Maker vs. Taker
Also: maker taker · liquidity provider vs liquidity taker
A maker posts a resting limit order and provides liquidity; a taker crosses the spread to fill immediately and removes it. The distinction drives fees, fill quality, and who bears adverse selection.
Every fill has two sides. The maker placed an order that was sitting in the book; the taker sent an order that matched against it. Makers supply liquidity and usually pay lower fees (sometimes a rebate); takers demand immediacy and pay for it — in fees and in crossing the spread.
The catch: making is not free money. When someone lifts your resting bid, they often know something you don’t in that instant — that’s adverse selection. Studies of venues like Polymarket show takers losing at most price levels, but naive makers get picked off by informed flow.
For an agent, the maker/taker choice is a live decision, not a setting. Patient, non-urgent entries lean maker to save cost; time-sensitive exits and stop-outs lean taker to guarantee the fill. A policy that forces “always maker” will hang an agent in a fast market — the right envelope lets it take when immediacy is worth more than the spread.
- microstructure
- order book
- fees
Research source: rSwarm research library →