Many people always focus on the yield rate when looking at DeFi, but this actually causes them to miss the more core aspects. If you look at it from a different perspective—treating DeFi as a comprehensive set of financial infrastructure rather than just a profit game—the project's value proposition becomes much clearer.
Taking projects like Ferra Protocol as an example, their design logic is obviously different. Rather than saying they are here to generate returns, it's better to see them as building a truly efficient financial layer. Considering issues systemically—how liquidity is allocated, how risks are managed, how assets circulate—these answers determine how far a DeFi project can go.
In other words, projects that position themselves as "components of a financial system" rather than "profit products" tend to be more sustainable. Because the former cares about sustainability and ecological value, while the latter ultimately faces a death spiral of declining yields. This is why understanding a project's financial design logic is more important than simply comparing APY.
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.
13 Likes
Reward
13
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
WhaleSurfer
· 01-10 16:10
That's right, a bunch of people are still staring at the APY and laughing foolishly, never considering how long this thing can last.
View OriginalReply0
GasBandit
· 01-09 09:01
Honestly, those who only look at APY are the most likely to get wrecked, never considering why the project can sustain such high returns.
Really interesting projects focus on the design aspect, not just stacking numbers. DeFi needs a framework to work properly.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeCrybaby
· 01-08 06:51
Honestly, I'm tired of projects that hype up APY; they're all just profit schemes. The ones that truly survive are those that see themselves as infrastructure builders. Projects like Ferra are indeed thinking more long-term.
View OriginalReply0
IntrovertMetaverse
· 01-08 06:50
That's right, a bunch of people are still chasing high APY there; sooner or later, they'll suffer losses.
View OriginalReply0
SoliditySlayer
· 01-08 06:49
Well said, those chasing APY are short-term thinkers; the real winners are focused on infrastructure.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHunterXM
· 01-08 06:45
That's true, but I think most people can't really distinguish between the two; they're still just thinking about making quick money.
View OriginalReply0
HypotheticalLiquidator
· 01-08 06:39
It sounds good, but if liquidity allocation is not done well, liquidation can still happen. The health factor is the real indicator.
View OriginalReply0
OnchainHolmes
· 01-08 06:25
That's correct, blindly chasing APY is all about the bagholder mentality.
Many people always focus on the yield rate when looking at DeFi, but this actually causes them to miss the more core aspects. If you look at it from a different perspective—treating DeFi as a comprehensive set of financial infrastructure rather than just a profit game—the project's value proposition becomes much clearer.
Taking projects like Ferra Protocol as an example, their design logic is obviously different. Rather than saying they are here to generate returns, it's better to see them as building a truly efficient financial layer. Considering issues systemically—how liquidity is allocated, how risks are managed, how assets circulate—these answers determine how far a DeFi project can go.
In other words, projects that position themselves as "components of a financial system" rather than "profit products" tend to be more sustainable. Because the former cares about sustainability and ecological value, while the latter ultimately faces a death spiral of declining yields. This is why understanding a project's financial design logic is more important than simply comparing APY.