The death of Defi & RWA

Andre Cronje发布于2023-02-03更新于2023-02-03

文章摘要

To answer “what could be the next thing for DeFi”, defi is the next thing for defi. It doesn’t need a “new narrative”, it doesn’t need a “new shiny toy”, it just works.

Background

A journalist asked the following question;

“With high yields being long gone and DeFi seeing almost zero growth since Terra, we want to know what could be the next thing for DeFi?

A lot of chatter is centered at bringing real-world assets to blockchain like investing in US Treasuries and bonds via DeFi, on-chain credit etc. But I am not sure the sustainability of it — the RWA topic has been going for a long time and obviously, there are reasons why it didn’t work in the past.”

Defi is dead

Jumping back to 5 Feb 2020;

Above is the original Yearn dashboard. DAI at the time had the DAI Savings Rate (DSR), which was providing ~7% subsidised via high interest rates, the “real” DAI yield was between 1%-2%. USDC was at ~4%. USDT was at the height of its FUD and people were shorting, but normally USDT would be around ~2%-4%. SUSD at 2%. BTC at 0.9%, ETH at 0.14%.

Fast forward to today, and if we look at Yearn again;

ETH at 2.5%, DAI at 3%, USDC at 3%, USDT at 3%. And this is all in an inactive market. All real yield is from lending markets and trading fees; lending markets are fueled by long/short activity. In a bear market, people enter short positions, they use stablecoins to collateralize their positions (increasing stable coin supply and pushing down stablecoin real yield), borrow crypto and sell (increasing crypto yield, as is evident by increases in real yield on ETH/BTC), and adding the stablecoins received from the sale as further collateral (further decreasing stable coin real yield). In a bull market, people enter long positions, they use their crypto to collateralize their position (decreasing crypto real yield), borrow stablecoins to buy more crypto off of the market (increasing stable coin real yield), and deposit the purchased crypto as further collateral (further decreasing crypto real yield).

Right now, we are in a low volatility phase of a prolonged bear market. At this point (using the past 2 bull markets as the basis), we see very little trade activity, everyone that was trying to short has shorted, but they aren’t confident enough yet to close their positions (causing rebuy’s and longs). So this is a “real yield low point”. Taking that into account, real yield is still higher than it was when Yearn was first created.

So I disagree with the statement “high yields being long gone and DeFi seeing almost zero growth”. That statement is based on comparing the current market with an unsustainable and highly delusional market peak, and not its progression. If you plot a growth chart on TVL, yield, and trade volume, and you flatten the curve to avoid oscillating, it is a clear linear growth chart. On every feasible metric, real yield and defi have grown substantially. The dot com bubble did not destroy the internet and require a next narrative, it was those projects that were given birth during that insanity that became the anchor products we use today.

Long Live Defi

To answer “what could be the next thing for DeFi”, defi is the next thing for defi. It doesn’t need a “new narrative”, it doesn’t need a “new shiny toy”, it just works.

Real World Assets (RWA)

Now to comment on the second part, it’s important to add some distinctions;

0 trust finance (where no trust is required or assumed), examples here are bitcoin, ethereum, fantom, uniswap, or yearn v1

Verifiable finance (where there are trust assumptions, but you can verify), examples here are aave, compound, yearn v2, where you can verify timelocked execution by multisigs.

Trusted finance (where absolute trust is required), centralised exchanges and prime brokers, examples Binance, Wintermute, etc

The next distinction is on regulated crypto vs crypto regulation. Regulated crypto are traditional products or companies that simply leverage crypto technology. They need to be fully legal, compliant, and regulated entities. Crypto regulation is the notion of trying to add regulation to decentralized protocols. The latter is not feasible and only creates friction for all parties involved.

RWA would need to exist in “trusted finance” or “verifiable finance”, and it would need to be “regulated crypto”. As you point out, RWA discussions have been going on for a long time. I myself had my first chats with traditional custodians, regulators, and governments on this topic back in 2018. At this point, regulated crypto does not yet exist. It is starting to exist, but it is a dependency for any RWA projects to succeed. Notable regulated crypto legislation examples include; South Korean Financial Services Commission allowing issuance of security tokens and the Swiss Parliament adopting the Federal Act on the DLT bill. The regulation is one part, the second part is on-boarding traditional auditors with the ability to verify and understand RWA on-chain and provide these reports, without which, again, it fails. So as these continue to develop, we will see more real world assets being tokenized on-chain. But it needs to be stated, these are not a new narrative, nor are they going to have any revolutionary change on defi. Defi will still simply be defi, it is just another tokenized asset being added as collateral or as a trading pair.

So I don’t see the requirement for a next trend in defi, I see defi as the trend. What we at Fantom Foundation are focusing on is;

Regulatory frameworks

Auditing tools

Layer 1 throughput and scalability

Layer 1 account UX and social recovery

Defi, and other blockchain verticals (social media, gaming, art, news, etc), are here to stay, but they are limited by the current state and access of the underlying technology (just like early web was limited by the underlying technology and access). There is no “new narrative” there is no “new trend”, simply more of the same. And that’s a good thing.

热门币种推荐

你可能也喜欢

天主教与执法团体警告CLARITY法案可能削弱打击加密货币犯罪的安全措施

一个由天主教领袖、执法相关团体及反贩卖倡导者组成的联盟警告称,《清晰法案》可能会削弱打击加密货币犯罪的安全措施。批评焦点在于法案中保护非托管软件开发者免受货币传输服务商待遇的条款。 这一争议触及了加密货币监管中最棘手的问题之一:如何区分中性软件与金融中介。加密倡导者认为,发布非托管代码的开发者不应像交易所或支付处理商那样受到监管。批评者则担心,广泛的豁免可能使追踪非法金融活动变得更加困难。 非托管软件是去中心化金融(DeFi)的核心。钱包、智能合约和去中心化协议通常允许用户在没有公司控制资金的情况下进行交易。这种架构是加密货币价值主张的核心部分,但当不法分子使用相同工具时,也带来了执法挑战。 《清晰法案》旨在制定更清晰的市场结构规则,但反对意见表明并非所有政策争论都围绕投资者保护或交易所注册。一些立法者在决定开发者保护应扩展到何种程度时,还会考虑人口贩卖、制裁逃避、欺诈以及执法可见性等因素。 尽管面临阻力,该法案并未夭折,但支持者可能需要回应法案可能为非法金融活动创造漏洞的担忧。这可能导致修正案、更狭窄的安全港规则或额外的报告要求。对加密公司而言,风险很高:更明确的规则可能在美国释放投资和产品开发潜力,但如果法案被定性为削弱犯罪防护,其政治道路将变得更为艰难。

bitcoinist34分钟前

天主教与执法团体警告CLARITY法案可能削弱打击加密货币犯罪的安全措施

bitcoinist34分钟前

加密独角兽 Blockstream 深陷严重欺诈始末

今年以来,比特币先驱Adam Back及其创立的Blockstream频繁引发争议。本月初,调查账号NatInfoSec发布长文,指控Blockstream发行的比特币矿业票据(BMN)可能存在严重问题。 指控核心包括:1. **算力与兑付能力存疑**:根据BMN的兑付义务,Blockstream需运营远超其公开显示的算力(约15 EH/s),但未在公开渠道找到相匹配的矿场、电力或算力证据。票据条款允许其以任意来源的BTC进行兑付,透明度不足。2. **高收益与高风险**:相关票据提供高达20%的固定年化收益,在波动剧烈的挖矿行业中难以持续,资金来源成疑。3. **关键人物前科与披露问题**:Blockstream矿业业务的重要关联方、Exacore CEO Christopher Cook曾被判邮件欺诈罪,但此前未在发行文件中披露,其背景陈述也存在夸大。4. **牵连BSTR上市计划**:质疑者担心BMN的潜在风险可能波及Adam Back关联的、正筹备SPAC上市的Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company(BSTR),尽管其法律独立性尚不明确。 BitMEX Research随后发表评论,承认Cook的前科属实且高收益令人担忧,但认为其他部分指控证据不足或存在误导,例如BMN与BSTR在法律上可能独立。社区争论焦点集中于Blockstream矿场算力的**可验证性**——投资者能否独立核查支撑收益的真实挖矿活动。 目前,围绕BMN仍存在几个关键疑问:实际发行规模与责任边界、矿场算力是否足以支撑兑付、近20%固定收益的具体来源、兑付资金的链上可验证性,以及Cook的实际角色。Blockstream尚未对此作出系统性回应。尽管指控有待最终证实,但BMN产品在透明度、风险披露和收益合理性方面,确实存在需要厘清的空间。

marsbit4小时前

加密独角兽 Blockstream 深陷严重欺诈始末

marsbit4小时前

交易

现货
合约

热门文章

加密市场宏观研报:《GENIUS Act》法案取得重大进展,BTC突破历史新高,后市全新展望

2025年5月22日,比特币价格正式突破11万美元大关,创下历史新高。在政策面、宏观经济、资金面与投资者结构共同作用下,一场结构性牛市浪潮正在展开。而此轮上涨背后的核心驱动,是美国《GENIUS稳定币法案》的实质性进展以及多项利好的叠加。本文将从政策端突破、宏观环境转向、链上与ETF资金结构、交易行为演化,以及重点受益赛道五大维度,全面解析此轮BTC再创新高的深层逻辑,并前瞻下半年市场的潜在趋势。

1.7k人学过发布于 2025.05.22更新于 2025.05.22

加密市场宏观研报:《GENIUS Act》法案取得重大进展,BTC突破历史新高,后市全新展望

相关讨论

欢迎来到HTX社区。在这里,您可以了解最新的平台发展动态并获得专业的市场意见。以下是用户对BTC(BTC)币价的意见。

活动图片