𝘽𝙍𝙊𝙊𝙊𝙊, 𝙒𝙃𝘼𝙏 𝙄𝙁 𝙔𝙊𝙐 𝘾𝙊𝙐𝙇𝘿 𝙎𝙒𝘼𝙋 𝘽𝙏𝘾 𝙁𝙊𝙍 𝙓𝙍𝙋, 𝙀𝙏𝙃 𝙁𝙊𝙍 𝘽𝙏𝘾 𝙊𝙍 𝙐𝙎𝘿𝙏 𝙁𝙊𝙍 𝙐𝙎𝘿𝘾 𝘼𝘾𝙍𝙊𝙎𝙎 𝘾𝙃𝘼𝙄𝙉𝙎, 𝘼𝙇𝙇 𝙁𝙍𝙊𝙈 𝙊𝙉𝙀 𝙐𝙄? 😭👀 No jumping between platforms. No manually coordinating separate steps. Just choose what you have, what you want and where you want it delivered! That's the vision behind 𝗣𝗢𝗟𝗬𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗘𝗥 𝗤𝗨𝗜𝗖𝗞 𝗦𝗪𝗔𝗣, the upcoming flagship feature expected around the end of October or beginning of November. 👀⚡ But hold on, because the technology behind this is what makes it REALLY interesting! 1/2🧵 𝗟𝗘𝗧'𝗦 𝗕𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗞 𝗜𝗧 𝗗𝗢𝗪𝗡! HOW WILL IT WORK? 🤔 Imagine holding BTC on Bitcoin but wanting XRP in your destination wallet. Here's how the journey works: 1️⃣ CHOOSE YOUR ASSETS Select the asset and network you're sending from, then choose what you want to receive and its destination network. Want BTC → XRP? ETH → BTC? USDT → USDC? Or ETH on Base → ETH on Arbitrum? That's the vision: different assets and networks connected through one interface, wherever the required routes and markets are supported. 2️⃣ ENTER YOUR AMOUNT AND WALLET Choose how much you want to swap and enter the wallet address that should receive your output. 3️⃣ REVIEW YOUR QUOTE Check the exchange rate, minimum protected output, fees, destination details and quote expiration BEFORE sending your funds. No guessing what the quoted conversion is supposed to deliver! 4️⃣ SEND YOUR ASSET Polyester provides the deposit instructions for your specific swap. Once your transfer is processed, the input becomes available for conversion. 5️⃣ THE ORDER BOOK DOES ITS JOB! ⚡ Polyester executes the conversion through its own order book for the selected trading pair, with price protection defining the minimum output the swap can accept. 6️⃣ RECEIVE YOUR ASSET After the conversion settles, the resulting asset is delivered through the selected destination route. Your deposit, conversion and delivery are connected through one Quick Swap workflow. SIMPLE FOR THE USER. POWERFUL UNDER THE HOOD. 🤯 NOW HERE'S THE REAL PLOT TWIST! Polyester isn't approaching cross-chain swaps the same way as Chainflip, NEAR Intents, Relaylink, funxyz and THORChain DEX. The BIG difference? 🔥 REAL ORDER BOOKS. POLYESTER'S OWN ORDER BOOKS. Let's make this ridiculously simple. 🟢 IMAGINE $1 MILLION IN ORDER-BOOK LIQUIDITY. With market makers keeping prices aligned with Binance or Bybit, that capital can be concentrated around the latest market price as conditions change. When BTC moves, market makers can update their orders to keep liquidity close to where the market is trading. The goal? Make more of that capital useful for executing trades around the current price. Now compare that with LP pools. Liquidity in these pools is distributed across a range of prices depending on their design. That means capital isn't necessarily concentrated where the market is trading right now. As a trade grows relative to the available liquidity, the execution price can move further, increasing slippage. THAT'S THE CAPITAL-EFFICIENCY CHALLENGE! 👀 🟣 AND WHAT ABOUT SOLVER-BASED SYSTEMS? Intent-based solutions use solvers to fulfil users' requests. Those solvers need to make money from execution, often through the spread. That introduces another participant into the transaction who needs to earn from providing the service. Polyester's approach is different: execute swaps through its own order books rather than relying on LP pools or external solvers to perform the conversion. The ambition is clear: concentrate liquidity more efficiently, reduce slippage and make large swaps more practical. And because execution happens through real order books, the quality of the result can be evaluated through actual market depth and execution prices. Of course, the advantage in any particular trade depends on available liquidity, market conditions and the size of the swap.

𝙒𝙀𝙇𝘾𝙊𝙈𝙀 𝙏𝙊 𝘿𝘼𝙔 11 𝙊𝙁 𝙊𝙐𝙍 30 𝘿𝘼𝙔𝙎 𝙊𝙁 𝙋𝙊𝙇𝙔𝙀𝙎𝙏𝙀𝙍! 🔥 Ever clicked BUY and wondered what happens before your order becomes a trade? 👀 Welcome to Day 11 of our Polyester lesson series, where we break down the product piece by piece. Today we're exploring 𝙏𝙍𝘼𝘿𝙀𝙎 𝘼𝙉𝘿 𝙁𝙄𝙇𝙇𝙎, where your order starts turning into an actual execution! An order is your instruction to buy or sell. A fill is the quantity that actually executes when it matches an eligible opposing order. So clicking BUY doesn't mean you've bought the asset already. Your order must pass the necessary checks and find a match first. ⚙️ 𝙃𝙊𝙒 𝘿𝙊𝙀𝙎 𝙄𝙏 𝙒𝙊𝙍𝙆? @polyester uses 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝘆𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲 to process orders and match eligible buyers and sellers. Think of it as the engine room turning your instruction into an execution. The system checks your account, available balance and market rules before matching begins. Better prices get priority and when prices are equal, earlier eligible orders go first. No cutting the queue! 😂 Imagine you're buying 1 BTC with a limit price of 100,000 USDT. Seller A offers 0.3 BTC at 99,800, Seller B offers 0.4 BTC at 99,900 and Seller C offers 0.3 BTC at 100,000. If all are eligible, your ONE order can produce THREE fills at different prices. You receive 1 BTC for 99,900 USDT in total before fees. That's why your average execution price can differ from your limit price. One order, multiple fills. BOOM! 💥 After each fill, settlement records the asset exchange and applicable fees. 🤯 𝙒𝙃𝘼𝙏 𝙄𝙁 𝙊𝙉𝙇𝙔 𝙋𝘼𝙍𝙏 𝙊𝙁 𝙔𝙊𝙐𝙍 𝙊𝙍𝘿𝙀𝙍 𝙁𝙄𝙇𝙇𝙎? Say you ordered 1 BTC but only 0.35 BTC executes. That's a partial fill, leaving 0.65 BTC unfilled. Depending on the order instructions, the remainder may stay open or be cancelled. GTC can remain active, IOC cancels what can't execute immediately and FOK requires the whole order to execute immediately or cancels it. Market orders follow applicable price protection. Cancelling the remainder does NOT reverse fills that already happened! Maker and taker roles matter too. A maker order was already resting on the order book when matched; a taker order consumes existing liquidity. One order can have both types of fills, which may affect fees. 👀 𝙒𝙃𝙀𝙍𝙀 𝘿𝙊 𝙔𝙊𝙐 𝘾𝙃𝙀𝘾𝙆? Market Trades shows public executions across a market, while your personal Trades and Fills show executions attributed to your account. Open Orders tracks active orders, Order History shows how orders ended and Order Details connects an order to its fills. Funds helps you understand your balance and reserved amounts. Understanding fills helps you review execution prices and fees, recognise partial fills and investigate your activity instead of guessing. Polyester brings these tools together in one trading workspace, connecting market analysis, order management and execution review. If you haven't explored it yet, sign up and see the features for yourself. Seeing is believing! 🔥 ❤️ 𝘈 𝘉𝘐𝘎 𝘛𝘏𝘈𝘕𝘒 𝘠𝘖𝘜 𝘛𝘖 𝘛𝘏𝘌 𝘗𝘖𝘓𝘠𝘌𝘚𝘛𝘌𝘙 𝘍𝘖𝘜𝘕𝘋𝘌𝘙 𝘈𝘕𝘋 𝘛𝘌𝘈𝘔 Building a trading platform takes vision, patience and serious engineering. I genuinely appreciate the @tristanchaudhry and @polyester team work to make complex trading tools more connected and easier to understand. Thank you for giving users and researchers something meaningful to explore. May your hard work keep bearing fruit and may the team grow stronger with every challenge. Keep building, bro. We're excited to see how far this journey goes! 🫡❤️‍🔥 𝙅𝘼𝙇𝘼𝙇 𝙍𝙀𝙎𝙀𝘼𝙍𝘾𝙃 ✍️

Just as usual, I dedicated some time to testing Polyester’s testnet, and somehow every time I check something new, it gets more interesting 😂 Today, I tested the Internal Transfer feature. I randomly picked an address through Polyester Scan, sent an internal transfer, and honestly… the speed was 𝗖𝗥𝗔𝗭𝗬. 👀 But the speed wasn't even the part that caught me off guard. What really got me was how Polyester handles the destination. From the Transfer dashboard, you can specify exactly where you want the funds to land, whether that's Funding or Unified Trading. Think about it. If you're sending funds to another Polyester user, they don't have to receive the asset first and then manually move it from Funding to Trading just because that's where they need it. You choose the destination balance area, send it, and boom 💥 it's already where it needs to be. That's a small 𝗨𝗫 detail that actually makes a huge difference. And the speed? Absolutely ridiculous. 😂 If you've been claiming your daily paper rewards, you've probably already tasted this speed yourself because those credits follow the same kind of internal settlement experience. But here's where things became even more interesting. You can track the transfer through Polyester Scan, where the movement is represented through a Transfer Flow. The Flow gives you a structured view of what happened instead of forcing you to piece together different records yourself. For the internal transfer I tested, the Flow showed the progression from: Transfer Observed → Ledger Settlement Confirmed And this is where the Ledger part becomes important. Polyester's Unified Trading environment uses a ledger to keep track of trading-side balances and settlements. So an internal movement isn't simply "sending a token across a blockchain" like a normal wallet transfer. It's an account-level movement inside Polyester, with the corresponding balance updated through its internal settlement system. That's also why Zipper isn't involved here. Zipper is what Polyester uses when assets move between external chains and Polyester. It handles things like deposits and withdrawals, including the chain-specific backing behind Unified Assets. Internal transfers are different. You're already inside Polyester. So instead of taking the asset out to an external chain, bridging it, and bringing it back, Polyester can move the available balance between Polyester accounts and balance areas directly. And then there's Polyester Scan. 👀 What I really like here is the emphasis on traceability. Polyester doesn't just show you that something happened. For supported movements, its Flow system connects the relevant stages into one trackable journey. Deposits have Flows. Withdrawals have Flows. Internal transfers have Flows. So instead of hunting through disconnected transactions and trying to figure out what happened where, you can follow the movement through its Flow ID and related records. I genuinely didn't expect this level of visibility when I started testing. I came to test one simple internal transfer and somehow ended up staring at the infrastructure behind it like: "Wait… you guys track THIS too? 😂😭" And that's probably what has impressed me most about Polyester so far. It's not just one fast feature. It's how the different pieces are being connected: Zipper → external asset movement Unified Assets → one account-facing balance across supported routes Funding → deposits, withdrawals and transfers Unified Trading → trading, orders and settlement Ledger → internal accounting and settlement Polyester Scan → public on-chain records and supported Flow tracking The more I test, the more I realize I'm not just testing a trading interface. I'm testing the infrastructure underneath it. And honestly, that's where things start getting REALLY interesting. 👀😂 You can see the screenshots from my test below. 👇 Big respect to the @polyester team and @tristanchaudhry . 🤝