1/ Volumes on global derivative markets are some large multiple of global spot markets - maybe 20X by my SWAG reckoning. Crypto futures are wildly successful products. The options side is developing. Also, there is the whole push to DeFi.
So what about Derivative DeFi?
2/ Sounds like a reasonable investment thesis. I have bought several projects in this space and see them working hard to develop out product offerings that attract volume as scale.
3/ In the real world, derivative market places can be siloed because customers guarantee margin obligations and the brokers underwrite the customers. The promise of cash to settle up margin is sufficient.
4/ Centralized crypto derivatives platforms replace the credit officer and customer guarantee with a liquidation engine. Accordingly, customers favor the exchanges with very liquid cash and derivatives market in the hopes that liquidation wicks are less severe.
5/ Because of this herding, a small number of centralized exchanges generate a large percentage of the volume, reinforcing centralization as a risk.
6/ Decentralized crypto derivatives protocols are siloed away from the cash markets. They try to institute oracles often with wvap / twap prices and fancy bonding curves into their liquidation mechanics.
7/ They have too because a simpler approach to margin requirements and liquidations would cause great rektage. Why? Each silo’s specific derivatives market suffers from illiquidity, and the cash market is approximated rather than adjacent, easily-accessible and highly liquid.
8/ The point I’m trying to make is that the optimal DerivDeFi protocol needs to be bundled with a DeFi protocol. While the cash market may not need the derivatives market, an efficient, highly liquid derivatives market greatly benefits from an at-hand cash market.
9/ To achieve the decentralized part of DerivDeFi, the protocol ideally would run on decentralized nodes which are independently aware of the state of every one of the protocol markets.
10/ While decentralized doesn't need speed per se, trading does so the protocol should operate in a fast block time environment.
11/ It almost sounds as if idealized version of DerivDeFi should exist on its own chain with native assets, liquid pools of non native assets, and the ability to synthesize any asset. Derivatives are just a subset of synthetic assets after all.
12/ Where could we find such a project - one that offered the necessary combination DeFi, DerivDeFi, a timely, stateful blockchain?
13/ Thorchain will offer the basic DeFi products - LPs, borrowing and lending. It is developing fully collateralized synthetics.
14/ Since Derivatives are synthetics, expect in due time, futures, options and a large array of other derivatives that mirror traditional market products, such as structured notes, cash flow factoring / tranching, and so on.
15/ Thorchain is the only protocol that offers these products to native BTC holders. It will easily have the most liquidity. This project has all the makings of the idealized DeFi+DerivDeFi protocol with an exceptional amount of native liquidity.
16/ Also, it will have the opportunity to cherry pick any other DerivDeFI product offering, fast following as necessary. Deep liquidity. All the best in class product offerings. Thorchain could easily dominate DerivDeFi
1/ One easily overlooked quality about Thorchain’s network of LPs is that they themselves are agents in the market place (as facilitated by swappers and arb bots). The way that agency expresses itself during a market sell-off is rather interesting.
2/ Perhaps we just saw a great example in the past 48 hours.
A generic scenario: BTC sells off, and alts, because they are less liquid sell off worse. Imagine on the initial downward impulse, RUNE sell off the worst of all the significant Thorchain LP tokens.
3/ Not an unreasonable assumption because it has the smallest market cap.
The LP balances are an expression of relative price and don’t change until swaps take place.
1/ Getting many questions, even accusations, about the usefulness of baseline price when valuing $RUNE. Here is a link to a more comprehensive breakdown:
1/ This long thread is an exploration on the notion that when you LP into an AMM, you are selling convexity. At the end of a longish abstract thread, I point out some of the ways that Thorchain and its native token $RUNE attenuation this risk.
2/ In finance, convexity is a notion of acceleration. Think of like the arc of ball thrown off the roof of a building. It drops at an accelerating rate. Imagine that ball was an investment, dropping at an accelerating rate. Putting assets into an AMM LP can kinda be like that.
3/ How so?
Imagine a bitconnect:ETH AMM LP. Hah! You can’t unthink that thought. As bitconnect ponzied ever higher, LP investors would have been furious about the way that token was sold out for more ETH by the AMM. This outcome is one version of convexity risk.
1/ The best metric to value $RUNE - its baseline price - is derived from RUNE’s deterministic value. It measures how much RUNE’s current price is a consequence of the value of the non-RUNE tokens locked in Thorchain’s LPs and how much the price is a speculative premium.
2/ RUNE’s deterministic value is simply three times the non-RUNE value in the network. Why three? Because for every $1 of non-RUNE value in the network, $1 of RUNE is in the LP and at least $2 of RUNE must be bonded by the nodes. For example ..
3/ Today’s $80M of non-RUNE TVL requires $240M RUNE - the network’s deterministic value. With roughly 200M RUNE outstanding, the deterministic value per RUNE is $1.20. This simple measure misses one critical, highly determinative factor. Not all RUNE is in the network.
1/ Let’s look at Thorchain / $RUNE and the opportunity to stake into the BTC:RUNE LP from the point of view of a BTC OG with sizable bags. Our BTC OG is curious, willing to learn-by-doing, and stakes 2 BTC into the LP. Why?
- the LP rewards could generate a significant economics (as in more BTC). And what BTC OG doesn’t want more BTC? The BTC:RUNE LP will literally buy the OG more BTC.
3/ So what happens when 2 BTC is staked? Two BTC go into the pool in exchange for an allocation of pool shares. The pool is balanced 50% BTC and 50% RUNE, so it’s as if the OG sold 1 BTC for the equivalent amount of $RUNE - a token. A nfw jfc token! Insert scream emoji here.
1/ Staking coins into a RUNE LP captures two types of value - cashflow, and RUNE appreciation. Cashflow has two parts - transaction fees and block rewards. Transaction fees are self-explanatory. Block rewards will create an explosive flywheel effect of value accrual.
2/ Currently, there are 200M RUNE in circulation, and a max total of 500M.
3/ Messari gives a great breakdown of RUNE’s token supply curve: messari.io/asset/thorchain. Over the next 5 years, 90M RUNE, worth $550M will be provided as liquidity rewards, issued with the production of each Thorchain block.