FG峰哥论币

When I looked at the data from @TermMax recently, my first instinct wasn’t to get excited over that TVL number—it was to dig in and see what’s hiding in the less noticeable corners.

First, let’s talk about TVL. The official figure says it’s over 90 million, while DeFiLlama reports about 31 million. Differences in methodology like this are completely normal. But if we’re talking about the people who actually put money in, what matters more to me is: does the pool I’m going into have enough depth? The issue with fixed-term products is that liquidity gets fragmented across different assets and different maturity dates. Even if the total pot is large, if I put in 50k or 100k, will the rate jump immediately? If the market moves, will slippage suddenly widen? And if I want to withdraw a large amount, can the order book handle it? Those are the truly life-or-death factors. Now they’ve added more variations like Dual Investment and Call/Put—product lines are richer, but the transparency at the execution level doesn’t seem to have kept up. Fixed interest rates solve the uncertainty around rates, but if exit costs are unstable, the risk is just wearing a different mask.

Next, let’s talk about Vault design. On the surface, it feels hassle-free: standardized shares, a Curator handling rebalancing, a Guardian acting as a backstop, and idle funds can go earn yield on other protocols. But “less manual work” doesn’t mean “less judgment.” Returns depend on the Curator’s skill. Withdrawals may need to queue, and if a physical settlement is triggered at maturity, it’s not impossible that you’ll be handed a pile of collateral directly. The “fixed income” shown on the page only makes the loan cash flows fixed—it doesn’t lock in the net value, time profile, and the final form.

Finally, let’s talk about future potential. V2 supports order placement across the entire market, and the Dashboard unifies multi-chain positions. Composable Base Yield also lets capital that’s waiting to be matched continue earning. And if Smart Unwind rolls out, this won’t be just lending anymore—it’ll look more like a bond market on-chain. But all of that is still on the way. So before TGE, the three things I most want to see are: real-world test data—slippage, depth, and exit cost under actual positions. That’s the confidence you need to dare to deploy a large position. #TermMax

$牛来 hits a new high, completely missed the sale!

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Research$DUSK During this time, I’ve been increasingly feeling that summarizing it with just the words “privacy chain” is a bit too narrow.

First, the positioning: when I first looked at @Dusk, I really noticed that attention was all on privacy. But once you dig deeper along the Dusk Trade, you find that what it truly wants to chew through is the whole tough block of issuing, trading, and settling regulated financial assets.

Next, the core issue: in a securities transaction, there are two parallel tracks—asset delivery on one side, and funds payment on the other. The hard part isn’t whether the trade can happen, but whether these two things can be coordinated to complete under the same set of rules. Dusk puts investor onboarding, trading, payment, and settlement into a single workflow, and the underlying layer relies on DuskDS for deterministic settlement. The official messaging also clearly says it supports DvP and atomic settlement. This leads to a very concrete question: if the securities display that the trade was executed, but the assets and funds are not actually delivered and settled, does that transaction count as finished? Viewed from this angle, the word “settlement” carries a different weight.

On the technical architecture, it’s fairly straightforward: DuskDS handles consensus and deterministic settlement; DuskVM runs native contracts (Rust/WASM); and DuskEVM is compatible with Solidity to make it easier for Ethereum developers to migrate. Further up the stack, Phoenix uses ZK for transaction privacy, Moonlight manages public accounts, and XSC handles compliance and permission control for confidential securities.

Then let’s talk about the current state and my concerns: recently, the DuskEVM testnet went live, and developers can deploy using Solidity and Hardhat directly—tooling reuse is definitely a good thing. But what I care about more is exactly how the privacy boundary is drawn. Under standard EVM semantics, contract storage is readable by default—so does privacy live at the settlement layer, or does it require developers to proactively invoke privacy modules? In institutional business, this cannot be ambiguous. It makes sense commercially: DuskEVM grows the number of developers, and DuskVM preserves native privacy. But for users, it adds one more decision point.

So what I’m paying attention to now isn’t how fast settlement is, but how both sides can stay consistent when assets and funds change at the same time. And also, how well the real network actually runs—these might be the ongoing questions worth asking once on-chain securities truly enter the financial market.

August 21st, #ALPHA Airdrop Announcement!

📅 Today’s Airdrop

Still zero. No surprise raid yesterday either—shouldn’t we get it scheduled today?

Alpha 24H Trading Competition Standings:

First place: DOS. Current price: 0.2314. 24-hour trading volume: 10.95M U. Down 8.34%. FDV: 231M U. Today’s limit orders filled: 1.04M; yesterday: 137M—completely cooled off. Total volume is 202M. 19 days left until it ends, and the rewards window still has 6 days left. In the front, 143 DOS are sitting there—roughly a small prize of about 33 U.

Second place: KII. Price: 0.0648. Trading volume: 83.58M U. Down 7.27%. FDV: 117M U. Today’s limit orders: 800K; yesterday: 273M—another massive drop. Total trading volume: 654M. 23 days left. Rewards are only 5 days remaining. 616 KII for roughly 40 U.

Third place: APR. Price: 0.1857. Volume: 2.37M. Down 5.6%. FDV: 186M U. Today’s limit orders: 67K; yesterday: 1.49M—still cold. Total volume: 24.9M. Rewards window has 13 hours left. 106 APR for roughly 19.7 U.

Fourth place: POWER has already ended. Price: 0.0923. Volume: 900K—actually up 3.58%. FDV: 92.34M U. Today’s limit orders: 624; yesterday: 19.68M—basically “zeroed out” with a sharp shrink in volume. Total volume: 427M. The 625 POWER rewards, about 57.7 U each, have already been settled.

Today’s Trading Suggestions:

GRVT has 8 days left, KII has 23 days left—do small rebuys of 300–500 U. The market feels a bit “rough” lately, so before you start, keep a close eye on the K-line charts—don’t go in stubbornly.

Also, about the Binance wallet: my invite code FFFAAA—if you haven’t used it yet, fill it in now to save 30% on fees. Whether you’re “hunting the dog” or刷 Alpha, the system credits automatically. Every cent you save is your survival capital. The specific steps are shown in the image. #空投大毛

$牛来 effective breakthrough 70 million in market cap. If you got in at the time when I first called the trade, you’d already be up 20x.

I’m not trying to say I’m awesome. Mainly, I want to say: don’t wait until after the coin launches an alpha on Binance before chasing—buy on-chain in advance. Binance Wallet is very smooth to use, and there’s also a trading fee discount. So you can buy on-chain, capture outsized returns, and also save on fees. Why not?

My invitation code is FFFAAA. Get 30% off trading fees. Whether you’re chasing Dog or trading Alpha, the system will credit it automatically—see the steps in the screenshot below. #牛市布局

Before DeFi lending in @TermMax , I only recognize USDC and ETH—everything else I won’t touch. It’s not that I don’t want to diversify; it’s just that I basically have no choice. I hold Ondo’s tokenized stock backed by NVIDIA (NVDA) and wanted to add a bit of leverage. I searched through mainstream protocols, but none of them would accept it.

It felt even more frustrating than missing out—my assets just sat there collecting dust while I could do nothing.

Until @TermMax launched on BNB Chain and supported using Ondo tokenized stocks as collateral, I finally moved this position into DeFi. Not for trading—directly as collateral to borrow liquidity.

Its logic is completely the opposite of what I’d seen before. Previously, you had to sell the stock first, convert it to tokens, and then use that as collateral. This one simply accepts the stock position. The loan is split into three parts: FT is a discounted bond—you buy it at a lower price, it’s redeemed at face value at maturity, and the difference is the fixed interest; XT is responsible for balancing—1FT + 1XT always equals 1 dollar; GT is an NFT that locks the collateral and the debt. When you deposit Ondo stocks, the protocol automatically packages them into GT, and when you sell FT you receive USDC. Lenders buy FT to earn the interest, while I use the borrowed funds.

Interest rates are set via range order pricing—like Uniswap V3’s range orders. When both sides’ orders match on the order book, the interest rate gets locked.

But once I calm down and think about it, the real thing to watch isn’t just a few extra percentage points on interest. Each market clearly states the maturity date, MLTV, and LLTV. When the interest rate is成交, it’s locked—but the collateral price is still moving. If the LTV hits the LLTV, liquidation happens as usual. If you don’t repay at maturity, there’s also a two-hour grace window, and there’s a 10% penalty on the debt. On the lender’s side, the fixed yield isn’t paid unconditionally—if liquidation fails, it could trigger physical delivery, and what you receive may not be the asset you expected.

Now when I evaluate a position, I have to keep three sets of books: fixed financing costs, the ongoing collateral safety buffer, and the repayment liquidity before maturity. Fixed interest rates only remove interest-rate drift—price volatility, liquidation penalties, and term mismatches are still all there.

Treating “costs being predictable” as “outcomes being guaranteed” means you end up overlooking the page where the most concentrated risk lives. #TermMax

Damn, my $牛来 order got sold. I just put it up casually at the time, and I didn’t expect it could sell at this price.

$牛来 Awesome!

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Last night, I chatted idly with Old Zhou, and we talked about @Dusk’s dual-virtual-machine architecture. He said, “Piecrust runs privacy contracts, and DuskEVM is compatible with Solidity.” I was skeptical, but when I got home I went through the whitepaper, staring at that architecture diagram for a long time.

Honestly, it doesn’t follow the pure-EVM bandwagon—that part is pretty distinctive. Piecrust is a native ZK virtual machine written in Rust and WASM; from the instruction set to the state model, everything revolves around verifiable computation. DuskEVM, on the other hand, provides an entry point for Solidity, so existing Ethereum contracts can be migrated at low cost. If you’ve written privacy contracts before, you’d understand why this step is indeed earlier than many projects.

But on closer inspection, you have to stay calm. Piecrust uses the Poseidon hash; verification can be compressed down to the millisecond level. Yet the audit reports openly spell out sandbox aliases, deserialization, and overflow risks. Even Dusk admits that Piecrust doesn’t “understand” zero-knowledge deeply enough yet—it needs the Rusk VM to make up for it. DuskEVM compatibility is definitely compelling, but the official documentation is very blunt: natively it only supports public transactions; privacy features have to go through the Hedger, and Hedger is still in Alpha. The mainnet is up, but full privacy will have to wait.

I also looked into the Kadcast network layer. It’s not just “adding bandwidth”; it computes routing paths based on XOR distance. Nodes maintain routing buckets and distribute them level by level, using less bandwidth than Gossip. Regular stakers don’t need dedicated lines to participate, but once practical issues like routing-table freshness and node uptime/offline come into play, performance is likely to be discounted.

I think the real hurdle for institutions going on-chain isn’t TPS—it’s that pair of eyes on the public ledger. Traditional finance can’t run its cards in the open. Dusk separates verification from disclosure by using ZK and homomorphic encryption: nodes can confirm that the rules are followed, but they can’t see the specific path or identity. This kind of “controlled visibility” really aligns with institutional needs. After RWA, the game probably won’t be about who gets assets on-chain first, but who can keep institutions confident enough to retain liquidity. What $DUSK is anchored to, is exactly this long-term proposition.

August 20th, #ALPHA Airdrop announcement!

📅 Today’s airdrop

No announcement for now. There’s still a bit left this week—later on, see whether there’s a surprise raid in the afternoon.

Binance Alpha 24H Trading Competition

1st place: KII. 24-hour trading volume is over 83.70 million. The price is hovering around 0.07, up 1.18%. Total competition volume so far: 380 million. Reward: 616 KII, roughly 43U.

2nd place: DOS. Price 0.25. Up 5.31% in 24H. Trading volume: 20.16 million. Total competition volume: over 65 million, with 7 days remaining.

3rd place: POWER. Total competition volume: 400 million. Reward: 625 POWER, roughly 55U. Price: 0.0887, up 1.81%, with 12 hours remaining.

4th place: APR. Volume 1.81 million, down 0.63%. Price: 0.195. Total competition volume: 23.34 million, with 2 days remaining.

Today’s trading suggestions:

GRVT: 9 days remaining. Do small buys in multiple batches (300–500U). But this coin has been a bit tricky lately—before you start, make sure you take a careful look at the K-line. Don’t go in headstrong and rush.

Lastly, Binance Wallet: My referral code FFFAAA hasn’t been used yet—if you haven’t filled it in, do it now to save 30% on trading fees. Whether you’re “hitting dogs” or farming Alpha, the system credits it automatically. Every saved dollar is your survival capital. The exact steps are shown in the image. #空投大毛

$BTC This powerful stretching turns out to be because of this?

On the 25th of #termmax @TermMax 8, TermMax is finally set to go live officially. Brothers who’ve been doing tasks along the way—remember to set your alarms.

Honestly, I used to be pretty skeptical about fixed-rate lending. The old-timers in the circle all know this—we’re all used to floating-rate setups, and at most we use forward contracts to hedge once in a while. Who would really lock money into a fixed interest rate? So when @TermMax first started to show up, I even made a bet with a friend that this project would pivot to floating rates within six months. Turns out I got slapped a bit. Then I recently looked at the data, and it pretty much froze me: daily active addresses are steady around 4,000, and on Token Terminal its ranking even surpasses Morpho. Back in March, it surged to second place—right behind Aave. The official roadmap says TVL passed 100 million in May, and I checked DeFiLlama as a quick sanity check, and real-time it’s only around 32 million. Those numbers don’t match, which makes me a little uneasy—but with the user base and the momentum it has, I can’t really argue.

At its core, this is a lending AMM. It basically takes Uniswap V3’s design and tweaks it: one debt position is split into three parts. FT is like a zero-coupon bond—you buy it at a discount, redeem for face value at maturity, and the interest is locked in end to end. XT is just the “difference filler”: 1 FT plus 1 XT always equals 1 debt token, and XT goes to zero at maturity. GT is the most interesting—it’s directly structured as an NFT, bundling collateral and debt together, making one-click leverage possible. Borrowers mint FT by locking collateral and sell it for funds. Lenders buy FT to receive the fixed interest. The interest rate is determined purely by range orders matching on the market—so the market calls the shots.

Liquidations are pretty straightforward too: if LTV exceeds the limit or it isn’t repaid at maturity, you get a two-hour window. The liquidator takes a 5% reward, and the borrower gets hit with a 10% penalty. If nobody intervenes, it settles via physical delivery: the collateral is transferred directly to the lender.

What surprised me most is that it even supports Ondo’s tokenized stock setup as collateral. I used to hold an NVDA position and wanted to add a bit of leverage—Aave and Morpho wouldn’t accept it, so I could only stare blankly. Now you can deposit it directly and borrow against it to unlock liquidity. The trust layer is a little longer than fully on-chain assets, but at least the door has been opened.

Now we just wait for the TGE, and see whether FT, XT, and GT can all build up their depth at the same time. If trading can be genuinely smooth, then maybe this fixed-rate lane really can run and make a name for itself.

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk After staying up late and scrolling on Twitter, I saw @Dusk. To be honest, I’ve stepped into multiple traps in the privacy public chain space—too many projects in the early rounds used privacy as a gimmick, and in the end they all turned into empty shells. But $DUSK ’s entry point made me take a closer look.

Instead of chasing after the usual things like wrapping US Treasuries and BTC into standardized assets, it targets non-standard instruments like private bond offerings and supply-chain receivables—real demand from institutions that don’t want the counterparty to keep an eye on their large positions. Government bonds rely on transparent pricing premiums; forcing privacy in is redundant. With non-standard assets, pricing and strategy are the real business secrets—without privacy, institutions wouldn’t dare to put them on-chain.

On the technical side, the Hedger module uses zero-knowledge proofs for default privacy plus permissioned disclosure. The direction aligns well with the EU’s MiCA. DuskEVM is directly compatible with Solidity, so developers don’t need to rewrite everything, making cold-start much friendlier. NPEX used it to raise tokenized securities financing of €300 million; Quantoz issued the EURQ stablecoin. The scale may be small, but at least there’s real business running—not just telling a story.

I checked their GitHub, and the Phoenix note refactor in April was pretty interesting: they split the spend circuit into two separate proofs. They trade a bit of gas for graded visibility. The public panel only shows the fee; the amount and payee are hashed, so outsiders can’t tell who transferred how much. The official wallet uses a client-derived view key to reconstruct transaction history locally—no server, no backdoor.

This logic is called “controllable but not transparent”: audit rights stay with the holder. If you want to show someone, you can give them the view key; if you don’t, no one can pry it open. It fits on-chain securities, dark pool–type scenarios. But the current reality is that it pleases neither side—compliance thinks it’s not transparent enough, while pure privacy advocates think it’s overkill.

Then look at Zedger: it embeds KYC, investor eligibility, and transfer restrictions directly into the contract, and uses a Sparse Merkle-Segment Trie stored in private accounts. Compliance is automatically blocked before the transaction, not handled by after-the-fact manual work. The XSC standard targets dividends and voting from tokenized bonds and fund assets. What it truly wants to solve is turning regulatory rules into default on-chain capabilities, not an external add-on.

So far, at least #dusk hasn’t copied a standard answer sheet, and it hasn’t left behind a centralized backdoor either. Working with the licensed Dutch entity NPEX to build DuskTrade is the direction I’ll be watching next. Whether it’s worth boarding is another question—but at least this time the logic holds together, not blind guessing.

August 19th: #ALPHA AIRDROP announcement!

📅 Today’s Airdrop

Currently it’s showing zero. So far this week, none have been scheduled—normally today should have been arranged.

Alpha 24H Trading Contest data:

1st place DOS, price 0.2376, up 7.55% in 24 hours, total trading volume has reached 73.6 billion, and the reward pool has 13 hours left.

2nd KII, price 0.0687, down 4.69%, total trading volume around 95.4 million, and 7 days left.

3rd POWER, price 0.0872, slightly up 1.33%, total trading volume 377 million, and 2 days left.

4th APR, price 0.2021, up 9.87%, total trading volume 22.52 million, and 3 days left.

5th QUID, price 0.0649, down 2.91%, total trading volume 1.21 million, and 13 hours left.

Today’s operation recommendation: (Token points ×4 for tokens launching within 30 days)

Recommended approach: rack up points via exchange limit orders—GRVT has 10 days left.

As usual, here’s the Binance Wallet reminder: my invite code FFFAAA—if you haven’t used it yet, fill it in now to save 30% on trading fees. Whether you’re farming Dogs or farming Alpha, the system will automatically credit it. Every saved cent is your survival capital. The specific steps are shown in the image.#空投大毛

$牛来 How come Binance listing #alpha went down instead? What’s going on? Now going to Alpha is a negative?

I don’t believe it!

#termmax Yesterday I kept flipping through and rereading the whitepaper for @TermMax several times. The more I read, the more I feel this project has something real.

Most protocols explain settlement, then stop right at the step where the auction liquidates the collateral—like the story is over there. But TermMax takes one more step, and it’s that step that makes me feel it’s genuinely taking fixed income seriously.

Fixed-term lending has a fatal weakness: what if the borrower doesn’t repay at maturity? A floating pool can slowly digest bad debt over time, but a fixed-term pool can’t—by that day, there must be an explanation.

TermMax’s idea is this: first, let the liquidator handle things normally—sell the collateral to repay. If the window closes and there’s still a shortfall, then it goes to Physical Delivery: the remaining underlying assets and collateral in the pool are directly distributed to holders according to their FT holdings.

So what does that mean? You might have expected to get stablecoins back, but instead you could end up bringing home a pile of collateral in physical form. The rules are written in advance: how much you get, and how it’s split by share—no room to negotiate.

Honestly, I’m more willing to buy into this than chasing an extra one or two percentage points in yield. Yield is a fair-weather number; distribution rules are what save you in a rainy day.

What surprised me even more is that it recently launched tokenized stock collateral on BNB Chain—bringing Ondo’s securities in as compliant collateral. RWA has been shouting for three years, and most projects are still stuck at whether they can even be deployed on-chain. TermMax, however, jumped straight to being on-chain and earning yield, and also enabling borrowing. Its fixed-term structure originally supports assets like Pendle, but now stock tokens can be slotted in as well. The liquidation engine and pricing curves are apparently reusable.

The token design is also pretty clean: FT is a zero-coupon bond. Lenders buy at a discount and redeem at face value at maturity. XT is a yield token: borrowers sell it to obtain liquidity, and the cost is locked in directly. GT is a leveraged NFT—one click handles collateral and debt, skipping the gas costs of repetitive looping operations. FT + XT physically separate principal and interest, and even the interest rate itself becomes a tradable asset.

Compared with Pendle, it didn’t go down the RWA-collateral borrowing route. Traditional RWA protocols often stop at issuance and custody. TermMax lands right on the intersection: the window period is real but narrow. As for risks—compliance and centralized trust for custody are unavoidable, and the off-chain assets mean the legal relationships have to be monitored continuously. But for me, transparency of the mechanism is the real confidence that fixed income can go the distance.

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk The first time I seriously read @Dusk’s documentation, I got stuck on the dual-track design for a long time.

At the time, I had one thought in my head: if it’s a privacy-focused public chain, why build two privacy schemes? Zedger uses UTXO, Hedger uses EVM—doesn’t that just make things harder for itself? Later, after talking with a friend for an afternoon, I realized this wasn’t redundancy at all; it was clearly intentional.

Zedger is the kind of route where things disappear completely: addresses and amounts are all hidden, and outsiders can only see that a transaction happened; nothing else can be learned. As for Hedger, transaction details are masked from the public, but regulators can decrypt and inspect them with compliance authorization. Thinking about it carefully, it makes sense: complete anonymity scares institutions away, while something that is only auditable makes ordinary users feel it’s boring. Dusk simply offers two paths: if you want absolute privacy, use Zedger; if you want to do DeFi and stay compliant, use Hedger.

Behind this is actually the nature of the ledger model. UTXO is naturally good at hiding things, but trying to build DeFi on it can drive you crazy; EVM is convenient for composable applications, but it’s hard to do real anonymity well. Dusk basically takes the strengths of both: native assets go into the private room, securities go into the glass room, and each follows its own path.

The network layer is also pretty interesting: instead of the usual Gossip broadcast, it uses a structured overlay like Kadcast. Message propagation is more organized, bandwidth pressure is lower, and latency is steadier. This is crucial for Succinct Attestation, where proposal, validation, and confirmation committees have to complete their steps in sequence. If the network becomes unstable, even fast consensus gets dragged down. For securities settlement, average speed is not the only thing that matters; confirmation time in extreme cases is the real bottleneck.

But to be honest, the product layer is still somewhat slow at the moment. Node overhead is not high, so it is still relatively friendly to small and medium validators. Privacy transfers are basically not readable in the browser, and most operations still require messing around in the command line. The basic SDK examples can run, but the gap in permission management and selective disclosure is still quite obvious. Token value capture still revolves around staking and fees, and the identity transfer module is not fully mature yet.

Still, I do recognize the idea of directly baking compliance into the privacy layer; it can withstand regulation better than pure anonymity. The dual-track privacy design plus the structured network is an architecture with foresight, but real deployment still depends on whether assets can move smoothly between the two schemes after mainnet goes live, and whether the tools can be fully freed from the command line.

August 18th, #ALPHA Airdrop Announcement!

📅 Today’s Airdrop
Currently at zero. There was no surprise airdrop yesterday either. Later, let’s see if one happens today!

Alpha 24H Trading Contest Rankings:

1st place: GRVT, current price 0.2839. 24-hour trading volume is just over 780k. Up 0.1%. FDV is roughly 284 million. Today, limit orders accounted for $38.22M; compared to yesterday’s $107M, that’s basically halved, then halved again. Since trading started from the evening of the 11th until now, total trading has exceeded $4.2B. Rewards: 160 GRVT, which is about 45U.

2nd place: DOS, price 0.2218. Trading volume is over 66M. Price down 3.8%. FDV 220 million. Today, limit orders are 770k, with total volume of 650M. Rewards: 143 DOS, about 31U.

3rd place: APR, 0.1849. Trading volume 8.3M. Down 2.78%. FDV 185 million. Today, limit orders are 68k; total成交/volume is only 21M so far. Rewards: 106 APR, about 19.6U.

4th place: POWER, 0.0861. Trading volume 970k. It’s up 2.32% against the trend. FDV 86.14M. Today’s limit orders: 32k. Yesterday: 76.33M. Total trading: 313M so far. Rewards: 625 POWER, about 53.8U.

5th place: QUID, 0.0665. Trading volume 13M. Down 8.31%. FDV 66.46M. Today’s limit orders: 1,882. Yesterday there were 78k. Total trading: 1.11M. Rewards: 370 QUID, about 24.6U.

Today’s operation suggestions: (For those launched within 30 days, points ×4)

For the GRVT score-farming limit orders: there are 11 days left, 200–500U.

Lastly, about the Binance wallet: my invitation code FFFAAA hasn’t been used yet—if you haven’t filled it in, do it now to save 30% on fees. Whether you’re farming dogs or farming Alpha, it will credit automatically—every saved dollar is your survival stake. The specific steps are shown in the image. #空投大毛

$SNDKB SanDisk has gone crazy, I sold it off again!

#termmax @TermMax #TermMax To be honest, I noticed @TermMax at first while I was looking at Ondo’s RWA sector—I clicked in on a whim and found that this protocol turns fixed-rate borrowing and lending into a standalone product. In the past, using Aave or Compound meant floating rates were like a roller coaster: whenever the market went haywire, your borrowing costs could surprise you, and the returns for suppliers would jump around just as wildly. TermMax’s logic is simple: when you borrow, the interest rate is locked; when you supply, the yield is calculated upfront, and you know exactly how much you’ll receive at maturity. For traders who need to manage financing costs, or anyone with long-term allocation needs, this kind of certainty is a lot less stressful.

On the functionality side, it’s not thin either. Modules like Borrow, Lend, Leverage, and Vault can be combined together—effectively consolidating complex fixed-income strategies into one operational interface. Recently, it also expanded the scope of collateral to include Ondo’s tokenized securities, bridging the gap between RWAs and fixed rates. Currently, TVL is about $34 million, and it has been gradually rising over the past month.

That said, I’m also thinking about one question: protocol fees compared to TVL seem a bit low. Fixed rates give users certainty, so the protocol’s room to earn from the spread naturally gets narrower. Next, we’ll need to see whether real usage can support revenue—otherwise relying on narrative alone won’t get you very far.

$TMX’s TGE is on the 25th of this month, and the Booster activity on Binance is also underway, with a sizable rewards pool. I’ll keep watching key metrics like TVL, trading volume, and product iteration to see whether the token can ultimately capture value. Fixed-rate lending is a genuine demand area in DeFi, and I think it’s worth observing for a while longer.