EN

Risks for liquidity providers

4 minDifficulty Checked 2026-11-10
Key takeaways
  • When prices move, a pool ends up holding more of the asset that fell.
  • Fees can offset that loss. Nothing in the protocol makes them cover it.
  • A frozen pool asset freezes the LP tokens. An issuer with clawback can claw back from a pool.

Putting assets in a pool is not the same as holding them. Four things can go wrong.

1. The price moves. A pool does not know outside prices. Say FOO jumps in value elsewhere. For a moment the pool still sells FOO at the old, cheap rate. Traders buy it up until the pool's price catches up. The pool is left with less FOO, the asset that rose, and more XRP.

Your LP tokens now redeem for that new mix. It can be worth less than if you had kept your FOO and XRP in your wallet. This gap is often called impermanent loss. xrpl.org calls it currency risk. If the price returns to where it was, so does the mix. If you withdraw before then, you take the new mix.

2. Fees may not cover it. Trading fees add to the pool, and they can offset the gap. They depend on how much people trade. No rule says they will be enough.

3. The token's issuer has powers. If an issuer freezes a pool token, deposits stop and the LP tokens freeze too. If the issuer enabled clawback, it can pull its token out of the pool from a specific provider.

4. The token may be worthless. Anyone can issue a token and open a pool for it. A pool of XRP and a bad token still takes your XRP. Check the issuer before depositing.

Check yourself3 questions
1. FOO doubles in price against XRP on outside markets. What does an XRP/FOO pool hold afterward?
2. An issuer freezes its token, which sits in a pool. What happens to that pool's LP tokens?
3. Does the protocol promise liquidity providers a return?
Sources
Next moduleMulti-Purpose TokensT5 · 15 min