That's the angle I keep returning to with FT and XT on #TermMax. The interesting part was never that one debt token becomes two. It's that two people can look at the same fixed rate position and want opposite things from it.

Splitting a risk is easy on paper. The hard part is whether anyone still wants to hold both halves when things get uncomfortable.

Someone underwriting a fixed cost wants the maturity side known outcome known date no surprises. Someone taking a view on rates before that date wants the other side and accepts the uncertainty that comes with it. The split lets each of them hold only the piece they actually wanted.

Which works cleanly while liquidity is healthy.

The question I'd put next to the design is what happens when it isn't. Volatility rises bids get thin and the two legs stop being equally easy to exit. Does the certainty leg still clear near fair value? Does the variable leg still find a buyer at all, or does the spread quietly do the rejecting?

Separation is a design property. Tradability is a market property. They're not the same thing, and stress is what tells them apart.

So the test isn't whether the risks can be split. It's whether both halves still have a market on the day people most want out of one of them.
@TermMax #TermMax
#termmax @TermMax
What tests FT & XT most?