発行済み
Checked our cross-exchange funding snapshot today (10 November, 10:00 UTC) looking for the usual thing -- which pair is most lopsided. Instead of one standout number, ARB gave me two numbers that point opposite ways, on the same coin, at the same hour.
Unanimous negative funding is rare
We pull funding rates for 24 featured pairs from seven exchanges: Bybit, Binance, Bitget, Gate.io, MEXC, Hyperliquid and OKX. Out of those 24 pairs, 9 have funding positive on every venue (longs paying shorts everywhere), and exactly 2 have it negative on every venue. ARB is one of the two. Its per-8h rates right now: Bybit -0.0228%, Bitget -0.0185%, MEXC -0.0160%, OKX -0.0160%, Binance -0.0096%, Hyperliquid -0.0031%, Gate.io -0.0021%. Every one negative. The only other pair in that category is POL, with a similar spread.
Negative funding means shorts pay longs. So on ARB, right now, holding a short costs you money on every exchange you could pick, and holding a long gets paid on every exchange you could pick. That's not a close call or a one-venue quirk -- it's the full set.
But the position is shrinking faster than any other pair
Here's where it stops being a clean story. ARB's open interest is down 5.09% over the last 24 hours -- the single largest 24h OI drop of all 24 pairs we track, ahead of TRX (-4.24%) and HYPE (-2.08%). POL, the other unanimous-negative-funding pair, moved a comparatively flat -0.14% in the same window. Whatever is happening on ARB isn't happening on its one peer with the same funding profile.
ARB's perp is also trading at a small discount to its index price, -0.0737% (mark 0.167528 vs index 0.167651) -- consistent with the negative funding, not contradicting it. And the account-count metrics are unremarkable: global long/short ratio 1.90 (65.5% long) sits mid-pack at 13th of 24, and the top-trader ratio, 1.31 (56.7% long), is lower still. Nobody's positioning by account count is extreme here. The extreme readings are funding (unanimous) and OI (biggest drop of the set) -- not who's long or short by headcount.
| メトリック | ARB value | Rank of 24 |
|---|---|---|
| Funding, all 7 exchanges | negative on 7/7 | 1 of only 2 unanimous-negative pairs |
| Open interest, 24h change | -5.09% | largest drop of 24 |
| Perp vs index basis | -0.0737% (discount) | not ranked, consistent with funding |
| Global-account long/short ratio | 1.90 (65.5% long) | 13th, mid-pack |
| Top-trader long/short ratio | 1.31 (56.7% long) | lower than global, still net long |
What this actually tells you
Not a trade signal. What it tells you is that "funding is negative" and "shorts are closing" are not the same statement, and ARB right now is proof -- a market can pay longs on every single venue while the position itself gets smaller, not bigger, over a day. If the short build that was pushing funding negative is unwinding, OI would drop as those shorts buy back, which also happens to put upward pressure on the rate over time (less short pressure, less need to pay). If instead longs are the ones leaving -- taking a funding-subsidized profit and closing -- OI drops too, for a different reason, and the unanimous-negative funding might not last once they're gone. The data here can't tell you which of those is happening. It can tell you both scenarios produce the exact OI and funding readings we're looking at right now, which is itself a reason not to read too much into either number alone.
Where to check this yourself
This snapshot updates continuously and the numbers above will already be stale by the time you read them. Our cross-exchange funding page shows the same 7-venue breakdown live, open interest rankings has the full 24h-change table across all 24 pairs, and the ARB coin page carries funding, OI, basis and both long/short ratios side by side. If you're actually sizing a funding-rate position rather than just reading about one, run it through the 資金調達率裁定取引計算機 first -- unanimous negative funding looks attractive until you price in the borrow/short cost on the other leg.