Reading live Uniswap data…
Reading live Uniswap data…
Uniswap v3 · Ethereum mainnet · 1.00% fee on every swap
0x2858840e4f5e7d004f945da9e0847514563ed802
Where a position in this pool would be active, as the price of one WBTC in WETH.
102.798 – 106.993 WETH per WBTC
1.98% below and 2.02% above the current price.
Current price 1 WBTC = 104.878 WETH
The current price is inside this range. A position opened here would be active straight away.
Between these two prices a position earns its share of the pool's swap fees. Outside them it holds a single token and earns nothing until the price comes back.
If the price falls below the range, the position ends up holding only WBTC; if it rises above it, only WETH.
From how much the price of WBTC actually moved over the last 30 completed days — not from a forecast of where it goes next.
The standard deviation of one day's price change, over the window.
The same movement stretched over the horizon chosen below: one standard deviation, either way.
Chosen below. A wider range is left less often, and the same deposit spread over it is thinner at any one price.
2 daily changes went into it.
The range is centred on today's price and drawn the same distance up and down in ratio terms — halving and doubling are the same move — which is why the two percentages differ. It describes how far the price has moved, not where it will go: it is not a forecast, and the width is not a confidence level. Nothing here sizes a position or says how much of either token to deposit.
The same method at each width the form offers, so the trade-off can be seen rather than told: a wider range holds more of the days, and spreads the same deposit over more prices — which is the last column, and it is the arithmetic of the protocol rather than an estimate.
| Width | Range | Inside, of the last 9 days | Inside, on days it never saw | Fee share while inside |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tight (1σ) · shown above | 102.798 – 106.993 WETH | 4 of 9 | not enough history | 1× |
| Medium (1.5σ) | 102.798 – 106.993 WETH | 4 of 9 | not enough history | 1× |
| Wide (2σ) | 102.798 – 106.993 WETH | 4 of 9 | not enough history | 1× |
| Very wide (3σ) | 102.798 – 106.993 WETH | 4 of 9 | not enough history | 1× |
The first count is over the days each range was drawn from, so it says how that width was fitted, not how it held. The second is the check above, run for each width: the method stepped back a horizon and laid over the days that followed.
The last column is what the same deposit would take of the fees charged on a day the price stays inside that range, against the width shown above — so that one reads as one. It is the protocol's own position arithmetic rather than an estimate: a narrower range turns the same money into more liquidity over fewer prices. It assumes the rest of the pool's liquidity is unchanged, which a deposit large enough to move it would not leave true, and it says nothing about the days price spends outside.
The whole pool's, shared among everyone whose liquidity was active.
Of the last 9 days, 4 stayed entirely inside this range, 1 sat entirely outside it, and 4 crossed an edge.
A day that crossed an edge spent part of itself inside and part outside, and the source's daily high and low cannot say how much of each.
These are the same days the range was drawn from, so they show how it was fitted rather than testing how it holds up — and the range is centred on today's price, which nobody could have opened a month ago. Read them as how the pool's recent movement sits against the range, not as a backtest.
None of this is what a position would earn: it is what the whole pool charged. What a deposit would have taken of it — its share of the liquidity active while the swaps happened — is the panel directly below, and even that is fees and nothing else.
The size this is worked out for. Change it in the form above.
Over the 4 days the price never left the range.
Those fees against the money put in, over those days and no others. Not a yearly rate, and nothing here turns it into one.
On the 4 days the price never left this range, the pool charged $2.10 in fees. A deposit of $1,000 placed in the range would have taken about $1.89 of that — its own liquidity as a share of the liquidity that was actually active on each of those days.
A larger deposit does not collect proportionally more. The share is your liquidity over everybody's including your own, so past a certain size most of what you add dilutes what you already have — which is why the amounts offered are a thousandfold apart.
Fees only, and days that have already happened. It assumes the position was open for every one of them and that nothing moved in response to it, and it says nothing about what the next thirty days will pay. What a position gives up against simply holding the two tokens is the comparison further down this page, and the two have to be read together.
These agree on every measured day. The declared rate is the rate that was charged.
The window's fees over the window's volume, so a busy day counts for more than a quiet one.
2 more day(s) in the window traded nothing, or were missing a figure, so no rate could be divided out of them.
The fee the pool states is one number. This is what swappers actually paid, divided back out of the same days as the figures above: a day's fees over that day's volume. It needs no extra request and nothing from the hook.
This pool could not be checked out of sample
This pool does not have enough indexed history to fit a band in the past and still have a full horizon of days to check it against.
What a position in this range would be worth compared with simply holding the two tokens, at each price. Exact arithmetic rather than an estimate — but it counts price movement and nothing else. It says nothing about the fees a position would earn, and fees are precisely what a liquidity provider is paid for this difference.
| Price of WBTC | Position against holding |
|---|---|
| 102.798 WETH | -0.50% |
| 103.833 WETH | -0.13% |
| 104.878 WETH | 0.00% |
| 105.93 WETH | -0.13% |
| 106.993 WETH | -0.50% |
The price this is measured from — the pool's current price.
This is what is usually called impermanent loss. It is only impermanent if price comes back: a position closed at a price other than the one it opened at has realised it.
The range above is two-sided: money on both sides of the price, earning fees for as long as the price stays between them. Split it at the price and each half is a different instrument. A position sitting entirely above the price holds one token and nothing else, and the pool sells that token for the other as the price rises through the band. Below the price it does the reverse. That is what a range order is, and both halves of this range are one.
Where the position sits. Its inner edge is the first price step past the one the price is in, so it starts out holding none of what it is converting into.
What the conversion works out at, if the price crosses the whole band.
That average is the geometric mean of the two bounds — exactly, and whichever way round the prices are written. It follows from the protocol's own formulas for what a position holds at each end of its band, and the amount put in cancels out of it: a hundred dollars and a million convert at the same price.
And only if the price crosses the whole band. One that turns back inside leaves the position holding some of each, at no single price at all — which is the same thing the range above it is for, arrived at by accident.
Nothing here schedules the conversion and nothing guarantees it. This is not an order book: an order the price never reaches is the ordinary outcome rather than a failure, and there is no queue and no counterparty waiting. What there is instead is that the position collects the pool's fees while the price is inside the band, rather than paying them.
Everything above is about providing liquidity. This is about using it. A pool's liquidity is constant between the price steps it is built on, so a swap that stays inside the step the price is in can be priced from the protocol's own formulas with nothing assumed — and one step further cannot, because another position's liquidity may begin there and this application does not read the liquidity at every price.
What goes in before the price reaches the end of the step it is in. Not a limit: a larger swap works, and this page cannot say what it costs.
How far the swap's average sits from the price on the screen.
What goes in before the price reaches the end of the step it is in. Not a limit: a larger swap works, and this page cannot say what it costs.
How far the swap's average sits from the price on the screen.
That average is the geometric mean of the price now and the price the swap ends at — the same identity the one-sided positions above rest on, seen from the other side of the trade. A swap crossing a band pays it; a position sitting in that band receives it.
The two directions are not the same size because the price sits somewhere inside its step rather than in the middle of it. What is worth comparing between pools is the size itself: it is what this market absorbs before it moves, and it is the reason anybody breaks a large order into small ones instead of sending it at once.
The ticks, blocks and figures the page above is checked against.
Source reported 276,800.
A price step of 2.02% between usable edges.
WETH per WBTC
Before snapping to the tick grid, in the pool's own direction.
Sample standard deviation of daily log returns, scaled by sqrt(365).
How much of the window had consecutive daily prices behind it.
2026-09-22 09:07 UTC
Writing the explanation…
None of these is a recommendation. A narrower range takes a larger share on the days it holds and nothing at all on the days it does not, and which of those matters more depends on what the position is for — which nothing here knows.
When the response arrived, not what it describes.
WBTC / WETH trades at only this fee tier on Ethereum mainnet. Everything above is about the whole pair, because the pair is this one pool.
No Uniswap v4 pool trades WBTC / WETH with these two contracts.
The suggested range runs from the lower price shown above to the upper price shown above, quoted as WETH for each WBTC. The current price is inside the band and sits close to neither edge. The band was placed using the movement already observed in this pool, not a view about where price will go. In Uniswap v3, a position earns swap fees while price is within its range. The pool charges the fee shown above, and the measured swap charge matched that stated fee on every observed day.
Still being written…
Still being written…
Still being written…
If price falls below the lower edge, the position holds only WBTC. If price rises above the upper edge, it holds only WETH. While price moves through the range, the position changes between those tokens according to the protocol's formulas. A price turning back inside can leave it holding some of each; there is no order book and no scheduled conversion. The swap examples show how much this market absorbs before the quoted price moves, but they are not limits or capacity estimates. A larger swap may work, yet its cost cannot be read from the liquidity examined here.
The observed daily movement was very small, but the range is based on only a few usable daily changes within the measurement window. The window therefore provides weak evidence about the pool's movement. The price was entirely inside the range on some observed days, entirely outside it on another, and crossed an edge on the remaining observed days. As these figures show, widening a range buys more days inside at the cost of a smaller share of the fees charged on each such day. The alternative widths shown here do not provide a meaningful history-based comparison because the available data is too limited.
This analysis does not include gas costs, token or pool trust, or the fees a position would earn over future activity. Its comparison with simply holding the two tokens is exact for price movement only: it excludes fees and gas, so it is not a complete return comparison. The displayed fee share comes from past fees on days the position is assumed to have remained open; it is not a yield, rate, or forecast, and the pool-wide figures are not an individual's earnings. Some days had no reported price, so missing observations were skipped rather than estimated. No out-of-sample check was possible here because the pool has too little indexed history to fit the band and then test it on a separate future period.
Written by gpt-5.6-luna. The figures above were not.