Skip to main content
In short: when a liquidity position stops earning fees, it is usually because it is out of range: the price has moved outside the range you set. This tool replays a strategy over a pool’s history, including moving the range when the price leaves it, and compares the result, impermanent loss included, with simply holding the two tokens. Tool: run_lp_backtest Where choosing a range answers “what would this band have collected”, this answers what happens when the position is allowed to move. Give it a pool, named as chain|PAIR|feePpm (for example ethereum|USDC/WETH|500), a strategy from list_lp_strategies, a window and a size.

​
Naming your own range

Two strategies take a band you write in real prices: the way an LP interface shows a range, and the way people say it. They are marked [band] in the strategy list. Every other strategy derives its own band and refuses bounds rather than holding them for the whole window under a moving strategy’s name. Asking recentre for 2,800–3,200 means nothing, because a recentring band moves.
A half-width cannot say what a price range says. “2,800 to 3,200” is only expressible as “the opening price plus or minus X” when it happens to be symmetric around the price the window opened at, and around an opening price of $3,353 it is not.

​
The band decides the answer

Same pool, same size, same window. 2025-01-01 to 2026-09-11, $100,000 in ethereum|USDC/WETH|500: A narrower band earns more while it holds and holds for less of the window. The best of these is neither the widest nor the tightest.
Until 2026-09-12 those four rows were identical. The band was accepted, sent, and dropped by a service whose request did not declare it, so every answer was the default half-width, labelled with whichever range had been asked for.Nothing failed and every figure looked reasonable. Only a comparison between two bands could show it, which is why the table above is four rows and not one.

​
The strategy’s own inputs

params carries them, as numbers: rung count, half-width, geometry. list_lp_strategies names every input a strategy takes, with its default and its range. If you omit it, each input takes its default, and the answer is for those defaults rather than for the setup you meant. A ladder runs at four rungs however many you meant: More rungs leave less of your money working at any moment. A four-rung ladder runs at about a quarter utilisation. The strategy claims this, and here you can measure it.

​
In range comes first

The in-range figure leads because every rate under it is computed across the whole window regardless. A band that held the price 19% of the time earned nothing for the other 81%, and its fee APR is still quoted over the full period, because that is what an APR is.
In that example the fee APR is 57.9% and the position still finished down 6.4%. People read the fee figure as the outcome. It is only one side of the result, and the other side was larger.

​
Three numbers, never one

The result has three numbers: fees, impermanent loss, and the total against simply holding the same two tokens. The third is the one that answers “was this worth doing”: in the run above the answer is yes, narrowly, because holding did worse.

​
It tells you when its own inputs were poor

Two warnings come back and both change how much the figures are worth:
  • The indexer priced none of this pool’s volume. Fees were rebuilt from the stable leg rather than read. The answer labels them as an estimate.
  • The venue’s protocol fee could not be read. The cut taken out of every fee is assumed. On a pool where the cut is 25%, assuming none overstates by a third.
The service also warns about the strategy itself. recentre reopens the band the day it goes out of range, so it is in range almost always by construction, and the answer says so, along with what a single day of delay costs.

​
Size changes the answer

capital changes the answer itself, not just its magnitude. Fees split by liquidity, so a large position earns a share it could not earn twice. Past roughly a tenth of the pool, the answer describes a pool the deposit itself would have changed, and the tool says which fraction it is.

​
It is history

It makes no forecast, signs nothing, and does not model gas.