Carbon DeFi exchange profile

Carbon DeFi is an orderbook-style decentralised exchange built around individually funded strategies. Makers publish prices and budgets; takers trade against that liquidity directly, through aggregators or as arbitrageurs. The distinction matters because creating a strategy makes liquidity available, while an execution still requires another participant to take it.[2]

The published product description supports standard ERC-20 tokens and excludes rebasing and fee-on-transfer tokens. Permissionless strategy creation is a technical capability, not a review of an issuer or proof that a token will attract buyers. The interface’s concentrated-liquidity product was previously described as overlapping liquidity; these names refer to the same strategy family.[1]

DefiLlama’s 21 October 2026 snapshot showed approximately US$1.23 million of TVL and US$1.72 million of DEX volume in its trailing 30-day window. The volume was concentrated in Sei, with smaller activity on Ethereum, Coti, Celo and TAC. These are attributed liquidity and turnover observations, not account counts or a global exchange ranking.[34]

The current fee page directs users to contract settings for the protocol charge and says collected protocol fees are allocated through DAO governance. It does not support treating an old 0.20% headline as one permanent rate across all pairs, networks and interface routes. Inspect the final transaction route and displayed charge before deciding whether a quote is comparable.[14]

For a hypothetical pair returning 2,000 parts per million, the fee rate is 2,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 0.002, or 0.20%. Applied to 1,000 units of its chargeable amount, that is 2 units. This illustrates the query’s unit conversion only; it is not a live rate observation and excludes gas, routing charges and rounding.[15]

For a hypothetical full-range sale of 10 base tokens between 1,600 and 2,500 quote tokens per base token, the documented geometric-mean estimate is √(1,600 × 2,500) = 2,000. Full conversion would therefore estimate 20,000 quote tokens. This is not an execution forecast: partial fills and replenished recurring orders change the remaining budget, and gas and external charges are excluded.[12]

The creation reference notes that encoded on-chain values can differ slightly from user-entered parameters because of precision and normalisation. For a tightly priced or very small order, inspect the stored values as well as the form you typed. Token decimals also matter: the contract’s amounts are token units encoded at the respective token’s precision.[17]

Editing is checked against the current order state. The update call includes both expected existing orders and replacement orders, helping prevent an edit from silently applying after another trade has changed the position. A stale-state failure should therefore prompt a fresh position read and a new review, rather than repeated submission of the same obsolete assumptions.[18]

A strategy’s transferable voucher NFT controls the underlying position. The inspected CarbonController source checks the voucher owner for update and deletion, and reserves fee-setting functions to an administrator. Sending the voucher elsewhere can therefore transfer practical position control; it should not be treated as an unrelated collectible. These source-code observations do not establish the current administrator of every deployed network.[32]

The public deletion reference still shows a pause-related modifier, while the newer inspected repository version does not include it on that function. That difference is a version-control issue, not proof that any live deployment is presently paused or unpausable. A material withdrawal decision needs the actual network, deployed implementation and current state.[19][32]

The published interface terms exclude US residents and domiciliaries and apply sanctions and prohibited-jurisdiction restrictions. They list countries including Russia and Ukraine, among others; this is the operator’s stated access policy, not a summary of every jurisdiction’s law. A connected wallet does not override these conditions.[29]

The inspected Ethereum configuration lists MetaMask, WalletConnect, Coinbase Wallet and Safe connectors and identifies 24 February 2026 as the policy update date. These are configuration observations for that frontend version, rather than an assurance of identical behaviour in every mobile browser or on every Carbon deployment.[31]

A market price touching the chosen range does not ensure a fill. The execution guide explains that available liquidity, competition between strategies and network gas affect whether a taker has an economic reason to trade. A small residual order may remain untouched even when the external price appears favourable. Increasing a tolerance cannot create an interested counterparty.[11]

The strategy ROI display uses current token prices to value historical token-quantity changes, separates periods between funding changes and aggregates those returns. It should not be read as historical cash profit at the prices prevailing on each trade date. Preserve actual quantities, funding movements and contemporaneous valuations when preparing accounts or tax records.[10]

The interface terms describe a website that prepares transaction data rather than executing on users’ behalf. They provide Swiss-law arbitration in Zurich. No entity-specific financial licence or deposit-compensation entitlement was established; the foundation’s commercial-register identity is not an exchange authorisation.[29]

The ChainSecurity report expressly limits what an audit can establish. Its security review and described administrative roles do not promise reimbursement, a segregated client-money claim or a particular insurer’s payout. Treat a position as exposure to the relevant tokens and deployed contracts, with the audit’s exact version and exclusions in view.[33]

The published privacy policy identifies Bprotocol Foundation, a Swiss foundation seated in Zug, under UID CHE-181.679.849. The terms and privacy content were inspected in the canonical Bancor frontend repository; the legal date comes from its Ethereum configuration. This establishes the published website counterparty, while the protocol’s governance is separately described through BancorDAO.[30][31]

Carbon’s ecosystem documentation places Carbon DeFi and the Arb Fast Lane under BancorDAO governance through staked BNT. The arbitrage protocol is a separate ecosystem component; its activity should not be represented as a personal managed strategy or automatically counted as Carbon interface users.[13]

The canonical website explicitly distinguishes this Bancor product from the Carbon protocol associated with Switcheo Labs. Use carbondefi.xyz and the app and documentation linked from it when identifying the service. A similar name does not establish common ownership, shared fees or an interchangeable legal agreement.[28]

Operator

Bprotocol Foundation (website); BancorDAO (protocol governance)

Exchange model

Decentralised

Service scope

Funded on-chain limit, range, recurring and concentrated-liquidity strategies; spot execution.

Client types

Not established

Pricing publication

Public pricing

Other names

Carbon by Bancor

Funding scope

Wallet-funded standard tokens; strategy deletion returns remaining liquidity.

Custody and asset handling

Tokens are committed to smart-contract strategies; voucher ownership controls position management.

Client eligibility

Website excludes US residents/domiciliaries and prohibited jurisdictions.

Support

Official strategy guide links Telegram and Discord; API provides activity data.

Authorisation and registration scope

Swiss website counterparty; no entity-specific financial authorisation established.

Exchange metadata checked 21 Oct 2026Source 1Source 28Source 30Source 13Source 2Source 29Source 32Source 19Source 14Source 3

For AI integrations, the documentation defines prices as quote tokens per one base token, buy budgets in quote tokens and sell budgets in base tokens. Mixing those units can radically alter a funded strategy. The published MCP service is labelled experimental, so it should be understood as transaction preparation within the user’s signing workflow, not an autonomous discretionary manager.[25]

As a range fills, its marginal price moves with the remaining budget. That best currently available price is different from the average price for converting the entire remaining position. Review both the amount still offered and the changing execution curve when interpreting a partially filled card.[9]