Comparação entre Protocolo Usual e LUNA
A seguir estão algumas diferenças importantes no design entre o Protocolo Usual e o LUNA, que determinam o potencial do Protocolo Usual para estabilidade e gerenciamento de risco:
(1) Diferenças nos mecanismos de moeda estável
LUNA: Utiliza uma stablecoin algorítmica, que mantém o preço da stablecoin por meio da relação de troca entre tokens LUNA e UST no mercado. Mas este design depende do sentimento do mercado. Quando o mercado perde a confiança, a moeda estável ficará desancorada, causando o colapso do ecossistema.
Protocolo Usual: utiliza uma stablecoin baseada em garantias (USD0). Os usuários precisam fornecer garantias elegíveis (como ativos criptográficos ou ativos do mundo real) para cunhar USD0. Isto significa que a estabilidade do USD0 depende do valor da garantia, e não das flutuações dos preços simbólicos no mercado.
Risk Management: Usual Protocol introduces the 'anti-bank run mechanism,' which allows the system to take measures to protect the stability of the protocol in the event of large-scale redemption demands (for example, it may restrict redemptions or sell collateral in the market). This collateral-backed stablecoin mechanism is more secure than LUNA's algorithmic mechanism.
(2) Differences in Governance Mechanisms
LUNA: The governance mechanism of Terra has a centralization issue, where a large amount of voting power is concentrated in the hands of a few major holders or development teams, leading to decisions overly dependent on the judgment of a few people, which also exacerbates risks.
Usual Protocol: Although the USUAL token also provides governance functions, the allocation mechanism and decentralized governance design of this token allow users to have a greater voice in protocol decisions. Although decentralized governance also carries certain risks, it is more inclined towards decentralization compared to LUNA, which can avoid control by a single party.
(3) Market Sentiment and Risk Response
LUNA: The Terra project failed to effectively manage market sentiment and lacked timely crisis response mechanisms, leading to large-scale investor panic and systemic collapse.
Usual Protocol: Usual Protocol provides strict collateral management and anti-bank run mechanisms, allowing the protocol to maintain stability during extreme market volatility. This is a significant advantage of the protocol compared to LUNA, indicating that it is more likely to cope with extreme market conditions.
(4) Access to Real-World Assets
LUNA: Terra's stablecoin UST has no real asset backing and relies on market supply and demand to maintain its value.
Usual Protocol: The design of the USD0 stablecoin also involves access to Real-World Assets (RWAs). By providing traditional asset access channels to crypto users, it may reduce the impact of market fluctuations on the protocol to some extent. If Usual Protocol can successfully access high-value, low-volatility real-world assets, it can provide more stable support for the protocol.
3. Possible Risks
Although Usual Protocol has many design features that are superior to LUNA, there are still some potential risks:
Liquidity Risk of Collateral: Usual Protocol relies on collateral to maintain the value of the USD0 stablecoin. If the market value of the collateral fluctuates significantly (especially in the case of large-scale redemptions), it may lead to liquidity issues for the protocol.
Impact of Market Sentiment: Although there is an anti-bank run mechanism, extreme market fluctuations may still affect the stability of the protocol, especially during market panic.
Risks of Decentralized Governance: Although Usual Protocol has designed a decentralized governance mechanism, the efficiency and fairness of governance still need to be tested. If the distribution of token holders is uneven, it may lead to governance centralization, thus affecting the stability of the protocol.
4. Summary
Usual Protocol has multiple advantages compared to LUNA, especially in the areas of stablecoin mechanism (based on collateral) and risk management. The USD0 stablecoin is based on asset collateral and anti-bank run mechanisms, allowing it to maintain stability better during market fluctuations. The USUAL governance token has also designed a decentralized governance mechanism to encourage user participation and prevent governance centralization.
However, no decentralized protocol can completely avoid risks, especially under the influence of collateral liquidity and market sentiment, there remains a certain degree of uncertainty. Therefore, while Usual Protocol has stronger design guarantees than LUNA, it still requires continuous attention to its technical implementation, market acceptance, and the effectiveness of its governance mechanisms.
