Three TermMax curators can price the same market differently, and that’s actually the part I find more interesting than any single quote.
Say Curator A is offering 8.2% for a $2M market, Curator B is at 8.6% for $1.5M, and Curator C is at 9.0% for $500K.
Looking at only the best rate makes the market look simple.
But aggregated depth tells a different story.
You’re not really choosing between 8.2%, 8.6%, and 9.0%. You’re looking at how much capital is available across those prices and maturities.
If I need $3M, the 8.2% quote alone doesn’t solve it. I may have to consume depth from multiple curators, pushing the effective rate closer to the higher-priced liquidity.
That’s where I think TermMax gets more interesting to watch.
The headline rate can look attractive while the actual executable size is much smaller.
I’d rather see $4M of usable depth around 8.5% than a $1M quote at 8.2% sitting on top of a thin market.
It also creates a small question for curators. If three of them keep pricing the same market within 20–30 bps, aggregated liquidity becomes much more useful. If spreads stay wide, users may end up paying for fragmentation without noticing it…

What matters more when comparing TermMax liquidity?

@TermMax #TermMax