As the market has progressed to this point, Azou has rarely viewed Lorenzo as 'a BTC staking project' anymore; it resembles a new type of 'asset management company' that blends family offices, hedge funds, and on-chain infrastructure. When you open the official website, what greets you is not the typical DeFi aesthetic, but terms like 'Institutional-Grade On-Chain Asset Management' and 'AI x Blockchain', positioning itself directly as an institutional-level on-chain asset management platform. This self-positioning has far exceeded the scope of ordinary LSD or lending protocols.
First, clarify the current system, then discuss what the rule changes mean for users. The underlying structure of Lorenzo actually consists of two main lines nested within each other: one revolves around the BTC liquidity layer and the other around the OTF (On-Chain Traded Fund) strategy layer. The former uses assets like stBTC and enzoBTC to transform the originally static BTC into 'tickets' that can circulate in multi-chain DeFi and aggregate yields; the latter moves multi-strategy funds from traditional finance onto the chain through OTF, using tokenization to carry different yield sources like RWA, quantitative trading, and DeFi combinations. To put it simply, it is 'using BANK as a fulcrum to package cash flows from both ends of BTC and stablecoins into a programmable fund structure'.
Many people's understanding of stBTC still lingers on the 'LST side', but the recent official statements have actually positioned it as the core entry point for the 'Bitcoin Liquidity Layer'. stBTC is an LST with yield attributes; it takes yield both from Lorenzo itself and from Babylon's BTC staking, while maintaining liquidity across 15+ chains. This means BTC is no longer just collateral on a specific chain; it participates in various strategies across a whole multi-chain network in the form of unified tickets. For users, the real change is: you do not need to repeatedly handle the BTC gateway issue on each chain; as long as you hold stBTC or enzoBTC, you can collateralize loans, do LP, or participate in more complex vaults across different protocols and chains. It abstracts the question of 'how to move BTC around', leaving you with the question of 'what risk curve are you willing to take and which strategy combination do you choose'.
Another severely underestimated module is the USD1+ OTF line. Many people only see it as 'stablecoin wealth management', but if you look at the official explanations and those from several exchanges, you'll find it is actually a standardized multi-strategy fund, only the issuing and accounting methods have become smart contracts. The design of USD1+ is a typical 'three-tier yield structure': part comes from RWA yields, such as tokenizing low-risk assets like U.S. Treasuries through partners; part comes from quantitative trading strategies in CeFi, such as arbitrage and trend following; and part comes from native yields like liquidity mining and lending interest on the DeFi side. These things were originally only seen in private fund and family office product brochures; they have now equivalently become a cash flow logic behind a token, and through on-chain net value, Rebase mechanisms, or value accumulation-type tokens like sUSD1+, transparently reflect yields in user balances. For stablecoin holders, what you receive is not just an APY figure, but a real, auditable, and traceable strategy combination.
The place where rule changes truly affect user decisions lies in 'how accounts are recorded and how rewards are distributed'. In the old Lorenzo era, many gameplay elements revolved around BTC pre-staking activities, phased cap plans, and one-time airdrops—typical DeFi incentive methods; but now if you look at the BANK airdrop guidelines and the explanation of Points & Yield, you can clearly sense that the logic has changed—the project has begun to emphasize 'identity binding' and 'behavior quality'. For example, the Airdrop Guide clearly requires users to first select an account type (BTC / EVM / Sui), then bind an EVM receiving address, and this binding action will become the basis for your subsequent rights calculations. The practical impact on users is that the approach of multiple wallets per person and chaotic chain hopping for points has been systematically weakened; you must seriously consider: which address represents your 'main identity' in the Lorenzo ecosystem? Are you participating as a BTC native player, EVM DeFi player, or Sui ecosystem player? Once bound, airdrops, points, and task rewards will be calculated around this main line.
In terms of the points system, Lorenzo is also migrating from a 'pure TVL orientation' to a 'behavior orientation'. The Points & Yield article emphasizes that stBTC, as the official LPT, will become the core anchor for scoring and reward distribution, with points being allocated more around real staking and actual usage behavior rather than a temporary spike in TVL. Adding to this are the activity details they announced on X, such as addresses completing designated tasks can earn fixed points at once, but each wallet can only claim once; these measures continuously reduce the rewards for 'script bots' and elevate the weight of 'long-term participants' and 'real users'. For regular users, the rule signal is very clear: rather than hopping between wallets and short-term volume, it is better to select a main battlefield, truly integrate BTC or stablecoins into the protocol, and continuously participate in OTF, vault, and multi-chain DeFi expansions. This way, the long-term points and governance weight you earn may actually be more substantial.
Many people mention Lorenzo's 'user acquisition' and think of the 'double invitation code mechanism'. This mechanism has actually been online for a year: BTC addresses and EVM addresses can generate independent invitation codes without affecting each other. The invitation logic of traditional products often forces users to complete operations on a specific chain, while Lorenzo's adjustment essentially acknowledges users' multiple identities—you can be a native DeFi player on-chain or an old miner only active on the Bitcoin mainnet; both communities have independent paths for expansion. For Azu, who has friends in different circles, this design is particularly useful: it lets friends who are used to Metamask enter liquidity staking and OTF through the EVM invitation code, while using the BTC invitation code to persuade native BTC players to lock a portion of their positions in Babylon for yield distribution through Lorenzo. This is not just a matter of 'giving a few more codes' but expands the project's social graph into a more authentic relationship network.
Revisiting security and underlying structures. The reason Lorenzo can carry the label of 'BTC Liquidity Layer' in narrative terms is that it does not simply treat BTC as collateral but deeply integrates with BTC staking infrastructure like Babylon. The model of Babylon achieves non-custodial BTC staking through Taproot UTXO time locks, allowing BTC to provide economic security to PoS networks without needing to be directly controlled by custodians. In a sense, it binds BTC and modern PoS reward mechanisms together in a very 'Bitcoin fundamentalist' way. Lorenzo plays the role of an 'aggregated issuer' here: it abstracts these underlying staking positions into stBTC and then transforms this 'staking certificate' into a freely tradable yield asset through its own liquidity network and cooperative agreements. For users, this means that your participation is not in isolated staking of a specific PoS chain, but in an entire set of cross-chain security and yield networks. Consequently, the risks you need to understand go beyond 'will I get liquidated' to include the security of the underlying PoS network, the implementation of staking contracts, and various technical details of bridges.
Having said so much, let's return to the question of 'how Azu would use it'. Assuming a typical long-term BTC holder who does not want to complicate things, Azu's approach is to first bring a portion of BTC into Lorenzo through the native BTC entry or custodial partners, exchange it for stBTC, and ensure they obtain the 'combined yield curve of Lorenzo + Babylon'. The next step will be to select a small number of DeFi scenarios they truly understand, such as deep liquidity lending or LP pools on a mainstream public chain, and deploy stBTC into them to enjoy basic yields and earn ecological task points, rather than rushing into a dozen unfamiliar protocols at once.
If you have a lot of stablecoins and your focus is on steady cash flow, then the route starts from OTF. Azu would suggest first clarifying the attributes of USD1 / USD1+ / sUSD1+: which one rebases and reflects yield through balance changes, and which one shows net worth through gradual price increases; then choose suitable targets based on your needs. If you come from a TradFi background and are familiar with RWA and quantitative strategies, you can look through public materials to check key details like underlying custodians, asset distribution, and drawdown control; if you have no understanding at all, then keep your positions within a ratio you can manage in your cognitive circle, and don’t dive in just because you see terms like 'multi-strategy' or 'institutional grade'.
As for $BANK, it is essentially the 'governance lever' of this entire asset management machine. From various research articles and exchange explanations, BANK is both Lorenzo's governance token and carries the rights for fee distribution, incentive bias, and even some product parameter adjustments through the veBANK model. Azu views it as a 'ticket to participate in the long-term game of the protocol': if you only see Lorenzo as a yield tool and plan to leave after use, then you may not need to hold a large amount of BANK; but if you genuinely believe this financial abstraction layer has the potential to become the next generation 'on-chain family office base', then appropriately allocating BANK and participating in veBANK after understanding the lock-up mechanism and governance rules becomes a seriously considered option. The most important thing here is cognitive matching—do not treat BANK as the next speculative target without understanding OTF and the BTC liquidity layer.
In conclusion, Lorenzo is working to break down the product forms in traditional finance that only high-net-worth clients can access into modular on-chain LEGO blocks, naturally accompanied by complex strategies, cross-chain, and compliance risks. For ordinary users, the most pragmatic action guide is three steps: first, use a small amount of funds in a testing environment or small positions to walk through the entire process and confirm that you understand 'how to enter and exit'; next, based on your risk preferences, make the simplest two-tier configuration between the BTC liquidity layer and the OTF stable layer; finally, if you genuinely see potential in this direction, slowly study BANK and governance, upgrading yourself from 'user' to 'co-builder'. Remember to keep all positions within a range where you can sleep soundly—that is the asset management approach that Azu believes deserves a 'family office level'.
