C1 Pools use a different fee structure to AMMs because they solve a different problem. The 1% seller fee is high by AMM standards. It still produces better net execution for sellers in thin liquidity tokens, which is the segment C1 Pools are designed to serve.Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://whitepaper.flowstate.exchange/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
A complementary model
AMMs are the foundation of on-chain liquidity. They work well for stables, blue chips and any pair with deep two-sided demand. The 0.05% to 0.30% fee range fits that profile because liquidity is abundant and price discovery is continuous. C1 Pools are designed for a different segment: tokens where two-sided liquidity is thin and price impact dominates the cost of any large trade. In that segment the binding constraint is not the protocol fee, it is slippage. C1 Pools remove the slippage and charge a fee that reflects the value of doing so. Both models can co-exist in the same router. The aggregator picks whichever delivers the best net price for the trade. For deep pairs that will usually be an AMM. For thin pairs at meaningful size that will usually be a C1 Pool.Why the AMM fee range is what it is
AMM fees sit between 0.05% and 0.30% because traders are already paying a price impact cost embedded in the curve. The fee is layered on top of slippage, so protocols that compete for routed flow optimise the fee downward to keep total execution cost competitive. The economics are well-tuned for that environment.| Protocol | Fee | Typical slippage (thin liquidity) | Total cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uniswap V2 | 0.30% | 5-15% | 5.3-15.3% |
| Uniswap V3 | 0.05-1% | 3-10% | 3-11% |
| SushiSwap | 0.25% | 5-15% | 5.25-15.25% |
| Curve (stables) | 0.04% | minimal | ~0.04% |
| C1 Pools | 1.00% | 0% | 1.00% |
The seller’s calculation
C1 Pools charge the seller because the seller receives the primary benefit. Consider a $200K exit:Uniswap V2
Fee: 0.30%Slippage: ~6%Net received: ~$188KLoss: ~$12K
Uniswap V3
Fee: 0.30%Slippage: ~4%Net received: ~$192KLoss: ~$8K
C1 Pool
Fee: 1.00%Slippage: 0%Net received: ~$198KSaved: $6-10K vs best AMM
The buyer’s position
Buyers pay nothing. C1 Pools are free for buyers. They receive tokens at market price with zero slippage and zero additional fee. For aggregators the routing decision is straightforward. If a C1 Pool can fill the buy at oracle price with no impact, that route wins on net execution. If a deep AMM offers a better total price, that route wins. C1 Pools are an additional option in the routing surface, not a replacement for any existing pool.How the 1% fee is split
The 1% seller fee is distributed across four recipients to align incentives across every participant in the routing ecosystem:| Recipient | Share | Amount on $1M volume |
|---|---|---|
| Aggregator / traffic source | 0.30% | $3,000 |
| STATE token stakers | 0.30% | $3,000 |
| Reseller / BD partner | 0.30% | $3,000 |
| Treasury | 0.10% | $1,000 |
| Total | 1.00% | $10,000 |
Aggregator share
The 0.30% aggregator share makes C1 Pools one of the highest-earning pool type any aggregator can integrate. A standard Uniswap V3 integration pays the aggregator nothing because the fee accrues to LPs. A C1 Pool integration pays the aggregator 0.30% on every routed trade, permanently. Aggregators can also add their own fee on top of the 0.30%. Because buyers receive zero slippage, an additional 0.10% to 0.20% aggregator margin still delivers better net execution than any AMM in the same scenario. That creates a revenue-stacking opportunity unique to C1 routing.Staker share
STATE stakers receive 0.30% of C1 Pool volume. The staking mechanism is being finalised and will be documented before TGE.Reseller / BD partner share
The 0.30% reseller share goes to operating entities that bring trading volume into the C1 Pool ecosystem through business development, integrations and community channels. New reseller and BD partners can be onboarded under the same fee share.Treasury
10% of every fee accrues to the protocol treasury. The treasury funds ongoing protocol development, integrations and ecosystem initiatives.How revenue scales with trade size
The C1 fee model produces a different revenue curve to an AMM because the fee is anchored to trade size at market price, not to depth-adjusted output. The two models are tuned for different trade profiles.