What does sleeping through the open cost, and save?

A toy model with honest math. Two identical concentrated LPs run for 26 weeks on the same simulated market; one goes flat before every open, one doesn’t. Both lines are excess return vs simply holding 50/50, so anything above zero is LP alpha. Drag the sliders. The interesting question is where the strategies diverge, not the absolute numbers.

Parameters

model inputs

Range width ±2.0%

Fee tier 30 bps

Weekly volume / TVL 2.0×

Gap regime normal

De-risk lead time 60 min

Intraweek volatility 2.5%

Gaps are drawn from a fat-tailed distribution: most weeks nothing happens, then one Monday does a year of damage. Redraw to see a different 26 weeks with the same settings.

DOSS, 26 weeks

—

excess vs holding

Passive LP, 26 weeks

—

same range, never de-risks

Gap losses dodged

—

what the passive LP ate

Fees forgone flat

—

cost of sleeping

Cumulative excess return · 26 weeks

DOSS passive LP

view weekly detail as table

Week	Mon gap	Fees, DOSS	Fees, passive	Gap hit, passive	DOSS cum	Passive cum

What this is and isn’t. This is a stylized model, not a backtest: fee income scales with volume, fee tier and concentration against a pool-average benchmark; impermanent loss scales with concentration and intraweek volatility; a gap bigger than half the range converts the passive position one-sided and charges it the overshoot; DOSS skips gaps entirely but forgoes fees while flat (five opens a week × lead time) and pays for the round trips. Real results depend on real volume, real gaps and execution. The terminal exists to replace the assumptions here with measurements.