How Linear USDC Perpetuals Differ from Inverse Crypto Contracts
Summary
This product guide explains linear USDC-margined perpetual contracts and compares them with inverse contracts collateralized in bitcoin. For equivalent positions, it says dollar-denominated profit or loss can match, while settlement currency differs: inverse-contract gains are paid in BTC and linear-contract gains in USDC. Consequently, BTC collateral leaves account value exposed to bitcoin price changes when no position is open, whereas a USDC balance remains dollar-denominated by default.
The guide also covers shared USDC collateral across ALT-USDC perpetuals and explains that position size is fixed in the underlying asset for linear contracts, compared with a fixed dollar value for inverse contracts. It includes operational details about depositing ERC-20 USDC on Ethereum and warns that sending USDC over unsupported networks can result in loss. The examples illustrate contract mechanics rather than performance; the guide’s claims describe the exchange’s product at launch and do not assess broader risks such as stablecoin or venue exposure.
Key ideas
- Linear USDC and inverse BTC perpetuals can yield equivalent dollar P&L but settle in different currencies.
- BTC collateral keeps the account exposed to bitcoin price changes when positions are closed.
- USDC collateral provides a dollar-denominated balance by default.
- Linear contracts fix position size in units of the underlying asset, while inverse contracts fix dollar value.
- ALT-USDC contracts share collateral, and the described USDC deposits support only Ethereum ERC-20.
Tags
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.