押注 RWA 赛道,MakerDAO 与 Frax 孰优孰劣?

长文源:foresightnews2023-10-31 tarihinde yayınlandı2023-11-07 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

Frax 的创新性产品值得关注,但 MakerDAO 是真正的现金流之王。

Frax 的创新性产品值得关注,但 MakerDAO 是真正的现金流之王。


撰文:Wajahat Mughal

编译:Peng SUN,Foresight News


作为去中心化稳定币,MakerDAO 与 Frax 现在都以大量 RWA 资产作为储备,那么这两个 DeFi 巨头谁更胜一筹?今天,本文将从储备、收益率与收益来源、收入、未来规划、治理代币等方面对二者进行比较分析。


Maker 和 Frax 是 DeFi 赛道的两个头部协议。Maker 发行的是超抵押去中心化稳定币 DAI,Frax 则推出了去中心化稳定币 FRAX 以及围绕 FRAX 构建的一系列金融产品。


DAI 的储备包括 ETH、稳定币和 RWA,其中大部分是美国国债。FRAX 储备状况近期有所变化,Terra 之后开始从算法稳定币转向抵押稳定币,目前抵押率已接近 100%,之后也不会将 FXS 作为储备。此外,近期 Frax 将 sFRAX 作为 RWA 储备资产,之后还会推出 FXB(债券)。





在收益率方面,当前 sFRAX 的年化是 6.5%,供应量为 4100 万枚;sDAI 的年化是 5%,当前供应量是 17.3 亿枚。DAI 的供应量很大,但 FRAX 收益率暂时更高。




从 makerburn 数据可见,Maker 的 sDAI 收入主要来自各种 RWA 国债利率收益;Frax 的 sFRAX 收益是美联储储备余额利息(IORB)利率,其链下合作伙伴 FinresPBC 则充当 IORB 利率和 sFRAX 之间的中介,将收益转移给 sFRAX。



由于供应量最大,Maker 是目前 DeFi 赛道最赚钱的协议之一。FRAX 收入来源很多,包括国债收益、AMO(自动化市场操作)以及 ETH LSD,目前年化收入为 2000 万美元。




作为治理代币,MKR 通过协议收入持续回购代币,目前市值已有 13 亿美元;FXS 现在市值是 4.5 亿美元,之后也将从协议中获得收入(目前所有努力都是为了使抵押率达到 100%)。




总体来说,这两个协议都很出色,Maker 仍然是现金流之王,Frax 则不断推出具有创新性的产品。更何况,它们对于未来的发展也都有着新的规划。


具体而言,Maker 的 Endgame 包括代币品牌重塑、移除中心化稳定币、推出子 DAO、AI 集成以及最终的 Maker Chain。Frax 则专注于 Frax 债券、frxETH 质押产品更新以及以太坊上的新 Layer2 Frax Chain。




我个人比较喜欢 Frax,因为 Frax 生态及其产品真的很有意思,但不得不佩服 Maker,这是真正的资产现金流之王。

İlgili Okumalar

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News12 dk önce

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News12 dk önce

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit22 dk önce

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit22 dk önce

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

Anthropic has published an article titled "When AI builds itself," discussing the emerging concept of "recursive self-improvement," where AI begins to actively participate in designing, training, testing, and optimizing its own subsequent versions. The company presents internal data showing that by May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its codebase was written by Claude, its AI model. Claude's capabilities have expanded to handling complex, open-ended engineering tasks, achieving a 76% success rate in such areas, and even contributing to research processes, such as optimizing code performance and conducting AI safety experiments. Anthropic outlines an evolution from human-driven development to AI-assisted workflows, culminating in the current stage where AI agents can autonomously write, run, and delegate code. The company cautions that the path toward a "closed loop," where AI continuously improves itself, is becoming visible. It calls for coordinated global mechanisms to potentially slow or pause frontier AI development to allow safety research and societal structures to catch up. However, the timing of this warning coincides with Anthropic's preparations for an IPO, framing the narrative not just as a safety concern but also as a demonstration of Claude's advanced capabilities and its integral role in accelerating Anthropic's own R&D—creating a potential "flywheel" effect for competitive advantage. This contrasts with OpenAI's recent, more policy-oriented discussion of the same risks, highlighting the competitive dynamics in the AI industry as companies position themselves in both the technological and regulatory landscape.

marsbit1 saat önce

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

marsbit1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片