A first in DeFi: Bitcoin can now earn staking yield without ever becoming public. Until today, earning yield on shielded assets meant giving up the privacy to do it. Your funds had to leave the privacy pool, pass through a public wallet, and enter the protocol in the open. Privacy and yield were a tradeoff. Endur removes that tradeoff. STRK and strkBTC can now be staked directly from the privacy pool. The position compounds, the yield accrues, and the funds never surface publicly at any point. Where we stand: Private staking ✅ Private unstaking via DEX ( @avnu_fi ) ✅ Private native unstaking 🔧 Privacy that works while your capital works. Live now at app.endur.fi You'll need a privacy compatible wallet, Ready or Xverse.

Effective borrow APY on the xSTRK/STRK Re7 pool is -5.26%. STRK debt against xSTRK collateral, $50.95M drawn against a $60M cap. Vesu's interest rate curves rise with utilization. At $50.95M of $60M, the curve alone should be pricing a positive rate, a real cost paid by the borrower. The -5.26% comes from a reward program layered on top of that curve, paid to borrowers to build volume in this specific pool. xSTRK's exchange rate appreciation is a separate mechanism. It comes from staking rewards and keeps accruing regardless of what any lending market does. The reward program on this Vesu pool has its own budget and its own duration, set by Re7, not by Endur's staking mechanics. If the reward program winds down or gets resized, the borrow rate reverts toward the underlying curve. At current utilization, that's a positive number, not -5.26%.

Your xSTRK gets a different max LTV on @vesuxyz depending on what you borrow against it. 87% for STRK, 68% for USDC, 65% for USDT. Borrow STRK and the only variable in your health factor is the xSTRK exchange rate, which only moves up as rewards accrue. Collateral and debt share an underlying, so a STRK price move hits both sides equally. Borrow USDC and health factor now depends on STRK/USD. A drawdown cuts your collateral value while the debt stays fixed. Vesu curators price that into a lower LTV. Our BTC LSTs follow the same pattern. xWBTC borrows WBTC at 92%, USDC at 78%. xstrkBTC borrows strkBTC at 94%, WBTC at 72%, USDC at 60%. Each step away from the underlying costs LTV. Which debt asset you pick is the biggest lever on how much you can borrow, and how far the price can fall before you're liquidated.

Borrow rate on the largest @vesuxyz pool carrying xSTRK collateral is currently -5.36%. Not near zero, negative. Borrowing STRK against xSTRK pays the borrower, on top of xSTRK compounding at 6.55% underneath. $53.12M of the $60M cap is already borrowed against. Same structure shows up smaller on the BTC side. xtBTC against USDC on Re7's core pool borrows at -0.39% while xtBTC accrues 2.10%. xWBTC against USDC prices similarly. The spread exists because the collateral is productive and the debt market is pricing that in. xSTRK isn't sitting idle as collateral, it's still earning through the exchange rate while it backs the loan. A lending market that ignores that mispriced borrow demand against it, and utilization on the STRK pool shows the market has found it. This isn't a yield strategy Endur invented. It's what happens when collateral that appreciates gets priced correctly in a lending market. The LST just has to be composable enough to get there.

Most liquid staking tokens outside Starknet still rebase. Balance goes up, price stays near 1:1 with the underlying. It looks simple until another protocol has to account for it. A rebasing balance changes outside of a transfer. Every integration touching that token, a lending market, an AMM pool, a vault, has to either explicitly support rebase accounting or silently break. Vesu positions, Ekubo LP ranges, Troves vault shares all assume a balance that only moves when the holder moves it. Rebasing violates that assumption by design. Exchange rate appreciation doesn't. xWBTC, xtBTC and xsBTC hold a constant balance. The redeemable value against the underlying BTC grows through the exchange rate, not the token count. A lending market reading the balance sees the same number it saw yesterday. The yield is priced in on redemption, not distributed as new tokens. That's what makes these LSTs collateral on Vesu, LP pairs on Ekubo, and deposit assets in Troves vaults without special-casing. No rebase-aware wrapper, no separate accounting path. The token behaves like any other ERC-20 to every contract that touches it, and the yield still accrues underneath. Composability isn't a property you add to an LST after the fact. It's a consequence of how the yield is represented in the first place.

96% of all wrapped BTC on Starknet is not staked. Checked it against the actual token contracts, not just Endur's own numbers. WBTC, solvBTC, strkBTC, tBTC, LBTC. 971 BTC total sitting on this chain. Only 39 of it is staked through Endur. The other 932, north of 70 million dollars at current prices, is just sitting there earning nothing. And it's not only the staking yield that idle BTC is missing. Every curated Vesu market Endur plugs into, the ones with borrow rates under 2% and LTVs up to 95%, only takes the staked version as collateral. Raw wrapped BTC doesn't get in. Staking is the ticket to both sides, the yield and the borrowing power. That's not a small gap. That's almost the entire supply sitting outside the system that would pay it to be there.

I built xSTRK to redeem 1:1..Right now the market's pricing it below that, so I'll point at the obvious. Buy 10M xSTRK with ethereum:0xca14007eff0db1f8135f4c25b34de49ab0d42766 , unstake on @endurfi wait the 7 days, walk away with about $2k. Call it 30% annualized for a week of patience. You don't need to come with 10M. I'm using it to show the ceiling. Bring what you've got and the spread scales down with you. The discount is there because the market put it there. Redemption doesn't move. Buy it, unstake it, keep the difference.

STARKtember.

A side by side look at Endur's five BTC LSTs, since the staking rate alone does not tell the full story. All five currently earn 1.86% APY. WBTC is the largest position at 24.98 BTC staked and carries the deepest Vesu liquidity, 2.38 million dollars of available capacity spread across nine markets. tBTC and solvBTC sit in the middle, each with several hundred thousand dollars of open capacity across five to six markets. strkBTC is the newest of the five, which is why its cumulative gain sits under 1% while the others are above 2%, the rate has been the same since each launched. LBTC is the outlier in the data. Every xLBTC borrow market on Vesu currently shows a $0 supply cap, and one of those markets still carries 32.69 thousand dollars of drawn debt against that zero cap. Separately, Starknet's community forum has an open proposal to remove LBTC from staking reward eligibility, and Troves has already wound down its Hyper xLBTC vault citing low adoption. Same base yield across all five assets. The differences show up in age, in how much room each has as usable collateral, and in what is currently happening around LBTC specifically.

If you are running native STRK stake or sitting on unstaked STRK on Starknet, the opportunity cost is larger than the headline APY suggests. Native staking exposes you to attestation risk directly. Starknet pays rewards per epoch on an all or nothing basis, so a missed attestation from your validator zeroes that epoch, not a fraction of it. Endur routes stake across a curated validator set instead of a single operator, so the tail risk of one bad epoch sits with the protocol's delegation logic, not your position alone. The bigger inefficiency is capital lockup. Native unstaking on Starknet is a 7 day protocol level lockup, full stop. Endur nets redemptions against incoming deposits first, so most exits clear in 1 to 2 days instead of waiting out the full unbonding window. That is not a convenience feature, it is the difference between STRK you can reposition inside two days and STRK that is dead capital for a week. Then there is the part that actually compounds the case: xSTRK is ERC-4626. It is not a wrapped IOU that needs a bridge or a custom adapter to be useful elsewhere. It posts as collateral on Vesu, LPs on Ekubo, and loops through Troves, all while the underlying exchange rate keeps accruing at 6.59% in the background. Capital that is native staked or sitting idle does none of that. It earns one yield or none. 140.8M STRK is already routed through Endur at a 1.1771 exchange rate that only moves up. The math on moving more of your stack here is not a leap of faith, it is comparing a single yield source with a lockup against a compounding base rate plus composability with fast exits.

Nothing happens to your position on Endur, epoch after epoch. That is the point. Rewards are claimed and restaked automatically by Endur's backend every epoch. No transaction lands in your wallet, no signature is needed, nothing to notice. The only trace of it is the exchange rate, which is a step higher than it was the epoch before. The automation has a limit built in on purpose. The conditions that gate unstaking live in the contracts, not in the backend that does the claiming. If the automation ever misbehaved, it could not force an unstake it should not. Compounding that requires nothing from you is the actual product. The exchange rate is just where you can see it happened.

What one Bitcoin actually earns on Starknet, at each level of engagement. Sitting in a wallet: 0%. Staked as a BTC LST on Endur: around 1.8%, live today, and it moves with the market since Starknet pays BTC staking rewards relative to STRK. Staked and looped through a curated vault: around 7% on Troves' WBTC Boosted, which routes the same staked position through lending and the STRK staking curve. Same Bitcoin, three outcomes, depending only on what you do with it after you stake it. The top rung carries more moving parts and more risk than the first. Worth understanding the vault before chasing the number.

Higheeer.

theres about $304,000 privately staked on @endurfi. programmable privacy only on starknet.

got some BTC staked it first, got the LST borrowed some USDC against the LST bought more BTC the LST kept earning the whole time, so that loan costs 0.63% instead of 2.47% same trade, cheaper leg

Borrowing Bitcoin against a BTC LST on Endur costs almost nothing at the moment. The collateral earns 1.84%. Borrowing strkBTC against xstrkBTC, xtBTC or xWBTC is priced at 0.10% in the Re7 xBTC pool. tBTC runs 0.50%, SolvBTC 0.73%, WBTC on Prime 1.19%. Net of what the collateral earns, those all sit below zero. The reason is worth stating rather than hiding. Utilisation sets the rate, and the cheapest markets are the ones with almost nothing drawn. Borrow demand arriving would move them. Borrowing USDC against the same collateral runs 2.47%, since stablecoins compete for capital elsewhere. Rates float and liquidation risk does not go away.

Shielded balances have been live on Starknet since June. Here is what you can actually do with one today, including the parts that are not finished. Holding and moving. Any ERC-20 can be shielded into the privacy pool. One pool holds every asset, balances sit as encrypted notes, and a spend is validated by a STARK proof rather than a visible transfer. Private transfers between shielded balances work. Swapping. Private swaps are live on AVNU, routed across existing Starknet liquidity. Output returns to the pool as a new shielded balance, so the position never has to surface to change asset. Staking. Live as of this week through Endur, for STRK and strkBTC. The privacy pool calls Endur directly through an anonymizer contract, the vault mints the matching LST, and it lands back in the pool shielded. The funds never sit at a public address on the way through. Lending, with a caveat worth stating plainly. Borrowing against the LST itself is live and reasonably deep. xstrkBTC alone has six Vesu markets across three curated pools, letting you borrow strkBTC, WBTC or USDC against it at ceilings from 78% up to 95%. What does not exist yet is borrowing while the collateral stays shielded. Doing it today means unshielding, supplying publicly, borrowing, then shielding what you received. The position works. The privacy does not survive the round trip. Exiting. Private swaps cover it for now. Native private unstaking is not live, and the reason is structural rather than unfinished work. The pool permits one external invoke per transaction and it has to complete atomically, while a withdrawal opens a claim now and settles days later through an NFT. Those two shapes do not fit yet. Worth being precise about scope throughout. The transaction is visible and the amounts are public. What stays hidden is attribution, so an observer sees the pool interacting with a contract without learning who asked. Protocol level state stays fully auditable. You will need a privacy compatible wallet, Ready X or Xverse. Private sub-accounts are still landing. Staking is the one productive use that runs end to end without surfacing. The rest is being built in the order Starknet set out.

Your Endur LST does not have one borrowing power. It has a different one in every pool that lists it. xWBTC against WBTC gives you 90% max LTV in Vesu's Prime pool and 92% in the Re7 xBTC pool. Same collateral, same debt asset, two different ceilings. The borrow rates differ too. Endur does not set those numbers. Pool curators do, and the gap between them is two risk teams pricing the same asset differently. Worth checking which pool you are borrowing in before assuming the terms.

Private Staking on Starknet only up. All via @endurfi. Built on STRK20. No UX change, just a privacy protocol on existing liquidity, volume and users.

Four Bitcoin wrappers on Endur, four almost identical returns. solvBTC 2.63%. tBTC 2.59%. WBTC 2.57%. LBTC 2.33%. Those are cumulative gains since each was added, and the small spread between them reflects how long each has been accruing rather than any difference in performance. Every BTC LST here earns the same rate, 1.93% today. So the wrapper you choose does not change your staking yield. What it changes is the bridge you are trusting and how easily you can exit. Worth choosing on those instead.