What I find strange about #TermMax ’s fixed-rate design is that one of its tokens is doing exactly what most token holders would normally hate to see: moving toward zero.

But with XT, that is not a failure. It is part of the structure.

Each fixed-rate market links FT and XT so that 1 FT+1 XT equals 1 debt token. FT represents the side that eventually reaches its redemption value, while XT is the complementary piece whose value disappears at maturity.

I think that makes XT harder to judge than it first looks.
Normally, when I look at a token, I ask what could keep demand alive over time. XT almost reverses that question. Its endpoint is already known, so the important part is everything that happens before it gets there: how traders value the remaining time, whether liquidity stays deep enough, and what the token can still be used for as maturity gets closer.

That also makes TermMax’s fixed yield look a little different to me.

The predictable side of the system is being created alongside something deliberately temporary. I like the logic because the 2 pieces have very different jobs, but it also means XT cannot really be judged with the same mindset as an ordinary token.

For me the real test is not whether XT eventually reaches zero. It is whether the market can keep pricing its remaining usefulness sensibly on the way there. @TermMax #TermMax .

👉XT’s path to zero is…