Ethereum has seen a significant increase in liquidity over the past three months, with a 2% market depth increasing from $278.35 million on April 25 to $393.34 million on July 21.
This 41% increase comes from a clear accumulation of break orders on both sides of the order book, suggesting an increase in participation by market makers and a larger buffer for volatile trading sessions.
However, the rapid spikes of trading activity on July 21 compressed the depth-to-volume ratio to months’ lows, pointing to a growing but still limited capacity in the absorption of rapidly moving flows.
The bid/ASK composition on July 21 showed a mild tilt towards the seller. Liquidity of $209.99 million was $209.9 million, with bids within the 2% range of $183.5 million. Although not dramatically disproportionate, the $26.64 million gap suggests careful upward resistance, perhaps following Ethereum’s recent rally, due to profitable and hedging actions.
More noticeably, US-based exchanges currently account for 50.29% of the global market depth of 2%, regaining parity with offshore platforms.
This shows a shift from April when the US platform fell slightly below the 50% threshold. Kraken and Cex.io were the main drivers of the move, holding 31.2% and 29.97% of the US market share, respectively, while Coinbase was catching up at just 18.54%. Coinbase’s decline in depth share may be attributed to recent adjustments to its fee structure, which reportedly reduced market makers’ incentives.
On the global side, Binance retained its advantage at 44.53% of all 2% es liquidity, followed by Bitfinex at 12.64% and OKX at 12.59%. Binance continues to act as the central liquidity hub for the market, but its share has slipped slightly over the past few weeks. Bitfinex and OKX have acquired a modest position, reflecting the gradually redistribution of liquidity at high-frequency trading venues.
Despite this shift, Binance remains the most popular venue for Ethereum trading. On July 21st, Binance processed 47.24% of its centralized exchange (CEX) spot ETH volume. Crypto.com and Bybit continued at 12.55% and 7.59% respectively, with Coinbase handling just 5.87% of the world’s CEX flow.
The gap between market depth and actual volume was most evident in the context of the July 21 transaction. Spot volume rose from just $4.15 billion in May, from $5.36 billion on June 25th. This followed a conservative expansion of 2% ($330.69 million to $393.34 million) and compressed the depth-to-volume ratio from 6.2% to 2.6%.
In reality, this means that the order is relatively thinner than the size of the flow required to absorb, and if the transaction persists in the low-liquid zone, it can increase the risk of slipping.
The sharp decline in depth and volume ratios on July 21 shows how market activity can quickly outperform order expansion, even when liquidity appears to be increasing. It also highlights the limitations of book-based metrics when faced with volatile or event-driven flows.
Regarding decentralized exchanges, DEX trading volume remains relatively stagnant. On July 21, DEXS processed just $699.51 million (approximately 4.5% of the daily CEX volume), despite an overall surge in activity. This ratio has not changed much since April, when DEX volumes reached $339.78 million compared to $5.79 billion in CEX flows. While on-chain trading is popular among the retail and arbitrage segments, large participants continue to rely on intensive venues with better execution guarantees and reduced friction costs.
Interestingly, Binance’s ETH/USD price traded between $3,703 and $3,859 on July 21st, closing at $3,764. This 4.2% info move is relatively contained given spot sales of nearly $15 billion. It suggests that the expanded order book depth played a role in attenuating volatility, even amid increasing activity. Ethereum saw an info-in-day swing of 6.1% at a similar volume event in mid-May.
Based on this data, we can draw some important conclusions about the market. First, although the market depth has been improving absolutely, the gap between liquidity and real-time volume remains wider during peak sessions. Second, changes in depth share to US venues indicate possible market maker relocation in anticipation of more favorable regulatory stances or evolving operational constraints abroad. Third, Binance’s role as a fluidity and execution venue remains structurally important. Even as a redistribution of depth, its unparalleled volume of trade affects price discovery.
Finally, the relative weakness of DEX volumes highlights a sustained structural barrier to wider adoption. These include gas fees, slip resistance, and latency issues. This is all the challenges that remain unsolved despite the growth of L2S and routing aggregators.
Overall, Ethereum’s fluidity profile demonstrates material advancements, particularly in the depth of rest and venue diversification. However, ecosystems continue to rely heavily on several dominant players for both fluidity and quantity.
Since April first appeared on Cryptoslate, the liquidity of post-Ethereum order books has increased by 41%.