Bolt vs. Traditional Models - Bolt Liquidity Documentation

How Bolt Positions

Every DeFi liquidity model in production today shares a fundamental assumption: execution quality is a function of liquidity depth. Bolt is the first model to break this dependency. The architecture decisions below illustrate how different models address the core execution problem: coupling or decoupling pricing from liquidity depth.

Model Comparisons

vs. AMMs / CLAMMs
vs. RFQ / Intents
vs. Traditional Prop-AMMs
vs. CLOB

Dimension	AMMs / CLAMMs	Bolt
Pricing mechanism	Bonding curve derived from pool ratios	Oracle-referenced deterministic pricing
Slippage	Increases with trade size	Zero, price independent of trade size
Capital requirement	Deep liquidity required	Minimal, settlement only
LP risk	Impermanent loss, rebalancing costs	Delta-neutral hedging, no IL
Composability	Fully composable	Fully composable
Integration	Direct pool interaction	SDK integration for aggregators and dApps

Dimension	RFQs / Intents	Bolt
Execution	Off-chain solver competition	Fully on-chain, atomic
Composability	Broken by off-chain coordination	Preserved, contracts compose natively
Trust model	Whitelisted solvers	Oracle-referenced, permissionless execution
Latency	Solver response time delay	Deterministic, instant
Centralisation risk	High, solver concentration	Low, oracle is the trust boundary

Dimension	Traditional Prop-AMMs	Bolt
Quoting	Off-chain engine pushes prices on-chain	On-chain oracle with deterministic pricing
Composability	Limited, standalone venues	Full SDK-based composability
Transparency	Quoting logic is opaque	Oracle prices verifiable on-chain
Integration model	Mostly direct and retail	B2B: built for aggregators and dApps

Dimension	CLOB	Bolt
Model	Central Limit Order Book	Prop-AMM, oracle-priced settlement
Pricing	Determined by order book depth	Determined by external oracle
Capital dependency	Requires deep order book	Minimal capital required
Strength	Transparent price discovery, margin trading	Zero slippage, extreme capital efficiency, composable integration
Best for	Sophisticated traders, margin, limit orders	Aggregator routing, dApp integration, predictable execution

Sui SUI/USDC Turnover by Architecture

The model comparisons above describe architectural differences in theory. The table below shows how those differences play out in practice across the Sui SUI/USDC market.

Turnover = daily volume / deployed capital. Figures are internally benchmarked.

Architecture	Pools tracked	Turnover (vol-weighted)
CLMM	11 pools, 5 protocols	1.29x
CLAMM	1 pool	2.70x
CPMM	1 pool	0.09x
Prop-AMM (peer)	3 pools	2.04x
Prop-AMM (Bolt)	1 pool	29.7x
Peer average	16 pools, 8 protocols	1.28x

Why Zero Slippage Matters

The structural advantage of deterministic pricing independent of capital depth.

How Bolt Works

Technical overview of Bolt’s settlement and hedging architecture.

​How Bolt Positions

​Model Comparisons

​Sui SUI/USDC Turnover by Architecture

Why Zero Slippage Matters

How Bolt Works

How Bolt Positions

Model Comparisons

Sui SUI/USDC Turnover by Architecture