Crypto market makers are typically paid in one of two ways: a fixed monthly retainer, or a token loan combined with call options. The retainer is a straightforward cash fee; the loan model swaps cash for tokens and upside. Choosing between them shapes both your cash flow and how aligned your market maker is with your token's success.
This guide explains each structure, the trade-offs, and how to pick one. For the underlying numbers, pair it with How Much Does a Crypto Market Maker Cost?.
The retainer (monthly fee) model
You pay the market maker a fixed recurring fee — usually monthly — in stablecoins or fiat. In exchange they quote your market to an agreed standard of spread, depth, and uptime.
Strengths
- Predictable cost — you know exactly what you are spending.
- You keep your tokens — no supply is handed over.
- Transparent — easy to hold against a KPI report.
Weaknesses
- Cash out of pocket every month, regardless of results.
- You may still need to fund inventory yourself, depending on the deal.
The retainer suits projects with treasury cash and a preference for clean, auditable arrangements — often teams already listed on major venues.
The token loan + call option model
Instead of cash, you lend tokens to the market maker to use as trading inventory. They are compensated through call options — the right to buy some of those loaned tokens later at preset strike prices. See the glossary for the underlying terms.
Strengths
- Low upfront cash — attractive for early projects with limited treasury.
- Aligned upside — the market maker profits if the token does well, so they are motivated to support a healthy market.
Weaknesses
- Can get expensive — if the token appreciates sharply, the options become very valuable.
- Supply exposure — loaned tokens are in someone else's hands; terms must define returns and limits.
- Complexity — strike prices, loan size, and duration all need scrutiny.
The loan model suits pre-revenue or early-stage tokens that are token-rich but cash-poor.
Side by side
| Retainer | Token loan + options | |
|---|---|---|
| You pay in | Cash (monthly) | Tokens + option upside |
| Upfront cost | Higher | Low |
| Cost if token moons | Flat | Rises with price |
| Supply handed over | None | Loaned to the MM |
| Incentive alignment | Neutral | Tied to token upside |
| Best for | Cash-rich, established | Token-rich, early stage |
The hybrid
Many real deals combine the two: a smaller retainer plus a modest token loan. This keeps cash cost manageable, limits option exposure, and still aligns incentives. If a market maker insists on a large loan with deeply in-the-money options and no cash component, treat it as a point to negotiate, not a default.
How to choose
- Cash-rich, later stage? A clean retainer is usually simplest.
- Token-rich, pre-TGE? A loan model can bootstrap liquidity without draining treasury.
- Unsure? Start hybrid, keep the loan modest, and insist on clear return terms.
Whichever structure you pick, judge the market maker on the same things: spread, depth, uptime, and transparent reporting. See How to Choose a Crypto Market Maker.
The right deal structure funds a real market without giving away more than you need to — and that balance is exactly what we help projects strike.
