incur commissions

[FinneysTrueVision]

There are currently some Hyperliquid pairs that don’t have funding rates. When I looked into what the reason might be, I saw those markets are in growth mode, which means trading fees are discounted by 80%. Forex pairs are usually quite stable and with almost no fees it is easier to keep prices aligned to their spot value because of tighter spreads and faster, more frequent arbitraging.