The first 30 days with a market maker decide whether the relationship runs smoothly or turns into a dispute. The most common market maker onboarding mistakes are not about choosing the wrong firm; they are operational: sending tokens before the terms are final, mishandling API keys and wallets, leaving KPIs vague, and failing to agree a reporting routine. Each one is cheap to fix before launch and expensive to fix after. This article lists eight mistakes and the fix for each, so your team enters the engagement with a clear setup.
It assumes you have already selected a provider. If not, start with how to choose a crypto liquidity provider and the market maker agreement checklist.
Mistake 1: Sending Tokens Before the Agreement Is Final
Teams under launch pressure sometimes transfer inventory while the contract is still being negotiated. Once tokens sit in the provider's wallet, your negotiating leverage on the open terms drops sharply.
Fix: treat the signed agreement, including loan terms, return conditions and option strikes if used, as the gate for any transfer. Agree the wallet addresses in writing, and send a small test transaction first. The models themselves are explained in market making fee models.
Mistake 2: Unclear Ownership of Wallets and Accounts
Who controls which wallet, which exchange account and which API key? Projects often discover during a dispute that nobody wrote this down. Some teams also lend tokens to an address they cannot later prove belongs to the provider.
Fix: keep a one-page register listing every wallet, exchange sub-account and API key: owner, purpose, permissions and rotation date. Hold your treasury in a multisig and keep it separate from the lending wallets. Custody options for token teams covers the setup.
Mistake 3: Over-Permissioned API Keys
An API key with withdrawal rights is a liability. Market making needs trading access, not the ability to move funds off the exchange.
Fix: whichever side creates the keys, make sure they are trade-only, with withdrawal disabled and IP whitelisting enabled where the exchange supports it. If your exchange accounts are yours and the provider trades through them, confirm who can change permissions. Exchange API integration for market making explains what the integration requires.
Mistake 4: Vague KPIs
"Provide healthy liquidity" is not a measurable obligation. Without numbers, you cannot tell whether the provider is meeting expectations, and neither side can argue from the same facts.
Fix: define obligations in measurable terms: maximum spread, minimum depth within a stated price band, minimum uptime, and per-venue requirements. Specify how each is measured, over what window and what counts as an exception such as exchange downtime or extreme volatility. How to evaluate market maker performance shows what to track and how to read it.
Mistake 5: No Agreed Reporting Routine
Some projects get a dashboard login and nothing else. Others get a weekly PDF nobody opens. Both leave problems undiscovered until the quarter ends.
Fix: set a fixed cadence: daily access to live metrics, a weekly summary covering spread, depth, volume and inventory, and a monthly review call. Agree the data source in advance, preferably something you can verify against exchange data and not only the provider's own numbers.
Mistake 6: Treating Volume as the Goal
Founders often ask for volume targets because volume is visible and easy to quote. But volume is a weak measure of liquidity, and chasing it can push providers toward activity that looks like wash trading. Venues and data aggregators are alert to it, and the reputational damage is yours.
Fix: anchor to spread and depth, not turnover. If you do set a volume expectation, tie it to organic activity and make clear that manufactured volume is out of bounds. Read trading volume versus liquidity and what wash trading is before you set targets.
Mistake 7: Ignoring Inventory and Unlock Interaction
Your provider holds a mix of tokens and stable assets. If a large investor unlock lands in the same week as a thin order book, the provider's risk changes and quoting behaviour may change with it. Teams that never share their unlock calendar are surprised when spreads widen.
Fix: share the vesting and unlock calendar, planned announcements and listings with the provider in advance, under confidentiality. Agree how inventory is topped up or reduced, and who approves changes. Allocation of launch liquidity should already be part of your supply plan, as discussed in our token allocation breakdown.
Mistake 8: No Plan for Exit
Contracts end, relationships change, and exchanges delist. Few teams think through how the engagement unwinds until they need to.
Fix: agree termination notice, a wind-down period for orders, return of loaned inventory by a stated date, treatment of any options and a clear process for handing over data. Settling this on day one costs a few lines in the contract. Settling it during a disagreement costs far more.
Who Should Own Onboarding Internally
Many onboarding problems trace back to a gap in ownership: the founder signs the contract, the engineer sets up keys, and finance tracks the inventory, yet nobody owns the whole picture. Name one person as the day-to-day contact for the provider, with a deputy for escalations. That person keeps the register from Mistake 2, reviews the weekly report, and logs every parameter change with the date and reason. When a question comes up three months later, such as why spreads widened in a particular week, the log gives you facts to work from, not recollections.
It also helps to agree how changes are requested. A message in a chat group that says "tighten the spread" is not a change process. Decide whether parameter changes need written confirmation, who on your side can approve them, and how quickly the provider should acknowledge them. Small habits like this keep the relationship professional and make any later review of performance straightforward for both sides.
The 30-Day Onboarding Timeline
| Period | What should happen |
|---|---|
| Before day 1 | Agreement signed; wallet and account register complete; test transfer done |
| Week 1 | API keys created trade-only; connectivity tested; KPI definitions confirmed; reporting access live |
| Week 2 | Inventory transferred in agreed tranches; quoting begins on the first venue; spread and depth checked against targets |
| Week 3 | Additional venues added; first weekly report reviewed; unlock calendar shared |
| Week 4 | Month-one review: KPI results, exceptions, adjustments to parameters; decide on scaling or changes |
Onboarding Checklist
- Signed agreement before any token transfer
- Wallet, account and API key register written and shared internally
- Treasury in multisig; lending wallets separated
- API keys trade-only, withdrawals off, IP whitelist on
- KPIs defined with measurement method and exceptions
- Reporting cadence and data source agreed
- Unlock calendar and announcement schedule shared in confidence
- Inventory top-up and reduction process agreed
- Exit, return and data handover terms written down
Good Onboarding Is Quiet
When onboarding is done well, nothing dramatic happens: quotes appear, spreads tighten, reports arrive on time, and both sides know what to expect. The goal is a working routine that survives a volatile week, not a perfect launch day. At Fibonacci Capital we run structured onboarding for every engagement so teams know the setup, the metrics and the escalation path from the start. If you are about to bring on a market maker or want to audit your current setup, get in touch with our team.