# Vaults Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Vaults", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

The $6 Billion Business of Stablecoin Wealth Management: Where Does the Yield Come From, and Where Does the Risk Go?

The article examines the resurgence of crypto yield products, specifically "Vaults," which manage over $6 billion in assets and are marketed as transparent, non-custodial alternatives to failed centralized lenders like Celsius and BlockFi. These Vaults use smart contracts to automate lending and trading strategies, offering yields from activities like liquidity provision and stablecoin lending. However, the piece highlights inherent risks: competitive pressure for higher returns can lead to increased leverage and off-platform exposures, as seen in the collapse of Stream Finance, which lost $93 million. While Vaults aim to avoid the opacity of previous models, the article questions whether transparency alone can prevent a shadow banking crisis, especially as stablecoin adoption grows and platforms like Coinbase promote high-yield products. The balance between innovation and risk remains unresolved.

marsbit19h ago

The $6 Billion Business of Stablecoin Wealth Management: Where Does the Yield Come From, and Where Does the Risk Go?

marsbit19h ago

The End of DeFi Lego: Vaults Are Left with Nothing but Deposits

This article argues that the era of "DeFi Lego" – the complex, interlocking composability of decentralized finance protocols – is ending. The primary user behavior has collapsed into a single action: depositing stablecoins into yield-bearing vaults for a return. Major exchanges like Binance, OKX, and HTX are forging their own paths by subsidizing and promoting their own stablecoin products (e.g., USD1, USDG) to capture user value directly. On-chain, the yield landscape has become homogenized, with vaults competing almost solely on the APY they offer for USDT and USDC deposits. Users no longer care about the underlying protocols (Morpho, Aave, etc.) or their governance tokens; they are primarily attracted by high yields and the branding of the platforms offering them (e.g., Kraken, Coinbase). This shift has led to several consequences: governance tokens are losing value, DeFi ecosystem has become a flattened landscape of competing vaults rather than a collaborative system, and the end-user experience is now a simple flow of converting fiat to stablecoins on a CEX, finding the highest-yielding vault, and spending via crypto debit cards. The article concludes that DeFi must learn from traditional finance (TradFi), which successfully serves human needs and builds network effects. To survive, DeFi protocols must move beyond being mere back-end yield generators and find ways to re-engage users, rebuild trust, and create value beyond just high APYs.

marsbitYesterday 01:38

The End of DeFi Lego: Vaults Are Left with Nothing but Deposits

marsbitYesterday 01:38

Bitwise tests institutional appetite for non-custodial DeFi yield with Morpho vault launch

Bitwise Asset Management launched non-custodial yield vaults on Morpho on January 26, marking its first direct participation in DeFi strategy curation. The vaults target up to 6% annualised yield through overcollateralised lending pools, with Bitwise managing strategy while users retain asset control. This structure avoids custody and reduces regulatory exposure, addressing key institutional concerns. However, risks include variable yields, smart-contract vulnerabilities, and market-dependent liquidation mechanisms. Bitwise has not disclosed vault size or whether access is limited to institutional investors. The launch tests whether professionally curated non-custodial DeFi products can attract sustained institutional interest.

ambcrypto01/26 21:43

Bitwise tests institutional appetite for non-custodial DeFi yield with Morpho vault launch

ambcrypto01/26 21:43

The United States Will Not Reject Stablecoins

The article argues that the U.S. has no fundamental reason to reject stablecoins, despite regulatory friction. The debate centers on the "passive yield" mechanism, with traditional banks fearing massive deposit outflows—potentially up to $6 trillion—from community banks into yield-bearing stablecoins like USDC, which could raise lending costs. Coinbase counters that yield is a tool for user benefit and efficiency, helping users escape near-zero bank interest rates. Stablecoin issuers like Tether and Circle have become significant buyers of U.S. Treasury bonds, holding $1700 billion in Treasuries and accounting for a small but growing share of the money supply. With foreign demand for U.S. debt declining, stablecoins help sustain Treasury markets. The piece traces the rapid evolution of on-chain yield mechanisms, from Ethena’s USDe—which surged then contracted after deleveraging events—to more mature vault-based models like those on Morpho. While on-chain yield products have advanced, real-world adoption in payments remains limited. The solution proposed is integrating yield into payment systems, making yield a default feature during transactions—not just when holding or idling—thus benefiting users, merchants, and platforms. Examples like Airwallex’s yield products and travel platform partnerships show the potential. The conclusion is that stablecoins must expand utility and user base to succeed, with the next challenge being the governance of yield vaults to prevent systemic risks.

marsbit01/19 03:37

The United States Will Not Reject Stablecoins

marsbit01/19 03:37

Thin Profit Business? No, DeFi Lending Protocols Are the Underestimated 'King of Value'

In the DeFi lending ecosystem, protocols like Aave and SparkLend capture more value than downstream vaults and even upstream asset issuers, challenging the notion that distribution is king. Despite perceptions of thin margins, lending protocols generate higher revenues than the vaults built on top of them. For example, Ether.fi’s vault pays Aave $4.5M in annual interest fees while earning only $1.07M in platform fees. Similarly, Fluid and Mellow vaults contribute significantly more value to lending protocols than they capture themselves. Even compared to asset issuers like Lido, lending protocols often yield greater economic benefits due to their central role in the credit stack. The true moat of lending protocols lies in their position as the highest value-capture layer in the on-chain credit value chain.

marsbit12/25 11:10

Thin Profit Business? No, DeFi Lending Protocols Are the Underestimated 'King of Value'

marsbit12/25 11:10

From Aave to Ether.fi: Who Captures the Most Value in the On-Chain Credit System?

In the DeFi lending ecosystem, lending protocols like Aave and SparkLend capture more value than the vaults and asset issuers built on top of them, despite the narrative that distribution is king. Analysis shows that major vaults, including Ether.fi, Fluid, and Mellow, pay more in interest fees to lending protocols than they earn in platform revenue. For example, Ether.fi’s ETH vault pays Aave ~$4.5M annually in interest while earning only ~$1.07M in fees. Even when combining vault strategy revenue and issuer fees (e.g., Lido), lending layer value capture remains higher. Lending protocol income is tied to borrowing scale and remains stable, whereas vault earnings depend heavily on fee structures. The true moat in on-chain credit lies with lending protocols, not distribution or asset issuance.

marsbit12/24 06:21

From Aave to Ether.fi: Who Captures the Most Value in the On-Chain Credit System?

marsbit12/24 06:21

Vaults, Yields, and the Illusion of Safety: The Real-World Benchmark

Vaults in crypto have evolved beyond simple yield farming tools into programmable portfolio wrappers, yet they remain dangerously misunderstood. While often marketed as yield-generating products, their economic essence is risk. This article reframes vaults as API-wrapped portfolios that embed various strategies—lending, leverage, credit underwriting—while obscuring the actual risks users assume: smart contract risk, counterparty risk, basis risk, and more. Historical data from traditional finance reveals a persistent risk-return ladder: cash/T-bills (~3.3%), investment-grade bonds (~4.5%), high-yield bonds (~7.8%), equities (~9.9%), and private equity/VC (12%+). These returns compensate for specific risks like credit default, liquidity, volatility, and complexity. DeFi’s focus on APY alone ignores this reality, encouraging riskier strategies to compete for yield, leading to systemic fragility (e.g., Stream, Elixir collapses). The solution is to adopt a risk-aware framework: categorize vaults by their risk profile (cash-like, credit, equity, etc.) and transparently communicate the sources of yield and associated risks. This shift is critical for both user protection and institutional adoption.

深潮12/19 02:59

Vaults, Yields, and the Illusion of Safety: The Real-World Benchmark

深潮12/19 02:59

From Gatekeeper to Gravedigger: JPMorgan Bets on Physical Precious Metals, Shorts Dollar Credit

JPMorgan Chase, a long-standing guardian of the U.S. dollar-centric financial system, is reportedly shifting its core precious metals trading team to Singapore—a move interpreted as a strategic pivot away from Western dollar hegemony. The bank has reclassified approximately 169 million ounces of silver in COMEX vaults from “deliverable” to “non-deliverable,” effectively locking down nearly 10% of global annual supply. This signals a broader bet on physical metal accumulation and a loss of confidence in paper-based derivatives. The London and New York systems, built on leveraged paper contracts (with claims far exceeding physical metal), are showing strain. Central banks are accelerating gold repatriation, while industrial demand—especially for silver in green technology—is draining physical inventories. Extreme backwardation in silver and extended delivery wait times at the Bank of England suggest a structural rupture between paper markets and physical reality. Meanwhile, Shanghai has emerged as the world’s largest physical gold exchange, emphasizing full physical settlement and rejecting the Western paper-gold model. China’s industrial demand and central bank purchasing are pulling vast metal volumes eastward, reshaping global liquidity and pricing power. Singapore is positioning itself as a neutral hub with tax-free private vaults, attracting Western institutions like JPMorgan seeking a safe, politically acceptable base near Asian demand centers. Yet it remains caught between dollar liquidity and yuan-driven physical trade anchored in Shanghai. JPMorgan’s maneuver reflects a deeper shift: the end of financial alchemy based on unlimited paper leverage and the return to a tangible asset system where physical metal defines value and trust.

比推12/12 15:31

From Gatekeeper to Gravedigger: JPMorgan Bets on Physical Precious Metals, Shorts Dollar Credit

比推12/12 15:31

活动图片

Bitcoin

Market Analysis