A position can look profitable before close and still settle below its entry value. That is not always a broken trade. Sometimes it is the difference between a mark-to-market estimate and the actual cash returned after the exit is finished.
For users, that difference feels personal. They saw green, clicked close, waited for settlement, then saw red. The product has one job in that moment: explain the journey without hiding behind jargon.
The live number is not the receipt
Live PnL estimates the value of a position while it is still open. It looks at current token prices, unclaimed fees, claimed fees, and the capital that went in. It is a snapshot taken before the exit is paid for.
Final PnL is stricter. It should reflect what actually came back after the close path runs. If the close has pending execution costs or reimbursements, those costs belong in the live view too. Without that, a small green number can be more of a promise than a signal.
The better experience is not a prettier profit number. It is a number that survives the close.
Fees are real, but they need context
Liquidity positions earn fees, and fees should be visible. The mistake is treating every fee display as spendable profit. If a fee has already been swept into the final close proceeds, adding it a second time makes the position look healthier than it was.
Degxifi separates the two ideas. Fees earned can be shown as a lifetime activity measure. Net PnL should stay honest about the full position result.
What a good close screen should do
- Show estimated net PnL after pending close costs.
- Keep fees visible, but do not double count them.
- Label settling states clearly while the transaction finalizes.
- Prefer conservative estimates when the trade is near break-even.
The goal is simple: users should not feel like the interface changed the story after they acted. If a close is likely to settle red, the open-position view should already be honest about that.