I've been using recursive lending & borrowing on @kava_platform to get a 55% yield on $UST paid in $KAVA and $HARD. Here's how that works 🧵
The strategy takes advantage of the fact that the net borrowing rate (after rewards) is higher than the net lending rate. In the case of #Kava, much higher!
One should deposit $UST and borrow $ATOM. Borrowing on Kava needs to be over collateralized so you cannot leverage indefinitely.
The platform has a collateral factor (cf) of 25% for $UST meaning that if you deposit $100 of collateral, you can only borrow $25 worth of $ATOM
However $ATOM itself has a collateral factor (cf) of 50% for meaning that if you deposit $100 of collateral, you can only borrow $50 worth of $ATOM
With a $100 initial lending deposit of $ATOM, one will borrow $50 against it in $ATOM. Those $50 will then be re-deposited and used to borrow $25 (50% of $50)
The formula for infinite number of recursions below. In
In practice you might loop 4-5x times your initial stake as after a certain amount you might want to have some margin of safety on our collateral to avoid liquidations
The exact yield fluctuates with the price of $KAVA. At today's rate it was 56.60% today
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Since $UST is the de-facto stablecoin of the #Cosmos ecosystem, I thought it'd be interesting to sum up the intense story of yesterday's de-pegging sequence 🧵
It started Saturday afternoon on the East Coast with significant withdrawals from the Anchor protocol
In an effort to promote the good actors of the ecosystem, I'm planning to publish a couple of threads per week on the most active community validators, starting today with fellow Frenchmen @imperator_co 🧵
Note that @imperator_co is the first validator to be listed on the new "Thyborg Cosmos Validator Ranking" available below. Imperator nominated @crypto_crew next, so I'll try to set up an interview with them, and the list will slowly grow that way cosmosvalidators.org
With 4 engineers, Imperator is a significant code contributor within the ecosystem validators. Their biggest achievement is clearly the website info.osmosis.zone and its widely used API (e.g by Dexmos & CitadelOne). Imperator is also an IBC relayer
If you’re new to #Cosmos (like me), you might be surprised about the intensity of the public debate. Since it is quite useful to understand the current dispute between important ecosystem actors, here's a neutral account of some prior events 🧵
Let's start from the beginning, as it was told by @buchmanster told @Cryptocito : when the two met, @jaekwon had already started researching proof-of-work consensus algorithms in the classical literature. That was before Ethereum.
Jae was the first to work on a byzantine-fault tolerant algorithm in the blockchain space. In 2014, Ethan & Jae created a company called Tendermint, who later organised the a public token sale for $ATOM, raising 17 million in 2017.
#Prop69 is getting everyone talking about CosmWasm so I thought it would be useful to explain what it is (while careful ignoring the hot debate around its implementation in the Cosmos Hub) 🧵
Unlike virtual-machine blockchains (like Ethereum) where everything is programmed as a set of smart contracts, the Cosmos SDK is a framework for application-specific blockchains
The framework is designed to build blockchains out of composable modules. Anyone can create a module, and integrating already-built modules is straightforward
#Prop69 isn’t a scam or a spam, & people are voting “No w/ Veto '' just to get $GNOT. Thing is, these wallets are essentially forever tagging themselves as “airdrop chasers''. As Cosmos grows, it wouldn't surprise me if other projects use that vote to exclude the chasers
I appreciate the fact that some people actually wish to convey the strongest opposition possible. However in blockchain voting "No w/ Veto" traditionally means the proposal is a scam and the proposer should loose the deposit
Also projects are free to incentivize voting however they want, and people are free to try to maximise their airdrop. I wrote a thread about doing that with #Gnoland here
Yesterday Cosmos founder @jaekwon published a lengthy article explaining his opposition to Cosmos governance proposal 69 and the details of the upcoming #Gnoland airdrop for $ATOM holders, which I've summarised as a Q&A below 🧵
I've explained Jae's and the minimalist hub philosophy in this previous thread. Note that this is not an endorsement of the "No" vote as I personally haven't made my mind yet