Best Crypto Market Makers Compared
Market making is the single most consequential vendor decision most token teams make, and the one they understand least at signing. The deal structure — loan versus retainer, option strike, term, exchange coverage — determines whether the MM's incentives point the same way as yours. This page explains the two dominant models, what to verify in a term sheet, and the clauses that cause disputes.
Covered on this page (alphabetical, not ranked): Amber Group, B2C2, Cumberland, DWF Labs, Flow Traders, Flowdesk, GSR, Jump Trading, Kairon Labs, Wintermute.
We have not audited these organisations, we publish no scores or price tables, and no placement on this page is paid for.
How the options differ
- Loan-and-option model. You lend tokens; the MM has a call option to buy them at a strike. Low cash cost, and the option can create an incentive to keep price near the strike. Read the strike and expiry carefully.
- Retainer model. A monthly fee plus a working inventory that stays yours. Higher cash cost, cleanest incentive alignment, and the standard for teams that can afford it.
- Exchange-designated programmes. The venue mandates or provides a maker. Limited choice, usually reasonable terms, tied to that venue.
- Passive on-chain liquidity. Your own liquidity in AMM pools, managed internally. No counterparty risk, requires real internal capability.
What to verify before you commit
- Get the KPIs in writing: spread, depth at defined percentages from mid, uptime, and per-venue coverage. "Best efforts" is not a KPI.
- Model the option. Strike, size and expiry against your own price scenarios, including the case where it is exercised at the worst time for you.
- Ask for a daily or weekly reporting feed you can reconcile against public exchange data.
- Confirm the notice period and inventory return process. Exit terms are where these relationships go wrong.
- Ask directly whether they take directional positions in your token and how that is walled off.
Mistakes we see most often
- Signing a multi-venue mandate before you have listings on those venues.
- Lending inventory sized for a bull case, leaving nothing for treasury operations.
- No monitoring — you cannot tell whether the quoted depth exists without checking the book yourself.
Want help choosing?
We take no kickbacks from anyone named on this page. Book a 30-minute vendor selection call and we will work through which option fits your stage, budget and ecosystem.
🔗 Related reading from the Metamoonshots Journal
FAQ
Loan-option or retainer?
Retainer if cash allows: your incentives and theirs stay aligned and there is no option overhang. Loan-option deals are common for pre-revenue teams but must be modelled to the downside before signing.
How many market makers do we need?
One primary is enough at launch. A second becomes useful when you list on venues the first does not cover well; more than two fragments inventory and reporting.
What does good performance look like?
Consistent quoted depth within your agreed band during volatile hours, not just quiet ones, and reporting you can independently verify against the public order book.