A retired banker’s story of financial transformation.
My father comes from a banking background and was initially skeptical about crypto wealth management. It wasn’t until he carefully compared traditional banking products with modern on-chain financial solutions using the evaluation framework of traditional finance that he changed his mind.
The core comparisons are quite straightforward:
**Yield**: A three-year fixed deposit at a bank typically yields around 2.75%, whereas USD1 wealth management can achieve an annualized return of 15%+ (measured in related governance tokens). The difference isn’t a matter of decimal points; it’s multiple times higher.
**Liquidity**: Once a bank fixed deposit is locked in, it’s very difficult to withdraw early. Premature withdrawal is calculated at the savings account interest rate, resulting in significant losses. In contrast, USD1 wealth management supports anytime redemption with no penalties. This is hugely meaningful for sudden needs in life.
**Collateral Security**: Traditional banks rely on deposit insurance (domestic cap of 500,000), which is far from sufficient for high-net-worth clients. Over-collateralization mechanisms (>150%) are extremely robust in finance — using assets worth 1.5 units to borrow 1 unit is reliable under any system. More importantly, the entire collateral status is transparently verifiable on the blockchain in real-time, with no black box operations.
**Transparency**: This aspect convinced my father. As a seasoned banker, he’s well aware of the gray areas in traditional finance. Every collateral and debt on the blockchain is openly visible, impossible to conceal.
"Isn’t this just investment gambling? Isn’t this a digital bank with clearer rules, more sufficient collateral, and higher operational efficiency?" he asked me.
I replied, "Exactly. More importantly, you’re not a passive depositor—you’re a shareholder in this bank."
What ultimately convinced him was the liquidity — the freedom to withdraw funds at any moment in an emergency.
Now he checks the blockchain explorer daily to verify that the collateral backing USD1 wealth management remains sufficient. An erstwhile skeptic has been persuaded by code and data, choosing to trust mathematics rather than institutional promises.
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.
17 Likes
Reward
17
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
AirdropHunterWang
· 01-11 06:54
Bro, this story is well told, but about the 15% return... I have to be honest, what about the risk? Governance tokens fluctuate so much; I've seen many tricks in the crypto world where a 15% gain today turns into a negative tomorrow.
View OriginalReply0
HashRateHustler
· 01-11 06:41
Damn, your father's awareness is much clearer than many of the crypto veterans I know... 2.75% is really a joke, no wonder you had to come out.
View OriginalReply0
RegenRestorer
· 01-11 06:38
Wow, this guy has become aware. Going from a 500,000 cap to over 150% over-collateralization is truly incredible.
A retired banker’s story of financial transformation.
My father comes from a banking background and was initially skeptical about crypto wealth management. It wasn’t until he carefully compared traditional banking products with modern on-chain financial solutions using the evaluation framework of traditional finance that he changed his mind.
The core comparisons are quite straightforward:
**Yield**: A three-year fixed deposit at a bank typically yields around 2.75%, whereas USD1 wealth management can achieve an annualized return of 15%+ (measured in related governance tokens). The difference isn’t a matter of decimal points; it’s multiple times higher.
**Liquidity**: Once a bank fixed deposit is locked in, it’s very difficult to withdraw early. Premature withdrawal is calculated at the savings account interest rate, resulting in significant losses. In contrast, USD1 wealth management supports anytime redemption with no penalties. This is hugely meaningful for sudden needs in life.
**Collateral Security**: Traditional banks rely on deposit insurance (domestic cap of 500,000), which is far from sufficient for high-net-worth clients. Over-collateralization mechanisms (>150%) are extremely robust in finance — using assets worth 1.5 units to borrow 1 unit is reliable under any system. More importantly, the entire collateral status is transparently verifiable on the blockchain in real-time, with no black box operations.
**Transparency**: This aspect convinced my father. As a seasoned banker, he’s well aware of the gray areas in traditional finance. Every collateral and debt on the blockchain is openly visible, impossible to conceal.
"Isn’t this just investment gambling? Isn’t this a digital bank with clearer rules, more sufficient collateral, and higher operational efficiency?" he asked me.
I replied, "Exactly. More importantly, you’re not a passive depositor—you’re a shareholder in this bank."
What ultimately convinced him was the liquidity — the freedom to withdraw funds at any moment in an emergency.
Now he checks the blockchain explorer daily to verify that the collateral backing USD1 wealth management remains sufficient. An erstwhile skeptic has been persuaded by code and data, choosing to trust mathematics rather than institutional promises.