#termmax had worked in a bank’s asset-and-liability department on reporting, and people like that have a physical reaction to the two words “floating.” Not because floating is definitely more expensive—but because floating can’t be entered into the budget. If a single number can’t be put into next quarter’s statements, in management accounting it is effectively non-existent.
That’s what kept coming back to me when I looked at @TermMax .
For on-chain lending and borrowing, for a long time it has only offered one type of liability: the interest rate jumps with utilization, with no cap and no commitment. This kind of liability is entirely sufficient for traders—they live in minute-by-minute timeframes. But for any entity that needs to do quarterly planning, it can’t be recognized on the books. $SPCXB
Fixed interest rates solve exactly this. When you borrow, the cost is locked in; the maturity date is clear; cash flows can be scheduled in advance onto the calendar. In traditional finance, this is called asset-liability matching—and on-chain, for the first time, it becomes executable.
But you need to state the trade-offs clearly. $SNDKB
First, certainty has a price. Most of the time, the market charges a premium for “predictability.” Fixed rates are usually not the cheapest option—they’re the most computable one. Treat it as a money-saving tool, and you’ll be disappointed.
Second, reinvestment risk hasn’t disappeared. On the maturity date, you get your principal back—but nobody guarantees what the interest rate for the next period will be. Fixed rates eliminate uncertainty during the holding period, not uncertainty across the entire time axis.
Third, rollovers require process. At maturity, you must make a decision. That action needs someone accountable, a time window, and a documented plan for what happens if it fails. It adds operational burden—it doesn’t happen automatically.
So what TermMax truly sells is not a lower cost, but a cost you can actually write into the statements. The buyers of these two things are not the same group of people.
Let me ask one question: if you calculate the total cost of two schemes and they turn out to be the same—one predictable and one not—how much would you pay for “easier to calculate”?
#TermMax @TermMax
That’s what kept coming back to me when I looked at @TermMax .
For on-chain lending and borrowing, for a long time it has only offered one type of liability: the interest rate jumps with utilization, with no cap and no commitment. This kind of liability is entirely sufficient for traders—they live in minute-by-minute timeframes. But for any entity that needs to do quarterly planning, it can’t be recognized on the books. $SPCXB
Fixed interest rates solve exactly this. When you borrow, the cost is locked in; the maturity date is clear; cash flows can be scheduled in advance onto the calendar. In traditional finance, this is called asset-liability matching—and on-chain, for the first time, it becomes executable.
But you need to state the trade-offs clearly. $SNDKB
First, certainty has a price. Most of the time, the market charges a premium for “predictability.” Fixed rates are usually not the cheapest option—they’re the most computable one. Treat it as a money-saving tool, and you’ll be disappointed.
Second, reinvestment risk hasn’t disappeared. On the maturity date, you get your principal back—but nobody guarantees what the interest rate for the next period will be. Fixed rates eliminate uncertainty during the holding period, not uncertainty across the entire time axis.
Third, rollovers require process. At maturity, you must make a decision. That action needs someone accountable, a time window, and a documented plan for what happens if it fails. It adds operational burden—it doesn’t happen automatically.
So what TermMax truly sells is not a lower cost, but a cost you can actually write into the statements. The buyers of these two things are not the same group of people.
Let me ask one question: if you calculate the total cost of two schemes and they turn out to be the same—one predictable and one not—how much would you pay for “easier to calculate”?
#TermMax @TermMax
可预测值不值得溢价
50%
我的负债能入表吗
50%
展期流程谁来负责
0%
2 votes • Voting closed