The total fees (taker fee + transaction fee) to do a trade is now at least 0.00512 BTC. That is equivalent to more than $21 USD!!!
I don’t know if the other party is also paying for another fee, but this is ridiculously high! Who gets the “taker fee” by the way?
Agreed, its too high. I mentioned in another thread yday that the security deposit paid by maker (0.03 BTC) is now about $125. This not just too high; it is prohibitively high. No one can be expected to act as market makers when each trade listed locks down $125.
All fees need to be set in fiat (as it is less volatile; generally) and then adjusted to BTC rates according to current exchange rates.
It go to Bisq and the other party (maker) thay also pay fee. Exchange normal have zero fee or 0.1% (viaBTC) for makers because makers make the store interesting for the taker.
Bisq is to expensive. I like the high security deposit.
But the total maker fee (Miner * 3 + maker or taker + bank) is high per trade.
Coinbases Gdax have 0% maker fee, limit order (LO). User use only one Bank deposit fee for many free LO trades. The free maker fee strategy is to create a interesting “shop” where takers like to come and look and make business.
Eg a maker (called a offer i Bisq) Buy 0.5 btc for altcoin 10% distance cost a maker fee 3162 bit = $13.5.
0.63% + mining fee 0.24 =0.87%. It is 6 to 8 times higher then 0.1%.
And then Bisq have a cancelling fee(!). Also normal a free services. Gdax and many other exchanges have API so the users can make hundreds of offer and cancel them. And some have discount or even free taker trade if you use API. The strategy is again same story. To make a more interesting store with a lot of life.
Compare https://www.gdax.com/trade/BTC-USD and Bisq…
It look like that Bisq like a store that is empty and quiet.
You are calculating very high rates because you introduce mining fees. If you buy in a centralized exchange and recover the BTC in your wallet you must pay those fees to the miners as well. If you leave your BTC in the exchange you do not have BTC. You have a promise of BTC
I agree that btc on a centralized exchange is promise of BTC.
About the high fee: No, I don’t calculating very high rates because I introduce mining fees. The 0.63% maker fee + cancelling fee is more then 6 time higher then 0.1 and it is free on Gdax and centralized exchange need to pay for servers ect.
Bisq don’t have that expenses (?).
And more then 600% higher fee is a lot + extra fee to miners because of the way Bisq work.
Mining fees are not high because of the way bisq works, but are used for transfers between addresses.
https://bitcoinfees.21.co/
BTC is a P2P asset, if we put it in the hands of third parties loses all its usefulness. Bisq works correctly.
It is possible that the rest of the fees are somewhat higher 0.6 against 0.1 but it will be a P2P deal and you will receive your BTCs. In other sites it will depend on whether they suffer DDoS attacks, whether they are hacked, whether their own site owners steal BTCs or if the government decides to ban the site. That security for me is worth those fees.
I know that the fee per byte is the block size limit and the miners deposition.
BUT:
Bisq way need to be on that way that it produce more byte to the block compare to other solution. That make Bis more expensive compare to the trades solutions.
The topic is the total cost a trade and because of the extra byte to the block (a multisig tx need more byte) and the tx need to go fast the trade fee according to miner fee will be higher compare to other solutions.
I also know Unconfirmed Transactions - BTC.com and Johoe's Bitcoin Mempool Size Statistics
I know all that. I have read the FQR.
But way do the fee need to be >600% higher?
Will it not be more intersession, for you, Bitcoin and Bisq, if many use Bisq?
The fact is that not many use Bisq. >600% make a different. And there are no reason for a so extremely high fee/profit. You use it - nice. I have use it one time, nice.
What about the hundreds of thousands of trades that are that is off Bisq?
Bisq will get more profit in total year to year if 100x more use Bisq with a 70% lower fee.
its not really a BISQ issue its an issue of Bitcoin. They promise us to fix that with Segwit Activation and or bigger blocks.
At the moment Bitcoin Cash is faster and free or really low fees.
Exactly. When Segwit is activated the fees will be smaller. Although the tx needs a byte but that is essential to eliminate third parts of the equation. It is not a wrong way to work.
There is a way to avoid all this, although it is much more complicated. It is the mode of operation of the exchange P2P Bitshares.
You can deposit / withdraw current BTC, but the trading is done in autonomous derivatives, Smartcoins, are backed 1: 1 by real BTC.
These Smartcoins have their own Blockchains and so it is possible to buy and sell without using the blockchain of the actual crypto. You can even use stable price Smartcoins like BitUSD to sell or buy BTC or any crypto. BitUSD guarantees the price through short trades, does not need trusted third parties like USDT, which makes Bitshares a better P2P exchange than Waves.
However in Bitshares you can not acquire P2P BTC with FIAT, - Yes with a Gateway, but there we have a third part. You can only do that with Bisq
If you could do that in Bitshares … it would be almost perfect, but I do not think they do anything like that, which leaves a wide field to Bisq
Hi wuhe, I think you mix the mining fee that in my case was 0.24% of the total trade volume and the 0.63% fee to Bisq?
The 0.24% is a bitcoin issue + the need for more byte to make a trade using bisq and this go to the miner. The 0.63% fee go to Bisq. All in all: 0.87%
So: No, the 0.63% fee is NOT at all a bitcoin issue.
Hi 8heqronaeh. Well, maybe Manfred can reconsider that, but I do not think it’s such an exaggerated rate, other centralized exchanges charge up to 2%.
There is no registration here, no photos or documentation. Have you ever wondered what the owners of the exchanges do with that documentation? Some like the BTC-E look like mafia …
Agree erizo, for sure, bisq have many god advantages and one of them is that bisq don’t have all that expense to staff that validate documentation, IT staff that run the servers and so on. Bisq could also make it cheaper then all other exchanges.
There is a endless of centralized exchanges that has be hacked and the user loose coin. At least two in 2017.
Bisq is more secure and more effective because it use the users computer and the tors networks computers.
http://viabtc-en.udesk.cn/hc/articles/45214:
Maker 0.1% Taker 0.2%
API users: ZERO fee to maker and only 0.1% to taker.
https://www.gdax.com/fees/BTC-USD
Maker Free Taker 0.25%
I will not pay 600% more for the same product: Exchange as maker. Especially because there is no technical reason for it. Bisq have less operational cost and I use my own computer that need to be turn on 24/7 when I am maker (for bisq). There is no reason for the high maker fee. And the taker fee is also to high.
and not secure / decentralised to trust as money.
GDAX is not a decentralized exchange and can steal your funds, be banned by a state, be hacked or suffer a DDoS attack. It’s not the same as Bisq, sometimes they act as snares for unsuspecting with a rich bait.
You had probably a 2 BTC trade because the fee is calculated amount based (linear). It is 0.003 BTC for a 1 BTC trade. A 2 BTC trade has 0.006 BTC. We set the fee when BTC price was 2500 USD and did not anticipate such a fast increase of the BTC price. With 2500 USD it was 7,5 USD or 15 USD for a 2 BTC trade. That is 0.3% which is IMO in the lower range (Localbitcoin has 1%, many others hide fees in spread like Shapeshift). But I agree with the current high BTC price it was getting too high. In the next release we will adjust it and maybe introduce a more flexible mechanism to adjust the fee (e.g. use market price).
The miner tx fee is taken from fee estimation and varies each day, but should be not too high atm.
Are you writing to me? I am not taking about a trade but a offer (maker). And it is not 2 btc. As I say:
“Maker (called a offer i Bisq) Buy 0.5 btc for altcoin 10% distance cost a maker fee 3162 bit = $13.5.
0.63% + mining fee 0.24 =0.87%. It is 6 to 8 times higher then 0.1%.”
Bisq v 0.53 calculate a maker fee for 2 btc for altcoin
10% distance 12649 bit
5% distance 8944 bit
2% distance 5657 bit
1% distance 4000 bit
0.1 % fee of 2 btc maker order (limit order) on viaBTC: A fixed fee 0.002 btc = 2000 bit where the distance don’t cost.
It is the percent profit you take that do your shop empty.
No, Bisq’s problem is not the fees. Anything below 0.75% is reasonable, and Bisq’s are lower.
Localbitcoins charges 1% of each transaction When you put an ad, and has a considerable volume. 1% does not deter traders.
Itbit charges 0.5%, approximately as Bisq and has a volume of 2000-3000 BTC day
Ecoin.Eu, charge up to 4%
Https://www.ecoin.eu/en/info/fees/?type=fiat
Bisq does not have the possibility of the extensive marketing operations that can make centralized exchanges, which have huge amounts of money of doubtful origin.
On the other hand people starting in BTC are not fully aware of the implications of trading with centralized exchanges. Sometimes they notice abruptly, as has just happened with BTC-E.
Good look. The 200% and up to hundreds of % over fee + additional fee to miner and bank per trade matter. And there are no teknical reasion other then “I like 600% over fee”
Well, you’ve seen that much larger fees are common in exchanges with significant market shares, and do not offer to work consistently BTC, which can only be P2P. Also in those exchanges you must pay fees to the miners.
I do not mind paying a little more, but I do not like to send my personal information, with photos and ID cards to reputed gangsters and I do not want to take the risk of government robbery or prohibition or suffer a Ddos attack.
I suppose that when Bisq increases the volume the fees can lower significantly, in any case all that seems to be in permanent revision.
Can you explane how you calculate that fee?
30-DAY VOLUME TAKER FEE MAKER FEE
XBT 0-2500 0.20% 0%