T.An

Just got an appearance on Monad in the Morning for making a clown of myself at their UGC workshop. Can't wait to cringe watching it back

@lordjorx @tulipacapital @yieldbasis So the AMM designed to not have impermanent loss has impermanent loss.

Why YieldBasis is working exactly as planned. The market just took a brutal hit. Here is how YieldBasis is surviving the crash, based on the latest math and data from the @tulipacapital report. When this team entered @yieldbasis with cbBTC back in November, the strategy was clear: leverage on top of Curve to earn massive fees while keeping price exposure. But now that the market has dumped, the TRD (Temporary Redemption Discount) has kicked in. If you try to withdraw now, you’ll lose a significant percentage (21%). But you need to understand the difference between the actual value of the assets in the strategy (the PPS) and the value you get if you exit early. The TRD isn't "lost" money; it’s a reflection of the pool imbalance caused by massive selling. The math behind the TRD is very specific: > If BTC bounces back to $80k-$85k, the TRD drops to 0% almost instantly. > If BTC stays flat (around $63k which is the actual price), we would need about 38-40 weeks for the fees to rebalance the system. > If BTC drops to $50k or lower, we enter a critical fear phase where we would have to wait more than a year, even though the underlying asset value (PPS) has already grown by 7.3% since launch. To speed things up, the new Hybrid Vault and LEVAMM adjustments will start shifting fees dynamically to redistribute liquidity faster. Everything is working exactly as it was designed to. It’s painful if you need an immediate exit, but the mechanical reality of the protocol is holding up.

Whys my entire feed people posting fake stories of Clawd printing money off of Polymarket. What do they have to gain from this? Are they just trying to get people to place stupid bets?

Capricorn Day 1 Liquidity Stack: Data: @trycodex Trade: @KyberNetwork @KuruExchange @mace_ag @0xProject @monorail_xyz @OpenOceanGlobal [Redacted] Earn: @ammplify_xyz

For AMM users, any thoughts about viewing "IL" this way? First it's tracked just as PnL in USDC terms, and second it's graphed over a range of prices so you don't have to punch it into any calculator.

Usually when you DM your account manager it’s for a refund – not an upgrade. Pull up a seat with @1xTerence or just shoot me a message if you want to find a shit ton of bugs.

I don't bullpost Monad often cuz community leeches are hella gross, but the airdrop has really outted how many people hopped on the Monad bandwagon cuz they're bullish on the tech and the people, and how many are just bullshitting to farm and was disappointed they got caught. Ammplify literally can't be built on any other chain (except maybe Solana?) cuz of our gas demands and we're just one protocol. Building a scalable blockchain is the first step in onboarding more advanced, feature-rich, compute intensive protocols to Web3. And this is just the current specs. James and Keone aren't going anywhere, the chain will improve, builders will realize new primitives to build, and if you lose sight of that ask yourself how much do you actually believe in Monad? in DeFi? in Web3?

This is heartbreaking. Bunni was a competitor but I had nothing but respect for their ingenuity. Best wishes to their team members and all their future endeavors.

@funderbrker Sorry i shoulda clarified. Street food. Like what you’d find at a night market. The sauce on fried chicken, the buns, the drinks, etc

@1xTerence which foods? i feel like this is just a bread problem

Taiwanese food is so friggin sweet I suspect the only reason everyone doesn't have heart disease is because the entire country is a literal sauna 9 months of the year.

It's happening

Note that yesterday's scenario might have triggered a halt instead of LULD by NYSE's rules, and we'll need to redesign rules for cryptos idiosyncratic correlations and volatility, but I'm sure it can be done, and periods of uni-directional bid/asks are still useful.

In all the conversations around ADL I've yet to see someone mention NYSE's Limit Up and Limit Down rules. It was specifically made to handle scenarios like this. If a single ticker drops unexpectedly, market participants can only post bids. They might not, but that's fine. It still prevents the dramatically goes-to-zero-wicks that wiped everyone out. Ultimately exchanges are made for people, and we need to slow down liquidations so people can re-collateralize and adjust their priors. This not only helps actual users but the exchange itself. We could have avoided ADL entirely had LULD rules been in place. When I advocate for circuit breakers and LULD rules, some people might contest that other exchanges will keep trading. That's entirely fine. The point is a large exchange like Binance halting removes enough price discovery that other markets will stall on volume and have less reliable quotes as well. Think of how wide aftermarket spreads are. This is a good thing. It gives actual humans the chance to step in instead of just letting the algos roll over everyone. Having said that, after some good conversations and threads, I'm open to changing my mind on ADL, but two things still stick out to me. 1. HLP having their best day ever obviously leaves a bad taste in lots of people's mouths. IMO they should share in the socialized losses or at least take more modest profits. Is HLP there to make money from HL users or to act as an insurance fund? A bit of both no? Jeff calls it a "social good" for users. It's understood to provide non-toxic liquidity but to turn around and opportunistically pull liquidity breaks said social contract. 2. Protocols should be their own buyers of last resort. Without clear fundamentals like tradfi, we rely on protocols signaling their own health. Idk what honest founder wouldn't buy back their own equity at a steep discount. I hope the industry can institute a standard where we measure a protocol's worthiness by their willingness to bid for their own token. Putting 1 and 2 together makes me question if HYPE should be also used as a deep bidder on HL. But anyways, in short 1. Limit Up Limit Down is good. 2. Circuit breakers are also good and it doesn't matter if other venues keep running if the big ones halt. 3. We should be designing exchanges around humans. 4. Protocols should be buyers-of-last-resort for their own tokens. 5. HLP cannot be both a "social good" and opportunistically antagonize users.

@markus_ Definitely not across the board, but I'm hoping more mature markets like Binance would start looking into it.

Im not sure if cryptos ready for circuit breakers across the board But they absolutely should be in place for assets like PAXG and USDE

@markus_ Yeah I think that tradeoff depends on on who you want to prioritize. IMO the former’s bid is mostly uninformed retail and the latter protects them from whats no different than a scam wick. I do think the former is better for the exchange though

Yeah I get what you’re saying My point is it’s a trade off btw “let me try and dump this exposure on liquidity while it exists because it might disappear forever” - which HFT firms help with as long as the book isn’t frozen And “let’s freeze and let books reset” Imo the former was historically the correct call as many assets only had a momentum driven bid - so after a flush they were dead I think I agree with you that the latter may be the correct call given how much the market has matured

How the heck is auto-deleveraging acceptable? Really exposes how much defi lipstick we’ve put on the pig.

@markus_ Cuz that’s precisely what happened with so many alts. It doesn’t matter if it keeps trading on other exchanges. That level of volatility doesn’t help anyone except the HFTs that can snipe. Better to let the dust settle and then resume clearing if necessary

@markus_ It’s not the gapping that’s the reason they halt books. The purpose is to give time for market makers to reposition so you won’t end up with scenarios where it gaps down 60%, blows up positions, cascades more liquidations, and then bounces again to something reasonable.

@markus_ So as far as i know, that’s not how tradfi adl works for exactly the problem you’re mentioning. The approach is to let the positions stand, halt the market, wait for stability and let the clearing house socialize losses. Which doesn’t blow up anyone in particular.

Yeah agreed in that sense Unfortunately liquidity correlation makes it hard - you’re only ADLing someone’s bitcoin short from their ETH/BTC pair trade if your BTC book is empty - which means your ETH book is near empty - so if you wanna deliver both legs what’re you closing the ETH long into? But I do agree it’s bad that delta-hedged folks, esp basis traders, got blown up yesterday - ADL is still fairly unrefined since people wanna assume it’s a last resort they’ll never need

If yesterday didn’t explain why DeFi needs options, idk what will

@markus_ If you’re long short tho, your broker knows to close both if they need margin back. HL closing half a leg (the profitable leg) is pretty unacceptable

@1xTerence I mean tradfi does it too it’s just not formalized or documented It’s just mandatory to be able to manage perp risk. Without it leverage, asset offerings, and liquidity would drop significantly - it’s all a trade off space Traders can always stick to spot or spot margin