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.

Crypto di tendenza

CitreaCTR

wrapped stUSDTWSTUSDT

Velodrome FinanceVELODROME

BrevisBREV

PancakeSwapCAKE

JUSTJST

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

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

The article analyzes the possibility of TradeXYZ, a dominant project on Hyperliquid's HIP-3 real-world asset (RWA) perpetual contracts market, splitting off to build its own independent trading platform. With TradeXYZ commanding over 90% of HIP-3 volume and over 35% of Hyperliquid's total open interest, its leverage and influence are significant. The primary motive for a split is seen as capturing the underlying protocol fees, of which TradeXYZ currently receives only half. However, several factors strongly discourage such a move. First, replicating Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure would be challenging and could degrade TradeXYZ's product quality. Second, Hyperliquid serves as a crucial distribution channel, with most users accessing TradeXYZ's liquidity through its frontend. Third, the close, trusting relationship between the founders of both projects makes a hostile "betrayal" unlikely. The conclusion is that a split would likely result in a lose-lose scenario. Hyperliquid would lose its main growth narrative and see its valuation impacted, while TradeXYZ would face immense technical hurdles, lose its primary user channel, and damage its reputation. Instead of a full separation, the more probable path is for TradeXYZ to negotiate better terms while deepening integration, focusing on enhancing its own brand and user ownership.

marsbit30 min fa

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

marsbit30 min fa

"Teletubbies" Robot Cleaning Service, $30/Hour, Pure·Manual·Intelligence

Anthropomorphic "Teletubby" robot offers cleaning services in San Francisco at $30/hour, but it's entirely remote-controlled. The robot, created by startup Tau Robotics, can perform household tasks like washing hands, mopping floors, and taking out trash. While the initial demo videos appear impressive and are notably shown at normal speed (unlike many sped-up robot demos), the company reveals the actions are performed via human teleoperation, not autonomous AI. Tau Robotics, founded in 2024, argues this "cheat" is a strategic way to bridge the current capability gap, ensure task completion, and collect real-world home data to eventually train autonomous systems. Their service features three robot models: Chelsea for kitchens/bathrooms, Elon for regular tidying with memory, and Tony for deep cleaning. Priced at $30 per hour, it's cheaper than average human cleaners in the US. The article discusses the broader challenge of deploying humanoid robots in homes, comparing Tau's approach to others like China's Ziliang and the US's 1X Neo, which also use teleoperation. A key reason for choosing a humanoid form is to make remote control more intuitive for human operators. The piece also notes the potential "emotional value" of having a humanoid servant. The service is currently invite-only in San Francisco.

marsbit44 min fa

"Teletubbies" Robot Cleaning Service, $30/Hour, Pure·Manual·Intelligence

marsbit44 min fa

From South Korea to the United States: Blue-Collar Jobs Are Becoming Increasingly Popular, Thanks to AI

AI is reshaping the labor market's value proposition. The traditional four-year college degree is losing its appeal as a guaranteed career path, while skilled blue-collar trades like electricians, welders, and plumbers are experiencing historic demand and wage premiums. This shift is driven by dual pressures: AI's displacement of certain white-collar roles and a booming need for physical infrastructure and data center construction. Data confirms the trend. In the U.S., vocational school revenue surged, and a significant portion of recent layoffs are AI-related. Surveys show a majority of Gen Z adults plan to pursue blue-collar work, citing better job security against AI automation. Vocational education interest has exploded recently. Experts cite a psychological shift as younger generations seek tangible, AI-resistant careers and avoid high student debt. In many cases, salaries for skilled trades now match or exceed those requiring a bachelor's degree. In South Korea, semiconductor vocational high schools boast near-total employment, with graduates securing high-paying roles at companies like Samsung. The shortage is structural, exacerbated by a retiring baby boomer workforce and massive infrastructure projects. Companies like JPMorgan Chase, Meta, and Lowe's are investing heavily in training programs. However, overcoming historical stigma and a "perception gap" around trade careers remains a key challenge to closing the talent gap.

marsbit1 h fa

From South Korea to the United States: Blue-Collar Jobs Are Becoming Increasingly Popular, Thanks to AI

marsbit1 h fa

Qualcomm: AI Hype Subsides, When Will Smartphones Emerge from the Gloom?

Qualcomm reported its Q3 FY2026 results (ending June 2026), with revenue of $9.95B, down 4% YoY but above expectations. Gross margin declined to 53.1%, pressured by rising costs across manufacturing and memory. Key business segments showed mixed performance: Handset revenue fell 19.6% YoY to $5.09B, dragged by an 11% decline in non-Apple Android shipments and weaker high-end mix. Conversely, Automotive revenue surged 61% to $1.59B, and IoT grew 9% to $1.83B. Core operating profit dropped 41% YoY due to margin compression and higher expenses. Management's Q4 FY2026 guidance projects revenue of $9.7B-$10.5B, in line with consensus, but Non-GAAP EPS guidance of $2.05-$2.25 fell short of expectations. Amidst persistent weakness in its core handset market, Qualcomm is pursuing growth in AI, focusing on Edge AI (smartphones, PCs, automotive) and Data Center AI. Its data center strategy includes four pillars: AI accelerators (e.g., AI200), commercial CPUs (Dragonfly C1000), custom silicon, and connectivity solutions. While these initiatives initially boosted its stock, concerns over AI capital expenditure sustainability have since erased those gains. The company targets $5B in data center revenue for FY2027 and $15B for FY2029. The report concludes that with the traditional handset business still under pressure, the data center opportunity is currently viewed as a longer-term option, and a more conservative valuation based on core operations may be warranted until AI contributions materialize.

marsbit1 h fa

Qualcomm: AI Hype Subsides, When Will Smartphones Emerge from the Gloom?

marsbit1 h fa

From TPU to Self-Evolving Agents: How Jeff Dean Predicts the Next Step in AI

At the 2026 YC Startup School, Jeff Dean outlined his vision for AI's next phase, shifting focus from simply scaling models to building intelligent, autonomous systems. He believes AI's progress is no longer just about creating smarter models, but about integrating them into systems capable of long-term, iterative work, automated experimentation, and continuous learning. This evolution moves the competition from "who has the bigger model" to "who can best organize intelligence." Dean suggests AI capabilities are now comparable to a junior engineer, enabling the automation of complex workflows. However, the true challenge and opportunity lie in managing these AI "workers" at scale. He emphasizes the importance of **context engineering**—structuring tools, memory, and feedback loops—over raw model power. For startups, this means building deep expertise in niche domains where general models currently fail (near 0-1% success rates), leveraging proprietary data, specialized tools, and domain-specific evaluators. A recurring theme is re-examining fundamental constraints. Dean's past work, like moving Google's search index to memory or creating the TPU, stemmed from questioning outdated assumptions about hardware and cost. He sees similar inflection points today, particularly in **specialized inference hardware** to drastically reduce latency and energy consumption for real-time Agent operation. Notably, he points out that in modern AI systems, the dominant cost is often not computation but **data movement**. Reliable, long-running Agents require robust system design, borrowing concepts from distributed computing like checkpointing, state management, and parallel exploration to handle failures and maintain progress over days or weeks. As AI automates execution, the scarcest human skills will shift to **defining clear specifications**, **judging what problems are worth solving** (taste), and designing effective feedback loops. Ultimately, Dean's framework prioritizes understanding the problem deeply, identifying the true bottlenecks, and systematically building closed-loop systems where AI can not only perform tasks but also improve AI itself.

marsbit1 h fa

From TPU to Self-Evolving Agents: How Jeff Dean Predicts the Next Step in AI

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot

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.

429 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.