Post by Auros

Most projects find out how their market maker actually operates after they've signed. By then, switching is expensive. For Report 3 of the Auros × The Block Liquidity Mastery Series, we spoke with executives at Bybit, Kraken, Keyrock, Immutable, LMAX Group, and others. The same five criteria kept coming up and the last two are the ones teams consistently underweight going in. 1. Reputation gets assessed on brand name when it should be assessed on behaviour under stress. Ask for references you didn't receive from the firm itself. Ask specifically what happened when markets turned. 2. Technical capability and capital strength have to be read together. A firm with strong infrastructure but a thin balance sheet will pull liquidity when conditions deteriorate - which is exactly when you need the opposite. 3. Specialisation is underrated. As Giancarlo Cudrig at Immutable put it: "There are meaningfully better MMs depending on size, stage, and vertical. A one-size-fits-all approach is inefficient and often value-destructive." The firm that's excellent for a large liquid token may be the wrong fit for an early-stage launch. 4. Operational discipline is harder to see in a pitch. Ask for sample reports. Ask how they handle issues they didn't cause. Reactive problem-solving and disciplined operations are not the same thing. 5. Economic alignment is the one most teams look at last. Low fees can reflect low commitment. What matters is whether both sides stay exposed to the same conditions throughout the contract - and whether the structure adapts when things change. The full report has a due diligence checklist, RFP template, and contract negotiation guidance.