{"id":14584,"date":"2026-10-16T18:01:49","date_gmt":"2026-10-16T18:01:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cryptonews.uk.com\/?p=14584"},"modified":"2026-10-16T18:01:49","modified_gmt":"2026-10-16T18:01:49","slug":"only-18-of-uniswap-v3-positions-under-1000-beat-holding-after-gas-study-finds","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cryptonews.uk.com\/?p=14584","title":{"rendered":"Only 18% of Uniswap v3 positions under $1,000 beat holding after gas, study finds"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n

Gas charges tipped many small Uniswap liquidity positions behind simply holding the tokens, according to blockchain data firm Bitquery\u2019s October 16 study. Among closed regular positions below $1,000 in eight sampled Ethereum v3 pools, 51% finished ahead before gas, compared with 18% afterward. The median gas bill for that group was 67 cents.<\/p>\n

Uniswap v4\u2019s flash accounting can reduce transfer overhead for liquidity providers, or LPs, who supply tokens for traders to swap. Standard v4 pools retain the price-range mechanics that change what a provider owns as prices move. Fees must compensate for those inventory changes as well as transaction costs.<\/p>\n

Bitquery\u2019s return study covers October 14, 2025, through October 13, 2026, in eight Ethereum v3 pools selected for their new-position counts in mid-2026. Its regular-position win rates exclude positions opened and closed within a single block.<\/p>\n

Gas matters most to small positions<\/h2>\n

Across the return study\u2019s eight sampled Ethereum v3 pools, 49% of 71,166 closed regular positions beat holding before gas. After transaction costs, that share fell to 34%.<\/p>\n

The effect was particularly sharp below $1,000. A transaction cost measured in cents can consume a narrow advantage over leaving the original tokens in a wallet. Bigger deposits spread that cost over more capital, which helps explain why the before-and-after gap varies so much by position size.<\/p>\n

Bitquery\u2019s published size breakdown shows the pattern:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Deposit size<\/th>\nBeat holding before gas<\/th>\nBeat holding after gas<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Below $1,000<\/td>\n51%<\/td>\n18%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
$1,000\u2013$10,000<\/td>\n45%<\/td>\n36%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
$10,000\u2013$100,000<\/td>\n50%<\/td>\n45%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
$100,000\u2013$1 million<\/td>\n55%<\/td>\n51%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Above $1 million<\/td>\n60%<\/td>\n59%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Each rounded percentage describes how often a closed regular position beat the holding benchmark. Win frequency differs from the dollar-weighted result: a group can have many small winners and fewer large losers.<\/p>\n

For the smallest band, gas separates the two win rates by 33 percentage points. That makes even modest execution savings consequential when a position\u2019s advantage over holding is narrow.<\/p>\n

For closed positions, Bitquery compares the tokens returned, plus collected fees, with holding the deposited tokens, using the exit price for both inventories. Gas is then deducted. A position can gain in dollar value while lagging a holding benchmark that gained more.<\/p>\n

The study\u2019s aggregate collected-fee comparison, which includes positions still open at the cutoff, reports $41.6 million in fees, a $60.6 million inventory shortfall against holding and $1.4 million of gas. Those rounded components reconcile to $20.4 million behind holding. Open positions are valued at the window\u2019s closing price.<\/p>\n

Bitquery estimates that the pools generated $59.5 million in total fees, while the position analysis counts $41.6 million collected. The remainder comprises fees still unclaimed at the cutoff or fees that could not be assigned to a position.<\/p>\n

Open positions are excluded from the win rates because their unclaimed fees are absent from the study\u2019s event-based accounting. Another 207 positions with fee claims crossed between sibling positions are excluded from per-position figures.<\/p>\n

Bitquery counts each transaction\u2019s gas once and splits it across liquidity actions.<\/p>\n

\n

Related Reading<\/span><\/p>\n

Ethereum arbitrage study reveals builders receive $5 for every $1 burned by the network<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n

<\/span> <\/div>\n

What v4 changes for providers<\/h2>\n

Ethereum transaction fees are paid in ETH. V4\u2019s flash accounting can reduce the work needed to settle swaps and liquidity changes by recording internal amounts owed during an operation and transferring tokens for the final net balance changes.<\/p>\n

That is useful when a route crosses several pools or combines a swap with a liquidity deposit. Intermediate tokens need not move repeatedly between separate pool contracts when their obligations can be offset internally.<\/p>\n

The saving depends on the transaction route and integration. A provider combining several operations may avoid more intermediate transfers than one making a simpler transaction.<\/p>\n