Aave/LlamaRisk V4 on Base is proposing a dedicated market where Coinbase B20 versions of the Mag 7 can collateralize USDC debt.
equity trading is session-bound while DeFi credit is continuous. Chainlink holds the last published equity mark through weekends and holidays, so off-hours price discovery is realized onchain as a discrete oracle repricing at reopen. a position can cross liquidation thresholds in that jump, while executable exit liquidity may still be constrained by the underlying market’s trading and redemption windows.
the parameters are calibrated to liquidation execution. collateral factors cover the drawdown from the last published mark to the next executable exit, while caps constrain exposure to the amount that can be cleared through available liquidation capacity.
this is the path for tokenized equities to become usable balance-sheet assets in DeFi.
Stocks close for the weekend. @aave doesn't.
Over weekends and holidays, the price feed holds its last value and the reopen reprices everything in one step. Our parameters are built around that gap.
Parameters: governance.aave.com/t/arfc-d…
Token review: governance.aave.com/t/coinba…
1
83
I think I really need to start structuring my days so that the first half is reserved for hands-on, focused work where I need to pay attention nonstop, with no calls in between.
Then I can move calls to the second half of the day, because if I have a lot of calls scattered between focused work, I feel like I spend more time trying to regain my focus than actually doing honest god work.
Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.
35
I don’t care that much about em dashes in general, but LLMs’ use of words like “useful” and “sits” triggers me way f more.
27
LS retweeted
Hey @StaniKulechov, you should check this out.
This is one of the reasons I’m building Kompose.
You create a strategy as a smart account with permissioned allowances to perform very specific actions. Other users can then deposit into and use your strategy while keeping custody of their own assets.
If you modify the strategy, all depositors are notified in real time. They can either accept the new version, continue earning with the previous version, or exit.
There’s no need to deposit assets into a vault contract. Each depositor keeps ownership of their assets, while the strategy only has permission to perform the actions it was explicitly allowed to perform.
Strategies can also be fully automated using session keys and policies, while keeping the permissions tightly scoped.
@aave is one of the main protocols already integrated.
The goal is to make DeFi strategies composable, automated, and transparent without giving up custody or control.
This categorisation doesn’t make sense and is pretty much self-serving.
First of all, arguing that a vault where a curator has discretion over how capital is allocated across markets, and can even expand into new markets beyond the user’s initial mandate, which, btw, is a known Morpho drawback (very non-LP friendly), should be considered non-custodial simply because it has a timelock is about as strong an argument as a wet European paper straw.
Especially the part of implicit approvals that simply changes the whole allocation mandate and users don’t even have the proper tools to monitor these changes.
Also the part on relying roles, doesn't really solve much, simply creates a blame game and relocates potentially liability but doesn't solve the actual problem.
Vaults that could reasonably be considered non-custodial are those without a manager. For example, vaults that simply wrap deposits into a lending protocol, or the original Yearn vaults. These are make sense to be categorized as non-custodial vaults.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with discretionary vaults, as long as the regulatory path is figured out. I’m all for developing industry standards, but let’s at least do it in a way that serves the broader industry rather than your own interests. 😂
1
1
12
432
vaults are still really good because they turn fragmented user capital into one deployable balance sheet, making strategies viable at a scale individual accounts often cannot reach.
but a user should not need to inherit one curator’s entire allocation just to access that infra. smart accounts + agents let the portfolio move across underlying vaults and lending markets while keeping the mandate at the account level.
@Zyfai_ is already moving in this direction. users retain ownership of a Safe smart account while the agent gets scoped execution authority to rebalance across approved strategies.
I think this is the next iteration of onchain portfolio management, and it could create a conflict of interest for curators, especially if existing vault infrastructure starts adopting stacks that reduce the need for hands-on management by curators.
2
6
492
LS retweeted
In a world with complex permissioned execution via session key policies, don't choose vaults.
The more one builds with vaults, the more one questions “why vaults?”
Vaults will always exist to increase composability, reduce transaction costs, and generally increase security
But at the same time 4 years ago when vaults became standardized as capital allocation tools we didn’t have mature smart account infrastructure and AI
There should be no question if something is non-custodial if the management of something is all purely code (whether public onchain, or verifiable offchain)
The sooner we embrace this future the better. Cypherpunk vaults
3
1
4
688
my first thought of a company I would start:
The Scapegoat, a DeFi risk consultancy.
in exchange for a retainer, whenever your protocol blows up because of internal risk management, you can just blame me instead.
premium tier includes a post-mortem where I explain that nobody could have seen it coming.
my first thought of a company I would start:
The Firefighters, a crisis-consultancy for DeFi teams.
In exchange for a retainer & allocation, you get a strategy consultant, bad-PR monitoring (Twitter etc).
And when shit hits the fan, I will be there with you
1
143
DeFi has always been on an insane innovation arc. even now, it’s working out how to continuously price equities that only trade during limited market hours, 24/7, every hour and every minute of the day.
DeFi will make boomer finance properly tradeable.
3
162
LS retweeted
We're building Fusion agents first, and our whole stack is now open to test, analyze, build and deploy vaults.
Over 170 adapters are available, reaching protocols like @aave, @morpho, @sparkfinance, @Uniswap and @aerodromefi.
Hundreds of untapped yield strategies remain to be built, and a Fusion vault can be configured to suit whatever regime its operator works under.
Whether you are just starting out, running a desk, or looking for an alternative to your existing vault stack, point your agent at this article and get started:
5
30
1,249
vault ≠ vault.
I think the spectrum is easier to understand across 3 layers:
1. Strategy: what can the vault actually own and do? Passive allocation, active rebalancing, leverage, nested vaults, PTs, LPs, hedging.
2. Custody / control: who ultimately controls the assets and how constrained is that control? Immutable rules, permissioned operators, policy modules, multisigs, EOAs.
3. Operations: which actions can be executed, by whom, and under what conditions? Rebalances, deposits, withdrawals, market additions, parameter changes, emergency actions.
4
724
imagine telling normies your job is finding obscure ways interconnected lending markets can blow up.
yeah I’ll just say I’m a finance consultant or something.
1
39
I’m a bit behind on MetaLeX in general, but I want to see more governance primitives / companies move onchain. we already know what happens when equity / tokens and actual control are misaligned.
I also think @lex_node might be the most cypherpunk legal person in the industry. he left a trad legal career to actually build in crypto around a pretty clear set of values and a long-term vision.
that takes either a lot of conviction or a very specific kind of insanity lol.
1
1
8
903
TLDR II: risk people will eat well.
even when RWAs are made liquid, the underlying liquidity risk moves to other party.
a strategy manager can underwrite assets with very different duration and redemption profiles, from T+1/T+2 claims to T+30 or longer. offering faster liquidity against those assets means someone else has to warehouse the mismatch. that party absorbs bunch of risks (duration risk, funding and liquidity risk, valuation risk, settlement risk and potentially credit or counterparty) if the underlying claim cannot be realized at the expected value or on the expected timeline.
the next step is when DeFi starts reusing these claims across protocols (it can happen we already can see increasing complexity with vaults/strategies).
feels like only a matter of time lol.
1
4
329