I’m ngl you guys are honestly fucking retarded and I’m sick of pretending you aren’t.
There’s less than a million dollars of liquidity in this bullshit ass coin
Fuck Ansem and fuck Arthur Hayes and fuck Trump.
The scaling unlock for @yieldbasis is almost complete.
It needed many parts to fully scale and the last piece is llamalend v2.
V3 Pools:
These new pools are optimized to recover fast and keep the pools in balance more often. This keeps APRs more consistent and the pools healthier.
However, these pools rely on the crvusd peg to be stable. If they get to large without equally big supply sinks for crvusd, they can make the peg more volatile during periods of high volatility.
That created the second problem. How to scale the credit line. The solution to that was…
Hybrid Vaults:
these allow users to deposit crvusd into scrvusd and create a personal cap in their corresponding yb pool. This creates a supply sink for crvusd and helps stabilize the peg and offset the crvusd borrowed for the yb pool.
But these hybrid vaults are not very capital efficient. Currently, you need 45% of your BTC value to open up the cap to deposit.
The third problem is how to make hybrid value more capital efficient. Enter…
Llamalend V2
The solution is to allow you to borrow crvusd against your yb pool lp position. By doing this, you can run a carry trade and cover your hybrid vault requirement.
The strategy looks like this:
1. Deposit 45k of crvusd into the hybrid vault to open 100k BTC cap in the yb pool.
2. Deposit 100k of BTC
3. Borrow 45k of crvusd from llamalend with n=50
You now have covered your hybrid vault and netted out only having 100k BTC.
Your loan is a 45% LTV. Fairly safe. With llamalend and a high N factor, even if BTC dips you can easily have your BTC converted to crvusd and back automatically. Just pay a little bit to keep your health above 0 with your yield.
Here is the SUPER COOL part…the more yb pools scales, the stronger crvusd gets and the cheaper the interest rates for crvusd are.
This improves the carry trade.
It also drives huge liquidity to crvusd, making soft liquidation even more efficient.
Only caveat: it requires yb lp tokens to be able to mint crvusd. @CurveFinance might feel that’s too dangerous.
The @mezzanine_fi pre-deposit / ecosystem vault is scheduled to go live July 1st.
Here's what I can say about it so far:
Its purpose is to bootstrap Mezzanine's core functions.
➢ It will provide liquidity for our @pendle_fi markets
➢ It will provide liquidity for mzUSD
➢ It may provide lendside liquidity against some of our staked assets
➢ After the initial pre-deposit campaign period, it will be converted into an ecosystem vault
➢ It will have the highest points multiplier for our S1
➢ It targets a 5-10% base organic yield
Caps will most likely be low to start. We don't want to give out points without being able to directly add utility.
It's really happening, guys. It's coming.
Current Polaris testnet yields:
• fpETH: 26% APR
The floor-price component of pETH. This one grows steadily while removing volatile exposure.
• pUSD: 7.29% APR
Yield earned by depositing pUSD into its low-risk Stability Pool.
• pGOLD: 2.83% APR
Yield earned by depositing pGOLD into its counterparty-free Stability Pool.
• vpETH Staking: 33.8% APR
The volatile side of pETH.
• POLAR Staking: 0.52% APR
The utility token's APR is currently relatively low because almost all POLAR is staked on testnet and there are no token emissions boosting the numbers.
---
• pUSD net borrowing rate: +1.12%
Borrowing costs are lower than the value flowing back to minters.
• pGOLD net borrowing rate: -3.84%
Borrowers are currently being paid (quite a lot) to mint pGOLD.
---
Testnet users only have limited (fake) capital, so yields won't perfectly match what happens on mainnet once liquidity starts moving around and users react to rates.
Still, fee flows are already working as they should, coming from:
• debt interest
• initial bonding curve bootstrap fees
• POLAR conversions
• bonding curve swap fees
• liquidation gains
• other token swaps on our platform
Important to flag that there are no token emissions involved, at all.
Yield is paid back in hard assets only (pETH, pGOLD).
Everything that happens onchain on Polaris is actively routed back to users.
@protocol_fx just launched a new market on @pendle_fi again with a new market for fxSAVE.
But what I'm actually looking at is the YT.
Everyone's fixated on the fixed rate.
I get it fixed, clean, predictable.
But if you know how fxSAVE generates yield, the YT is the more interesting play.
fxSAVE yield comes from 2 sources: stETH staking rewards (~3-4% base) + fees from every xPOSITION opened/closed on f(x) Protocol. No emissions, no points, pure activity.
Now here's where it gets confusing. The site shows 3 different numbers:
• Pendle UI: ~0.8% implied yield on YT
• Pool APY: ~3%
• f(x) site: 6.5% compounded
None of them are lying. They're just measuring different windows.
So I pulled the data straight from the contract.
fxSAVE is ERC4626.
Call convertToAssets(1e18) on 0x7743e50F534a7f9F1791DdE7dCD89F7783Eefc39 and compare NAV across blocks.
Real on-chain APY:
📅 7d annualized → 6.29%
📅 30d annualized → 3.95%
📅 90d annualized → 3.10%
Yield is clearly picking up.
That 6.5% on f(x)'s site is real, just a short window.
The YT at ~3% implied is basically a bet that fxSAVE stays above 3% until expiry.
Bull case: 7d APY is 6.29%, xPOSITION activity is up, you're buying yield exposure below current rate.
Bear case: 90d average is barely 3.1%, one quiet period in DeFi and fees collapse back to stETH base. Thin margin of safety.
Historically fxSAVE hasn't sustained above 4% for long. That's the risk.
Know what you're betting on. The contract doesn't lie.
@protocol_fx@pendle_fi
I’ve never understood why bridges have to always be fast. I get it for impatient retail or cross-chain arbitrage.
But many tasks aren’t very time sensitive. Which is why I always had a soft spot for the (now-defunct?) @fraxfinance bridge.
They called it Frax Ferry and gave the roles a nautical theme. The captain had admin roles, and a second set of actors called crew members had the power to temporarily pause to enforce a “stop, look, listen” process.
Normally I dislike meme-y themes (like food names), but in this case I think the ferry analogy helped communicate to users how it worked.
The Frax Ferry would have scheduled departure times between specific chains, and would take 24 hours to arrive.
This gave ample time to catch shenanigans. And also meant there was low risk of infinite mint, since any compromise would have to be sustained undetected for the entire journey.
I’m not sure if 24 hours is the right time period, but it’s hard to think that the Frax Ferry would have allowed DPRK to rekt Kelp.
To the extent a need for fast bridging still exists, it does seem appropriate for someone (bridge, issuer, swap-bridge counterparty) to levy a fee to account for the increased risks.
The model converged upon has been the asset issuers doing this for free - you’ll notice even on L2s, the standard bridges aren’t growing their escrows much as fast options proliferate.
I think we can agree there needs to be a rethinking about how this risk is shared. That could be a fee, lower claims priority, or some TBD clever solution.
It's no a question of IF, but WHEN @pendle_fi will smash through their (already high) ambitions:
- Boros Update: Introducing Rate Sensitivity https://t.co/AgX58SwUff
- Pendle Thesis: The Yield hub of DeFi https://t.co/mVRaLTB580
- Pendle Peepo is now AI boosted https://t.co/NIOL0KRvbP
- New RWA addition: Institutional grade Asia Credit with MuDigital https://t.co/w1oMgJkzYV
Last week in the dApp:
- USDG underlying from March 06 to April 31 distributed
- sPENDLE for 5th Epoch distributed
- Boros: directly swap to underlying collateral asset under Deposit
TASTY on Pendle now ($STRC related pools)
- [ETH] PT-sUSDat 27-AUG 13.02% APY
- [ETH] PT-apyUSD 18-JUN 15.91% APY (loopable on Morpho up to 65.16%)
- [ETH] PT-apxUSD 18-JUN 13.75% APY (loopable on Morpho up to 39.26%)
Pendle Print #112 https://t.co/zBn7DGcX76
dc: tier 1 kol supreme for pendle