
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes," as evidenced by the launch of a new stablecoin offering a 27.6% APY, despite the previous failure of Luna, which promised a 20% APY. This move has sparked criticism, with some stating, "Hold my blockchain!" and others arguing that a stablecoin offering such high yields contradicts its supposed stability. Concerns are raised about the sustainability of decentralized stablecoins, especially when they rely heavily on placing a significant portion of their collateral on exchanges. This strategy becomes increasingly problematic as the size of the stablecoin grows, yields drop, and positions are forced to remain open. Experts remind the community that no amount of financial engineering can guarantee the perpetual stability of a stablecoin, citing previous failures like Luna and Basis as cautionary examples.
Periodic reminder that no amount of hedging wizardry can result in a stablecoin remaining stable forever. No convertibility, no parity in all market conditions. Basis tried this. Luna tried this. Someone else is trying this. https://t.co/vHbUCsOrDo
Periodic reminder that no amount of hedging wizardry can result in a stablecoin remaining stable forever. No convertibility, no parity in all market conditions. Basis tried this. It blew up in the hangar. Luna tried this and it nearly destroyed crypto. https://t.co/vHbUCsOrDo
Consider this a hot take but decentralized stablecoins shouldn’t be putting a fat stack of the collateral on exchanges… Especially as size grows and yields drop, and positions are forced to stay open study UXD
