# Impermanent loss

{% hint style="info" %}
**In short**:

✅ Impermanent loss (IL) is the value difference between:\
(a) providing liquidity to a pool vs. (b) simply holding the same tokens, after prices move.

✅ It’s called “impermanent” because if the price ratio reverts, the gap shrinks.

✅ Swap fees (and incentives) can offset or exceed IL—that’s why LPing can still be profitable.

✅ Volatile pairs → higher IL risk; correlated/stable pairs → lower IL.
{% endhint %}

### Why IL happens

AMMs price assets by pool ratios rather than order books. When price moves on the market, arbitrage traders push the pool back to fair value by adding the cheaper token and removing the more expensive one. In a constant-product AMM (like most v2 pools), the pool keeps the product x\*y = k constant.

As an LP, you end up holding more of the token that went down (relative) and less of the one that went up, compared to simple holding. That’s IL.

### Example

Imagine you want to provide liquidity into the TON/USDt pool, and an initial prices are: 1 TON = 10 USDt (i. e. $10), 1 USDt = $1.

Let’s say the pool reserves 100 TON and 1,000 USDt (each side worth $1,000).

Remember the constant product formula?  x\*y = k = 100 x 1,000 = 100,000

You decide to add liquidity: 10 TON ($100) + 100 USDt ($100) = $200\
Your pool share ≈ 10%

Consider price change: TON pumps 4× vs USDt. New price: 1 TON = 40 USDt (=$40)

Pool must rebalance to the new ratio with k:

* Let new reserves be x TON and y USDt, with y =40 x and x ⋅ y = 100,000
* x ⋅ 40x=100,000 ⇒ x = 50, y = 2,000 
* New pool: 50 TON and 2,000 USDt

You decide to withdraw your 10% share:

* You get 5 TON and 200 USDt
* Value at new price: 5 × $40 + 200 × $1=$200 + $200 = $400

Compare to holding strategy:

* If you had simply held 10 TON + 100 USDt: 10 × $40 + 100 × $1 = $400 + $100 = $500

Impermanent loss = $500 − $400 = $100 (−20%) relative to a holding strategy.

🔎 Note the pattern: as TON outperforms USDt, the pool tilts you away from TON and toward USDt — this is the essence of IL. IL depends on price ratio, not which side you added: if TON dumps vs USDt, you’ll end up holding more TON and less USDt than a holder — still IL.

### Quick Reference Table

Below are common IL magnitudes (absolute %)

| Price move | ≈ IL    |
| ---------- | ------- |
| 1.25×      | \~0.6%  |
| 1.5×       | \~2.0%  |
| 1.75×      | \~3.8%  |
| 2×         | \~5.7%  |
| 3×         | \~13.4% |
| 4×         | \~20.0% |
| 5×         | \~25.5% |

{% hint style="info" %}
💡 For precise scenarios, use our [Impermanent Loss Calculator](https://tools.ston.fi/impermanent-loss-calculator).
{% endhint %}

### Fees vs. IL

* Swap fees (and possible farming incentives) accrue to LPs as trades happen.
* If fee revenue ≥ IL, your net PnL can be positive.
* Deeper and busier pools (with healthy volume) improve the odds of fees offsetting IL — but nothing is guaranteed.

### Common Misconceptions

* “IL is a permanent loss.” → False. It’s impermanent until you withdraw; if prices revert, IL can shrink.
* “Fees always cover IL.” → Not always. It depends on volume, fee rate, and how far prices move.
* “Equal-value deposits eliminate IL.” → No. IL depends on price changes after you deposit, not how you enter.


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://guide.ston.fi/en/providing-liquidity/impermanent-loss.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.