Dune flags $542M/week of idle capital in concentrated-liquidity DEXs in H1 2026
The study estimates ~29.4% of liquidity sat out of range on average, and Uniswap v4 hooks showed no idle-yield impact at the time.
Dune’s H1 2026 analysis of concentrated-liquidity DEX pools found a large share of LP capital was not actively facilitating swaps or earning fees. The dataset points to roughly $542 million per week sitting idle out of range and an estimated $150 million in annual foregone LP fee income across four major implementations.
Key Takeaways
- Concentrated-liquidity pools averaged about 29.4% of capital sitting outside active trading ranges in H1 2026, which meant that portion earned no swap fees while out of range.
- Across Uniswap v3, Uniswap v4, PancakeSwap v3, and Aerodrome Slipstream, the out-of-range share was estimated to translate into roughly $542 million of idle capital per week and about $150 million in lost annual LP fee income.
- When liquidity that was technically available but never used is included, underutilized capital was estimated at about 85%.
- More than $200 million in idle liquidity had not been repositioned for over 90 days, while automated managers kept positions in range far more often than individual wallets.
Dune’s H1 2026 Snapshot: Out-of-Range Liquidity and the Fee Gap
Dune’s H1 2026 snapshot puts a hard number on a problem LPs already feel in realized fee APRs: a meaningful slice of concentrated-liquidity TVL is not actually “working” at any given moment. The study found an average of 29.4% of liquidity sat outside the range of active trading during the first half of 2026, which means it was not used for swaps and generated no trading fees while out of range.
Dune translated that positioning into dollars across four concentrated-liquidity implementations, estimating the out-of-range share equaled about $542 million in idle capital per week and about $150 million in lost annual fee income for LPs. The scope covered Uniswap v3, Uniswap v4, PancakeSwap v3, and Aerodrome Slipstream.
The report also offered a broader framing that matters for market structure. When including liquidity that was technically available but never used, Dune estimated about 85% of capital was underutilized. For traders, that’s a reminder that headline TVL can overstate effective liquidity, especially when price moves push ranges out of play.
Who’s Leaving Capital Idle: Wallets vs Automated Managers
Concentrated liquidity is designed to be capital-efficient only if LPs keep ranges aligned with price. When the market trades outside an LP’s chosen band, that liquidity stops executing swaps and stops earning fees until it is repositioned.
Dune’s data suggests the drag is not just mechanics, it’s behavior. More than $200 million in idle liquidity had not been repositioned in over 90 days, consistent with a long tail of passive or neglected positions.
Automation showed up as a measurable edge. Automated managers had only 6.5% of positions out of range versus about 30% for individual wallets, indicating that tooling and active management materially change how much capital stays productive.
The ownership breakdown reinforced where the idle liquidity sits. On Ethereum, wallets held 94% of idle capital and 91% of Uniswap v3 liquidity. On Arbitrum, wallets controlled 92% of idle liquidity and 78% of liquidity. On Base, individual users oversaw 82% of idle capital even though smart contracts held roughly 50% of the liquidity.
Uniswap v4 Hooks Haven’t Fixed Idle Liquidity—Yet
Uniswap v4 introduced hooks that can modify pool behavior and, in theory, route idle capital into external strategies. Dune’s snapshot did not show that thesis landing yet.
The study found about 30.5% of Uniswap v4 liquidity was still out of range, roughly in line with the broader concentrated-liquidity averages. Hook usage was also limited, with about 10% of v4 TVL using hooks. At the time measured, none of the hooks produced yield from idle liquidity.
That combination matters for expectations. If hooks are not widely adopted and do not generate incremental yield on out-of-range inventory, LP returns remain structurally tied to active range management rather than protocol-level “set-and-forget” enhancements.
Signals LPs and Traders Can Track From Here
The first signal is whether Uniswap v4 hook penetration rises materially above the ~10% of TVL observed, and whether any hooks begin producing yield from idle liquidity.
Second, watch the out-of-range share versus the ~29.4% H1 2026 average, particularly during high-volatility periods when ranges are more likely to be breached and effective liquidity can thin quickly.
Third, track adoption of automated liquidity management. Dune’s 6.5% out-of-range rate for automated managers versus ~30% for wallets implies that even modest migration toward automation could change fee outcomes and execution quality.
Finally, the >$200 million of liquidity not repositioned for 90+ days is a clean behavioral metric. If that figure shrinks, it would indicate more active LP management or better tooling. If it persists, underutilization remains a feature of the market.
The Market Signal Is About LP Behavior, Not Just DEX Design
I treat this dataset as a reminder that “liquidity” is not a single number, it’s a distribution across price, time, and operator sophistication. The threshold that matters is whether the out-of-range share can move sustainably below the ~29% band without requiring every LP to run an active strategy.
Uniswap v4 hooks read like a sentiment catalyst more than a fundamental shift so far, because adoption is still around ~10% of TVL and the snapshot showed no idle-yield production. If automation adoption expands and the 90+ day idle bucket starts to clear, the setup starts to look structural rather than narrative-driven, and reported TVL would begin to converge toward effective liquidity that traders can actually hit.
