#termmax @TermMax I initially read TermMax’s user roles as a simple borrower-versus-lender setup.
Then I reached the Two-Way Range Order Setter.
One order can quote both sides of the same fixed-rate market using separate borrowing and lending curves. In the V2 contracts, the maker can configure those curves and prices instead of accepting a rate chosen by the protocol.
That changes how I see @TermMax .
The fixed rate is not one universal number displayed by a lending pool. It is formed through maturity-specific liquidity provided at different rates and trade sizes.
A two-way maker can potentially capture the spread between both curves. But that spread is not free yield.
If borrowing demand dominates, the order can become increasingly exposed to one side. If lending demand dominates, its inventory shifts the other way. Profit therefore depends on where the curves are placed, how flow arrives and whether the maker can reprice before the market moves.
MLTV protects the loan with collateral. It does not protect a poorly positioned curve from asymmetric order flow.
So the number I would watch is not only the quoted APY.
I would watch how much usable depth exists on both sides of each maturity and how quickly makers adjust when that balance changes.
TermMax looks less like a fixed-rate lending pool here and more like an onchain interest-rate market. $TMX
Then I reached the Two-Way Range Order Setter.
One order can quote both sides of the same fixed-rate market using separate borrowing and lending curves. In the V2 contracts, the maker can configure those curves and prices instead of accepting a rate chosen by the protocol.
That changes how I see @TermMax .
The fixed rate is not one universal number displayed by a lending pool. It is formed through maturity-specific liquidity provided at different rates and trade sizes.
A two-way maker can potentially capture the spread between both curves. But that spread is not free yield.
If borrowing demand dominates, the order can become increasingly exposed to one side. If lending demand dominates, its inventory shifts the other way. Profit therefore depends on where the curves are placed, how flow arrives and whether the maker can reprice before the market moves.
MLTV protects the loan with collateral. It does not protect a poorly positioned curve from asymmetric order flow.
So the number I would watch is not only the quoted APY.
I would watch how much usable depth exists on both sides of each maturity and how quickly makers adjust when that balance changes.
TermMax looks less like a fixed-rate lending pool here and more like an onchain interest-rate market. $TMX