Full-spectrum risk DeFi is what we are excited about building at @3FLabs. DeFi yield has definitely found PMF and with a bit of creativity and coordination, we have the opportunity to scale junior/mezzanine of DeFi - similar to how senior credit (overcollateralized lending) is starting to dominate the defi mullet thesis with integrations with CEXs, custodians and fintechs.
To my mind, there are two main primitives necessary to commercialize higher-risk defi: tranching and leverage
- Tranching (horizontal scaling): slices single yield stream/risk into multiple products for different appetites. @pendle_fi’s PT/YT split is an example of this. Benefit is that the splitting of risk expands addressable market by being more targeted. Seniors attract conservative capital, junior attract degens.
- Leverage/Looping (vertical scaling): turns a modest yield into supercharged returns by increasing effective exposure. Benefit is increasing demand by making collateral more productive. This is where @3FLabs is innovating.
By splitting risk and amplifying returns, tranching and leverage together will exponentially expand the addressable market for yield. And we are here for it!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Lido allows users stake their ETH to secure Ethereum for yield without sacrificing the ability to do DeFi. $stETH is the liquid derivative token that's usable as collateral in other DeFi protocols such as @AaveAave and @MakerDAO
1/ Lido makes money by:
- Taking 10% of staking rewards (revenues)
- Paying half of that out to node operators (COGS)
- Paying staff and contributors (operating expense)
- Incentivising $stETH liquidity in other protocols (operating expense)
2/ Lido is quite close to being breakeven. As % of ETH staked rises and liquidity incentives eventually decline, Lido should be able to benefit from operating leverage.
Now that some time has passed since @blur_io's airdrop szn 1, I checked some high-level numbers to gauge whether it was good use of capital.
🧵
1/ Firstly, I was impressed that @PacmanBlur talked about the importance of capital allocation on @bankless ()
It's refreshing to know there are founders in crypto who are well-aware of this concept.
2/ As Mr. Buffett points out, capital allocation is a critical job that isn't easily mastered.
Company CEOs are unskilled in capital allocation, which "isn't surprising. Most bosses rise to the top because they've excelled in marketing.. or sometimes, institutional politics" 🏦
Arbitrum is essentially a spread business🖖. It takes in user gas fees as revenues and incurs L1 (Ethereum) gas fees and L2 compute fees as operating costs.
Protocol Earnings (called sequencer profits) are directed to the DAO Treasury. This has the impact of increasing Arbitrum's “book value” (i.e. Arbitrum has clear economic value accrual).
Future unknowns: how margins will evolve as the scaling roadmap for ETH plays out.
- EIP-4844/full Danksharding will reduce the cost of storing data for L2s by 10x/100x. To what extent will L1 batch fee cost savings be passed onto L2 users?
Firstly, law of large numbers is the phenomenon that the sample average converges to the population expected value as the number of trials increases.
The spraying will result in an averaging down of portfolio returns to the market average
🧵
1) In an industry where a winner-takes-all dynamic prevail (crypto is one because money and liquidity have big network effects), investors must go whale hunting rather than casting the net wide. Let’s illustrate with a simple example.
2) Consider the distribution of long-term crypto returns. It will look something like the power law distribution, NOT a bell-curve. Say for every 100 tokens, there will be 5 winners & 95 losers: