温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.bee.com/ko/63243.html
点击访问原文链接

From Aave to Ether.fi: Who has captured the most value in the on-chain credit system? | Bee Network

进入原网站 导航首页
From Aave to Ether.fi: Who has captured the most value in the on-chain credit system? | Bee Network Login 인기 뉴스 밈 런치패드 AI 에이전트 DeSci 탑체인 익스플로러 뉴비의 경우 100x 코인 꿀벌 게임 필수 웹사이트 필수 앱 암호화폐 유명인 드핀 루키 에센셜 함정 탐지기 기본 도구 고급 웹사이트 교환 NFT 도구 안녕, 로그아웃 웹3 유니버스 계략 DApp 꿀벌 하이브 성장하는 플랫폼 기원 후 찾다 영어 코인 충전 로그인 다운로드 웹3 유니 계략 DApp 꿀벌 하이브 기원 후 집•분석•From Aave to Ether.fi: Who has captured the most value in the on-chain credit system? From Aave to Ether.fi: Who has captured the most value in the on-chain credit system?분석2개월 전업데이트와이엇 16,738 29 Odaily Planet Daily에서 편집( @오데일리차이나 )

Translator | Dingdang ( @XiaMiPP )

As vaults and curators gain market share in the DeFi world, questions are emerging: Are lending protocols seeing their profit margins squeezed? Is lending no longer a good business?

However, if we shift our perspective back to the entire on-chain credit value chain , the conclusion is quite the opposite. Lending protocols still constitute the strongest moat in this value chain. We can quantify this with data.

On Aave and SparkLend, the interest fees paid by the vault to the lending protocols actually exceed the revenue generated by the vault itself. This fact directly challenges the mainstream narrative that “distribution is king.”

At least in the lending sector, distribution is not king.

In short: Aave not only earns more than the various vaults built on top of it, but also surpasses the asset issuers used for lending, such as Lido and Ether.fi.

To understand why, we need to dissect the entire value chain of DeFi lending and re-examine the value capture capabilities of each player by following the flow of funds and fees.

Lending Value Chain Deconstruction

The annualized revenue of the entire lending market has exceeded $100 million . This value is not generated by a single link, but by a complex stack of components: the underlying settlement blockchain, asset issuers, lenders, the lending protocols themselves, and the vault responsible for distribution and strategy execution.

As we mentioned in previous articles, many current lending market applications stem from basis trading 그리고 liquidity mining opportunities, and we have broken down the main strategic logic behind them.

So, who is actually “in need” of capital in the lending market?

I analyzed the top 50 wallet addresses on Aave and SparkLend and labeled the major borrowers.

The largest borrowers are various vault and strategy platforms such as Fluid, Treehouse, Mellow, Ether.fi, and Lido (who are also asset issuers). They control the distribution capabilities to end users, helping them obtain higher returns without having to manage complex cycles and risks themselves. There are also large institutional investors, such as Abraxas Capital , who deploy external capital into similar strategies, whose economic models are essentially very similar to those of a vault.

But the vault isn’t the whole story. This chain includes at least the following types of participants:

사용자 : Depositing assets, hoping to obtain additional returns through a vault or strategy manager. Lending agreements : These provide infrastructure and liquidity matching, charging interest to borrowers and taking a percentage as agreement revenue. Lenders : The providers of capital, who may be ordinary users or other financial institutions. Asset issuers: Most on-chain lending assets have underlying backing assets that generate returns, a portion of which are captured by the issuer. Blockchain Network: The Underlying “Track” Through which All Activities Occur The lending agreement earned more than the downstream vault. Take Ether.fi’s ETH liquidity staking vault as an example. It is the second-largest borrower on Aave, with approximately $ 1.5 billion in outstanding loans. The strategy itself is quite typical:

Deposit weETH (approximately +2.9%) Lend out wETH (approximately -2%) Vault charges TVL a 0.5% platform management fee. Of Ether.fi’s total TVL, approximately $215 million is net liquidity actually deployed on Aave. This portion of TVL generates approximately $1.07 million in platform fee revenue annually for the vault.

However, at the same time, this strategy requires Aave to pay approximately $4.5 million in interest annually (calculated as: $1.5 billion in borrowing × 2% borrowing APY × 15% reserve factor).

Even in one of the largest and most successful circular strategies in DeFi, the value captured by lending protocols is still several times that of a vault.

Of course, Ether.fi is also the issuer of weETH, and this vault itself is directly creating demand for weETH.

Even when considering both the returns from the vault strategy and the returns from asset issuers , the economic value created by the lending layer (Aave) is still higher.

In other words, the lending agreement is the link with the greatest value increment in the entire stack.

We can perform the same analysis on other commonly used vaults:

Fluid Lite ETH: 20% performance fee + 0.05% exit fee, no platform management fee. It borrowed $1.7 billion in wETH from Aave, paying approximately $33 million in interest, of which about $5 million went to Aave, and Fluid itself earned nearly $4 million.

The Mellow protocol (strETH) charges a 10% performance fee, with a loan size of $165 million and a TVL of only about $37 million. We see again that, in terms of TVL, the value captured by Aave exceeds the vault itself.

Let’s look at another example. In SparkLend, the second-largest lending protocol on Ethereum, Treehouse is a key player, running an ETH revolving strategy:

TVL approximately US$34 million Borrowed $133 million Performance fees are charged only on marginal revenue exceeding 2.6%.

SparkLend, as a lending protocol, has a higher value capture capability in the TVL dimension than Vault.

The pricing structure of a vault has a significant impact on the value it can capture; however, for lending agreements, revenue depends more on the nominal size of the loan and is relatively stable.

Even if a strategy is shifted to dollar-denominated pricing, the higher interest rates will often offset the effect of lower leverage. I don’t think the conclusion will fundamentally change.

In relatively closed markets, more value may flow to curators, such as through Stakehouse Prime Vault (26% performance fee, incentivized by Morpho). However, this is not the final state of Morpho’s pricing mechanism; curators themselves are also collaborating with other platforms for distribution.

Lending Agreements vs. Asset Issuers So the question is: is it better to use Aave or Lido?

This problem is more complex than comparing vaults because the pledged assets not only generate returns themselves, but also indirectly create stablecoin interest income for the protocol through the lending market. We can only make approximate estimates.

Lido has approximately $4.42 billion in assets in the Ethereum Core market, which is used to support lending positions, generating approximately $11 million in annualized performance fees.

These positions roughly balance ETH and stablecoin lending. Based on the current net interest margin (NIM) of approximately 0.4%, the corresponding lending revenue is around $17 million , significantly higher than Lido’s direct revenue (and this is a historically low NIM level).

The real moat of lending agreements If compared solely to the profit model of traditional finance deposits , DeFi lending protocols may appear to be a low-profit industry. However, this comparison overlooks the true location of the competitive advantage.

In an on-chain credit system, the value captured by lending protocols exceeds that of the downstream distribution layer and also surpasses that of the upstream asset issuers on an overall basis.

On its own, lending may seem like a low-profit business; but within the complete credit stack, it is the layer with the strongest value capture capability relative to all other participants—the treasury, the issuer, and the distribution channels.

이 글은 인터넷에서 퍼왔습니다: From Aave to Ether.fi: Who has captured the most value in the on-chain credit system?

Related: A $2,000 Christmas “heist”: Trump and his tariff windfall Every Christmas, children receive a gift from a mysterious old man, never questioning its cost. Now, Donald Trump is attempting to play Santa Claus for the adult world, promising a $2,000 “tariff bonus” that seems to have fallen from the sky, claiming the gift is paid for by a distant “foreign factory.” The crypto market is already buzzing with excitement, like a bunch of children eagerly unwrapping their presents. But there’s one overlooked detail in this grand magical spectacle: before clapping for the bunny that appeared out of nowhere, no one asks whose dinner it cost, or who’s going hungry tonight. I. When the President Announces Nationwide Money Splashing: A 시장 Frenzy Source: Donald Trump The crypto market is precisely that diner who doesn’t care who pays for dinner, but…

# 분석# 데피# 이더리움# 마켓© 版权声명배열 上一篇 The Rebirth After the Crypto Winter: The Major Reshuffle in 2025 and the Path to Value Reconstruction in 2026 下一篇 Lighter's upcoming TGE: A comprehensive overview of timing window, on-chain signals, and market pricing. 상关文章 Lazy Financial Management Guide | Ripple is giving out RLUSD incentives; Electric led investment with an annualized retu 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 30,705 1 This week’s featured interactive projects: Stable launches Galxe missions; Warden Season 2 missions; and Cookie DAO’s LA 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 24,965 Stable’s Fundraising Chaos: Why I Missed the FOMO Train 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 15,687 Prediction Market New Infrastructure: An Inventory of Polymarket’s Third-Party Ecosystem Projects 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 21,876 Surf Protocol Fully Upgraded: TurboFlow, PerpDEX for Retail Investors 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 18,029 Bitcoin’s $110,000 defense line has been breached. Is the market about to turn bearish? 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 17,241 2 최신 기사 Did Jane Street “Manipulate” BTC? Decoding the AP System, Understanding the Power Struggle Behind ETF Creation and Redemption Pricing 21시간 전 641 Stop Comparing Bitcoin to Gold—It’s Now a High-Volatility Software Stock 21시간 전 705 Matrixport Research: $25 Billion Gamma Unwinding Imminent, Liquidity Yet to Return Behind the Rebound 21시간 전 655 ERC-5564: Ethereum’s Stealth Era Has Arrived, Receiving Addresses No Longer ‘Exposed’ 21시간 전 542 Hong Kong Regulatory Green Light: Asseto Enables DL Holdings to Achieve Compliance for Two RWA Business Implementations 21시간 전 629 인기 있는 웹사이트TempoLighterGAIB글라이더PlanckRaylsBCPokerVooi Bee.com 세계 최대의 Web3 포털 파트너 코인카프 바이낸스 코인마켓캡 코인게코 코인라이브 갑옷 Bee Network 앱을 다운로드하고 web3 여정을 시작하세요 백지 역할 자주하는 질문 © 2021-2026. 모든 권리 보유. 개인 정보 정책 | 서비스 약관 꿀벌 네트워크 앱 다운로드 Web3 여정을 시작해보세요 세계 최대의 Web3 포털 파트너 CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko Coinlive Armors 백지 역할 자주하는 질문 © 2021-2026. 모든 권리 보유. 개인 정보 정책 | 서비스 약관 찾다 찾다사이트에온체인사회의소식 熱门推荐 : 에어드롭 헌터 데이터 분석 암호화폐 유명인 함정 탐지기 한국어 English 繁體中文 简体中文 日本語 Tiếng Việt العربية Bahasa Indonesia हिन्दी اردو Русский 한국어

智能索引记录