During the process of building a stablecoin liquidity pool, have you ever encountered such an awkward situation—holding three types of assets in your account: liquid staking certificates, trading mining tokens, and platform governance tokens, yet each operating independently? After a month, you either rely on staking certificates for fixed income, use mining tokens to seize new opportunities, or speculate on governance tokens when you’re bullish, but what’s the result? The annualized return of the liquidity pool remains stuck around 35%-40%, unable to break through even after adjustments, and during market fluctuations, you are forced to endure drawdown risks.
Actually, the root of the problem lies here—you’ve been treating these rights and interests as independent profit tools, never considering how to make them collaborate. The real strategy should be the other way around: the value of these three assets is not just about stacking yields, but about leveraging an ecosystem feedback mechanism to make their rights and interests’ effectiveness run through the entire operation chain of the liquidity pool. In other words, optimize your capital allocation with liquid staking certificates, strengthen risk hedging with mining tokens, and reverse the yield structure with governance tokens—ultimately forming a closed loop of "rights and interests empowering the liquidity pool, and the liquidity pool amplifying the value of rights and interests."
What are the benefits of this approach? First, it can break through the 35%-40% ceiling; second, it significantly enhances risk resistance under market volatility. It sounds complex, but step-by-step it’s actually very clear. Starting from diagnosing your current operational misconceptions, then detailing how the three types of rights and interests can feedback, how to implement the entire process, and how to respond to risks—this methodology dissects all the details and can be directly applied.
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.
11 Likes
Reward
11
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GateUser-afe07a92
· 22h ago
Oh no, it's the same pattern again. I feel like I'm stuck in an inefficient cycle.
View OriginalReply0
YieldHunter
· 01-08 19:54
honestly the 35-40% ceiling thing screams opportunity cost to me... if you're really just mixing these three asset classes independently you're basically leaving money on the table fr
Reply0
NFTDreamer
· 01-08 19:54
Damn, this is me. Managing three assets separately, with an annualized return stuck at 40%.
Bro, this theory sounds good, but actually implementing it might be another story...
I've been stuck on the 35-40% threshold for a long time. Maybe it's time to try a different approach.
The idea of a closed-loop feedback sounds great, but it feels like another big pit waiting for me.
Why has no one directly talked about this kind of combined strategy? Feels like I've been cut off from the real deal.
View OriginalReply0
WalletDetective
· 01-08 19:52
Damn, I've also been stuck at a 35-40% ceiling, it's really incredible.
Each权益 fighting on its own is just wasting money; they need to feed off each other.
Sounds feasible, but will there be pitfalls in actual implementation?
I've thought about optimizing the liquidity pool before, and I didn't expect the answer to be in ecological feedback.
You're right, just stacking yields alone won't work; we need to find ways for assets to collaborate.
This logic is clear, but I'm worried that we'll have to adjust strategies again when the bull market comes.
Getting stuck at 35% to death is indeed a common problem; let's see if this closed loop can really break through.
View OriginalReply0
StablecoinGuardian
· 01-08 19:52
To be honest, I hadn't thought of this closed-loop approach before... Turns out, the three types of rights can be linked in such a way.
View OriginalReply0
TokenRationEater
· 01-08 19:49
Selling governance tokens and then realizing the truth, turns out you have to lose some money to learn how to allocate properly.
View OriginalReply0
PumpDetector
· 01-08 19:46
Nah, this 35-40% ceiling thing screams people aren't reading the whale flows correctly. Seen this pattern before.
Sounds like another "closed-loop" marketing term... The ones that can truly break through the ceiling are never just theories.
Three types of assets collaborating? Basically, it still depends on how the timing and sentiment cycle unfold. Don't be fooled by the feedback mechanism.
If this methodology is broken down into details? I knew the most dead in the details back in the Mt. Gox era lol.
Honestly, if it were really that easy to break the ceiling, smart money would have already moved everything, and they wouldn't still be waiting for popular science.
Feels like they're just teaching people how to ignore risks... True hedging is a short position, not a reorganization of asset classes.
View OriginalReply0
MEVHunterLucky
· 01-08 19:42
It's that same "closed-loop feedback" trick again, hearing it so many times my ears are calloused. If it were really that magical, I would have been earning 100,000 a month long ago.
During the process of building a stablecoin liquidity pool, have you ever encountered such an awkward situation—holding three types of assets in your account: liquid staking certificates, trading mining tokens, and platform governance tokens, yet each operating independently? After a month, you either rely on staking certificates for fixed income, use mining tokens to seize new opportunities, or speculate on governance tokens when you’re bullish, but what’s the result? The annualized return of the liquidity pool remains stuck around 35%-40%, unable to break through even after adjustments, and during market fluctuations, you are forced to endure drawdown risks.
Actually, the root of the problem lies here—you’ve been treating these rights and interests as independent profit tools, never considering how to make them collaborate. The real strategy should be the other way around: the value of these three assets is not just about stacking yields, but about leveraging an ecosystem feedback mechanism to make their rights and interests’ effectiveness run through the entire operation chain of the liquidity pool. In other words, optimize your capital allocation with liquid staking certificates, strengthen risk hedging with mining tokens, and reverse the yield structure with governance tokens—ultimately forming a closed loop of "rights and interests empowering the liquidity pool, and the liquidity pool amplifying the value of rights and interests."
What are the benefits of this approach? First, it can break through the 35%-40% ceiling; second, it significantly enhances risk resistance under market volatility. It sounds complex, but step-by-step it’s actually very clear. Starting from diagnosing your current operational misconceptions, then detailing how the three types of rights and interests can feedback, how to implement the entire process, and how to respond to risks—this methodology dissects all the details and can be directly applied.