timzz

A milestone for @Ethereum in Asia. Sharplink is honored to partner with @VitalikButerin, @ethereumfndn, and @SNZHoldings in the launch of the Ethereum Community Hub in Hong Kong, the first in the region. Hong Kong's digital asset ecosystem is maturing rapidly, and Ethereum is at the center of what comes next.

Aave 上的资金还在持续流出，3 天半的时间已经流出了 $151 亿：总存款量从出事前的 $485 亿到现在的 $307 亿，差不多是跑了三分之一的资金。 另两家主流借贷平台的情况 ◎Morpho：总存款量从 rsETH 事件前的 $117 亿到现在的 $102 亿，跑了 $15 亿资金。 ◎Spark：SparkLend 业务 TVL 从 rsETH 事件前的 $19 亿到现在的 $32 亿，进来了 $13 亿资金。 Spark 吸纳了部分巨鲸/机构 (例如孙哥还有 2 月份 $5 亿资金抄底的那个巨鲸等) 从 Aave 撤出的资金。 ---------------------------------------------------- #Bitget VIP 费率更低，福利更狠！买美股秒级入场

x.com/i/article/2046…

据 Lookonchain 监测，资金持续从 Aave 流出，部分流入 Spark。Aave 的 TVL 目前已降至 164.3 亿美元，下降 99.4 亿美元。与此同时，Spark 的 TVL 已升至 45.5 亿美元，增长 8.25 亿美元。wublock123.com/news/aave-outf…

Spark Savings spUSDT is the ONLY liquid defi deposit for USDT Aave Core: illiquid for past 2 days (and potential bad debt for rsETH hack) Morpho: currently all major vaults/markets are at 100% utilization @sparkdotfi Savings: >$400 million in instantly available liquidity

重大更新: 根据借贷市场的需求和资产风控模型，Sparklend 将逐步移除移除对 [Gnosis Market] 市场的支持，以及对 [$ezETH]，[$rsETH]，[$tBTC] 作为抵押物的支持, 阶段1设置具体如下： 1）[Gnosis Market] - 不再支持新借贷仓位的建立 - Reserve factor 设置成为50% 2）[$ezETH] - 不再支持 $ezETH 作为抵押物借贷仓位的建立 3）[$rsETH] - 不再支持 $rsETH 作为抵押物借贷仓位的建立 4）[$tBTC] - 不再支持 $tBTC 作为抵押物借贷仓位的建立 - Reserve factor 设置成为99% 以上资产的相关情况，以及目前在Sparklend的利用率如下图1，详细数据可以参考：spark.blockanalitica.com/v1/ethereum/ma… 调整之后，Sparklend支持的合格抵押物为：[$ETH]，[$wstETH]，[$weETH]， [$rETH]，[$cbBTC]，[$LBTC]，详情请参考图2. 未来 @sparkdotfi 将会继续积极支持蓝筹资产，并根据风险模型和需求进行相应调整。

some great risk discourse from @LucaProsperi and @adcv_ Luca reaches the conclusion that defi lenders are significantly underpricing risk vs SOFR, while Adrian counters that defi prime repo markets have very little default risk in practice generally find myself aligned with Adrian, but with a few caveats: (1) risk for prime repo is mostly driven by fundamental rather than market risk, and (2) prime repo provides idiosyncratic advantages that can explain divergence from SOFR/risk free rate benchmarks --- first- the bulk of the risk of onchain prime repo is not from market price jump risk, but rather from technical and counterparty risks embedded in the underlying collateral assets and oracle mechanisms most blue-chip collateral in ethereum defi is either tokenized bitcoin (WBTC, cbBTC) or liquid staking tokens (wstETH, weETH). these collateral issuers have long successful track records, but they are still subject to various fundamental risks including custody/key management, smart contract integrity, business continuity/uptime, etc. additionally, repo markets depend on data integrity, smart contract security, and key management of oracle providers. probability of default/incidents across these dependencies is expected to be very low, but the potential losses incurred in a failure case can be significant (up to 100% of the exposure) looking at the most recent loss events in defi (resolv and drift), we see that they were driven by fundamental risk factors rather than market risk. as a defi lender, the primary driver of risk is these fundamental factors rather than jump risk. --- second- onchain lending has additional benefits that can explain low or even negative spreads vs risk free rates like SOFR fundamentally, i think it makes sense to assume that (most, large scale/sophisticated) market participants are prima facie rational; if they are accepting defi lending risk with yields at or below SOFR, there is probably a reasonable explanation my mental models for this are liquidity premia or convenience yield liquidity premium is the excess return that investors demand to hold assets that cannot be quickly converted to cash at low cost. for tradfi investors, prime MMFs, tbills, and other SOFR benchmarked cash equivalent assets are this asset class and we wouldnt expect them to accept a yield below this in any circumstance. but for cryptonative investors or cryptoasset service providers (think whales, hedgefunds, exchanges), the key measure of liquidity is not the speed+cost to receive cash in a bank account, but rather the speed/cost/slippage to meet their business liquidity needs, which are typically onchain/within the crypto ecosystem. taking a directional hedge-fund as an example, if they face even a 1 hour delay between the time they request redemption of a MMF and when they receive wire transfer into their exchange account, they could easily miss a 5-10% move in a volatile asset, wiping out years of "excess risk adjusted return" they might earn with tradfi SOFR linked instruments over onchain repo convenience yield, the implied return on holding inventories, is another way to look at the same benefit. if onchain actors can expect to derive meaningful benefits from having their assets closer at hand in onchain repo markets, even if the benefit is only realized infrequently, then it can be entirely rational for them to accept risk adjusted returns below SOFR on prime repo opportunities --- @sparkdotfi has placed significant effort into both elements above, mitigating fundamental risks and facilitating onchain repo's key liquidity advantages with respect to risk- in sparklend, we use redundant/aggregated price feeds across multiple providers to mitigate oracle risks, and are continuously introducing mechanism design solutions to alleviate corner cases (eg. automatically freezing borrowing when a pegged asset trades below peg). additionally, we put significant focus into fundamental research on collateral assets, with rate limits and automated cap management helping limit exposure to issuer failures with respect to liquidity/utility- Spark is laser focused on delivering high liquidity savings products that meet the needs of sophisticated crypto market participants taking the Spark Savings USDT vault as an example (app.spark.fi/savings/mainne…), we currently maintain over 700 million in available withdrawal capacity against a 885 million total vault size, or roughly 80% liquidity ratio. this far surpasses the typical liquidity available within other onchain lending markets, which already have a significant liquidity advantage for cryptonative entities vs offchain cash equivalents --- to summarize - market risk is an important consideration, but generally represents only a small factor within onchain prime repo - the larger impact on risk is from fundamental factors, which can be mitigated with a diligent approach to counterparty+collateral evaluation and technical/mechanism design solutions - the market is fundamentally (mostly) rational and delivering superior a superior onchain liquidity profile can justify residual risk exposures, even when the spread vs SOFR is low or negative

孙哥，理财的神😇 Aave 疑似坏账，那就存去安全风险更小的 Spark，早上提出来的 53665 枚 ETH 已在 2 小时前全部存入，价值 1.24 亿美元 intel.arkm.com/explorer/addre… 关乎孙哥有多少 $ETH 持仓及其成本，持有数量超 15.6 万枚，具体可以回顾这条推文 👉 x.com/ai_9684xtpa/st…