@absforeever @ethena @AbstractChain Both apps on abstract and MegaETH are just shitty gambling games, abstract has even more stupid NFT scams
English
rmL
55 posts
rmL
@0xLRM
MEV bot feeder, gwei optimizer || prev @Citadel @UChicago
Katılım Nisan 2024
33 Takip Edilen11 Takipçiler
It seems like @ethena pulled $400M from MegaETH
Didn't think my prediction would come true this fast
Wen native yield on @AbstractChain?
Sure, Abstract still lacks liquidity (project quantum soon), but it makes way more sense there than on MegaETH or, god forbid, TON
Mike 🐧✳️@absforeever
MegaETH, Ethena, and $400M Ethena built USDM for MegaETH - a stablecoin backed by tokenized US Treasury bills yielding 3.7%. The partnership happened largely because of the hype around the network As part of liquidity bootstrapping, Ethena minted $400M USDM, generating around $12.5M in annual yield for MegaETH. That revenue will cover network operating costs, bringing gas fees close to zero, and fund $MEGA token buybacks The low-gas idea is interesting, but it raises a question: where's the actual technological edge of MegaETH's super-centralized sequencer if the network has to subsidize gas? As for the buybacks - that's a trap for investors. No buyback program will offset the selling pressure from token unlocks I don't see a long-term future for MegaETH. Once the hype fades and stagnation becomes obvious, Ethena will pull that $400M out Abstract, on the other hand, has missed a real opportunity. In a year and a half, the team hasn't built anything like a native yield mechanism for users - despite it being a perfect fit for consumer crypto. A lot of that comes down to an early mistake of ignoring DeFi Right now, Ethena has no reason to partner with Abstract - there's no liquidity, no attention But with Project Quantum and other initiatives in the pipeline, Abstract will have its chance - and I hope to see native yield for users materialize, whether through a partnership with Ethena or their own implementation. @0xCygaar
English
@DefiIgnas I like see MegaETH bleed and die, ugly scam chain, full of stupid gambling games
English
Early $MEGA price action suggests that building for the degen crowd doesn’t work.
Sad.
The narrative has shifted from retail degens to institutions. Degens are rekt, bearish, or unwilling to deploy capital.
The only degen retail narratives showing strength are privacy and pre-IPO perps but even those are related to institutional adoption.
Things can still turn around but degens must feel they can EARN money on MegaETH. Haven't seen viral rags to riches stories yet.
Ignas | DeFi@DefiIgnas
Hope MegaETH succeeds: Mega still targets crypto natives with CT cultured marketing, airdrop terminal, token allocation to core communities etc. While Tempo, Canton and other corpo-chains target institutions, payments RWAs while totally sidelining crypto natives. If Tempo or Canton does well, does an average CT person profit much? Nope. Mega is our opportunity.
English
I know the team from FantasyTop and FrinedTech sucks, I just miss the era when everyone come up with a crazy idea and throw a PWA on my face to ask me to try. There are so many crypto experiments two or three years ago and right now the RWA/Perp trend is far more boring than before
English
i have been incredibly humbled by the inability of fantasy top, friendtech and consumer crypto apps to cross the chasm. crypto in its most ambitious form (of ushering in a new era of user owned software and infrastructure) has failed.
we optimistically tried to blend the personas of investor (people allocating capital to production to receive more money than they put in) and consumer (people willing to pay more for a product than it costs to operate) and found ourselves serving the needs of neither.
where the strong form of crypto failed, the weak form (of commoditized ledger/database tech for financial transactions) has succeeded beyond anyone's expectation. the consequence is that crypto has been reduced to a vassal of traditional finance, both more impactful than any normie anticipated, and deeply disappointing in structure to crypto OGs. reducing global transaction costs as commoditized ledger/database technology reduces drag on global GDP, but this is a marginal improvement over the status quo and one where the value accrues in large part to incumbent intermediaries in reducing overhead and improving margins.
crypto was supposed to be the most egalitarian thing ever. it was insanely ambitious and, if it worked, could have really changed the fabric of society.
it didn't. it's over. we haven't found the right primitives, and, more importantly, the right culture for delivering the most ambitious version of crypto. it's time to question everything again.
kipit | fan/acc@0xKipit
English
After reviewing the Terminal data, we’ve decided to conclude the season early, and sunset our Terminal program.
The points distribution for Week 3 has gone out as normal and a snapshot has been taken of all user activity up to this point, which will be used in our final calculations. This decision did not come easy, but we believe this is what’s best to support our ecosystem.
Next week, we'll run a supplemental points distribution to thank all users who have been exploring and experimenting with the different apps throughout the program.
Eligible Terminal participants will receive a share of the rewards pool in USDM, based on the points accumulated to date as well as activity that supported Mega.
Early next week, we'll open a place on Terminal for one week so you can designate a wallet address to receive your rewards.
Terminal’s main features will be merged with Rabbithole, transitioning everything into one unified chain experience.
Thank you to everyone who has supported us this far. We can’t wait to show you what we have in store.
A note from Shuyao on what’s next:
Shuyao Kong@hotpot_dao
The existing financial system neither reflects the culture nor addresses the economic realities of this upcoming generation of financial participants. Our team, composed of emerging market citizens and perma-online Gen Zers are here to build the financial operating system for the internet-native generation. We’ve spent the past two years building MegaEVM, the fastest execution environment in the industry. The MegaEVM withstood a 11B tx stress test in mainnet production, averaging 40k TPS, while consistently charging lower fees than all others competitors. Our technical milestones paved the way for a collaboration with @chainlink to begin building the first real-time oracle, providing unparalleled speed and security to the DeFi ecosystem. The past two years has seen a notable and eventful ecosystem grow through MegaETH. Today, some of the most interesting new applications sit on Mega. The points program on Terminal has allowed crypto-native users to further explore the initial Mega Ecosystem, but we believe it has run its course. We will be providing boosted USDm rewards to all eligible participants in the program. Moving forward, we will double down on sourcing and accelerating the best applications on MegaETH through personalized GTM, targeting users beyond crypto. We are momentarily launching the MOSS SDK, a self-custody wallet that unifies liquidity between applications while maintaining top in class security through smart approvals. These pieces lay the foundation for M(OS)S to become the financial OS built for users born to this generation. Live Q3, MEGA blends finance and entertainment with primitives and risk preferences that have never been available to everyday users. The MOSS SDK is uniquely positioned to solve the embedded wallet <> generalized wallet dilemma by giving best in class security guarantees to users across all apps while still maintaining one unified account. MOSS SDK builds on the foundational work of Porto by Ithaca, providing a user-first mentality to product. We look forward to working with applications to integrate Moss and provide users with a solution to the crypto UX problem. The legacy financial system merely adopted the internet, it was not born in it. M(OS)S is being built by people who understand the culture of internet-native users and how finance, entertainment, and identity are converging online.
English
So they raise $50m to build an aggregator of other trading venue?
Variational@variational_io
We’ve raised $50M led by @dragonfly_xyz to go all in on RWAs and bring TradFi liquidity on-chain. Today, we're launching Phase 1 of our RWA rollout to stress-test our infrastructure before bringing 100+ TradFi markets on-chain this summer.
English
@bonnazhu @3f_xyz @MidasRWA @symbioticfi @upshift_fi @grovedotfinance @gearbox 3F的垫资其实也需要在morpho上分别建立借贷市场设置参数，复杂度和每个rwa设一个池子也差不多
中文
Call Back 下3月关于 RWA 垫资摆渡人的帖子
最近又看到不少项目进入这个领域，梳理了下：
@3f_xyz 做杠杆建仓/关仓的即时垫资
@MidasRWA + @symbioticfi 做赎回即时流动性
@upshift_fi 做通用的即时赎回 Vault
@grovedotfinance 与BlackRock合作实时赎回垫资通道
@gearbox 的架构则本身就允许一次完成循环贷
往大了看，它们应该算是资产上链过程中，传统金融周期性结算向链上原子化结算迁移过程中的必然。这个过程中最核心的，
- 一个是 NAV 净值更新的频率
- 另一个是申购赎回结算的即时性
前者实时更新遇到的困难是，很多 RWA 的底层往往是一个资产包，各类资产收息频率不同、估值方式不同，要做到实时 NAV 就需要持续的管理和对账，短期内还是比较难解决。后者则相对容易一些，可依赖即时流动性资金去解决，具体也有两条实现路径：
- 一种是在 DEX 铺设交易对，让用户在二级市场买卖
- 另一种就是提供面向一级申赎的即时垫资服务
本质是一样的，前者摩擦是滑点，后者摩擦是垫资费。
当初 Crypto Staking 其实最终选的是 DEX 交易对的道路，当初各类币种的原生质押也面临同样的退出等待期和流动性困境，那个时候，我还在 CEX，就曾牵头过 Instant Unbonding 的垫资服务，我们当时甚至让 Staked Asset 可以被用作 Collateral 去参与杠杆和合约交易，进一步释放流动性。
但后来 @LidoFinance 推出了Liquid Staking 服务，把质押仓位变成了可以在 DEX 上自由交易的 LST，用户想退出直接在 @CurveFinance 上卖就行，因为可组合性更强，第二条路也就慢慢退出主流。
但很多 RWA 属于证券，不能进入 Permissionless 的 DEX，只能在隔离的 Vault 或 Lending Market 里流转。而且 DEX 路线需要针对每一个 RWA 独立预铺流动性，单个 RWA 交易量小，往往需要 APR 补贴，成本不低。
相比之下，垫资模式可以将资金池聚合起来，按需调配给不同 RWA 的申赎请求，更为灵活。同时也可以对申赎的对象做 KYC 和白名单管控，从而不受限于 RWA 证券属性的合规约束。因而对于 RWA 来说，垫资很可能是比 DEX 更现实的路。
那站在出资方的角度，这笔垫资的钱能赚什么？
拆开来看，其实至少可以有两到三层收益叠加在一起。
1）第一层是闲置资金的基础收益
Vault 里的 USDC 不是时刻都在垫资，没有请求的时候部署到 @Morpho @aave 这些借贷协议赚基础利息，这是稳定底线。
2）第二层是垫资发生时产生的费
当申赎请求触发时，资金被调用去垫资，赚一个固定费率。3F 的首次拍卖清算在大约 7% APR（overnight），比普通超额抵押借贷高出数百个bps，可见时间价值的溢价之高。
3）第三层是 DEX - NAV 套利
如果底层 RWA Token 又恰好在 DEX 上也有流动性，那么，理论上能够在 DEX 上价格脱锚时低价买入、按 NAV 赎回赚套利。
其实整个架构和 @LiquityProtocol 的 Stability Pool 是有异曲同工之妙的。Stability Pool 里用户存 LUSD，等清算事件发生，折价吃掉 ETH 抵押品，而 RWA 垫资的 Vault，LP 存 USDC，等申赎请求进来，垫资赚费。区别在于，清算属于更低频的事件，而申购与赎回的资金利用率更高，更为高频。
所以怎么定义这一类收益的属性呢？
个人看来，这可能也是为数不多的，真正来自 TradFi 和 DeFi 之间结构性摩擦的 Native 收益之一了，和当初 Funding Rate 被发现时可能是同一个级别的结构性机会。而且这个摩擦在可预见的时间范围内会一直存在。
Bonna | U酪乳@bonnazhu
果然金融到最后就是过桥 这篇 @3f_xyz 创始人 @sonyasunkim 的文章讲了RWA Looping的困境与3f目前的解决方案，有感而发，也想记录一点自己的思绪和理解： 很多人不理解Looping，觉得风险很高，但其实传统固收类资产都是加杠杆的，最大的杠杆市场就是国债逆回购。 RWA 想要在链上实现规模增长，绕不开这件事，毕竟如果不能被高效加杠杆，那机构为什么不留在 TradFi？那边的借贷基础设施已经跑了几十年，没有理由搬到一个连杠杆都做不好的链上环境。 那链上怎么加杠杆？最直觉的方式是抵押 → 借稳定币 → 买更多 RWA → 再抵押 → 重复。但这里有一个前置问题：RWA得有DEX流动性，以允许闪电贷一个 Block 里 Swap 完。 但大部分 RWA根本没有这种链上流动性。想给Tokeniznized Asset一个深度足够的交易市场，成本不低：CLOB 需要专业做市商挂单，AMM 需要给 LP 足够的激励来承担无常损失。对很多新上链的 RWA 来说，这个启动成本是不现实的。 那直接走一级市场 申购赎回呢？不好意思，跟 Crypto 原生资产不一样，链上原生资产是基于区块即时结算的，而传统资产是基于工作日的，申购赎回T+1。 ------------------- Sonya提到了目前的解法基本是两类，但都有隐性成本： 一是 Curator 管理的Looping Vault，Vault帮 LP 加杠杆。所有摩擦都由 Vault 内部消化，为了应对赎回，Curator必须留好流动性，这也意味着拖累收益，因此没有办法获得理想的杠杆敞口。 二是包装成稳定币，项目方亲自下场管理Collateral资产，坏处是可能碰到像 @StreamDefi 那样的没有良好风控，为了收益不管不顾的项目方，成为整个市场的系统性风险。 -------------------- 传统金融里面是怎么做的？ 有大投行给提供专额信贷，你告诉高盛 我要 5x，高盛直接给你信用额度，一笔订单买入全部头寸，等一个 T+1 全部结算到账。建仓从 N × T 压缩到 1 × T。 高盛本质上是在资产结算之前先垫钱给你，用信用关系打断了"有抵押品才能借钱 → 有钱才能买资产 → 买了资产才有抵押品"这个串行依赖链。其实也就是所谓的过桥资金。 ---------------------- 3F 做的事就是把垫资搬到链上。 1）Bridge Facilitator：主要解决建仓/平仓的结算延迟 用户存 $100 万本金要 5x 杠杆 → bridge facilitator 一次性垫 $400 万 → 一笔交易买入 $500 万 RWA → 等一个结算周期 RWA 到账后在 Morpho 上做抵押借贷 refinance → facilitator 收回垫资 + 赚利息。建仓从 N × T 压缩到 1 × T。平仓同理。 Facilitator 赚的是短期垫资的利息：一个结算周期的资金成本。资金用完立刻回收，可以服务下一个仓位。多个 facilitator 之间竞争，利率自然趋向市场均衡。 2）Liquidity Integrator：主要解决退出端的流动性 Bridge Facilitator 把建仓/平仓压到一个结算周期，但有些 RWA 结算周期是季度级别的。用户今天想快速退出，不想等三个月。 3F 的方案是把"即时赎回"外包给专业整合商。短期 RWA 由原子 swap 提供商处理（类似 @multiliquid_xyz），长期 RWA 由专业定价商处理（类似 @FissionXYZ，根据资产风险和到期时间定折价）。用户选择：等一个结算周期按面值退出，还是立刻退出但接受市场定价的折扣。 整合商的商业模式跟 Bridge Facilitator 本质上一样，都是垫资。用户要退出，整合商先垫 USDC 给你，自己持有 RWA 等赎回结算后收回本金，赚的是垫资期间的利息加上折价差。一个垫建仓的钱，一个垫平仓的钱，都是过桥。
中文
It seems there is a trend that the RWA assets can find its own way to build a secondary market liquidity which allows instant leverage build and unwind, for example assets backed by STRC, and through protocols like @pendle_fi . I don’t think bridge faciliator will still be needed in the near future.
English
@0xfarmed @LiquityProtocol Looks like @LiquityProtocol promote themselves recently, you can’t compare the fees because you can’t even leveraged looping on Liquity while this is a basic use case on all other protocols
English
If you have $1M in wstETH and want to Borrow $500k in stables.
On Aave (DeFi avg, 4.24%): $21,200/year in interest.
On @LiquityProtocol (1.06% avg): $5,300/year.
Same collateral. Same dollars out. ~$16k/year saved. That's a 5x reduction in cost of capital.
Why is @LiquityProtocol cheaper?
Because it's the first real interest rate market in DeFi.
On @aave , an algorithm sets your rate. A utilization curve. The pool fills up, your rate spikes. A hack on a token you don't even own can move it overnight. You don't pick. You don't negotiate. You just pay whatever the function spits out.
On Liquity, you set your own rate. Other borrowers do the same. The rates settle into a distribution. Set yours too low, you face redemption risk. Set it too high, you overpay. The market finds the price.
That's the whole trick.
And because $BOLD demand has been strong and the peg has held above $1, redemption risk for low-rate borrowers is near zero , so rates are compressed.
English
@phtevenstrong How is the incentive calculated? Seems a number jumped out of air and I have no idea where it’s from, if it’s stable and how long it can last
English
Pretty cool to see Ipor / Fusion with the best ETH yields during this Base renaissance.
10-17% on ETH with ecosystem incentives flowing.
Fusion (by IPOR)@ipor_io
The @base season is shaping up.
English
@Ikebillion_ @LiquityProtocol it’s meaningless to compare Liquity to other lending protocols, on Aave you can leverage loop on stables, LST and other assets, none of them is possible on Liquity
English
People do not realize how deep this really goes.
If I borrowed $100,000 on Aave V3, I pay around $4,000 a year in borrow fees. Compound V3 runs roughly $5,000. Sky charges up to $6,000 on an ETH-backed position.
@LiquityProtocol V2 with rETH collateral? $500.
Same $100,000. Same 12 months. The entire difference is the borrow rate. Liquity V2 lets borrowers set their own rate and with rETH collateral that rate currently sits at 0.5%. Compare that to the 4 to 6% you give up elsewhere just to access your own liquidity.
That is $3,500 to $5,500 you keep every year on a $100,000 position.
Scale that to $500,000 and you are looking at $17,500 to $27,500 in annual savings. On the same collateral. Doing nothing differently except choosing where you borrow.
Bojan@bjnpck
This is Klaus. He could save $51,870/y by moving his loan to @LiquityProtocol How about you? Check here: rate-comparooor.vercel.app
English
It's really conterintuitive that users don't want to build/exit their looping position instantly. Of course it's limited now because of the period in RWA assets and other factors like thin onchain liquidity, but I truely believe instant leverage/redemptions/liquidations is what user's want
English
Many MMs and onchain prime brokers we speak to are focused on RWA instant redemptions/liquidations but imo this isn’t the right sequencing from the perspective of servicing what users want.
A big use case for RWAs is looping. The natural capital flow is then:
1. Help users build leverage on RWAs efficiently (@3f_xyz’s BFs carry out this function)
2. Once sufficient leverage positions are established, then maybe there will be liquidations and demand for instant redemptions
Those who focus on 2 before 1 will see no flows and therefore no yield.
TLDR: Become a 3F BF! ☺️
English
MegaETH doesn't looks good to me.
Entire tvl heavily maintained by the incentive distributed to Aave depositors, and even they have raised the cap for USDm and USDe, only 60% and 50% of cap were fullfilled.
Other apps also suck, you can tell all of them are boring trash gambling game with the first galance. Think the chain will dead in 6 months. Just another useless l2
jussy@jussy_world
I mean, it's just been two weeks 😂 USDm supply already down ~50% from ATH They spending 3x more on incentives just to sustain USDm TVL on Aave (per @Naeven_0) No offense to anyone who jumped to farm Mega or was bullish on it But I really think the industry has enough chains It's time for dApps like HL and Poly to lead Agree or disagree?
English
Incredible to see hack events only has 3 bps impact annually on defi lending, with diversity investment looks like the yield can far more compensate the loss
Alex McFarlane@flipdazed
English
Tranching is actually a more adjacent primitive to fixed-rate in this thesis than most think.
Both solve the same institutional problem from different axes; flat pool defi is unallocatable on a risk committee because there's no defined position in the capital stack.
1) Fixed-rate solves it on the rate axis (know what you earn, over what duration).
2) Tranching solves it on the loss axis (know where you sit in the waterfall if losses occur).
Together they reproduce tradfi level structured credit toolkit for onchian capital markets.
What's interesting is the wave is on its third real attempt, and the timing finally fits:
1 (2020–22): @BarnBridgeDAO shipped SMART Yield in 2020 = Senior bonds + Junior tokens tranched from Aave/Compound yield. @idlefinance followed with Perpetual Yield Tranches (epoch-free, novel design).
Both hit ~$80M TVL peaks, both effectively dead now. Right idea, four years early.
2 (2023–24): @StructFinance ported the model to @avax on GLP yield. Idle then pivoted into @paretocredit, recognizing tranching alone doesn't capture value, but tranching inside an institutional credit product (@RockawayX + @FalconXGlobal + @Maven11Capital) does.
Now upwards of $50M+ in structured credit facilities.
3 (2025–26): purpose-built for the moment (and honestly the most interesting one)
@roycoprotocol dawn -> universal yield-source tranching, continuously-priced Senior/Junior split, observation period before Junior absorbs losses. Dialectic curating.
@0xKnoxFi -> 3-tranche model (Senior / Spectrum / Junior) with Surplus Participation. The Spectrum tranche is the under-appreciated bit — DeFi's first real mezzanine layer. In TradFi, mezzanine is where most institutional allocators actually sit. Two-tranche models reproduce only Senior + Equity; three-tranche unlocks the middle.
@LotusFi_ -> tranching within a lending market via LLTV tiers. Different surface, same idea.
@mezzanine_fi -> tranching applied to peg arbitrage + crosschain stables.
Why i think this wave works (and will be bigger than ever) when the previous ones didn't:
1) mature variable-rate base layer (30+ @Morpho curators, @pendle_fi PTs, sUSDe, syrupUSDC)
2) the substrate is finally rich enough to tranche meaningfully
3) institutional buyer is actually here (Pareto's pivot is the proof that risk committees can't allocate to flat pools)
4) curator/structurer role separation now exists for structured products, not just lending
5) fixed-rate origination is shipping alongside, so the full toolkit closes
Defined positions in the capital stack by rate and by loss.
But i believe ideally both is what unlocks the next wave of institutional DeFi.
This will be the next thing i dive deeper into after fixed-rates. Builders in this lane, would love to trade notes.
0xyanshu (d/acc)@0xyanshu
Been diving into the fixed-rate defi landscape for the past few weeks and trying to understand the different architectural approaches forming. Variable rates bootstrapped onchain liquidity. They cannot scale it. Institutions don't underwrite against utilization curves. BTC-collateralized stablecoin borrow rates ranged 2–16% across major protocols over the last 18 months, no treasury models against that. The market is already showing the demand: for eg, 5–6% fixed on 1–3 month maturities clearing via OTC right now (cc @MacroMate8), @Fira_Lend skyrocketing with $420M+ in loans. @pendle_fi was the early experiment here; splitting yield-bearing assets into PT (fixed) and YT (variable) tokens proved demand for fixed yield onchain. But that was a yield derivative layer on top of someone else's variable rate. DeFi wasn't mature enough yet for native fixed-rate origination, no sophisticated curator base, expensive blockspace, no proper variable-rate primitive to sit on. Three preconditions that killed earlier attempts are finally resolved: 1) deep liquidity, 2) sophisticated curators (30+ active on @Morpho alone), 3) cheap blockspace The architectural split forming now is interesting: 1) Native origination: @Morpho Midnight (intent-based ZCBs), @TermMaxFi (FT/GT token model), @loopscale (orderbook on Solana), @term_labs, @Fira_Lend, @D2_Finance 2) Solver / swap layer: @iris_credit isolating rate risk to a third party while keeping variable-rate origination 3) Collateral utility: @Cassa_fyi + @eulerfinance + @infiniFi making fixed-maturity assets usable as collateral with a credible exit path The unresolved question: asset-liability mismatch when fixed loans sit inside vaults promising instant liquidity ( @AnthonyBowman43 has the sharpest critique, altho @Crotts__ had a solid pointers on duration management). Worth noting: the variable-rate base layer is also evolving. Tranched risk tiers in connected markets like @LotusFi_, @roycoprotocol and similar concentrated-liquidity designs are building the kind of efficient variable-rate benchmarks fixed-rate solvers need to quote tightly against. The two layers reinforce each other. Writing a long-form piece on this, would love to chat if you're building or have strong views (DMs open). (p.s. threw this together with claude on a lazy sunday, happy to be corrected)
English
@sonyasunkim @3f_xyz @centrifuge Bridge facilitator overnight apr is 9.1%, do you have any estimate value for a longer time window?
English
From last week's deposits for @3f_xyz private beta:
⬛️ $7.1 million of total exposure in @centrifuge $JAAA from LPs who are earning yields from leveraging the real world!
🟧 10x leverage on JAAA = ~39.4% APY
🟦 Bridge Facilitator overnight liquidity = 9.1% APR
🟩 wJAAA Morpho lender = 3.7% APY
Sonya Kim@sonyasunkim
Another week of @3f_xyz private beta! Now $3.1 million of total exposure sits with the JAAA tokenized fund sub-managed by @JHIAdvisors and tokenized by @centrifuge Yesterday's 3F auction cleared the full stack. Same RWA, three risk profiles, three different rates: 🟧 Leveraged LP (8x): 21.7% APY 🟦 Bridge Facilitator: 8.95% APR overnight 🟩 Morpho lender: 3.3% APY To be continued next Wednesday!
English
Woooow I didn’t releaize that you can loop PT-apxUSD with 107% apy on Base
Apyx@apyx_fi
Onchain digital credit yield is taking over @pendle_fi. 🚀
English
rmL retweetledi
The team behind thBILL @Theo_Network is honestly unbelievable. Since the launch of their new product, thUSD, they’ve diverted all their resources toward promoting it. The official website no longer displays details for the original Treasury-backed stablecoin, thBILL; they are completely ignoring the depeg, and even the Points system has been scrubbed from the site.
Currently, the official price for thBILL is 1.025, but the swap price has dropped to 1.0126—a 1.2% depeg. On top of that, liquidity has significantly dried up. For a stablecoin backed by short-term U.S. Treasuries, I find this level of illiquidity and depegging to be completely unacceptable.
Furthermore, thBILL’s price-stabilization mechanism relies on whitelisted users minting and redeeming to maintain the peg. This means regular users have no way to redeem at the official price.
Isn't it about time did something to actually make this "stablecoin" stable?@Theo_Network
English
@0xlemoneth 个人感觉apyx和saturn两个项目是cs的概率都不小，融资金额都不大，saturn还说s1的分配up to 5%，昨天又刷到saturn统一的洗地稿吹融资vc的，又是华人创始人再加上yzilab投资，反正是不敢碰
中文
