The maturity date is easy to understand. The redemption outcome is where things get interesting.
My initial assumption with @TermMax was that an FT represents a straightforward path to the debt token at maturity.
But that only describes the clean settlement case.
If liquidation finishes without fully recovering the loan, the remaining assets can become part of the redemption process through physical delivery. Instead of receiving one uniform asset, FT holders may receive a proportional share of the redemption pool, including underlying and leftover collateral tokens.
So an FT is not always just a fixed-token claim.
Its eventual composition can depend on how the underlying loan performed before the liquidation window ended.
That makes pre-maturity monitoring much more important.
The question I’d want answered is simple:
How transparent is the evolving redemption pool, and can an FT holder estimate their actual collateral exposure before maturity?
#TermMax @TermMax
$BCH
$PROM
$ONG
My initial assumption with @TermMax was that an FT represents a straightforward path to the debt token at maturity.
But that only describes the clean settlement case.
If liquidation finishes without fully recovering the loan, the remaining assets can become part of the redemption process through physical delivery. Instead of receiving one uniform asset, FT holders may receive a proportional share of the redemption pool, including underlying and leftover collateral tokens.
So an FT is not always just a fixed-token claim.
Its eventual composition can depend on how the underlying loan performed before the liquidation window ended.
That makes pre-maturity monitoring much more important.
The question I’d want answered is simple:
How transparent is the evolving redemption pool, and can an FT holder estimate their actual collateral exposure before maturity?
#TermMax @TermMax
$BCH
$PROM
$ONG