I recently noticed some movement related to @Bedrock , and it feels like there's more to unpack than just the surface-level partnership announcement.
The institutional trading firm Selini Capital has officially integrated with Cap, while Bedrock is currently one of the largest liquidity providers on the Cap platform, with a deployment scale reaching $183 million.
Meanwhile, the other participants include Amber Group, Flowdesk, and Susquehanna Crypto.
If you're familiar with the crypto market, you should know what these names represent.
Market making, quantitative trading, high-frequency trading—these are some of the most seasoned players in the industry.
So, I prefer to view this as:
Institutional capital is starting to explore acquiring BTC liquidity through an on-chain credit system.
This logic is quite different from many past DeFi projects.
A few years ago, everyone was chasing yields, with the core logic basically being:
Staking for mining
Liquidity incentives
Token subsidies
Most of the returns came from protocol releases, not actual business revenue.
But as the market has evolved, this model has become increasingly difficult to sustain long-term.
Bedrock's current exploration is different.
The focus is no longer on attracting deposits with high APYs but rather on trying to connect BTC assets to real institutional strategy needs.
The Selini Vault that's currently operational can be seen as a new attempt.
At the core, it uses a credit underwriting mechanism to control risk, while the upper layer is executed by professional institutions engaging in arbitrage, market making, and quantitative strategies.
Returns no longer fully rely on token incentives but come from profits generated by real market trades.
In other words:
On-chain users finally have a chance to indirectly engage with institutional-level capital strategies.
Of course, this doesn’t mean there are no risks.
I'm still monitoring a few issues:
* Will the vault's capacity maintain stable returns after expansion;
* How is institutional lending risk priced;
* To what extent can on-chain information disclosures be achieved;
* Will advanced products raise the participation threshold.
So my stance is:
I recognize this direction, but further validation is needed.
However, from a broader perspective, the signals being released are quite clear.
The competitive logic of BTCFi is changing.
In the past, it was all about who could offer the highest yields;
In the future, it may come down to who possesses a more mature credit system and who can connect with more real institutional capital.
And this might be the most significant change to watch in the next phase of BTCFi.
#bedrock $BR
The institutional trading firm Selini Capital has officially integrated with Cap, while Bedrock is currently one of the largest liquidity providers on the Cap platform, with a deployment scale reaching $183 million.
Meanwhile, the other participants include Amber Group, Flowdesk, and Susquehanna Crypto.
If you're familiar with the crypto market, you should know what these names represent.
Market making, quantitative trading, high-frequency trading—these are some of the most seasoned players in the industry.
So, I prefer to view this as:
Institutional capital is starting to explore acquiring BTC liquidity through an on-chain credit system.
This logic is quite different from many past DeFi projects.
A few years ago, everyone was chasing yields, with the core logic basically being:
Staking for mining
Liquidity incentives
Token subsidies
Most of the returns came from protocol releases, not actual business revenue.
But as the market has evolved, this model has become increasingly difficult to sustain long-term.
Bedrock's current exploration is different.
The focus is no longer on attracting deposits with high APYs but rather on trying to connect BTC assets to real institutional strategy needs.
The Selini Vault that's currently operational can be seen as a new attempt.
At the core, it uses a credit underwriting mechanism to control risk, while the upper layer is executed by professional institutions engaging in arbitrage, market making, and quantitative strategies.
Returns no longer fully rely on token incentives but come from profits generated by real market trades.
In other words:
On-chain users finally have a chance to indirectly engage with institutional-level capital strategies.
Of course, this doesn’t mean there are no risks.
I'm still monitoring a few issues:
* Will the vault's capacity maintain stable returns after expansion;
* How is institutional lending risk priced;
* To what extent can on-chain information disclosures be achieved;
* Will advanced products raise the participation threshold.
So my stance is:
I recognize this direction, but further validation is needed.
However, from a broader perspective, the signals being released are quite clear.
The competitive logic of BTCFi is changing.
In the past, it was all about who could offer the highest yields;
In the future, it may come down to who possesses a more mature credit system and who can connect with more real institutional capital.
And this might be the most significant change to watch in the next phase of BTCFi.
#bedrock $BR
