Recent Mass Shutdowns of DeFi Protocols: They All Have One Thing in Common

marsbitPubblicato 2026-03-06Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-06

Introduzione

In recent months, multiple DeFi protocols have announced shutdowns, not due to exit scams but because of a lack of users, funding, or both. Projects like Angle Protocol, Polynomial, MilkyWay, and Step Finance—despite having functional products and significant past traction—were unable to sustain operations. Common challenges included an inability to attract liquidity (especially critical in derivatives), failure to achieve product-market fit, and high costs of expanding to new chains or narratives. Many teams pivoted repeatedly to chase trends like restaking or real-world assets but ran out of capital before finding sustainable demand. Others, like ZeroLend, suffered from deploying on smaller blockchains that lost liquidity during market downturns. Despite these failures, the projects shut down responsibly, allowing users to withdraw funds and avoiding reckless token launches—a sign of industry maturation compared to the reckless exits of 2022.

Author: Ignas

Compiled by: Chopper, Foresight News

Over the past two months, at least 10 crypto protocols have announced their closure. Not rug pulls, but due to no users, no money, or both.

Not to mention mining companies like BlockFills and lending platforms freezing withdrawals. Just yesterday, Angle also announced (https://x.com/AngleProtocol/status/2029161525580112263) the gradual shutdown of its EURA and USDA stablecoins, despite having reached a Total Value Locked (TVL) of $250 million and having strong business partnerships.

Angle stated bluntly in the announcement, "The decentralized stablecoin landscape has completely changed. Yield-bearing stablecoins today are essentially just branded wrappers over existing vaults and lending protocols; there's no longer a need to maintain a separate, independent infrastructure."

These shuttered projects almost all had functional products:

Polynomial processed a cumulative trading volume of $4 billion across 70 markets
MilkyWay's TVL once reached $250 million
Step Finance had a peak of 300,000 monthly active users

I've used, or at least tried, these products. The technology wasn't the issue, but no one was willing to pay the fees needed for the projects to survive.

MilkyWay is a typical example: four pivots in less than two years. Starting with Celestia liquid staking, then moving to restaking, RWA tokenization, and crypto debit cards for rent payments... each pivot chased the hype of the moment.

Their description of the restaking pivot is poignant: "We identified the restaking opportunity early, designed the system, TVL to $250M, completed security audits, and were ready to launch. But the market moved on from restaking faster than anyone anticipated."

In the end, they had to admit the funding wouldn't last long enough to find product-market fit.

The Polynomial team was brutally honest about the reason for failure, offering a lesson for all perpetual contract projects: "In derivatives, good tech is useless. We improved execution speed, optimized UX, built innovative infrastructure, but none of it mattered. Traders go where the liquidity is. We didn't have it. Everything else is just a nice-to-have feature."

The conclusion is even harsher: "Liquidity is the only moat in derivatives. You can't beat liquidity with innovation, you can't beat it with marketing, you can't beat it with development."

ZeroLend's shutdown sounds a warning bell for dApps trying to launch on multiple blockchains. They bet on supporting projects on niche chains like Manta, Zircuit, and Xlayer, but when the market turned bearish, liquidity on these chains dried up, and oracle providers stopped their services.

Ultimately, operating at a long-term loss was unsustainable.

Aave recently also voted to shut down services on several chains, citing the same reason of unprofitable operation.

Then there's Parsec, once a legendary tool in the circle used to track Terra, 3AC, and the stETH depeg. But the team admitted, "After the FTX collapse, DeFi spot trading, lending, and leverage never returned to their former state. The market changed, on-chain behavior changed, and we didn't truly understand it."

Simply put, the market moved on, and we were left behind. The market is cruel.

Slingshot was acquired and completely shut down. Eden cut 80% of its unprofitable products, keeping only the core business.

As they said, "The 80/20 rule became a reality; the products that cost us 80% of our expenses brought in only 20% of the revenue."

Finally, Step Finance's case is more unique: it was hacked for $26 million on January 31st, which was a death sentence. "We tried fundraising, acquisition, nothing worked."

What's the common thread among these deceased projects? They failed to adapt to the ever-changing market and lacked sufficient capital to pivot again.

Each team bet on a particular ecosystem experiencing explosive growth, but the growth either wasn't fast enough or didn't happen at all. Celestia DeFi never truly took off, on-chain derivatives struggled to compete with Hyperliquid, and even established platforms like dYdX and GMX are having a hard time.

And expanding into new chains and narrative areas is costly.

For players like me, moving funds from one platform to another is effortless and cheap. But applications need to invest significant time and financial resources to prepare for potential new user bases.

The good news is, these were all "dignified deaths." All projects gave users time to withdraw funds; the teams didn't run away or issue tokens to cash out. Compared to the outright rug pulls of 2022, the industry has indeed learned to die responsibly.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the common reason behind the recent shutdowns of multiple DeFi protocols?

AThe common reason is that these protocols failed to adapt to the rapidly changing market conditions and lacked sufficient funding to pivot or sustain operations, despite having functional products.

QAccording to Angle Protocol, why did they decide to shut down their stablecoin operations?

AAngle Protocol stated that the decentralized stablecoin landscape has fundamentally changed, and yield-bearing stablecoins are now essentially just branded wrappers over existing vaults and lending protocols, making it unnecessary to maintain independent infrastructure.

QWhat did Polynomial identify as the only moat in the derivatives space?

APolynomial identified liquidity as the only moat in the derivatives space, emphasizing that innovation, marketing, or development cannot overcome the advantage of liquidity.

QWhat lesson did ZeroLend's shutdown provide for decentralized applications?

AZeroLend's shutdown served as a warning for dApps launching on multiple blockchains, as betting on smaller chains like Manta and Xlayer led to liquidity drying up and oracle services halting when the bear market hit.

QHow did the shutdowns of these protocols demonstrate responsible behavior compared to past incidents?

AThese protocols allowed users time to withdraw funds, did not engage in exit scams, and avoided issuing worthless tokens, showing that the industry has learned to 'die responsibly' compared to the outright fraud seen in 2022.

Letture associate

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit1 h fa

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit1 h fa

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit1 h fa

marsbit1 h fa

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

In 2026, a historic shift occurred in AI as major cloud providers' inference spending surpassed training spending for the first time, signaling a move from "building large models" to "using large models." This shifts the core challenge from computing power to the "memory wall"—the bottleneck of data movement (model weights, activations, KV Cache) between external DRAM and processors, where energy and latency from data transfer far exceed computation itself. Companies like Nvidia face GPU idle time due to bandwidth limits. In contrast, Cerebras Systems adopts a radical "wafer-scale" approach with its Wafer-Scale Engine (WSE). Instead of cutting a silicon wafer into many chips, Cerebras uses almost the entire wafer as one massive chip (WSE-3). This design provides 44GB of on-chip SRAM, delivering memory bandwidth thousands of times higher than traditional HBM (e.g., 21 PB/s vs. Nvidia B200). For LLM inference, weights are streamed layer-by-layer from external MemoryX storage to the chip, avoiding HBM bottlenecks. This results in token generation speeds 1.5–5 times faster than Nvidia's B200 in some models and significant advantages in first-token latency and long-context tasks. Additionally, Cerebras's architecture offers much lower interconnect power consumption (0.15 pJ/bit vs. GPU's ~10 pJ/bit). However, Cerebras faces challenges: SRAM scaling has slowed with advanced nodes, limiting future capacity gains; the chip requires specialized liquid cooling and custom software stacks; and its external I/O bandwidth (150 GB/s) is low compared to NVLink, hindering multi-system scaling for very large models. Competition is intensifying. Major players are pursuing three paths: 1) Developing proprietary inference ASICs (e.g., Google TPU, Microsoft Maia), 2) Leveraging advanced packaging (e.g., TSMC's SoW) to democratize wafer-scale-like integration, potentially eroding Cerebras's process advantage within a few years, and 3) Exploring optical interconnects for ultimate bandwidth. Commercially, Cerebras is transitioning from a hardware vendor to a service provider, facing the immense challenge of building high-power, specialized data centers to meet large contracts (e.g., 250MW/year from 2026–2028). In conclusion, the AI inference era presents a fundamental architectural trade-off. Cerebras opts for extreme physical optimization for low-latency, single-task performance, while Nvidia prioritizes versatility and massive cluster throughput. The path forward remains uncertain, with technology and business models still evolving in the race toward advanced AI.

marsbit1 h fa

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

marsbit1 h fa

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

**Title: Has Bitcoin's Rebound Ended, Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?** **Summary:** Bitcoin's price has declined by 13% this week, signaling a potential return to late-stage bear market conditions. The price fell to around $67k, positioned between the Realized Price and Realized Cap Weighted Average. For the first time since early 2022, the Short-Term Holder cost basis has dropped below this key average, confirming a hallmark of late-cycle bear markets. Profitability metrics have collapsed sharply. The 7-day average of the Realized Profit/Loss ratio plummeted from a local high of 3.16 to 0.29, mirroring the February panic sell-off. Critically, the 90-day average never breached the threshold of 2, indicating the recent rally to $82k was a bear market bounce, not a structural shift. Realized losses surged to $1.35 billion daily, with $770 million coming from Long-Term Holders selling at a loss. This accelerating redistribution of supply from weak to strong hands is a necessary but ongoing process for a market bottom. The rally stalled almost precisely at the aggregate cost basis (~$83k) of US spot Bitcoin ETF investors, turning that level into strong resistance and leaving the average ETF holder underwater again. Spot market flows have turned decisively negative, showing sellers are dominating order books despite the price drop. While a significant futures long liquidation event cleared over $400 million in leverage, providing a potential reset, sustained spot demand is yet to materialize. Options markets continue to price in higher future volatility (Implied Volatility) than recent price action (Realized Volatility) has shown, with a persistent skew towards put options, indicating ongoing demand for downside protection. In conclusion, multiple metrics point to a fragile market structure. Resistance at the ETF cost basis, accelerating realized losses, dominant spot selling, and cautious options pricing all suggest the bear market trend persists. A sustainable recovery likely requires a resurgence of spot demand, ETF holders returning to profit, and a clear reduction in selling pressure.

marsbit1 h fa

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

marsbit1 h fa

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

In today's TechFlow Intelligence Briefing, several major tech stories highlight a growing theme of trust and credibility gaps across AI, crypto, and finance. AI company Anthropic has publicly called for a global pause in AI development, citing risks from Claude's "recursive self-improvement." Ironically, this coincides with reports the company is preparing for a massive IPO targeting a near $1 trillion valuation. This perceived hypocrisy, coupled with widespread user complaints about Claude's declining performance, is sparking debate over whether the safety warning is genuine or a competitive tactic. Meanwhile, in a substantive security move, Anthropic open-sourced a framework for AI-powered vulnerability discovery. In the crypto market, Bitcoin's price drop below $61,000 triggered over $1.16 billion in liquidations, flipping the market into a state where more BTC is held at a loss than at a profit, a historical bearish signal. On the corporate front, SpaceX's highly anticipated IPO is generating immense Wall Street excitement, with Goldman Sachs projecting 100x revenue growth by 2030. However, the S&P 500 has refused to fast-track the company's inclusion post-IPO, potentially limiting immediate institutional demand. Separately, ByteDance's AI app Doubao lost over 6 million monthly active users after introducing a subscription model, highlighting the challenges of AI monetization. Other notable developments include Nvidia certifying HBM4 memory from Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron; Cloudflare's acquisition of front-end tooling company VoidZero; and its CEO warning that bot traffic now exceeds human traffic online. The underlying narrative connects these events: a trust crisis. From AI firms' contradictory actions and crypto volatility to the clash between SpaceX's hyped narrative and institutional rules, a pattern is emerging where stated intentions and actual practices are increasingly misaligned.

marsbit1 h fa

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot

Futures

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare ONE

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di Harmony (ONE) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente HarmonyONE.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva Harmony (ONE)Dopo aver acquistato Harmony (ONE), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia Harmony (ONE)Scambia facilmente Harmony (ONE) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

319 Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2024.12.12Aggiornato il 2026.06.02

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di ONE ONE sono presentate come di seguito.