Cross-Exchange Funding Rate Arbitrage: A Fixed-Yield Strategy Through Boros
Perpetuals markets have become the most traded financial market in crypto. Open Interest (OI) of perp markets regularly exceeds $150-$200B, significantly…
Key Findings
- Cross-perp funding rate arbitrage through Boros delivers consistent, average yields of 5.98%-11.4% Fixed APR across BTC and ETH markets between Hyperliquid and Binance
- These returns outperform traditional low-risk crypto strategies such as AAVE lending and ETH staking by 2–4x while maintaining zero directional price exposure
- Peak opportunities exceeded 23% APR during our observation window in this case study, with prior instances reaching as high as 48% APR
- These arbitrage opportunities present themselves repeatedly over time — recurring streams of extractable yield rather than isolated, one-time events
- Unlike traditional funding rate arbitrage which exposes traders to funding rate volatility and sudden rate reversals, this strategy with Boros locks in fixed yields at entry
- The same structural opportunities documented in this study extend across other assets (e.g. BNB, HYPE) and exchanges (e.g. OKX, Bybit), making this strategy broadly replicable as Boros expands market coverage
Introduction & Motivation
Perpetuals markets have become the most traded financial market in crypto. Open Interest (OI) of perp markets regularly exceeds $150-$200B, significantly bigger than the entire DeFi TVL of $120B.
Given identical asset exposure, funding rates should equilibrate across platforms through arbitrage. In reality, they rarely do. Persistent spreads exist daily, presenting arbitrage opportunities for those savvy enough to capture them.
Boros changes this. By creating liquid markets for funding rates themselves, we’ve opened up fixed yield strategies that were previously impossible, while unlocking new trading and speculative opportunities for users. For instance, traders can now actively arbitrage the funding rate gap across exchanges, locking in fixed returns while maintaining delta-neutral exposure.
Previously, we shared on X a single case study featuring how a funding rate arbitrage trade between Hyperliquid and Binance could achieve 48% Fixed APR.
This report demonstrates how to execute this strategy. Through historical analysis of funding rate differentials between Binance and Hyperliquid across BTC and ETH markets on Boros, we prove these arbitrage opportunities are not isolated incidents, but persistent structural differences that allow this strategy to be replicated regularly at scale.
Mechanics of Funding Rate Arbitrage
Perpetual futures don’t have an expiry. Exchanges use funding rates to keep perp prices anchored to spot. Funding is the periodic payment exchanged between longs and shorts to keep the perpetual price aligned with spot.
So when perp > spot, funding is positive → longs pay shorts
When perp < spot, funding is negative → shorts pay longs
Different exchanges have different liquidity, trader flows, market sentiment, and risk models, so cross venue perp markets don’t move perfectly in sync. For example, Binance settles funding on an 8-hour basis, while Hyperliquid settles hourly. Different liquidation algorithms and risk parameters across venues also change the effective leverage traders are willing to take platform to platform. This shapes directional pressure and, ultimately, funding rate dynamics.
As shown by Bitmex in their recent study, funding rates usually oscillate within predictable bounds, constrained by a structural floor arising from inherent biases in the funding formula, and a ceiling enforced by arbitrageurs who compress rates when they drift too far from equilibrium.
These structural differences create persistent opportunities. Since each exchange operates with distinct settlement schedules, liquidity profiles, and risk parameters, funding rates for the same asset rarely sync perfectly across venues. Hyperliquid might show 30% annualized funding while Binance sits at 15% for the same asset, and these gaps can persist for days or weeks.
Traditional naked arbitrage (without Boros)
These differences open up opportunities for systematic trading strategies.
The traditional, classic approach is simple on paper: take opposite perp positions on 2 exchanges to capture the difference in funding rates. But in practice, this is operationally heavy.
Example:
Funding rate for BTC on Exchange A → +5% APR (Long)
Funding rate for BTC on Exchange B → +25% APR (Short)
Being short on B is extremely attractive since shorts receive a 25% APR funding rate. Long on A is cheap as longs only have to pay 5% APR.
Doing so lets you earn the funding rate differential: 25% — 5% = 20% APR
This sounds good on paper, but it’s hard to manage in execution:
- The trade requires margin deposited on multiple exchanges while monitoring the gap between rates
- 2 separate perp positions means double the risks of liquidation, loss of margin, or losing on funding fees if the differential changes
- During volatile market conditions, it can be difficult to ensure accounts have healthy margin and are rebalanced accordingly
But with a Boros swap-based approach, one can eliminate funding rate volatility and lock in fixed funding.
As such, funding rate arbitrage transforms from a high-risk yield play into a stable fixed yield trade with zero directional exposure.
Boros: Funding Rate Swaps
Boros facilitates Interest Rate Swaps onchain, called Yield Units (YUs), with one YU representing one notional unit of the perp market’s funding.
e.g. 10 YU-BTCUSDT-BN represents the funding of 10 notional BTC on Binance’s BTCUSDT perp market
YUs are priced according to their Implied APR, while holders receive/pay Underlying APR (the floating funding rate) depending on their long/short positioning:
With Boros, fixed-rate funding for perpetual positions became possible through a simple 1:1 hedge with YUs.
Long Perp + Long YU (Pay Fixed)
When you Long YUs:
- You receive the Underlying APR (floating funding rate)
- You pay the fixed Implied APR (locked at your YU entry price)
When you long a perp position:
- You pay the Underlying APR (floating funding rate)
By holding equal notional amounts of long YUs and long perps, the floating Underlying APR cancels out. You’re left paying only the fixed Implied APR, effectively converting your funding payment into a fixed-rate payment:
Short Perp + Short YU (Receive Fixed)
Simply inverse this dynamic for short YUs on Boros, and traders can receive fixed funding payments on their short position:
When you Short YUs:
- You pay the Underlying APR (floating funding rate)
- You receive the fixed Implied APR (locked at your YU entry price)
When you short a perp position:
- You receive the Underlying APR (floating funding rate)
Funding Rate Arbitrage with Boros
Combining Boros fixed-rate funding with cross-exchange arbitrage transforms volatile funding spreads into stable, fixed-yield positions.
Assuming Hyperliquid has a higher Implied APR for BTC on Boros, the steps for this will be to:
A. Short Hyperliquid BTC YU (on Boros)
B. Short BTC on Hyperliquid
C. Long Binance BTC YU (on Boros)
D. Long BTC on Binance
The overall result is a delta-neutral, fixed yield strategy:
A + B = Receive fixed funding on BTC on Hyperliquid
C + D = Pay fixed funding on BTC on Binance
B + D = Delta-neutral on BTC
A + B + C + D = Receive the fixed funding between Hyperliquid and Binance with no exposure to BTC price movements or funding rate volatility.
The benefits of executing this arbitrage through Boros YUs are significant:
Elimination of funding-rate volatility risk
By locking in a fixed funding rate, traders no longer need to worry about sudden funding rate swings.
Fixed yield strategy
When funding between exchanges diverges sharply, Boros allows those differences to be locked in immediately.
Longer duration arbitrage
Since rate volatility is removed, positions can be safely held for much longer, allowing traders to capture extended share of the yield available from cross-venue arbitrage.
Immunity to extended negative rates
While cash/carry traders will lose yield to periods of extended negative rates, Boros YUs allow traders to lock in the funding rate arbitrage the moment it appears while providing a fixed yield. This increases the viability and availability of the trade for crypto users.
Enhanced returns with leverage
With leverage available on both perp markets and Boros, traders with higher risk tolerance/appetite can amplify their fixed-yield returns with this strategy. (e.g. 15% Fixed APR x 10x leverage = 150% Fixed APR)
Delta-neutral (price agnostic)
While rates may remain largely positive on crypto perp markets, extended periods of negative rates require cash/carry traders to monitor and adjust their positions to prevent possible losses. Due to this strategy being delta-neutral, directional price risk is eliminated.
Ultimately, executing this trade with Boros is agnostic to market trends and price action. As long as funding rate discrepancies arise between perp platforms, this yield trade will remain extractable for crypto users.
Empirical Analysis
Hyperliquid consistently exhibits a higher funding rate, and consequently higher Implied APR (market pricing for funding rate on Boros), than its Binance counterpart. This creates persistent arbitrage opportunities.
In this section, we will demonstrate the feasibility and profitability of this funding rate arbitrage strategy with Boros based on historical data and markets.Our analysis focuses specifically on capturing the funding rate differential between Hyperliquid and Binance through Boros YUs, transforming this volatile spread into stable, fixed yields.
Assumptions
- Each trade captures at most 0.2% of the Implied APR from the Boros orderbook. For example, if Hyperliquid funding trades at 9.6% and Binance at 6%, the strategy sells down at most from 9.6% to 9.4% on Hyperliquid, while simultaneously buying from 6% to 6.2% on Binance
- The orderbook is assumed to recover fully within one hour
- Slippage on the CEX side is assumed to be negligible
- CEX positions are modeled at 10x leverage
Glossary
Long Avg Price (HLP): The Implied APR of the Hyperliquid YU market
Short Avg Price (BN): The Implied APR of the Binance YU market
Notional Volume: The total volume the strategy allows at each timestamp (hourly)
Annualized Return: The return % of the strategy, calculated and extrapolated over 1 year
Total Margin: The amount of margin needed to execute the arbitrage trade. The unit of the margin is dependent on the market i.e.
- BTC 28 Nov = BTC margin
- ETH 28 Nov = ETH margin
Weighted Annualized Return (%): Average return of all trades, with each trade being weighted based on its total margin required
Average Margin: Average margin required to execute the arbitrage trade throughout the backtested timeframe
BTC (31 Oct 2025 Maturity)
We’ll start by examining the arbitrage opportunities between BTCUSDT-Binance (31 Oct 2025 maturity) and BTCUSD-Hyperliquid (31 Oct 2025 maturity).
Our analysis reveals a persistent pricing gap on Boros for BTC funding rates on Hyperliquid and Binance (31 Oct 2025 maturity), with an average of 11.4% discrepancy noticed in our observation window.
This discrepancy is driven by a divergence in the actual underlying funding rates for BTC between the two platforms. As such, this creates consistent arbitrage opportunities. Every data point on the chart above presents a viable entry point with solid returns.
We quantified the strategy’s performance metrics for this market by backtesting across the entire observation window:
- Weighted Average Fixed APR: 11.4%
- Average Position Size: 1.21 BTC per opportunity
To contextualize these returns, Table 1 compares this strategy against established low-risk crypto yield opportunities:
The Boros funding rate arbitrage strategy demonstrates a substantial yield premium, approximately 3.5–9x higher than traditional staking yields, while maintaining delta neutrality and comparable risk characteristics.
Strategic timing during periods of elevated funding rate divergence between Hyperliquid and Binance could yield even higher returns:
September 20, 2025, 23:40 UTC
- Annualized Return: 17.7% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 2.3 BTC
October 18, 2025, 18:50 UTC
- Annualized Return: 23.5% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 1.2 BTC
October 19, 2025, 00:00 UTC
- Annualized Return: 22.1% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 1.1 BTC
These peak opportunities demonstrate that actively managed positions could potentially generate returns approaching 2x the strategy average.
The BTC arbitrage opportunity between Binance and Hyperliquid shows that this strategy works in practice. The backtested 11.4% weighted average fixed APR significantly outperforms other low-risk yield opportunities in crypto. With an average of 1.21 BTC in margin available per opportunity and peak instances hitting 23.5% APR, the strategy is both consistent and scalable for real capital deployment.
What’s particularly interesting is that these funding rate gaps persisted throughout our entire observation period and were not just isolated incidents. This suggests there are structural differences between how these platforms operate that create ongoing arbitrage opportunities, rather than fleeting inefficiencies that impede traders.
BTC (28 Nov 2025 Maturity)
We now turn to the arbitrage opportunities between BTCUSDT-Binance and BTCUSD-Hyperliquid (28 Nov 2025 maturity).
Our analysis reveals a continued pricing gap on Boros for BTC funding rates across the Hyperliquid and Binance markets, though with a slightly different risk-return profile to the October maturity. The average discrepancy of 6.42% was smaller than the 31 Oct maturity, but still created consistent arbitrage opportunities throughout our observation window.
Though more modest in magnitude, the strategy continues to deliver compelling risk-adjusted returns. The 6.42% average APR represents a 2.1–2.6x premium over traditional staking yields and remains highly competitive with established low-risk strategies like AAVE lending and sUSDe (Table 1).
What distinguishes this strategy from competing options/yield farms is its fixed yield alongside a delta-neutral structure. Knowing that the yield from this arbitrage can be consistent, while remaining unaffected by price volatility increases its attractiveness to traders seeking yield without directional exposure to crypto.
- Weighted Average Fixed APR: 6.42%
- Average Position Size: 0.71 BTC per opportunity
Again, strategic timing during periods of elevated divergence in Implied APR could yield stronger returns, with peak opportunities approaching 2x the strategy average:
November 6, 2025, 15:48 UTC
- Annualized Return: 12.36% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 2.94 BTC
November 5 2025, 20:24 UTC
- Annualized Return: 11.89% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 0.48 BTC
November 6 2025, 11:52 UTC
- Annualized Return: 11.64% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 0.58 BTC
With an average 0.71 BTC average position size per opportunity and peak instances exceeding 12% APR, traders can capture this arbitrage repeatedly to accumulate their desired position size. Despite offering lower returns compared to its October counterpart (6.42% vs 11.4%), the 28 Nov maturity demonstrates:
- Boros funding rate arbitrage remains economically viable across different markets and maturities
- It continues to outperform other alternatives in DeFi, remaining an attractive source of yield
ETH (31 Oct 2025 Maturity)
Having established the viability of BTC funding rate arbitrage, we now examine the same strategy applied to ETHUSDT-Binance and ETHUSD-Hyperliquid (31 Oct 2025 maturity)
Our analysis reveals equally compelling opportunities in the ETH market, with pricing gaps that mirror the structural inefficiencies observed in BTC. The average discrepancy of 9.94% in Implied APR throughout our observation window created consistent entry points.
We quantified the strategy’s performance metrics for this market by backtesting across the entire observation window:
- Weighted Average Fixed APR: 9.94%
- Average Position Size: 40.65 ETH per opportunity (~1.44 BTC equivalent at time of writing)
The ETH October maturity delivers a slightly lower average return against its BTC October maturity counterpart (9.94% vs 11.4%), with comparable capital deployment capacity.
Comparing against low-risk yield alternatives (Table 1), the 9.94% Fixed APR still offers outsized risk-reward:
- 3.5–4x premium over ETH staking (2.5–3%)
- 2.3–3x premium over AAVE lending (3.0–4.0%)
- Competitive positioning against Ethena sUSDe (4.5%-12%), with the advantage of fixed, predictable returns
Similarly, strategic timing during periods of elevated divergence in Implied APR yielded exceptional opportunities, with peak returns approaching up to 2.6x the average, comparable to its BTC counterpart:
September 19, 2025, 18:11 UTC
- Annualized Return: 23.88% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 27.96 ETH
September 20, 2025, 05:03 UTC
- Annualized Return: 23.86% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 4.83 ETH
September 20, 2025, 11:11 UTC
- Annualized Return: 23.7% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 7.90 ETH
The ETH October markets thus represent a solid alternative to the BTC markets. While offering slightly lower average yields, it delivers comparable peak returns (~23.8%) and maintains similar capital deployment capacity. ETH (and potentially other assets outside of BTC) offers an additional avenue for portfolios seeking to scale the strategy while diversifying asset exposure, while still maintaining the same delta-neutral, fixed yield profile.
ETH (28 Nov 2025 Maturity)
We complete our ETH analysis by examining ETHUSDT-Binance and ETHUSD-Hyperliquid (28 Nov 2025 maturity).
Consistent with the pattern observed in BTC, the November maturity ETH markets yielded lower returns relative to its October counterparts. However, opportunities remained persistent throughout the observation window.
- Weighted Average Fixed APR: 5.98%
- Average Position Size: 34.26 ETH per opportunity (~1.21 BTC equivalent at time of writing)
The average Fixed APR declined (5.98% vs 9.94%), and average position sizes also contracted (34.26 vs 40.65 ETH).
Despite this, the 5.98% fixed APR continues to deliver compelling returns relative to industry benchmarks (Table 1):
- 2.0–2.4x premium over ETH staking (2.5–3%)
- 1.5–2.0x premium over AAVE lending (3.0–4.0%)
- Exceeds the lower bound of sUSDe yields while providing fixed-rate certainty
Similarly, strategic timing during periods of elevated funding rate divergence created attractive opportunities that significantly outperformed the strategy average by almost 3x:
October 30, 2025, 16:39 UTC
- Annualized Return: 17.1% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 26.87 ETH
October 30, 2025, 17:57 UTC
- Annualized Return: 16.35% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 35.19 ETH
October 23rd, 2025, 00:57 UTC
- Annualized Return: 16.31% Fixed APR
- Position Size: 16.40 ETH
The ETH November maturity also tracks closely to BTC November averages (5.98% vs 6.42%), with higher capital deployment capacity (1.21 vs 0.71 BTC equivalent). Notably, its peak performance exceeds BTC November’s peak performance (16–17% vs 11–12%), exhibiting greater upside potential. As such, this arbitrage may be particularly attractive for active traders/fund managers timing their entries on the arbitrage.
Risk, Frictions, and Real-world Constraints
While the yields from cross-perp arbitrage are sizable, executing this strategy requires careful consideration of various risks and constraints.
Trade structure recap:
- Short Hyperliquid YU
- Short perp on Hyperliquid
- Long Binance YU
- Long perp on Binance
With 4 separate legs to trade and manage, we should carefully examine the key factors that could constrain and impact execution.
Orderbook Depth & Liquidity Limits
Based on our case studies, maximum trade sizes during peak APR opportunities are limited to low-6 figures in margin for both BTC and ETH.
Our analysis assumed that YU orderbooks recover within an hour and capped each trade at 0.2% of the YU orderbook. Under these assumptions, traders could execute the strategy sequentially. However, real-world liquidity conditions may vary significantly:
Orderbook depth recovery times may extend well beyond one hour, especially during high volatility periods.
Traders are not strictly bound by the 0.2% orderbook constraint in reality. Larger positions are possible by consuming more orderbook depth, albeit at slightly worse fixed rates due to slippage. This trade-off becomes especially attractive during peak arbitrage conditions. For instance, when spreads exceed 20% APR, absorbing additional slippage to capture larger size at 15–16% Fixed APR remains highly profitable
As such, traders should monitor real-time orderbook depth before execution and be prepared to scale position sizes up or down, or stage entries over multiple hours to minimize market impact.
Exiting positions on Boros may require careful limit order placement or TWAP execution (when possible) if YUs are not held to maturity. This is especially critical to minimize price impact for large sizes.
The deep liquidity for BTC and ETH perps on Both Binance and Hyperliquid generally makes slippage negligible on the perpetual side. However, during extreme market movements or flash crashes, even major exchange orderbooks can experience temporary liquidity gaps.
Asset Volatility & Liquidation Risks
While YUs convert the arbitrage into fixed yield and the overall position has a net zero directional exposure, each individual leg remains exposed to liquidation risk from price volatility.
- Hyperliquid short perp: Vulnerable to liquidation if BTC/ETH price spikes upward
- Binance long perp: Vulnerable to liquidation if BTC/ETH price crashes downward
- Boros short YU: Vulnerable to liquidation if Implied APR spikes upward
- Boros long YU: Vulnerable to liquidation if Implied APR crashes downward
Whipsaw price action during major economic events such as FOMC announcements, NFP releases, CPI data can trigger volatility spikes sharp enough to liquidate individual legs before traders can react. Ideally, the trade is arguably best executed during periods of low volatility when price action is relatively stable. Traders can deploy significant excess margin to buffer against liquidation risk, but this directly compromises capital efficiency.
Timing & Execution Risk
Executing this four leg strategy requires coordination across multiple venues. Margin must be present on two separate exchanges, plus BTC/ETH collateral prepared on Boros. This multi-venue setup introduces execution complexity.
Due to the volatility of crypto prices, traders may end up filling long and short positions of the trade at different prices after factoring in fees, compromising a “perfect” hedge”. Executing all four legs as market orders to capture time-sensitive arbitrage can result in higher slippage.
The strategy can be challenging to time on both entry and exit. On entry, traders must decide whether the arbitrage spread is wide enough and the liquidity depth is sufficient to justify execution. Unwinding presents similar challenges. YU orderbook liquidity may have changed since entry and price volatility during the unwind can make exiting all four legs cleanly difficult. Traders who need to exit quickly may face significant slippage or be forced to hold positions longer than intended.
Tools like Insilico Terminal enable traders to manage multiple perp accounts on a single terminal, significantly reducing the time lag between leg executions.
Counterparty & Depeg Risk (BTC Specific)
Executing BTC YU trades on Boros requires holding wBTC as collateral, introducing counterparty risks not present in ETH trades.
wBTC maintains a 1:1 peg to BTC through a custodial model managed by BitGo. This means traders are exposed to BitGo’s solvency and reserves management. If BitGo fails or is unable to honour redemptions, wBTC could depeg from BTC’s price.
Additionally, there are also possible smart contract risks to holding wBTC. While the contracts have undergone extensive audits, exploits or vulnerabilities could still compromise holdings.
Trading fees & Carry Costs
Transaction fees across all four legs accumulate and must be factored into net returns.
- Boros collects an 0.05% fee on the value of the position traded, and collects an 0.2% flat fee on every YU settlement
- Binance charges a 0.02% maker fee (limit orders), and a 0.05% taker fee (market orders)
- Hyperliquid charges 0.015% maker fees, and 0.045% taker fees
These costs are fixed regardless of how long the position is held, making longer duration arbitrage trades more fee-efficient. Traders should calculate break-even spreads that account for round-trip fees before entering positions.
Conclusion
This analysis demonstrates that cross-perp funding rate arbitrage through Boros represents a structurally viable and consistently profitable strategy. Across all examined markets — BTC and ETH with both October and November 2025 maturities — the strategy delivered average Fixed APYs ranging from 5.98% to 11.4% APR, with peak opportunities capable of spiking dramatically higher, exceeding 23% APR. We’ve previously documented instances exceeding even 43% Fixed APR, as shared in our earlier X post. While less frequent, these exceptional opportunities demonstrate the strategy’s potential during peak differentials.
These returns substantially outperform traditional low-risk yield alternatives, while providing the crucial advantage of fixed returns with zero directional exposure.
Traditional funding rate arbitrage is operationally burdensome and especially vulnerable to funding rate volatility. Traders must constantly monitor positions across multiple exchanges, adjust margins as rates fluctuate, and accept that profitable spreads can quickly evaporate or reverse. Despite the limitations and risks, the Boros approach remains superior to traditional methods with the advantages of predictable returns, extended holding periods without heavy monitoring (especially with significant margin), immunity to funding rate reversals, and the ability to size positions with confidence, knowing the exact yield at maturity.
Structural Opportunities Beyond The Study
While our empirical analysis focused on BTC and ETH perpetuals between Hyperliquid and Binance, the structural opportunities for this strategy extend far beyond these assets and exchanges.
Consider BNB which trades with a 0% APR baseline funding rate on Binance, stemming from a deliberate exchange policy to incentivise BNB trades. Meanwhile, other venues like Hyperliquid and Bybit maintain standard baseline funding at 10.95% APR. This creates a persistent, structural arbitrage opportunity to run this strategy. Similar structural advantages exist across dozens of altcoin perp markets (SOL, HYPE, DOGE) where exchange-specific policies or liquidity profiles create durable funding rate differentials.
Additionally, the arbitrage opportunities aren’t limited to Hyperliquid-Binance pairs. Major exchanges like OKX have also displayed persistent funding rate gaps against their counterparts:
The implication is clear: the opportunities we’ve documented in this article are not isolated phenomena, but representative examples of a much larger addressable market. As Boros grows and expands with more assets and exchanges, the total extractable yield from cross-perp funding arbitrage could also scale dramatically. Similarly, YU orderbook depth and liquidity will improve over time as we scale, especially as we onboard more institutional traders and market makers. What begins as a niche strategy for sophisticated traders could evolve into a standard institutional yield strategy.
The funding rate arbitrage opportunities documented in this report are persistent, profitable, finally practical to capture at scale with Boros. For traders seeking stable, uncorrelated returns in crypto markets, the infrastructure is here today.
Try It Yourself
To help you evaluate live opportunities, we’ve built a funding rate arbitrage calculator that lets you model potential returns across different scenarios of YU prices. Being able to see how the funding differences turn into fixed yield will also give you the confidence to execute the trade.
This functionality will also be integrated into the Boros UI soon for a more seamless experience, so do keep an eye out!
Interested in learning more about funding rate arbitrage or exploring OTC opportunities? Reach out to us at [email protected]