One thing about TermMax caught my attention: it doesn't treat a debt position as one simple asset.
Its design splits the position into two pieces: FT (Fixed-rate Token) and XT (Interest Obligation Token).
FT represents the fixed-income side of the position, while XT represents the interest obligation. Together, 1 FT + 1 XT = 1 debt token throughout the position's life.
I find this interesting because it separates two parts of lending that are normally bundled together.
It also creates different ways to interact with the same underlying debt exposure. FT can behave like a zero-coupon bond, while XT carries the interest-rate exposure.
And then there's GT, TermMax's Gearing Token, which packages a leveraged strategy into an NFT instead of making users manage every step manually.
That's a different way of thinking about DeFi lending: not just borrowing and lending, but breaking financial exposure into components that can be managed separately.
Whether that design can create deeper and more useful markets is the part I'm watching.
#termmax @TermMax
Its design splits the position into two pieces: FT (Fixed-rate Token) and XT (Interest Obligation Token).
FT represents the fixed-income side of the position, while XT represents the interest obligation. Together, 1 FT + 1 XT = 1 debt token throughout the position's life.
I find this interesting because it separates two parts of lending that are normally bundled together.
It also creates different ways to interact with the same underlying debt exposure. FT can behave like a zero-coupon bond, while XT carries the interest-rate exposure.
And then there's GT, TermMax's Gearing Token, which packages a leveraged strategy into an NFT instead of making users manage every step manually.
That's a different way of thinking about DeFi lending: not just borrowing and lending, but breaking financial exposure into components that can be managed separately.
Whether that design can create deeper and more useful markets is the part I'm watching.
#termmax @TermMax