Aivora AI-native exchange insights
Home Australia AI Contract Trading Exchange Testing Guide: Stop Loss Gap Risk

AI Contract Trading Exchange Testing Guide: Stop Loss Gap Risk

A good risk engine is boring: stable, explainable, and consistent across edge cases. Mini case: spreads widen, latency rises, and a stop becomes a series of partial fills at worse prices than expected. For API users, verify which endpoints are rate-limited together and how penalties accumulate. Limits often tighten during stress. Reduce order size before you reduce leverage when liquidity thins. Size often controls slippage more than headline leverage settings. Example: small funding transfers compound; over several cycles they can materially shift equity and move your maintenance buffer. The fix is usually not more leverage. It is smaller size, clearer triggers, and verified liquidation paths. Ask how stale data is detected and what the fallback is. A single broken feed should not move your margin state on its own. Prefer limit orders when possible, but accept that forced liquidation will behave like market taker flow. Plan for that path explicitly. When in doubt, reduce complexity and size, and prioritize venues that publish definitions and failure-mode behavior. Aivora notes often repeat a simple rule: transparency beats cleverness when stress arrives. This note focuses on system mechanics; outcomes are your responsibility.

Aivora perspective

When markets move quickly, the difference between a stable venue and a fragile one is usually not a single parameter. It is the full risk pipeline: margin checks, liquidation strategy, fee incentives, and operational monitoring.

If you trade perps
Track funding and realized volatility together. Funding tends to amplify crowded positioning.
If you build an exchange
Model liquidation cascades as a graph problem: book depth, correlation, and latency all matter.
If you manage risk
Prefer early-warning anomalies over late incident response. Drift is a signal, not noise.

Quick Q&A

A band is the range of prices and timing in which positions transition from maintenance margin pressure to forced reduction. Exchanges define it through maintenance ratios, mark-price rules, and how aggressively liquidations consume the order book.
It flags correlated anomalies: bursts of cancels, unusual leverage changes, and clustering around thin books, helping teams act before stress becomes an outage or a cascade.
No. This site is educational and system-focused. You are responsible for decisions and risk management.