Eric Schertenleib

dblp:327/3766 · also Eric G. Schertenleib · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-0927-8178ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Security and privacy · 3 · 3 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 2 since 2021
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Non-Atomic Arbitrage in Decentralized Finance
abstract
The prevalence of maximal extractable value (MEV) in the Ethereum ecosystem has led to a characterization of the latter as a dark forest. Studies of MEV have thus far largely been restricted to purely on-chain MEV, i.e., sandwich attacks, cyclic arbitrage, and liquidations. In this work, we shed light on the prevalence of non-atomic arbitrage on decentralized exchanges (DEXes) on the Ethereum blockchain. Importantly, non-atomic arbitrage exploits price differences between DEXes on the Ethereum blockchain as well as exchanges outside the Ethereum blockchain (i.e., centralized exchanges or DEXes on other blockchains). Thus, non-atomic arbitrage is a type of MEV that involves actions on and off the Ethereum blockchain.In our study of non-atomic arbitrage, we uncover that more than a fourth of the volume on Ethereum’s biggest five DEXes from the merge until 31 October 2023 can likely be attributed to this type of MEV. We further highlight that only eleven searchers are responsible for more than 80% of the identified non-atomic arbitrage volume sitting at a staggering $132 billion and draw a connection between the centralization of the block construction market and non-atomic arbitrage. Finally, we discuss the security implications of these high-value transactions that account for more than 10% of Ethereum’s total block value and outline possible mitigations.
Lioba Heimbach, Vabuk Pahari, Eric Schertenleib
SP3
2023 DeFi Lending During The Merge
Lioba Heimbach, Eric Schertenleib, Roger Wattenhofer
AFT2
2022 Risks and Returns of Uniswap V3 Liquidity Providers
abstract
Trade execution on Decentralized Exchanges (DEXes) is automatic and does not require individual buy and sell orders to be matched. Instead, liquidity aggregated in pools from individual liquidity providers enables trading between cryptocurrencies. The largest DEX measured by trading volume, Uniswap V3, promises a DEX design optimized for capital efficiency. However, Uniswap V3 requires far more decisions from liquidity providers than previous DEX designs.
Lioba Heimbach, Eric Schertenleib, Roger Wattenhofer
AFT2