Recently, many people have been hyping: USDT is going to fail, USDC will kneel, and only lisUSD can survive. The reason is nothing more than it claiming to be a "decentralized stablecoin," not pegged to fiat currency, thus escaping regulatory oversight.

It's time to calm down. The EU MiCA regulation has already been implemented, and global regulation of algorithmic stablecoins is indeed tightening. But can a name change really make it immune to risks? That's too naive. Regulation is far more complex than it appears.

lisUSD does have technical features that resist censorship, but its price target is still pegged to 1 USD, and its collateral includes a bunch of real-world assets (like USD1 in RWA form). To put it simply, it still needs to follow the logic of the fiat world to operate stably. Lista DAO is migrating to Liquity's immutable codebase, which is a fortress-level security measure—eliminating governance risks and enhancing decentralization. But this doesn't solve a fundamental problem: if global deposit and withdrawal channels are truly blocked, the use cases for lisUSD will be severely squeezed.

I personally hold lisUSD, valuing its internal circulation within the BNB Chain ecosystem—mining, buying assets, participating in Launchpool interactions. But I would never use it as a substitute for cross-border payments or long-term savings.

What is the smartest strategy in a regulatory storm? Asset "polymorphism." Hold compliant USD1 as a credit anchor on one side, and use decentralized lisUSD as an interaction medium on the other. Don't put all your chips on the story of "fighting regulation"—that’s too easy to backfire.