Direct answer
A delivery future locks in its holding cost at entry: a 90-day contract at a 1.5% basis costs a long 150 USDT per 10,000 USDT. A perpetual depends on the path of 270 funding intervals: 135 USDT if the rate holds at +0.005%, 270 USDT at +0.01%. The break-even is about 0.00556% per interval; above it, holding to expiry is cheaper in the delivery contract.
Where each cost comes from
A perpetual never expires, and each interval funding pulls its price toward spot: while the rate is positive, longs keep paying. A delivery future settles against the spot index at expiry, and whatever it traded above spot at entry — the basis — is the long's implicit cost.
Suppose spot is 50,000 USDT and a future expiring in 90 days trades at 50,750, a 1.5% basis. Hold to expiry with spot unchanged and that 750 USDT gap disappears as the price converges: the long paid 1.5% for those 90 days.
Measure both with the same rule
Annualised basis = (future − spot) ÷ spot × 365 ÷ days remaining. The 1.5% over 90 days above is about 6.08% a year.
To compare a perpetual, total its funding over the same 90 days: three settlements a day, 270 in all. At a steady +0.01% that accumulates to 2.70%, more than the future's 1.50%; at +0.005% it is 1.35%, less.
Holding cost over 90 days
Same 90-day hold, same 10,000 USDT notional: the delivery future's cost is 150 USDT from the moment of entry, while the perpetual's depends on the path of 270 rates.
At a steady +0.005% the perpetual is cheaper; at +0.01% it is already close to twice the future; at +0.03% more than five times. Each perpetual figure assumes one rate for the whole period — three scenarios, not a forecast.
| Contract | Assumption | 90-day cost per 10,000 USDT | Share of notional |
|---|---|---|---|
| Delivery future | 1.5% basis at entry | 150.00 USDT | 1.50% |
| Perpetual | rate held at +0.005% | 135.00 USDT | 1.35% |
| Perpetual | rate held at +0.010% | 270.00 USDT | 2.70% |
| Perpetual | rate held at +0.030% | 810.00 USDT | 8.10% |
The perpetual's break-even rate
Spread the future's basis evenly across every interval in the period and you get the perpetual's break-even rate. Here that is 1.5% ÷ 270, about 0.00556% per interval.
If you expect the perpetual to average more than 0.00556% over the 90 days, a long held to expiry is cheaper in the delivery future; below it, the perpetual wins. The threshold leaves out the round trip of rolling, and the more often you roll, the smaller the future's advantage.
Lock the cost, or carry the float
The delivery future fixes the holding cost at entry; however hot the market runs afterwards, the long pays no more. The perpetual's cost is reset each interval: late in a bull market rates often stay elevated, while in negative-funding periods a long may be paid instead.
The price of certainty is the roll. Before expiry the old contract must be closed and a new one opened, an extra round trip in fees and a fresh basis at the moment of rolling.
The order of comparison before a trade
Decide how long you intend to hold, find the delivery future whose expiry is closest, and annualise its basis; then estimate the perpetual's funding over the same period from its recent rate range.
When the two are close, roll fees and liquidity usually decide it. When the basis is negative — the future below spot — the delivery future pays a long instead, and the comparison runs the other way.
Official sources and calculation boundary
Fee calculation for futures and perpetuals comes from OKX's futures fee documentation and Binance's fee schedule, the funding mechanism from OKX's funding FAQ. Basis and annualised basis are arithmetic on two market prices; the 50,000 and 50,750 here are illustrative quotes, so substitute the prices and expiry you actually see.
- OKX: futures trading fee calculation
- OKX: perpetual futures funding fee FAQ
- Binance: futures fee schedule
Next checks in this series
Frequently asked questions
Is the basis a fee the exchange charges?
No. It is a gap between market prices, not a charge. It converges to zero at expiry, so for a long held to expiry it behaves like a cost fixed at entry.
Can annualised basis be compared directly with a perpetual's annualised rate?
As a common yardstick, yes. But a perpetual's annualised figure only describes the current rate's intensity, and what actually accumulates follows the path of each interval's rate; the future's basis is settled at entry.
Must a delivery future be held to expiry?
No, it can be closed at any time. Closed early, the basis has not fully converged, so what you actually pay is the change in basis between entry and exit rather than the whole basis at entry.
Does the same comparison work for a short?
Yes, in the opposite direction: a positive basis is income for a short in the delivery future, and a positive rate is income for a short in the perpetual. The question is still which pays more over your holding period.