Maker vs Taker Volume
Maker volume is volume that traded against a market maker's own resting orders, the passive side that others bought from or sold into. Taker volume is volume where the firm crossed the spread to trade against existing orders, activity that consumes liquidity rather than providing it. Tokenomist reports both, and their combined total, on the Volume Leaderboard.
TradFi parallel: Like separating the fills a designated market maker receives on its own quotes from the trades it initiates by lifting someone else's offer.
Key Takeaways
- 01Maker volume is a fill against the market maker's own resting orders, so the firm supplied the liquidity
- 02Taker volume is a fill where the firm crossed the spread into existing orders, so it consumed liquidity
- 03Combined volume measures overall turnover and says nothing on its own about how that turnover was produced
- 04A maker weighted split is the healthier signal, since providing liquidity is usually what the issuer is paying for
- 05Taker volume is legitimate as inventory management or hedging, and becomes a question when it persistently dominates
- 06Volume is neither depth nor spread, so high turnover can sit on a thin book and needs to be read alongside both
How It Works
Every trade has two sides, and the labels describe roles rather than different kinds of volume. One party had an order resting on the book, the other crossed the spread to meet it. When a market maker's resting bid or offer is traded against, that fill is maker volume for the firm: it supplied liquidity that someone else consumed. When the firm sends an order that crosses the spread into existing orders, the fill is taker volume: it consumed liquidity someone else supplied. The same firm produces both, usually every day.
The split is what makes the number readable. Combined volume measures turnover, and higher turnover on its own says nothing about how it was generated. Maker heavy volume is the firm doing what an issuer generally pays for, standing on both sides of the book so others can trade. Taker heavy volume means the firm was crossing to trade, which can be inventory management, hedging a position or directional trading. None of that is improper, and none of it is liquidity provision. A leaderboard rank built on combined volume alone will place both patterns in the same place.
Volume also answers a narrower question than it appears to. It is a record of what did trade, not a measure of what could have traded, which is depth, or of what it cost to trade, which is spread. A firm can post substantial turnover on a book that is thin between fills, and a quiet period can leave a genuinely well quoted book with modest volume. Reading volume next to depth, spread and uptime is what turns four partial views into one usable picture.
On the Volume Leaderboard, Tokenomist shows average maker, average taker and their combined total for the selected timeframe, with market share and volume loan utilization alongside. The ranking itself comes from Forgd's volume score. The practical habit is to look at the rank once and the maker to taker ratio twice, because two firms adjacent in the ranking can be doing quite different work.
Real World Examples
Same total, different service
Two firms report similar combined volume for the month. One generated most of it passively on its own quotes, the other by crossing the spread. The leaderboard totals are close and only one of them was consistently providing liquidity for holders to trade against.
Taker volume with a reason
A firm's taker share rises sharply in the week after a large unlock while it rebalances inventory it accumulated on the bid. The spike is explainable and temporary. The signal worth acting on is a taker weighted split that persists with no depth to show for it.
Turnover without a book
A firm ranks well on combined volume while its depth within tight thresholds stays thin. The turnover was real, and a trader arriving with size still met very little resting liquidity. Volume confirmed activity, not availability.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is maker volume always better than taker volume?
As a signal of liquidity provision, yes, because maker volume is the firm being traded against rather than trading. But a firm with zero taker volume is unusual, since managing inventory and hedging both require crossing the spread at times. The question is proportion and persistence, not the presence of taker flow.
Does high combined volume mean the token is liquid?
Not by itself. Volume records what traded, while liquidity is about what can trade and at what cost. That is depth and spread. A token can show strong turnover and still offer very little resting size to a participant arriving with a large order, which is why the volume figures are best read next to the depth and spread leaderboards.
Why would a market maker take liquidity at all?
Mostly to manage risk it accumulated by making. Filling one side repeatedly leaves an inventory position, and reducing or hedging that position often means crossing the spread. Taker volume from that activity is a normal by-product of quoting. Taker volume that dominates the split over long periods describes a different business.
How should I use the split when comparing firms?
Compare the maker to taker ratio at the same timeframe, then check whether the maker heavy firms also hold up on depth and uptime. A firm that provides most of its volume passively and sustains its depth and spread obligations is delivering the service. Combined volume alone will not separate that firm from an active trader.
Related Terms
Track on Tokenomist
Supply-side analysis for educational purposes. Not financial advice. Verify assumption and precision labels on the relevant token page.
Tokenomist.ai provides a complete solution for supply-side tokenomics data. Analyze future token emissions, track vesting schedules, and compare standardized tokenomics and allocation across projects to gain actionable insights