2025-12-31 06:21:48

Recently, I saw a project in DeFi that took a different approach—using a "stable reserve" to cope with major market fluctuations. The idea is quite practical: when staking yields can't cover losses, especially when facing reverse funding rates, this reserve pool can come into play. It's like installing a fuse for the project, buffering the impact of sharp market shocks. This kind of risk management design is worth paying attention to in DeFi—not relying solely on a single yield model to endure, but planning emergency measures in advance. For users, this also provides an extra layer of protection.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

14 Likes

Reward
14
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MEVSandwich

· 2h ago

Stable reserves sound good, but I'm worried it might be one of those designs that look very safe but are actually empty... How many can truly withstand extreme market conditions?

View OriginalReply0

InscriptionGriller

· 12h ago

Another "fuse" story, and it sounds just like a prelude to cutting the leeks The reserve pool is basically just robbing Peter to pay Paul. When the market crashes, it could very well trigger a death spiral The project team is really good at painting illusions. I bet five dollars that the reserves will eventually end up in some wallet

View OriginalReply0

BTCRetirementFund

· 12h ago

Haha, the idea of a stable reserve sounds good, but I'm just worried it might be another empty promise. --- Instead of creating a reserve pool, it's better to thoroughly understand the revenue model first. --- Finally, a project has thought about defense; previously, it was all about rushing forward. --- I like this approach. DeFi should be designed like this to be reliable. --- A fuse? That depends on where the money comes from—real silver or just air. --- It seems most projects are just scrambling at the last minute; few plan ahead. --- Having an extra layer of protection is good, but the key is to trust that this reserve actually exists. --- If you ask me, this is pragmatic risk management—much better than those boastful projects.

View OriginalReply0

DeepRabbitHole

· 12h ago

The reserve pool system is indeed more reliable than a pure profit model, but very few projects can truly execute this well.

View OriginalReply0

MeaninglessGwei

· 12h ago

Stable reserves sound good, but how many can really withstand the next big crash? It sounds nice, but ultimately it depends on whether there's enough to go around. DeFi is like that—today there's talk of insurance, tomorrow it might just break the circuit. This approach is definitely more reliable than pure yield models, points for that. Another "layer of protection"... I bet five bucks this layer won't last long. It seems like they've learned from the last lesson, hopefully this time they're not gambling again. During the reverse staking yield phase, all protections were useless, haha. The reserve pool sounds great, but I'm worried the administrators might secretly embezzle funds. In theory, there's no problem, but in execution? That's the real key. DeFi always claims to have insurance mechanisms, but what happens? Still ends up with a blow-up.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoCrazyGF

· 12h ago

Stable reserves sound good, but can they really withstand a major drop? Or are they just for peace of mind?

View OriginalReply0