A 41.76% ETH range and no funding data leave a basis trade paying only for the hedge
Should the basis trader keep the equal spot-and-perpetual-short position at full size through this volatility, or cut it until eight-hour funding can be verified and the short leg's margin is sized to a 10.03% hour?
The market facts are real; the decision maker is illustrative.
The week and the position
In the week of 24 December 2018, ETH rose 6.77% from 129.03 to 137.77, inside a 41.76% range (high 157.67 on Monday, low 111.22 on Thursday), with realised volatility at 174.5% annualised. It fell 12.02% on Thursday, then gained 18.95% on Friday, including a 10.03% hour at 15:00 UTC. Volume ran 2.66 times its prior 12-week average, and ETH beat BTC by 10.02 percentage points. Funding rates are absent from the data, and an illustrative basis trader holds spot against an equal perpetual short.
Judgment
With funding rates unrecorded, the trade carries no verifiable carry income, so the hedge earns nothing that can be counted on. Keep the pair only at a size the short leg can hold through an 18.95% day against it, and keep the spot leg where it can be moved to that margin quickly. The 12.02% Thursday fall and the 10.03% Friday hour are the sizing tests, not the 6.77% weekly gain.
What would change it
If eight-hour funding prints are confirmed as consistently positive and large enough to justify the margin cost, full size can resume. If funding prints negative, the short leg pays and the position should be closed.
What sets this case apart
The basis trade's usual payoff is missing here: funding data is null, so the decision rests entirely on margin survival through one week's 41.76% range.