How to choose a crypto market maker: ask for exchange coverage, written spread and depth terms, the firm's own trading capital, a reporting schedule and the payment terms, in that order, then put each answer next to what a directory already holds on the firm. NAUT tracks 25 service rows tagged market making, read on 7 November 2026, of which 14 are market makers by their own stored description or their own site: 9 work on a retainer, 4 on a success fee, 9 accept payment in a token, their estimated monthly ranges run from $2,000 to $43,000, and onboarding lead times run from 7 to 56 days.
Data note. The 25 tagged service rows were read from NAUT's own database on 7 November 2026, read-only. 11 of the 25 are not counted in the 14. 6 are confirmed off topic by their own description or domain: an NFT marketplace, a margin-trading blockchain protocol, a research and development lab, a forex and contracts-for-difference broker group, a euro stablecoin issuer and an artificial-intelligence portfolio app. The other 5 are excluded for a reason of their own: they carry no domain, no stored description and an X profile that this environment could not fetch, so nothing confirms them either way, and they are not named here. 7 of the 14 kept firms had 1 detail put to the firm's own page on 8 November 2026: 6 came back confirmed, Flowdesk's came back contradicted and is left out of this article, and the other 7 firms were not put to a source at all. NAUT Research wrote it, and the places where NAUT's stored text loses to a firm's own page are left in rather than tidied away.
How to choose a crypto market maker: the 5 checks
Each check is a question with a short answer, and a seller who will not answer it in writing has answered it. 3 of the 5 are things a directory can pre-fill for you, and 2 of them have to come from the firm.
- Count the venues3 of the 14 stored NAUT descriptions name a venue count, from Caladan's 65+ exchanges to the 35+ on Digital Liquidity Partners' own page.
- Get spread and depth in writingNAUT holds no spread or depth field on any of the 14, so this one comes from the contract.
- Ask whose capital tradesNAUT holds no market-making capital figure on any of the 14, and 2 firms say on their own pages that they trade their own.
- Fix the reporting cadence1 of the 14, Digital Liquidity Partners, documents monthly reports and live dashboards on its own page.
- Price the option terms9 of the 14 take a retainer, 4 a success fee, and 9 accept payment in a token.
Check 1: how many venues does the firm actually quote on?
A market maker is worth what its venue list is worth to you, so ask for the list and the tier on each venue. 3 of the 14 kept firms name a venue count in their own stored NAUT description: Caladan, Flowdesk and Digital Liquidity Partners. That is 3 of 14, which is the useful finding: a venue count is a selling point a firm publishes when it has one, and 11 of these 14 do not publish one at all.
Of those 3, 2 held up against the firm's own page on 8 November 2026. Caladan has been active since 2017 and trades 1,000 or more assets across 65 or more exchanges, and its own site puts a number on the longer record with the line "1,000+ Tokens traded all time". Digital Liquidity Partners is stored on NAUT as partnered with more than 20 exchanges, while its own page on 8 November 2026 reads "Partnered with 35+ exchanges", so the stored figure is behind the firm's own claim and the firm's own page is the one to quote at them. Flowdesk's stored venue and asset counts came back contradicted by its own site, so they are left out here and its row below carries price terms only.
Check 2: are spread and depth in the contract, or in the pitch?
This is the check a directory cannot do for you. NAUT's stored service profile holds a payment model, a monthly price range, an onboarding lead time, the funding stages a firm works with and whether it takes a token, and it holds no spread, depth or uptime field on any of the 14. So ask for the numbers in the contract: maximum spread, minimum depth at a stated distance from mid, quoting hours and the venues each applies to.
1 of the 14 publishes a commitment of that kind on its own page. Digital Liquidity Partners describes designated market making for token offerings "By maintaining contractually committed 24/7 passive liquidity tiers", read on 8 November 2026. That is the shape of the sentence to ask every other firm for, and 13 of the 14 were not checked for one or do not publish one, so for them it is a question rather than a known answer.
Check 3: whose capital is on the book?
Ask whether the firm quotes with its own capital, with a loan of your tokens, or both, because the answer decides who carries the loss when the market moves against the quote. NAUT holds no market-making capital figure on any of the 14. The 1 capital field in the record tracks a firm's own deal investments elsewhere in the database, which is not a market-making balance sheet, so it is left out of this article rather than relabelled.
2 of the 14 answer it on their own pages. LO:TECH is a capital markets firm for onchain markets that says "We trade our own capital" and also sells market data, read on 8 November 2026, and raised $12,000,000 in early November 2026 to extend into the United States and Asia. Adaptive Frontier describes itself as a "Crypto native proprietary trading firm" offering liquidity, treasury management and advisory work to token projects, read the same day. A proprietary book is not a promise about your spread, and it does tell you the firm has something of its own at risk.
Check 4: what gets reported to you, and how often?
Fix the cadence before the loan terms. 1 of the 14, Digital Liquidity Partners, documents monthly liquidity reports and real-time dashboards for clients on its own page, read on 8 November 2026. For the other 13 there is nothing on reporting in NAUT's record, so ask for a named report, a named frequency and the venue breakdown inside it, and put it in the agreement.
Stored descriptions are a weak proxy here, and 3 of the 14 do not even carry one: Auros, FalconXGlobal and Adaptive Frontier have no stored description on NAUT at all. Auros and FalconXGlobal are kept on their established identity as a market maker and a prime broker, and Adaptive Frontier is kept on the line from its own page in check 3.
Check 5: how do you pay, and what does the option cost?
This is the check NAUT's data answers best, and it is where the firms differ most. 9 of the 14 work on a retainer, 4 on a success fee, and 1, Digital Liquidity Partners, has no stored service profile at all, so it appears in no price or payment comparison here. 9 of the 14 accept payment in a token, which in practice means a token loan with a call option on top, so read the strike, the size and the expiry before the monthly number.
How to choose a crypto market maker on price and option terms?
Take the monthly estimate as a band to negotiate inside, not a quote. Every 1 of the 13 stored price ranges carries NAUT's price source as an estimate, so no firm in this table has quoted these numbers to NAUT.
The 13 firms with a stored service profile, ranked by the top of their estimated monthly range, largest first. Pay is the payment model, Monthly is NAUT's estimated monthly range, Days is the onboarding lead time, and In token is whether the firm takes payment in a token:
| Firm | Pay | Monthly | Days | In token |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Flowdesk |
Success fee | $8,500 to $43,000 | 35 days | No |
 Nonco |
Retainer | $4,000 to $21,000 | 7 days | Yes |
 Auros |
Retainer | $3,500 to $18,000 | 21 days | Yes |
 Caladan |
Retainer | $3,000 to $15,000 | 56 days | Yes |
 Byte Trading |
Retainer | $3,000 to $14,500 | 35 days | Yes |
 Skynet Trading |
Retainer | $3,000 to $14,500 | 14 days | No |
 Stillman Digital |
Success fee | $3,000 to $14,500 | 7 days | Yes |
 FalconXGlobal |
Retainer | $2,500 to $13,500 | 21 days | No |
 ABEX |
Success fee | $2,500 to $13,000 | 7 days | Yes |
 Arbelos Markets |
Success fee | $2,500 to $13,000 | 56 days | No |
| LO:TECH | Retainer | $2,500 to $12,500 | 21 days | Yes |
 Adaptive Frontier |
Retainer | $2,500 to $11,500 | 56 days | Yes |
 TDMM |
Retainer | $2,000 to $11,000 | 14 days | Yes |
Flowdesk is the outlier in 2 ways: its range tops out at $43,000, which is 2.0x the next firm, and it is the only 1 of the 13 whose stored profile covers a Series A stage as well as pre-seed and seed. The other 12 are all stored as pre-seed and seed. 12 of the 13 sit inside a band of $2,000 to $21,000 a month at the top of their range, so for most of this list the monthly fee is the smaller half of the negotiation and the token terms are the larger half.
How to choose a crypto market maker on reporting and lead time?
Lead time is the number that decides whether a firm can be in place for your listing date, and it is stored for all 13. It runs from 7 to 56 days, an 8.0x spread across the same list, with no relationship to price: Stillman Digital at 7 days and Byte Trading at 35 days carry the same $3,000 to $14,500 range.
| Lead time | Firms | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 7 days | ABEX, Nonco, Stillman Digital |
3 |
| 14 days | Skynet Trading, TDMM |
2 |
| 21 days | Auros, FalconXGlobal, LO:TECH |
3 |
| 35 days | Byte Trading, Flowdesk |
2 |
| 56 days | Adaptive Frontier, Arbelos Markets, Caladan |
3 |
3 of the 13 need 56 days, so a project 6 weeks from a listing has 10 of the 13 to work with and 3 it has probably already missed. Run the reporting question in the same call as the lead-time question, because both end up in the same agreement.
What this tells a founder running a token launch
Picking a market maker for a token launch is 2 decisions wearing 1 name: who quotes your token, and what you hand over to get it. NAUT's record is strong on the second and thin on the first, so use it to shorten the shortlist and spend the call on spread, depth and reporting.
- Start from payment model. 9 retainer firms and 4 success-fee firms on this list are 2 different deals, and a success fee has to be defined before it can be agreed.
- Treat the monthly figure as a band. All 13 stored ranges are estimates, so the first real number comes from the firm.
- Sort by lead time before price. 3 of the 13 need 56 days, and a listing date does not move for a counterparty.
- Count the token terms as cost. 9 of the 14 take payment in a token, and a loan plus an option is usually the expensive half.
- Ask the 2 questions no directory holds: the written spread and depth terms, and whose capital is quoting.
- Shortlist on lead time10 of the 13 firms with a stored profile onboard in 35 days or less, and 3 need 56.
- Split by payment model9 of the 14 take a retainer and 4 a success fee, so ask each for the other shape too.
- Open the NAUT pageEach of the 14 has a page with its domain, its X account and the people NAUT names at it.
- Ask for the contract numbersMaximum spread, minimum depth at a stated distance from mid, quoting hours, per venue.
- Price the token leg9 of the 14 accept payment in a token, so read the strike, the size and the expiry first.
What this tells a business development team selling to market makers
The same 25 rows read the other way are a target list. 14 of them are trading firms with a token-project client base, and the 5 that could not be confirmed either way are the gap in NAUT's record rather than in the market. Firms with a 56-day onboarding cycle, 3 of the 13, are the ones buying infrastructure and data on a planning horizon, and the 3 at 7 days are running on volume.
Related reading on NAUT: Crypto market makers list: 24 firms and 102 people on NAUT and How to get listed on Binance: 2 routes, 0 authorized agents.
Can you pull this data through the NAUT API?
Yes. The same service rows behind this article come back from GET https://api.naut.so/v1/services?q=market%20making&limit=100 with Authorization: Bearer $NAUT_KEY, and 1 firm with the people NAUT names at it comes from GET https://api.naut.so/v1/services/tdmm. Each data or search call costs 5 credits on a plan from the NAUT pricing page, and the parameters, the response shape and the rate limit are in the NAUT API docs. Verified Telegram, email and LinkedIn for the people on those pages unlock on any paid NAUT plan, so start a 7-day trial if you need the channel and not just the name.
How to choose a crypto market maker FAQ
How much does a crypto market maker cost?
On NAUT's record, read 7 November 2026, the 13 market makers with a stored service profile sit in estimated monthly ranges from $2,000 to $11,000 at the low end, TDMM, up to $8,500 to $43,000 at the high end, Flowdesk. All 13 of those ranges are stored as estimates rather than quotes, and 9 of the 14 kept firms also accept payment in a token, so the token loan and its option terms belong in the cost alongside the monthly fee.
Which crypto market makers accept payment in a token?
9 of the 14 market makers NAUT tracks accept payment in a token as of 7 November 2026: ABEX, Adaptive Frontier, Auros, Byte Trading, Caladan, LO:TECH, Nonco, Stillman Digital and TDMM. 4 do not, Arbelos Markets, FalconXGlobal, Flowdesk and Skynet Trading, and Digital Liquidity Partners has no stored service profile, so NAUT holds no answer for it.
How long does it take to onboard a crypto market maker?
Between 7 and 56 days on the 13 firms with a stored lead time on NAUT, read 7 November 2026. 3 are stored at 7 days, 2 at 14, 3 at 21, 2 at 35 and 3 at 56, so a token launch less than 8 weeks out should start with the 10 firms at 35 days or less.
Which spread and depth terms should the contract name?
Maximum spread, minimum depth at a stated distance from mid price, quoting hours, and the venues each of those applies to. NAUT holds no spread, depth or uptime field on any of the 14 market makers it tracks, and 1 of the 14, Digital Liquidity Partners, publishes a commitment of that kind on its own page, so for the other 13 it is a question to put to the firm.
Where can I find crypto market makers and their contact channels?
On NAUT. The 14 market makers in this article each have a page under /services/, read 7 November 2026, carrying the firm's domain, its X account and the people NAUT names at it, and the same rows come back from the API with GET https://api.naut.so/v1/services?q=market%20making. Verified Telegram, email and LinkedIn for those people unlock on any paid NAUT plan, so start a 7-day trial if you need to reach them this week.
Sources
- NAUT's own database, read on 7 November 2026, read-only: the 25 service rows tagged market making, each row's stored description, domain, X handle, country and service profile (payment model, monthly price range and its source, onboarding lead time, funding stages, whether it takes a token). Every count above was computed from those rows at that time.
- Caladan's own site,
caladan.xyz, read 8 November 2026: the 2017 start, the asset and exchange counts, and the line "1,000+ Tokens traded all time". - Digital Liquidity Partners' own site,
dlp.group, read 8 November 2026: "Partnered with 35+ exchanges", the founding team's Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Virtu Financial and XBTO background, and the designated market making described "By maintaining contractually committed 24/7 passive liquidity tiers" with monthly liquidity reports and real-time dashboards. - LO:TECH's own about page,
lo.tech/about, read 8 November 2026: "We trade our own capital" and the market data business line, with the early November 2026 $12,000,000 raise reported by CoinDesk. - Adaptive Frontier's own site,
adaptivefrontier.com, read 8 November 2026: "Crypto native proprietary trading firm", with liquidity, treasury management and advisory services for token projects. - Nonco's own site,
nonco.com, read 8 November 2026, with its institutional stablecoin liquidity work reported by The Defiant: stablecoin and crypto liquidity for institutional and enterprise clients. - Stillman Digital's own site,
stillmandigital.com, read 8 November 2026: institutional-grade digital asset infrastructure, execution and liquidity, with the firm's acquisition by DeFi Technologies reported on PR Newswire. - Flowdesk's own site,
flowdesk.co, read 8 November 2026. It contradicted the venue count, asset count and office list stored on NAUT, so none of those stored figures is used above and the firm appears here on its stored price terms only.