由於破碎，技術設計差異，加密流動性繼續落後於傳統金融

該研究分析了關鍵的流動性指標，數量，出價差價，市場深度和滑倒，遍布集中和分散的交易場所

Crypto market liquidity is still lagging behind traditional finance due to fragmentation, technical design differences, and exposure to external shocks, according to a new report from S&P Global.

根據標準普爾Global的一份新報告，由於分裂，技術設計差異和外部衝擊暴露，加密市場流動性仍然落後於傳統金融。

The study, which analyzed key liquidity metrics—volume, bid-ask spreads, market depth, and slippagestyling across major crypto and stablecoin pairs—found that while crypto trading platforms are becoming more efficient, they remain fractured across hundreds of markets.

這項研究分析了關鍵的流動性指標 - 批量，出價，市場深度以及在主要的加密貨幣和穩定幣對之間的偏斜，雖然加密貨幣交易平台越來越有效，但它們仍然在數百個市場中脫穎而出。

The report showed that spot trading volumes on exchanges like Binance still fall well short of traditional venues like the NYSE, and fiat-based trading pairs consistently exhibit shallower order books compared to crypto-native pairs.

該報告顯示，與加密本地對相比，Binance等交易所的現貨交易量仍然遠遠沒有落在紐約證券交易所（NYSE）和基於菲亞特（FIAT）的交易對中。

CEX vs. DEX

CEX與Dex

Centralized exchanges (CEXs) mirror traditional stock markets in their reliance on order books and custodial accounts. They offer high speed and low spreads on popular stablecoin pairs, especially large-cap coins like Bitcoin.

集中式交流（CEXS）在依賴訂單書籍和託管帳戶的依賴中反映了傳統股票市場。他們在流行的Stablecoin對上提供高速和低價，尤其是像比特幣這樣的大型硬幣。

In contrast, decentralized exchanges (DEXs) allow users to maintain custody through automated market makers (AMMs), but introduce price slippage and impermanent loss, especially during volatile periods or large trades.

相比之下，分散交流（DEX）允許用戶通過自動做市商（AMM）維持監護權，但會引入價格滑倒和無常損失，尤其是在波動期或大型交易中。

Despite these challenges, some digital assets, particularly BTC, ETH, and USDT, display comparable or even narrower (smaller) bid-ask spreads than mid-cap equities like Broadcom.

儘管面臨這些挑戰，但與Broadcom這樣的中型股票比中股票相比，一些數字資產，尤其是BTC，ETH和USDT，顯示出可比甚至更狹窄（較小）的出價。

Overall, CEXs continue to dominate volume in the market and provide higher liquidity compared to their decentralized counterparts, which provide deeper access.

總體而言，與分散的同行相比，CEX繼續在市場上佔據主導地位，並提供更高的流動性，這提供了更深入的訪問。

The report also noted that the launch of Bitcoin and Ether ETFs in the US has increased trading activity and deepened liquidity on crypto exchanges, although ETF trading volumes remain smaller than their underlying assets.

該報告還指出，儘管ETF交易量仍然小於其基本資產，但在美國，比特幣和Ether ETF的推出增加了交易活動並加深了加密交易所的流動性。

Infrastructure constraints

基礎架構約束

S&P also highlighted how political instability and exchange hacks can significantly impact localized liquidity, a prevalent issue in the crypto industry.

標準普爾還強調了政治動盪和交流黑客如何顯著影響局部流動性，這是加密貨幣行業普遍的問題。

A political crisis in South Korea triggered a 30% drop in BTC-KRW pricing on Upbit and a substantial decline in trading volume, while a February breach at Bybit led to a sustained decrease in ETH trading volume. These rapid price changes and limited market depth underscore the fragility of fragmented order books.

韓國的一場政治危機引發了30％的BTC-KRW價格下降，交易量大幅下降，而2月份的違規行為導致ETH交易量的持續下降。這些快速的價格變化和有限的市場深度強調了零散的訂單書籍的脆弱性。

The report also highlighted that stablecoin liquidity remains higher in crypto-to-crypto trades than in fiat pairs, due to banking hurdles and compliance friction. However, their growth combined with easing regulations could enforce their role in finance.

該報告還強調，由於銀行障礙和合規性摩擦，加密貨幣到核心交易的穩定流動性仍然高於菲亞特對。但是，它們的增長與緩和法規相結合可以在金融中發揮作用。

Meanwhile, slippage analysis on Uniswap shows that low-volatility stablecoin pairs maintain near-zero slippage, while ETH pairs can show high variation, especially during sharp price moves.

同時，對單務工程的滑倒分析表明，低揮發性穩態對保持接近零的滑移，而eth對可以顯示出較高的變化，尤其是在價格上漲期間。

According to the report, while crypto market liquidity is maturing with the entry of institutional investors and regulated products, fragmentation, design limitations, and inconsistent depth continue to hinder full-scale efficiency.

根據該報告，儘管加密貨幣市場流動性正在與機構投資者和受監管產品的進入，但分裂，設計限制和深度不一致，繼續阻礙了全尺度的效率。