Binance Square
LIVE
LIVE
比特先生
--384 views
See original
There is actually only one core element of a stablecoin, that is, the network scale. The network scale can be observed by the following three factors: 1. Number of addresses holding coins 2. Issuance scale 3. Organic application scenarios: Organic application scenarios refer to protocols and scenarios that are willing to access it without subsidies. Using subsidies alone, or using stablecoins simply for mining income, does not belong to organic use scenarios. The importance of these three factors is ranked as follows: 3>1>2 Why is the issuance scale the least important? Because the issuance scale can attract capital inflows through token mining subsidies and quickly increase the scale (see the algorithmic stablecoins and luna-ust in the previous round for examples). Why is the organic application scenario the most important? Because there is a scenario, users will be willing to hold this stablecoin without mining subsidies, which means that the liquidity cost of this stablecoin is very low, and a large operating scale can be maintained with very small operating costs. The moat of USDT, USDC, and DAI comes from this. They almost do not need their own stablecoin liquidity to subsidize, and even enjoy free subsidies from other stablecoins. However, USDE now lacks organic application scenarios, and the main purpose of users obtaining it is mining. In addition to staking to obtain funding rates, another scenario is to realize the expected ENA points on Pendle, which is equivalent to using the ENA currency price to stimulate users to buy USDE in disguise. This is actually similar to other stablecoin projects, that is, using project tokens to stimulate the issuance scale of stablecoins, and walking the spiral of stepping on the left foot and the right foot. This type of model is quite high when the currency price rises, and it is also prone to negative spirals when the currency price falls. Enter the cycle of currency price falling → expected points falling → USDE YT price falling on Pendle → PT price falling → USDE yield falling, mining subsidies reduced → scale growth stagnant → currency price expectations deteriorating, and continued to fall. #USDe #ENA

There is actually only one core element of a stablecoin, that is, the network scale. The network scale can be observed by the following three factors:

1. Number of addresses holding coins

2. Issuance scale

3. Organic application scenarios: Organic application scenarios refer to protocols and scenarios that are willing to access it without subsidies. Using subsidies alone, or using stablecoins simply for mining income, does not belong to organic use scenarios.

The importance of these three factors is ranked as follows: 3>1>2

Why is the issuance scale the least important? Because the issuance scale can attract capital inflows through token mining subsidies and quickly increase the scale (see the algorithmic stablecoins and luna-ust in the previous round for examples).

Why is the organic application scenario the most important? Because there is a scenario, users will be willing to hold this stablecoin without mining subsidies, which means that the liquidity cost of this stablecoin is very low, and a large operating scale can be maintained with very small operating costs.

The moat of USDT, USDC, and DAI comes from this. They almost do not need their own stablecoin liquidity to subsidize, and even enjoy free subsidies from other stablecoins.

However, USDE now lacks organic application scenarios, and the main purpose of users obtaining it is mining.

In addition to staking to obtain funding rates, another scenario is to realize the expected ENA points on Pendle, which is equivalent to using the ENA currency price to stimulate users to buy USDE in disguise.

This is actually similar to other stablecoin projects, that is, using project tokens to stimulate the issuance scale of stablecoins, and walking the spiral of stepping on the left foot and the right foot.

This type of model is quite high when the currency price rises, and it is also prone to negative spirals when the currency price falls.

Enter the cycle of currency price falling → expected points falling → USDE YT price falling on Pendle → PT price falling → USDE yield falling, mining subsidies reduced → scale growth stagnant → currency price expectations deteriorating, and continued to fall.

#USDe

#ENA

Disclaimer: Includes third-party opinions. No financial advice. See T&Cs.
0
Explore the lastest crypto news
⚡️ Be a part of the latests discussions in crypto
💬 Interact with your favorite creators
👍 Enjoy content that interests you
Email / Phone number
Relevant Creator
LIVE
@Square-Creator-012394769

Explore More From Creator

左侧交易本质和寻求抄底最低点位进场是矛盾的, 你又想买到最低点,又想买了就涨,有这种好事吗? 你应该关注的不是最低回调到哪里,而是愿意在什么价位,以几层的仓位开始建仓,而不是一开始就在寻求那个最低点的精准数字在哪里, 这是一种病,不治的话发展到后期会演变成踏空癌症,基本上短线选手的症状较为严重 这个市场是动态的,谁也没法预料下一秒会发生什么, 一昧寻求在最低点买入,在最高点卖出,会给我们的交易系统造成很大的压力,因为它要求非常高, 所以我建议是把这两句话的最前面那个字去掉,不是最高点和最低点,而是低点和高点,因为低点和高点它是一个交易范围,而不是精准到最高点和最低点, 列如大饼6万和5万有区别吗?看起来相差了一万点, 但是那一万点如果拆分开来根本没什么区别, 5.8万-5.4万-5.2万分批建仓后是不是把一万点缩小成了3000点呢?而多人喜欢更愿意去等着5万时候才进,而忽略了你入场在一个区域内,高一点低一点,远远没有买不到重要,有多少人在一个大概率的趋势性行情中,为了追求一个精确的入场点而错失一机会。真正做交易的高手从来不奢望自己能够买在最低点,卖在最高点 最后我总结了喜欢追求精准的最低点数字的人的特征: 1,没有仓位管理的意识,喜欢一把进一把出,喜欢进场就立即有盈利,无法忍受价格的回调, 2,认为止损就像一场灾难,所以总是把止损做的很小,不愿意吃一点点亏, 3,短线长线分不清,对自己要买的这个币没有明确的长短线定位,只寻求一个非常舒服的点位, 如果拿长线的一个币当时进场的点位往上有几倍的空间,往下极端条件下却只有20%-30%的跌幅,那我会毫不犹豫的直接进,我忍受那百分之几十的跌幅带给我的却是几倍的涨幅,这是非常不错的一笔收益, #山寨币热点 #Meme币你看好哪一个?
--

Trending Articles

View More
Sitemap
Cookie Preferences
Platform T&Cs