Honestly, recent market conditions have been a bit cold. External factors like the ongoing Middle East tensions, especially the uncertainties surrounding Iran, have kept overall risk appetite low; internally, on-chain liquidity has noticeably tightened, with many projects reaching their peak immediately after launch, and some even experiencing "more losses the more you try."

At this stage, the biggest risk isn't missing opportunities but gradually eroding your principal with transaction fees, ending up with no points and zero funds.

So when I evaluate projects lately, I have a clear standard:
Either they are in the very early stages or have a cost structure that’s sufficiently friendly, preferably directly serving hedging or fund management.

Coincidentally, I’ve been trading on @PlanX_DEX recently, which perfectly meets my needs!

Just to say, what attracts me the most is actually one sentence:
Reduce trading costs to the lowest possible, even approaching zero during certain phases.

Currently, PlanX’s fee model is like this:
Zero fees for opening positions, zero fees for closing at a loss, and only a dynamic fee when in profit.

A point to emphasize is that from April 1 to May 1, both opening and closing trades are completely fee-free.

I think the logic behind this design is very clear: it aims to align the platform’s revenue with user outcomes, rather than charging fees every time you make a move, like traditional DEXs.

In today’s liquidity-tight market, this structure is actually very suitable for two things:
First, hedging.
For example, if you hold spot positions, you can open inverse contracts at almost zero cost to hedge volatility, rather than having fees repeatedly eat into your profits.

Second, strategy testing.
Often, it’s not that we lack ideas, but the cost of trial and error is too high—slippage plus fees can already wipe out expected gains. In a zero-fee environment, this problem is significantly reduced.

Regarding my actual experience, I ran a simple test myself. The spread control was decent, execution was smooth, without obvious lag or abnormal price slippage, which is quite rare for early-stage projects.

From a deeper perspective, PlanX isn’t following the traditional Perps DEX route. It emphasizes “execution” itself, treating trading as a process that can be optimized by AI and systematic engineering, rather than just simple matching. Features like off-chain matching, on-chain settlement, and non-custodial funds are designed to ensure transparency while improving execution efficiency.

Additionally, it’s exploring RWA assets like gold and silver, broadening hedging scenarios beyond just pure crypto assets.

Of course, this project is still very early, and even the points system hasn’t launched yet, so its visibility isn’t high. But because it’s early, many aspects are actually cleaner, with less speculation and internal competition.

To sum up in one sentence:
In uncertain markets with tight liquidity, instead of blindly increasing trading activity, it’s better to use low-cost or even zero-cost execution tools to improve capital efficiency and manage risk.

Whether it can succeed or not is another story. At least in the current environment, it’s one of the few products I feel comfortable using without worrying about fees.