#永续合约交易 In the past few days, I've seen debates about UNI token burns and Ondo's stock tokenization, which really highlight the issue—market opportunities and traps are often just a thin line apart.

The UNI burn of 4,000 tokens for $39,500 in assets, netting a profit of $14,500, appears to be a clever on-chain arbitrage at first glance, but in reality, it's a classic information asymmetry game. Large traders and on-chain analysts can detect contract vulnerabilities in real-time, while retail investors often see the information only after the fact. That's why I've always emphasized that copying trades isn't about bottom-fishing; it's about choosing the right people and the right timing.

Looking at the Ondo xTSLA liquidity controversy, this is the real thing to watch out for. The front-end shows a 0.03% slippage, but the actual on-chain liquidity is only $7,000, with real slippage reaching up to 45%. This isn't just about fragmented liquidity; it's the biggest pitfall in the RWA (Real-World Asset) track right now—off-chain market makers provide liquidity only during US stock trading hours, and during other times, you're essentially gambling.

My current strategy is that for high-risk products like perpetual contracts, you must prioritize following traders who truly understand the microstructure of the market. They won't be fooled by flashy data and know when to reduce positions to avoid liquidity risks. If you're also trading perpetuals, instead of chasing perfect execution on every trade, learn to identify what truly presents an opportunity and what is a data trap. Practice makes perfect, but the prerequisite is not to be blinded by false prosperity.