# Anoma-Powered Cross-Chain Strategy Builder

**URL:** <https://forum.anoma.net/t/anoma-powered-cross-chain-strategy-builder/1305>\
**Category:** Applications\
**Tags:** anoma\
**Created:** [March 19, 2025, 5:32am UTC](https://forum.anoma.net/t/anoma-powered-cross-chain-strategy-builder/1305 "2025-03-19T05:32:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Atharva](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b5a626/32.png) [@Atharva](https://forum.anoma.net/u/Atharva)\
**Post date:** [March 19, 2025, 5:32am UTC](https://forum.anoma.net/t/anoma-powered-cross-chain-strategy-builder/1305/1 "2025-03-19T05:32:27Z")

</div>

We’re exploring a **cross-chain strategy builder** that leverages Anoma’s **intent-centric architecture** to facilitate complex, multi-step trading workflows—particularly for **options and derivatives**. By harnessing **Anoma’s universal intent standard** , we aim to enable atomic, privacy-enhanced, and composable financial actions across multiple chains and platforms.

This post outlines our **technical design** , integration with **Anoma’s Intent Machine**. We’re seeking **feedback from the Anoma community** on design trade-offs, solver integrations, and potential future improvements.

**1. Problem Statement**

1. **Fragmented Liquidity**

• Defi liquidity sits scattered across CEXs, various L2 solutions, and specialized DeFi protocols.

• Bridging capital or manually executing on multiple platforms leads to high transaction costs and operational overhead.

1. **Complex, Multi-Step Strategies**

• Delta-neutral, principal-protected, or multi-leg strategies often require numerous transactions across different protocols (e.g., staking in Lido, bridging to an L2, opening an options position, hedging on another chain).

1. **Atomic Execution & Privacy**

• Traditional DeFi transactions face MEV front-running and partial fills; bridging is also risky with uncertain finality.

• We need an atomic, trust-minimized solution, ideally with ZK-friendly or privacy-preserving features.

**2. Proposed Approach**

**2.1 Intent-Centric Execution (Anoma)**

• **Declarative Model** : Users describe _what_ they want (e.g., “Put 20% yield into a BTC call option,” “Auto-roll a covered call strategy”), while Anoma’s solver ecosystem determines _how_ to fulfill those requests.

• **ZK & Fractal Instances** : Leverage Anoma’s fractal instance concept for cross-chain bridging, with potential ZK features to hide strategic details. ( It’s still a bit unclear to me how, I will be need to dig deeper here)

**2.2 EIP-7521 Integration**

• **Intent Specification** : Each user action is a standard EIP-7521 message, detailing constraints (eg: strike price, expiry, risk tolerance) without specifying the step-by-step mechanics.

• **Partial State Transitions** : This seamlessly fits Anoma’s “universal intent” interface, letting multiple protocols tie into one atomic transaction.

**3. Architecture**

1. **User Intents (EIP-7521)** :

• Users issue high-level requests (e.g., open an options position, roll it weekly, etc.).

• Each intent is cryptographically signed and references specific constraints.

1. **Intent Processing (Anoma)** :

• Anoma’s solver ecosystem receives the user’s declarative request and checks for feasibility.

• Validity predicates ensure collateral requirements and user constraints are met.

1. **Liquidity Aggregation** :

• Queries CEXs, DEXs, and market maker RFQs to find the best premium and minimal slippage.

• Potential to incorporate bridging if the best liquidity is on a different L2 or chain.

1. **Execution & Settlement (Atomic)** :

• Bundles all steps into a single transaction or fractal instance.

• If any step fails (e.g., insufficient collateral, bridging timeout), **nothing** finalizes.

• If successful, the entire multi-chain trade is committed on-chain.

1. **Anoma Solvers / Fractals** :

• Off-chain or fractal chain logic may handle complex computations (e.g., advanced greeks calculations, multi-leg option combos) while ensuring final settlement is tamper-proof.

**4. Strategy Builder & Connector Hub**

**Zapier-Style Workflows**

• **Lego Blocks** : Each building block might be “Stake in Lido,” “Open a Call Option,” “Redeem Rewards,” “Bridge to Arbitrum,” etc.

• **Modular Pipelines** : Users can chain these blocks in an **Anoma-intent** format for advanced logic (e.g., principal-protected strategies, periodic auto-roll).

**Principal Protection Example**

1. **Deposit principal** into fixed-yield (Term Finance/Pendle).

2. **Use only the yield** for options speculation.

3. If the trade goes south, your principal is untouched.

**Complex Hedging (Custom)**

• Rebalance or auto-roll a covered call on ETH weekly, bridging to a cheaper L2 if gas fees spike on L1.

• Combine with a put hedge if volatility is high.

* * *

All the feedbacks are appreciated, I would love to know what everyone thinks about it

[![](https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/uploads/anoma1/original/2X/0/0b750196bad32f879c0095ab96f992680f30272e.jpeg "Introducing GOEMON Strategy builder") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsB_OlIshiU)

Questions:

1. Are there established patterns , or deterministic way to determine how and how much to incentivize solvers within anoma

2. We plan multi-step flows (deposit in Pendle, buy an option, re-stake yields, etc.). Would fractal instances help orchestrate these flows more securely and cost-effectively? or my understanding of fractal instances are completely wrong and possibly i don’t even need it !!

3. Finally all the feedbacks are appreciated \<3