Resolving liquidity matrix...
Fees, liquidity, product flags, margin, RFQ, and editorial volume. Fit score is a research model, not a safety or “best broker” ranking. Deribit scores higher on the research-model fit (94 vs 74). OptionsMatch does not open accounts.
Trade hops use tracked /go links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. OptionsMatch does not open accounts. We may earn a commission.
| Metric | Paradigm Institutional crypto options RFQ / block liquidity | Deribit Benchmark crypto options venue |
|---|---|---|
| Fit scoreresearch model | 74 | 94 |
| Fit /10research model | 7.4 | 9.4 |
| Liquidityresearch model | 72 | 98 |
| Cost scoreresearch model | 68 | 78 |
| Product depthresearch model | 88 | 96 |
| Tech / APIresearch model | 80 | 95 |
| API quality | 4/5 | 5/5 |
| Maker bpsresearch model | — | 3 |
| Taker bpsresearch model | — | 3 |
| Margin | mixed | portfolio |
| Settlement | usdc, coin | coin, usdc |
| Assets | BTC, ETH | BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP |
| RFQ / blocks | Yes | Yes |
| On-chain | No | No |
| 24h vol (edit.) | — | $1.2B |
| OI (edit.) | — | $18B |
| Best for | RFQ / blocks · Multi-leg structures · Institutional | Long-dated · Highest liquidity · Pro desks |
| KYC | Institutional KYC / invite | Full KYC for fiat rails; crypto deposit flows vary by region |
| Profiles / hops |
Fit score is a research model, not a safety or “best broker” ranking.
Paradigm liquidity score 72 vs Deribit 98. Product depth 88 vs 96. RFQ/blocks: Paradigm & Deribit. On-chain: — / —.
Both venues enforce geo and KYC rules that change by entity. Paradigm: Invitation / institutional onboarding. Deribit: US; UK retail restrictions vary. Use country hubs for jurisdiction mapping — not legal advice.