注册
关闭
琥珀财经

琥珀财经

发布于 2周前 阅读量 4978

纯粹、简单、完美、无暇

FTX创始人,Serum顾问SBF谈流动性挖矿项目的可持续性及其对市场的长期影响

——本文翻译自FTX创始人、Serum顾问SBF于2020年9月13日发布的关于流动性挖矿的最新推特,文末附推特原文。

流动性挖矿是可持续的吗?它是愚蠢的,还是具有革命性意义的呢?

不是在尝试回答这些以食物所命名的通证(food tokens)在短期内会涨还是会跌的问题。而是在尝试关注这些通证的长期影响。

本文并非投资建议。我个人也持有一些以食物所命名的通证。

流动性挖矿背后的核心金融交易是什么?

从根本上来说,新项目通常会把所有通证或大部分通证空投给DeFi用户,以提升其协议价值或总锁定价值(TVL)。

那么,这种模式是否合理呢?

对于这一点,很多时候是归结为:你认为DeFi究竟应该具有多少价值?

现在,我将做这样一个假设:假定 DEFI-PERP(编者注:DEFI-PERP是FTX推出的DeFi指数合约) 目前定价合理。DEFI-PERP 对标了多种当下最热门DeFi项目(编者注:如 Kyber Network(KNC)、Aave(LEND)和 Maker(MKR)等)。

目前,DEFI-PERP 对标的项目通证市值大约在在2亿到20亿美元左右。以乐观的角度来评估的话,我认为其余以蔬菜、食物命名的 DeFi 通证市值加总起来,大概等同于剩下的DeFi价值总和,差不多在60亿美元上下。

也就是说,这些流动性挖矿所获得的通证能产生最多那么高的估值以及交易成本。

那么,真正产生的价值又会是多少呢?

有一些DeFi项目的估值的确很离谱,我也不知道究竟是谁在买入这些DeFi通证。如果剔除这些项目,其实DeFi项目的估值也并没有那么疯狂。YFI 目前的总市值在10 亿美元左右,一些例如COMP、BAL、SNX 和LEND 等通证市值大抵是由YFI 所推动,剩下的通证市值总和也差不多有几亿美元。

好,让我们来看看交易成本(transaction cost)又是什么样子的呢?

现在,人们每个月大约要花上1亿美元去支付矿工费 (gas费用)。此外,人们还在DeFi上锁定了约100亿美元的资金,如果您用每年20%作为基准加密货币资金成本进行计算,那么又要再加上大约10亿美元的成本。

所以,如果把上述金额相加的话,你就会得到……

当然,你懂的,大约在60亿美元或者更多。老实说,这对我来说完全是意料之外的结果。

现在,我在计算中有意忽略了某些通证,以及人们的时间机会成本。

但是,好吧,我依然感到非常惊讶。我以为以食物命名的这些DeFi通证 (Food Token) 是一场显而易见的泡沫。但现在我反而不那么确定了。

这种方法显然忽视了通证之间的独特性,有些具有明显的实用性!举例来说,像是 Compound、Aave 和 Balancer 等,就算忽略其具有流动性挖矿的设计,用户都是会使用的。而 Cream、SushiSwap 等,则是从一些有用的项目中分叉出来的。

yearn.finance却是一个与众不同的案例——目前,它大部分是和流动性挖矿有关,但同时它算得上是流动性挖矿中的王者,流动性挖矿币种的鼻祖。所以说,它从中分得一杯羹还挺合理的。

所以,综上所述,以食物命名的这些DeFi通证们显然是一个巨大的泡沫,我从一开始就这么认为。

但是,它也有可能不是,或许只是我的想法错了?

显而易见,一些项目还是会崩盘、一些会出现问题、还有一些是会彻底搞砸。但无论如何,哪怕只有少数项目能达成这些所有同类型项目所想要到达的目标,这些少数项目也会弥补其它项目所缺失的部分。

———————

以下为SBF的推特原文:

Is yield farming sustainable? Is it stupid? Is it revolutionary?

This is *not* trying to answer the question of whether food tokens will go up or down short-term. It’s trying focus on the long-term ramifications of it.

What is the core financial transaction behind yield farming?

Well, basically: new projects drop most or all of their tokens on DeFi users in return for valuation and TVL.

Are those justified?

A lot for this will come down to what you think DeFi should be worth.

For now, I’m going to make the following arbitrary assumption: that https://ftx.com/trade/DEFI-PERP is “fair”. DEFI-PERP is currently basically made up of the largest DeFi projects pre-yield-farming.

So, the projects in DEFI-PERP are worth about $200m-$2b right now.

I think that optimistically, vegetables all together are worth about as much as the rest of DeFi — so maybe like $6b or so.

That means that giving away all the yield farming coins can generate at most that amount of valuation, and that amount of transaction costs.

So how much is it in fact generating? So put it all together and you get…

…well, you know, $6b or so. I’m gonna be honest, I wasn’t expecting that, at all.

Now I ignored some coins from the calculation, intentionally; and I ignored the opportunity cost of peoples’ time.

But, like, ok, so I’m still surprised. I thought food tokens were obviously a bubble.

Now I’m not so sure.

This is also obviously ignoring the difference between different coins. Some have obvious utility! @compoundfinance, @AaveAave, @BalancerLabs, etc. are important products people use even ignoring farming; @CreamdotFinance, @SushiSwap, etc. are forks on useful products.

@iearnfinance is a weird case — right now it’s mostly just about farming, but it’s also the king of farming, the meta-farming coin, and so it kinda makes sense that it should get a decent piece of that pie.

So, TL;DR: obviously food tokens are a ridiculous bubble, it was clear to me from the beginning.

But also maybe it’s not and maybe I was wrong about that?

Obviously some will still crash, and some will founder, and some will fuck up magnificently, but if even a few get to where they’re trying to go, that could make up for the rest.

原文链接:

  • 0
琥珀财经
琥珀财经

纯粹、简单、完美、无暇

0 条评论