The arbitrage band is the price range around an underlying asset's spot price within which an asset-backed token trades, set by the width of the creation and redemption fees. Too wide and the token tracks its asset loosely; too narrow and the margin cannot motivate participants to enforce the peg.
The band floor is set by the cost structure of whoever enforces the peg, not by how stable the underlying asset happens to be.
Scroll to see the full diagram
How it works
The arbitrage band is the price range around spot within which the token trades in equilibrium. It is not a failure indicator, it is an engineered tolerance. The upper bound sits at spot plus the creation fee: any price above that creates a profitable mint-and-sell that participants exploit immediately. The lower bound sits at spot minus the redemption fee: any price below makes buy-and-redeem profitable.
A flat symmetric fee schedule produces a symmetric band that is easy to communicate. Asymmetric fees, where redemption exceeds creation, produce a downward-skewed band that sits below NAV on average. That can suit assets with costly redemption logistics, but it must be disclosed, because holders are structurally buying at a level that will consistently trade below the declared reference price.
How we approach it
The real question is not just how wide to set the band but whether the arbitrage economics at that fee level are viable for real participants. A band that looks tight on paper but whose implied margin falls below realistic round-trip costs, gas, custodian processing, counterparty spread, and capital cost, is a paper peg, not a functioning one. We model the realistic round trip before finalizing the fee schedule, not after.
Liquidity depth interacts with the band for illiquid underlyings. A large sell order can push price through the lower bound, and the correction is not instant: it requires a participant to execute a redemption with its processing delay. During that delay, urgent sellers face prices below the theoretical floor, so illiquid assets often need wider bands to absorb the redemption cycle.
Common mistake
The most frequent error is calibrating the band against the underlying asset's volatility rather than against the cost structure of the participants who enforce it. A low-volatility asset does not automatically support a tight band if the custodian's minimum redemption fee is large. The floor is set by whoever is doing the enforcing.
See RWA Tokenomics Design for how this applies in practice.
More in Real-World Assets (RWA)
Know the terms but not sure how they apply to your project? That is what an engagement is for. We design, document, and stress-test the whole token economy inside the Tokenomics Data Room.
80+ projects advised. Complete tokenomics in 4 to 6 weeks.