I can only say that DeFi, as the closest track to money in the entire crypto world, frequently encountering such problems is truly ridiculous!

If you put 100 million dollars on the chain, according to the on-chain security interest rate of about 3%-5%, you would earn 3–5 million dollars in interest in a year.

Theoretically, if there is one accident at the level of KelpDao, the gains over the years would be directly wiped out, and you might not even get back the principal.

What's even more absurd is that funds are still accepting this risk model!

Now the total value locked (TVL) in DeFi has panic-evaporated nearly 10 billion, and for the assets entering, it's time to reflect deeply and start over.

Many lending protocols talk about expansion but what they are actually doing is underwriting the quality of upstream assets, effectively continuously incorporating external risks.

Let's look at a few straightforward data comparisons —

Aave: supports nearly 50 types of collateral assets, mixing long tails, wrapping, and stablecoins together;

Spark: so far, only supports about 7 core assets.

This January, @sparkdotfi suspended or equivalently risk-managed assets like rsETH, which had low utilization rates and high tail risks — either they were deprecated or had an LTV close to 0% / isolation mode, which is why they were not affected this time.

No wonder Sun Ge @justinsuntron urgently withdrew 125 million dollars of $ETH to Spark;

If I were a whale, I would definitely stay away from flashy things, reducing variables, reducing scenarios, and reducing uncertainty!

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。