>> CLEARING_VS_TRADING.DAT
TRADITIONAL CEX/DEX Binance MATCH MARGIN SETTLE Hyperliquid MATCH MARGIN SETTLE Generic CEX MATCH MARGIN SETTLE NO SHARED LAYER AUTONITY AFP AutEx [Venue B] [Venue C] DCC shared margin · OI · settlement
THREE VENUES, ONE CLEARING LAYER. THE SILOS NEVER TALK. THE DCC ALWAYS DOES.
AUTONITY BLOCKCHAIN TERMINAL v1.1.2
STAGE 1

The Silo Problem

Every traditional venue — CEX or DEX — bundles three functions into one box. Autonity's AFP pulls them apart.

Traditional CEX/DEXAutonity AFP (DCP model)
Binance:
  • Own contracts
  • Own clearing
  • Own settlement
 Execution Venues:
  • AutEx (official, shipped)
  • [Venue B — permissionless slot]
  • [Venue C — permissionless slot]
Hyperliquid:
  • Own contracts
  • Own clearing
  • Own settlement
 ↓  ↓  ↓   — all resolve into —
  • DCC — Decentralised Clearing Contract
  • Margin (on-chain, shared)
  • Open interest (one ledger)
  • Settlement (deterministic, oracle-fed)
"Is a market where you can only trade through a single venue really decentralized, even if that venue is a DEX?" — CoinDesk, July 28, 2025
AFP vs. PERP DEXES — FULL COMPARISON 8 entries
AFP (Autonity)HyperliquiddYdX v4Lighter
AFP = new EVM chain + separate exchange  ·  Hyperliquid = bespoke L1 chain with built-in DEX  ·  dYdX = Cosmos chain + validator-matched orderbook  ·  Lighter = Ethereum zk-rollup with a sequencer
At the start of Season 2 on Oct 25, 2025: all four separate user-facing matching from final settlement to some degree, but only AFP separates them into two independent systems — a chain-agnostic clearing layer (the DCC) that any exchange can plug into, rather than one exchange's own bespoke stack.
STAGE 2

Contract Portability

Two different venues. One ledger slot. Watch a position open on one venue and close on another — no bridge, no wrapping.

AutEx [Venue B] DCC OPEN INTEREST LEDGER This is the literal mechanism behind "shared liquidity" — not a marketing phrase. Both venues' intents resolve against the exact same on-chain storage slot. NET OI: 0 INTENT
Ready.
SAME LEDGER SLOT. DIFFERENT VENUES. NO BRIDGE. NO WRAPPING. NO SEPARATE SETTLEMENT.
Two keys underpin this portability. The margin account key holds capital. The intent-signing key authenticates orders. They may be the same key — but need not be. This is why a position opened via one venue's signing key can be managed by any other venue.
STAGE 3

Capital Efficiency

Scenario: LONG CPI Futures + SHORT Jobless Claims Futures. Same trader, two positions.

Toggle position correlation to see how shared margining responds:
SILOED MARGINING SHARED DCC MARGINING (AFP) 200 USDZ 120 USDZ
Portfolio Correlation
-0.65
Total Locked (Siloed / Shared)
200 / 120 USDZ
CAPITAL SAVED: 80 USDZ (40%)
Cross-margining benefit is largest when positions partially offset each other. The DCC doesn't manufacture capital savings — it removes artificial fragmentation. For uncorrelated positions, the benefit is minimal.
"[AFP] allows products to be permissionlessly listed on multiple trading venues but with all the collateral and the cross-margining done on-chain. This makes it very capital efficient." — CoinDesk, July 28, 2025
[ ▸ SEE THE COMPUTATION IN DETAIL ]
● TOOL AVAILABLE — AINUMBERS.CO
The computation on this page has a working implementation in the Autonity Tool Suite on AINumbers.co. Each tool produces a fingerprint of its result — if the calculation changes, the fingerprint changes. Share it with anyone. They can verify it in seconds, in their own browser, with no server access.
[ READ THE OCG STANDARD → ]