sounding open dataReading the waterlineLive sources are loading. Nothing is filled with placeholder market data.
Loading market readings
☴≈⌇Liquidity and market structure · mechanistic
Can the same cryptocurrency trade at persistent price gaps across venues and countries?
Makarov and Schoar document large recurrent cross-exchange price deviations, with larger gaps across countries and evidence consistent with constrained arbitrage capital.
Source reviewed
Makarov and Schoar document large recurrent cross-exchange price deviations, with larger gaps across countries and evidence consistent with constrained arbitrage capital.
The result is clear in the peer-reviewed historical study, but the venue set and market structure have changed since its 2017 to 2018 sample.
Literature record
Source reviewedWhat the reviewed source and linked counterevidence support.
Bathymark reproduction
Not startedBathymark does not yet retain synchronized order-book and withdrawal-state history across venues.
Live validity
Not monitoredCurrent premium views are related market context, not a paper replication.
where the claim applies
Scope and horizon
Assets
Bitcoin and additional cryptocurrencies examined by the paper
Venues or data
34 exchanges
Geography
19 countries
Sample
1 January 2017 to 28 February 2018
Horizon
Transaction-level and exchange-level price deviations
source result
What the work reported
The paper reports larger price deviations across countries than within countries and links their behavior to limits on arbitrage capital.
structured numbers
Exchanges in study34 exchanges
Countries in study19 countries
how the result was made
Method and implementation boundary
Design
Cross-exchange price comparison, regional arbitrage indices, and signed-volume decomposition.
Measures
Prices, signed volume, common price components, and exchange-specific deviations.
Reality gap
Observed price gaps are not net arbitrage returns until transfer, funding, custody, capital-control, fee, and execution constraints are modeled.
Assumptions
Venue price and volume records are comparable enough for the stated decomposition.
Regional premia are interpreted with the capital and market-access constraints of the sample period.
Limits
The source used historical proprietary exchange data and does not establish today's gaps.
A displayed spread may be impossible to capture because capital, banking, inventory, or withdrawals are constrained.
Exchange failure and counterparty risk are not represented by a quoted price alone.
Required reality checks
Retest on current venues with synchronized timestamps and withdrawal state.
Subtract all fees, funding, transfer delay, slippage, and capital costs.
Keep country, venue, asset, and stablecoin quote currency separate.
What this cannot mean
That a visible premium is risk-free profit.
That one venue price represents the global market.
That historical country segmentation has the same cause or size today.
source and version trail
The works behind this record
Bathymark stores curated bibliographic facts and its own paraphrase. It does not store the source abstract or full text. Open the original work to inspect the complete analysis.
Both identify segmented markets and constrained intermediaries, but one concerns stablecoin-FX transmission and the other crypto exchange prices.
append-only assessment memory
Status history
Source reviewedHistorical journal result verified; current venue validity is not monitored.
current Bathymark context
Related live evidence, not a replication
Current premium views are related market context, not a paper replication.
Reviewed 2026-07-13; next review 2026-10-13. The paper record is not a recommendation, forecast, or proof of current profitability. Information, not financial advice.