Forensic Analysis.
Mathematical Models and Data Sources for ZeroCopy Systems Calculators. Infrastructure Latency & MEV Impact.
Abstract: This document outlines the mathematical models and data sources used in the ZeroCopy Systems "Jitter Tax" and "MEV Extraction" calculators. The models quantify the financial impact of infrastructure latency on High-Frequency Trading (HFT) profitability and the value leakage inherent in public mempool usage.
1. The Jitter Tax Model
Objective: Quantify the annualized "Alpha Decay" caused by non-deterministic latency (jitter).
1.1 The Formula
The proprietary "Jitter Tax" is calculated as a function of daily trading volume, average profit per trade, and the latency delta relative to a kernel-bypass baseline.
L_annual = V_daily × P_avg × min(1.0, Δ_latency × M_vol) × 365
- L_annual: Annualized loss in USD.
- V_daily: Daily trading volume (User Input).
- P_avg: Average profit per trade (User Input, typically basis points).
- Δ_latency: Latency delta in milliseconds (T_signer - T_baseline).
- M_vol: Volatility Multiplier (Decay rate per millisecond).
1.2 Constants & Coefficients
- Baseline Latency (T_baseline):
0.042ms (42µs). Sourced from ZeroCopy internal benchmarks on AWS c6i.metal instances using userspace networking (DPDK). - Volatility Multipliers (M_vol):
- Low:
0.05% / ms(Stable markets). - Medium:
0.10% / ms(Standard HFT volatility). - High:
0.20% / ms(Crisis alpha / cascading liquidations).
- Low:
1.3 Reproducibility
Run It Yourself: All claims are verifiable using the open-source ZeroCopy Audit CLI.
1# Install the CLI2# From the workspace root3cargo install --path cli/zcp45# Run a 10-second benchmark (local signing, no network)6zcp bench --duration 10 --output benchmark.json78# Compare against simulated AWS KMS latency9zcp audit --benchmark-kms --volume 100000
Test Environment:
- Instance: AWS c6i.metal (us-east-1)
- Kernel: 5.15.0-aws (isolcpus=2-7, nohz_full)
- Networking: DPDK 21.11 (userspace bypass)
- Signing Library: k256 v0.13 (pure Rust ECDSA)
- Samples: 1,000,000 signing operations per run
1.4 Latency Sources (T_signer)
| Provider | Latency | Architecture | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| AWS KMS | 25ms | HSM | AWS Documentation |
| Turnkey | 75ms | TEE / Nitro | Turnkey.com |
| Privy | 200ms | Server-Side | Privy SLATE (2024) |
| Fireblocks | 500ms | MPC (Async) | Fireblocks API |
| Lit Protocol | 700ms | D-MPC Network | Lit Datil Benchmarks |
Note: Fireblocks latency assumes standard async polling architecture. Higher performance is possible with specialized "Co-Signer" setups, but remains network-bound.
2. MEV Extraction Model
Objective: Quantify the "Sandwich Attack" and "Slippage" costs for transactions broadcast to the public Ethereum mempool.
2.1 The Formula
The extraction cost is a composite of three leakage vectors:
C_mev = (V_trade × R_sandwich) + (V_trade × R_slippage) + G_wasted
- C_mev: Total extraction cost per trade USD.
- V_trade: Trade size in ETH (User Input).
- R_sandwich: Sandwich attack extraction rate.
- R_slippage: Additional slippage induced by front-running.
- G_wasted: Gas cost of failed/reverted transactions.
2.2 Constants & Assumptions
- Sandwich Rate (R_sandwich):
0.50%(50 bps). Average extractor profit in high-vol pools. - Slippage Rate (R_slippage):
0.30%(30 bps). Unintended price impact. - Gas Wasted (G_wasted):
0.02 ETH. Avg revert cost during congestion.
2.3 Mitigation
The "Protected Mode" simulation assumes usage of a private transaction bundle (e.g., Flashbots Protect, ZeroCopy Enclave), which routes transactions directly to builders, bypassing the public mempool and eliminating sandwich vectors entirely.
3. References
- BIS Working Papers No 955: High-frequency trading, variance, and market structure. Bank for International Settlements.
- Flashbots Research: Quantifying MEV: The Dark Forest.
- Tabb Group: The Value of a Millisecond in Electronic Trading.