duneanalytics / duneanalytics/spellbook
[CONTRIBUTION] Add RFQ_trades Ethereum dataset
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 1.5k
- Forks
- 1.4k
- Avg merge
- 3d 16h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 22
Description
Proposal: new rfq_trades dataset on Ethereum
Problem
There is currently no standardized dataset on Dune that tracks RFQ (Request-for-Quote) trades on Ethereum. RFQ-based execution is a significant and growing share of on-chain volume (>10% of all DEX volumes and approx. 25% of all routers/aggregators flow). This activity is scattered across protocol-specific tables and raw traces, making cross-protocol analysis difficult and error-prone.
What are RFQ trades?
RFQ trades are off-chain quoted, on-chain settled swaps where a market maker provides price to verified counterparties, mostly routers/aggregators. Unlike AMM swaps, RFQ trades:
- Have no slippage (exact amounts are agreed before execution)
- Are settled via direct token transfers between counterparties through executor contracts
- Often represent institutional-grade or large-size flow
Proposed schema
| Column | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
blockchain |
varchar | Chain identifier |
project |
varchar | Protocol name (bebop, hashflow, superposition, ...) |
maker_address |
varbinary | Market maker |
maker |
varchar | Market maker name if known |
taker_address |
varbinary | Router |
taker |
varchar | Router name if known |
block_date |
timestamp | Trade day |
block_month |
timestamp | Trade month |
block_time |
timestamp | Trade timestamp |
tx_hash |
varbinary | Transaction hash |
taker_token_symbol |
varchar | Token sold by the user |
maker_token_symbol |
varchar | Token received by the user |
token_pair |
varchar | Token pair |
taker_amount |
decimal | Sell amount (adjusted for decimals) |
maker_amount |
decimal | Buy amount (adjusted for decimals) |
amount_usd |
decimal | Amount of swap in USD |
taker_amount_raw |
uint256 | Sell amount |
maker_amount_raw |
uint256 | Buy amount |
taker_token_address |
varbinary | Token sold by the user (address) |
maker_token_address |
varbinary | Token received by the user (address) |
tx_to |
varbinary | Origin of transaction (aggregator) |
tx_from |
varbinary | Origin of transaction (user or solver) |
Why this matters
- Transparency: RFQ flow is a large but invisible part of on-chain volume. A unified dataset makes it measurable and comparable across protocols.
- Research: Enables analysis of RFQ vs AMM execution quality, market maker concentration, and solver competition.
- Ecosystem growth: Standardized data attracts more builders and analysts to the RFQ/intent space.
Our contribution
We (Barter) are willing to build and maintain the initial version of this spell. The identification logic is proven (see reference query) and can serve as a template for adding other RFQ protocols.
- Reference query: https://dune.com/queries/5768003
- RFQ research: https://barterswap.xyz/blog/private-liquidity
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the reference query 5768003 and inspect the spellbook repository for existing dataset views that follow a similar protocol-integration pattern. Compare the proposed schema and Ethereum RFQ identification logic with those entry points; done means the rfq_trades dataset is implemented with the listed fields and supports cross-protocol analysis.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- sql
- Domain
- data-engineering
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100