The crypto market has been taught by perpetual contract education for too long, so that when many people hear “going long, going short, adding leverage,” their minds automatically default to opening a futures position.
But recently, after looking at @TermMax ’s Alpha Market, a different question came to mind: Does leveraged trading really have to be tied to “liquidation”?
TermMax’s approach is not quite the same.
For certain assets that don’t yet have a mature perpetual market, it doesn’t force-create a Perp. Instead, it uses options structures like Calls and Puts to express bullish and bearish views. The buyer first pays a Premium. If the direction is correct, they gain profit; if the direction is wrong, the maximum loss is simply the premium paid at the start.
At first glance, this difference seems small. In reality, it changes the entire risk structure.
With perpetual contracts, you don’t only have to judge direction—you also have to manage margin, funding rates, and liquidation lines at the same time. Even if the market eventually moves according to your prediction, a single sharp wick in the middle could liquidate your position before you get there.
Options work differently.
From the beginning, you can know the worst-case amount of money, and only then decide whether this trade is worth doing.
That’s also what I find interesting about TermMax. The first thing it makes people remember is fixed-rate borrowing, but if you keep reading, you’ll find the team has been building around the same idea: turning uncertain financial risk into something that can be priced as early as possible.
In borrowing, they want to determine the cost of capital in advance; in Alpha Market, they attempt to determine the maximum loss of a leveraged trade upfront.
These two products look completely different on the surface, but the underlying idea is actually quite consistent.
Of course, options structures are clearer—but that doesn’t mean users will necessarily migrate from perpetuals. Crypto users are used to Perp’s high liquidity and simple operations. With options, you also have to deal with pricing, expiration dates, and liquidity depth.
So now when I observe $TMX, I’m not only wondering whether it can build the product. I’m also more interested in one question: Would Crypto users actually be willing to accept a trading方式 completely different from perpetuals, just so they can know the risk in advance?
#termmax
But recently, after looking at @TermMax ’s Alpha Market, a different question came to mind: Does leveraged trading really have to be tied to “liquidation”?
TermMax’s approach is not quite the same.
For certain assets that don’t yet have a mature perpetual market, it doesn’t force-create a Perp. Instead, it uses options structures like Calls and Puts to express bullish and bearish views. The buyer first pays a Premium. If the direction is correct, they gain profit; if the direction is wrong, the maximum loss is simply the premium paid at the start.
At first glance, this difference seems small. In reality, it changes the entire risk structure.
With perpetual contracts, you don’t only have to judge direction—you also have to manage margin, funding rates, and liquidation lines at the same time. Even if the market eventually moves according to your prediction, a single sharp wick in the middle could liquidate your position before you get there.
Options work differently.
From the beginning, you can know the worst-case amount of money, and only then decide whether this trade is worth doing.
That’s also what I find interesting about TermMax. The first thing it makes people remember is fixed-rate borrowing, but if you keep reading, you’ll find the team has been building around the same idea: turning uncertain financial risk into something that can be priced as early as possible.
In borrowing, they want to determine the cost of capital in advance; in Alpha Market, they attempt to determine the maximum loss of a leveraged trade upfront.
These two products look completely different on the surface, but the underlying idea is actually quite consistent.
Of course, options structures are clearer—but that doesn’t mean users will necessarily migrate from perpetuals. Crypto users are used to Perp’s high liquidity and simple operations. With options, you also have to deal with pricing, expiration dates, and liquidity depth.
So now when I observe $TMX, I’m not only wondering whether it can build the product. I’m also more interested in one question: Would Crypto users actually be willing to accept a trading方式 completely different from perpetuals, just so they can know the risk in advance?
#termmax