Remove Liquidity on Polygon

Connect whichever wallet holds it and the position surfaces on its own, whether it lives on Uniswap or QuickSwap and whatever version it belongs to. Set the share you want gone, read the summary of what returns, and sign. The second call both exchanges require before they will actually pay you is included, and that is the step people most often miss doing this by hand.

Almost certainly the second call was never made, and your money is not lost. Pulling liquidity out and receiving it are separate operations on both Uniswap and QuickSwap. The first records the debt inside the position manager without shifting a single token, fees and principal alike. It is common: across a recent stretch of Polygon withdrawals, roughly one Uniswap removal in thirteen was the reduction with no payout attached, and not one of them moved a token to the person who signed it. The balance sits there waiting until someone makes the collecting call, which is a normal transaction anyone can send, and the people this happened to did eventually get paid. Doing both at once here means it never comes up.

Mechanically, no. QuickSwap's concentrated liquidity inherits the same two-step design, and a bare reduction there pays out exactly nothing in the same way, whatever fee tier the liquidity pool uses. What differs is how often people fall into it: QuickSwap's own interface bundles the payout more reliably, so the gap shows up in about one removal in fifty rather than one in thirteen. The trap is identical, the exposure is not.

There are none, which is worth knowing rather than assuming you have missed something. Their documentation covers providing liquidity and stops there; searching the entire docs index for withdrawing, removing or exiting returns nothing at all. That is why the better-ranking answers to this question tend to be forum posts from several years ago rather than anything official.

Anything up to 99% leaves it standing with its bounds unchanged, still earning against the remainder. That can be repeated as often as you like without minting anything or resetting the range you originally chose.

It is burned. Clearing a position and destroying its token are separate acts, and on Polygon opinion is genuinely split: measuring real withdrawals that took a Uniswap position to zero, about a third went on to destroy the token while two thirds left an empty one sitting in the wallet. So it is a common practice here rather than an odd one, though still a choice, and it cannot be undone. Wanting those exact bounds again later is a good reason to stop at 99%, which keeps the position available.

The price travelled beyond your price range, so the pool has already turned your principal into whichever of the two it settled on. That is the more common outcome on Polygon at roughly 58% of real withdrawals, though not overwhelmingly so. Trading fees get counted separately: about two thirds of withdrawals paid them in both tokens, while close to a third collected none whatsoever, generally because an earlier transaction had claimed them already. Receiving one token, or no fees, is not evidence of anything having gone wrong.

It does not, despite being widely claimed. Only a trade writes a pool's price. We looked at large Polygon withdrawals that had no swap in the same block, so nothing could confuse the reading, and compared the stored price immediately before and after. It was bit-for-bit identical every time, including one case where a pool's entire active liquidity went to zero and the price still did not move. What changes afterwards is depth, so the next trade travels further than it would have.

10 POL plus gas. A Uniswap withdrawal here runs about 294,000 gas; the same thing on QuickSwap runs about 528,000, close to twice as much, which is a real difference nobody publishes. In POL the total gas landed anywhere between roughly 0.07 and 0.54 across a recent five-day window, an eightfold spread driven purely by when the transaction was sent. Competing tools charge from 10 POL, where one matches us, up to 250 POL for the same withdrawal.

Polygon has a hard floor of 25 gwei, and anything priced below it never mines rather than mining slowly. The confusing part is that the network's own base fee is a poor guide to what to pay: it can read zero in a block where transactions are paying several hundred gwei, because priority competition sets the real price. A wallet estimating from the base fee will underprice badly. Raising the fee and resending is the fix, and it is the answer to most Polygon withdrawal complaints you will find online.

A pair writes off 1,000 units of LP tokens the moment it takes its first deposit, guarding against a rounding exploit, and nobody redeems them afterwards. Sampling pairs across both exchanges on Polygon, every one that had ever been used carried precisely that floor. Reading the burn address is not how to check it, though: LP tokens get sent there voluntarily too, and among currently active pairs we found several holding many times the structural amount.

Faster than almost any advice you will read. Polygon finalises through validator milestones rather than by accumulating confirmations, so the honest instruction is to check your transaction's block against the chain's finalised marker rather than counting blocks. In practice that gap measured two to four blocks, about three seconds. Guidance telling Polygon users to wait 128 or 256 blocks predates the finality upgrades and is now wrong by orders of magnitude.

Neither can be undone, and that is deliberate rather than a gap. A locker refuses to release before its date, which the contract itself will tell you. Burning sent the tokens somewhere ownerless, leaving that liquidity in the pool indefinitely. Being offered a paid reversal of either is being offered something the contracts do not permit.