Myron

Meridian (formerly Ethereal) urges users to withdraw or transfer assets from the Ethereal dApp as soon as possible. Is the “Ethena ecosystem project” ultimately just a dream?

Earlier, Meridian said it will shut down Ethereal and advised users to move their assets to the official newly built Meridian dApp in advance. In the future, Robinhood Chain will be the primary network used.

This move seems to indirectly confirm the alleged report released before Terminal was shut down: “Ethena has already stopped preparing its own Converge-specific chain and the development of ecosystem projects.”

Back in 2024, Meridian’s predecessor, Ethereal, was the so-called ecosystem project at Ethena’s launch. At the time, many users generally believed Ethereal was nearly identical to Ethena’s own native project.

Now that even it has decided to officially migrate to the Robinhood mainnet, it also symbolizes the end of the Ethena ecosystem.

-

Ethereal → Meridian: key timeline points:

➤ Meridian has opened prediction market trading
➤ On 2026/7/28, Ethereal Perps will enter “close-only mode,” meaning you can’t open new positions
➤ Next week, the MLP (Meridian Liquidity Provider) Vault will open for pre-staking, and you can earn rewards including: USDe, Ethena, Meridian
➤ Next week will be the last time Ethereal Points are distributed; going forward, points data will be displayed on Meridian
➤ In the coming weeks, Meridian Perps will officially launch on Robinhood Chain

Put simply: the original functionality of Ethereal will be fully re-listed on Meridian. The difference is that assets will move from the Ethereal Chain to Robinhood Chain.

-

For now, you can already deposit USDe directly into Meridian. It will automatically bridge the USDe to Robinhood Chain, which suggests that with the closure of the Ethereal DEX, the Ethereal Chain will most likely be shut down sooner or later.

I’ve already bridged the USDe stuck on the Ethereal Chain to BSC via Stargate (with the lowest fees). After that, you can seamlessly store it into Binance.

Everyone is also advised to handle your assets on the Ethereal Chain as soon as possible!

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should act according to their own risk tolerance. DYOR and participate in the market cautiously.

● The attached images are sourced from Meridian

#Meridian #robinhoodchain #USDe #Ethena $ENA

【The Renaiss card buyback cycle of the circular economy—how much economic value does it bring to individual users?】

Yesterday, from the perspective of an investment institution, we discussed that the card retention rate is only about 2.36% for <0-9->{@Renaiss Collectibles } cards saved; however, the buyback feature can also be seen as a golden hen for the project’s sustainable revenue.

If we go deeper and combine Renaiss card data on the BNB Chain, we’ll find that the economic value generated by Renaiss individual users is beyond imagination—like a small sample creating massive returns:

➤ Number of unique addresses for Renaiss Token: 1,011 (including at least 6 contract addresses)
➤ Token Transfers: 867,921
➤ Total Supply (number of cards): 9,292

→ That is equivalent to about 858 transfers per single address involved, and an average single address holds 9 cards.

If we pair this with the revenue data from the official Dune Dashboard for a more intuitive view:

➤ Total opening events: 394,171
➤ Card pack purchase value: 22,823,494

→ On average, each single address contributes about 390 openings and contributes $22,660 in card pack purchase value.

-

The above data is estimated using the current number of unique addresses, so it cannot cover users who opened cards but have already churned. If we incorporate those previously used but churned users by using the number of SBTs minted through social media accounts bound on the Renaiss platform (9477):

➤ Average number of card openings per single address: about 41 times
➤ Average income contributed per single address: $2,408

For an emerging protocol that has been created for less than a year, this set of user data already demonstrates that the economic value of core users is quite competitive; but the concern lies in whether these users’ engagement can remain “stuck.” Based on the current data, the proportion of long-term card holders is only about 1/9, so the churn rate may also need to be monitored continuously.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should make decisions based on their own risk tolerance. DYOR and participate in the investment market prudently.

● The images are sourced from BscScan

#renaiss #RWA #bnb #TCG $BNB

【Why does Renaiss @Renaiss Collectibles look like a continuously running cash-printing machine from an investment firm’s perspective?】

For a while, I hadn’t paid attention to Renaiss on BNB Chain. Then I just noticed that on 6/18, it completed a seed round led by YZi Labs (with Hash Global and other institutions participating).

Just looking at the official Dune Dashboard, it seems pretty clear why institutions are willing to bet on Renaiss—this is obviously an investment with high upside?

-

《Buyback: The Art of Sustainable Money Printing, or a Hidden Game Theory Poison?》

One of the most user-friendly mechanisms in Renaiss is that after opening a card pack, users can immediately sell back to the platform at a high buyback ratio.

The current buyback rates for card packs that are always available are as follows:
➤ Eden Pack: 90% instant buyback
➤ Renacrypt Pack: 85% instant buyback
➤ Omega Pack: 85% instant buyback

For users, this almost eliminates the “secondary market liquidity risk.” As long as they don’t pull the lowest-tier cards, there’s a chance to trade a small downside for a bigger upside.

But can users truly break even in the long run—or even profit?

Dune data seems to reveal a harsh reality:

➤ A total of 393,964 card pack opening events
➤ Only 9,301 cards are actually circulating on-chain

= A card retention rate of only “2.36%”

This suggests that more than 97% of draws ultimately flow back to the platform through Buyback.

For many users, it may look like using a 10%–15% possible loss to exchange for a 20%–40% chance of pulling mid- to high-value cards. But based on on-chain data, the proportion of high-value cards that truly end up being kept by users may be very low.

The ongoing loop of “open pack → buy back → open again” is like building an efficient money-printing machine for the project team. For investment institutions, it’s undoubtedly an obvious cash-flow generator.

I’m just a bit puzzled: in the eyes of current users, does Renaiss function more like a “gambling product,” or like on-chain collectible infrastructure?

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Please act according to your own risk tolerance. DYOR and participate in the investment market cautiously.

● All attached images are sourced from the Renaiss Dune Dashboard

#Renaiss #RWA #YZILabs #BNBChain $BNB

Does on-chain US dollar yield ultimately still rely on Ethena USDe?

After Lido Earn supported USDe deposits on 6/30, the share of earnUSDe in the strategy reached 68.7%. It mainly runs on three chains—Ethereum, Mantle, and Plasma—using Aave to execute a looping borrow strategy.

According to on-chain address information, Lido Earn on Aave (Mantle) stakes sUSDe + MNT and borrows USDT0. The health factor of this position is close to 1.03—almost maxing out the loan.

On Aave (Plasma), Lido Earn stakes sUSDe + USDe and borrows USDT0. The health factor is around 1.07. It looks like part of the borrowed USDT0 may have been sent to syrupUSDT?

However, Lido Earn’s operations on Aave (Ethereum) are relatively more conservative. It also stakes sUSDe + USDe, but the borrowed asset is USDC, and the health factor is as high as 1.96.

-

After a few years of going in circles in crypto, on-chain US dollar yield ultimately still relies quite heavily on USDe!

That said, it’s worth noting that Aave also supports USDe deposits on MegaETH and Ink, but Lido Earn does not choose to perform borrowing operations via these two chains.

As for why borrowing performance differs so much across the three chains, I guess it has to do with Mantle and Plasma’s high throughput and execution speed—so Lido Earn is willing to push the borrowing ratio to the max on those two chains.

But overall, for Lido Earn to charge a 10% performance fee plus a 1% platform fee, it’s not exactly cheap.

If you stake Aave yourself, at least you can get 5x Ethena airdrop points.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should act according to their own risk tolerance. DYOR and participate cautiously in the investment market.

● All figures/images are sourced from Lido

#ethena #Lido #USDe #ENA $ENA

【Binance Wallet x Predict.fun，NBA Finals prediction rewards are in!】

The last time Predict rolled out a 100K Predict Points giveaway for the NBA Finals (Nets vs. Spurs), eligibility applied whether you placed orders in the Binance Wallet or on the Binance exchange. In the end, the number of actual Predict Points credited to a single account was 50—so based on this, only about 2,000 people were eligible for the event?

If you accumulate 50 Predict Points in a single week purely through placing limit orders and trading, you’d roughly need a capital amount of around 300 ~ 500 US dollars (U). Compared to that, getting 50 Predict Points from a single event order for a match with > 20 USDT is way more efficient!

At this stage, the World Cup of soccer mostly offers cash rewards, but there are ranking restrictions. You need to keep accumulating event points; if you haven’t been actively participating earlier, it will likely be very hard to make it into the reward-division list later.

It feels worth keeping an eye on the World Cup’s semifinals or the championship/match for third place. Will it also launch a Predict Points giveaway like last time for the NBA Finals? A surefire opportunity to earn points—definitely don’t miss it.

Honestly, if all you’re doing is playing Predict purely by placing limit orders, participating through the Binance Wallet & Binance exchange still offers pretty high convenience—you can directly pull the USDT balance on the BNB Chain in your Binance Wallet or your exchange balance.

However, if you want to look at some details like the time window in which Predict Points take effect, or if you’re used to executing trades directly with market orders, going through the Predict dApp with an invite code to get a 10% discount on trading fees might be a bit better.

-

● Predict.fun绑定可減免 10% 交易手續費 — check the comment section below

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should make decisions based on their own risk tolerance. DYOR—participate in the investment market cautiously

● All images are taken from Binance

#PredictFun #Airdrops #BinanceWallet #WorldCupPrediction $BNB

【What are the differences between Binance Wallet’s “Sports AI Assistant” and the collective consensus of prediction markets?】

I recently noticed that when I open Predict, Binance Wallet will pop up a small icon for an AI assistant. After仔細 studying it, I found that its model prediction results differ quite a bit from Predict’s real-time data.

For example, the market data it displays should be Predict’s data: currently, Brazil’s win probability is about 55%, a draw is about 27%, and Norway’s win probability is about 21%.

But the Sports AI Assistant model predictions in Binance Wallet show: Brazil’s win probability is about 70%, a draw is about 19%, and Norway’s win probability is about 10%.

This seems to reflect differences between collective consensus and AI model predictions—for instance, Binance Wallet’s “Sports AI Assistant” uses a statistical model plus multi-factor adjustments, importing information such as team fatigue levels, player injuries, lineup tactics, and more to make dynamic adjustments.

Under the interaction of the default variables, its final judgment may differ from the collective consensus of prediction markets—for example, collective consensus might be more intuitive in assessing details like overall team momentum and matchup advantages.

That said, I think one advantage of Binance Wallet’s “Sports AI Assistant” is that it lets you quickly overview the key factors that could affect the match outcome directly from the match insight page. If you believe such conditions are crucial to determining the winner, it becomes much more convenient.

Also, aside from the larger difference in win probabilities, based on my observation, regarding goals and possible scores, there doesn’t seem to be much difference from Predict’s prediction data. For instance, the “tight range” for total goals is around 2.5 to 3.5, and the possible scores correspond to whether both sides score. For these two items, the gap between Binance Wallet’s “Sports AI Assistant” and Predict’s shown collective consensus is not large.

Without going into other things, Binance’s support for projects on BNB Chain is truly very dedicated. Not only does it aggregate Predict on the exchange and wallet side so users can participate in predictions, but even the AI assistant is pulling data from Predict.

I wonder if anyone has already profited from the World Cup based on Binance Wallet’s “Sports AI Assistant.”

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice. Users should make decisions based on their own risk tolerance and participate in the investment market cautiously.

● All attached images are sourced from Binance Wallet.

#Predict #世界盃 #BinanceWallet $BNB

Binance Wallet Second-Quarter Native Finance Rewards ($USDC ) have been credited

Compared with the first quarter, the reward distribution time is much faster—rewards are issued one week after the program ends.

During the uncertain times of the bear market, Binance Wallet’s finance activities still feel quite reliable. Although the third-quarter Native subsidy was cut in half (888 USDC/day), the participating capital also flowed out at the same time.

Currently, $WBTC remains at 4.5 ~ 5% APY; $WETH remains at 6.5 ~ 7% APY.

Compared with the second quarter’s average, it has only dropped by about 0.5 ~ 1%, and it’s still quite competitive. After participating across three quarters, half a year has already passed—and at the beginning, nobody expected they would keep staking all the way into the third quarter...

But on-chain, there probably aren’t that many protocols offering comparable annualized returns that are still just as reliable, right?

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Please make decisions based on your own risk tolerance. DYOR and participate in the market cautiously.

● The attached images are taken from Binance Wallet.

#BinanceWallet #Native #WBTC #WETH $ETH

[Brand Rebranding | Ethereal → Meridian, ready to step out of the Ethena comfort zone?]

Since I cleared out $ENA ($sENA), I haven't been keeping an eye on the Ethena @Ethena Labs ecosystem project for a while.

Just checked the data, and the locked supply of two upcoming token projects has significantly tanked:

➤ Meridian (Ethereal) TVL
74.88m(2026/1/23) → 24m(2026/6/25)

➤ Strata TVL
276.94m(2026/3/21) → 81.3m(2026/6/25)

Unlike Strata, which pivoted early towards aggregating a broader range of DeFi protocols, Meridian (Ethereal) is still using $USDE as its default platform currency.

This is related to the platform's nature; for example, Strata is a structured product designed to easily aggregate various features. Meridian (Ethereal), as a DEX, aside from trading assets, can only break free from the shadow of $USDe with new feature updates.

-

● Major Update for Meridian (Ethereal) 2026: Prediction Markets

To be honest, this year it seems like apart from systematic UI and UX updates, the only new feature is the launch of prediction market trading.

They recently opened up testing for the prediction market through a whitelist mechanism, and now it's fully available for use.

Its underlying infrastructure should be linked to Polymarket @Polymarket , but according to official sources, Meridian (Ethereal) offers greater flexibility in combination predictions, allowing bets on different categories of event predictions.

In other words, similar to lottery combination betting, by bundling multiple bets together, you can further increase your final profits.

Of course, from a probability perspective, unless you tie together highly correlated events, like the US-Iran conflict, the Strait of Hormuz, inflation, etc., the success rate of combination betting is more challenging.

According to the current status of Meridian (Ethereal), the minimum deposit amount is 10 USDe, and for withdrawals, it supports Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Ethereal chains. For the other two chains, the withdrawal fee is 2 USDe, aside from the Ethereal Chain.

The usual bridge functionality can go through Stargate; for friends interested in combination betting in the prediction market, you might want to give it a shot. They also seem to have launched new incentives for the prediction market recently.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA), users should operate according to their own risk tolerance, and DYOR before participating in the investment market.

● Attached image from Meridian (Ethereal)

#ethena #Meridian #Ethereal

【Speculations about the Bedrock $BR Season 2 Airdrop】

CreatorPad's last day, reflecting on my experience with Bedrock @Bedrock , and why I think we shouldn't hold our breath for a second airdrop in Bedrock 2.0.

In 2024 and 2025, I'm mainly leveraging Tranchess's yield product with a small amount of capital to maximize my points efficiency. Besides the BR airdrop, I've also snagged $EIGEN $BABY due to the ecosystem airdrop effect.

I exited my position after the Bedrock TGE when the current Tranchess fund product matured. The reason is simple: in the crypto space, airdrops are always about chasing the first one, which is the wave of profits from token issuance.

It's been over a year since the Bedrock TGE, and even though the official announcement claimed that the Season 2 airdrop points and tokenomics would reserve 14.5% for community airdrop incentives, I believe the Season 2 airdrop is a long shot:

➤ LSTs and LRTs are collectively flatlining
Generally, community users often compare projects within the same ecosystem or concept, and in the liquidity staking arena, aside from Lombard still distributing subsequent season airdrops, projects like Solv, Satlayer, and mETH have stopped mentioning any future airdrops for BTC and ETH staking.

➤ Characteristics of low market cap and high control
I previously mentioned BR token's wild price swings, which are very indicative of high control dynamics, possibly due to whales and market makers holding large amounts of tokens. If BR airdrops continue, it will increase the variability in this structure; price control will be affected, which is clearly not something preferred by certain parties.

➤ Ecosystem projects halt updates
Since the issuance in 2025, Bedrock has basically seen no new aggregations. Aside from the cooldown of the track itself, past collaborative projects like Tranchess have ceased support for related products. This somewhat indicates that the official team has little desire to keep pushing ecosystem product staking and point acquisition.

Lastly, regarding Bedrock 2.0, whether from the official website or blog announcements, there’s no mention of a second airdrop; instead, the focus is more on laying the groundwork for BR's empowerment expectations.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should operate based on their own risk tolerance; DYOR and participate in the investment market cautiously.

● Attached image sourced from Bedrock

#Bedrock #BR #Airdrop

【Speculation | Bedrock 2.0 Transformation Plan, Will the Opportunity to Unwind uniIOTX Arise?】

The most criticized aspects of the last bull run's LST and LRT were probably the inability to exit after staking. Whether it was due to the target chain lacking trading liquidity or holding too little to meet the unstaking conditions.

For those who got liquidity trapped in uniIOTX, waiting for Bedrock @Bedrock to phase out the uniIOTX product line might be the only chance to recover assets, and that day should be coming soon.

Yesterday, it was mentioned that Bedrock has stopped supporting the bridging functionality for uniBTC across 12 blockchains, and the official team will assist in transferring assets to Ethereum. A similar opportunity may also arise with uniIOTX.

-

Since its launch in 2024, uniIOTX has consistently maintained a staking volume above 400m $IOTX , but the reason might not be the allure of over 5% APY, rather it’s due to the lack of exit opportunities that passively traps holders.

According to the rules for unstaking uniIOTX, the minimum unstaking amount must reach 1m IOTX, currently valued at about $3,300.

Looking at the total staking volume, uniIOTX's reserves are approximately 420m IOTX, with 14,019 holding addresses, and an average holding amount of only about 30,000 IOTX, far below the threshold for unstaking applications.

Worse yet, the IoTeX chain has essentially become a dead chain, with the largest liquidity on-chain being Bedrock uniIOTX, meaning that even if users want to swap for other assets, the liquidity on the chain cannot meet the demand.

So, most uniIOTX holders can only passively wait for the Bedrock team to announce the discontinuation of that product line and provide users with an exit liquidity opportunity.

-

Summary

In contrast, even though uniETH did not appear in the Bedrock 2.0 plans, I believe ETH Staking is a more manageable product line, currently still accounting for about 1/3 of Bedrock's TVL, likely to be maintained for some time.

On the other hand, the uniIOTX product line is highly likely to be terminated in the near future. Interestingly, if uniIOTX officially enters its final chapter, it would also signal the end of the IoTeX blockchain.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA); users should operate based on their own risk tolerance, DYOR and participate in the investment market cautiously.

● Attached image sourced from Bedrock

#Bedrock #BR $BR #uniIOTX #uniBTC

【Notice｜Bedrock uniBTC Halts Support for Over a Dozen Blockchain Cross-Chain Bridge Functions】

On June 11, Bedrock @Bedrock announced the suspension of support for the uniBTC bridge across 12 blockchain networks, affecting: Bitlayer, Corn, DuckChain, IoTeX, Mode, Sei, Sonic, Starknet, TAC, ZetaChain, Taker, Taiko.

With the advancement of Bedrock 2.0, changes to uniBTC will become more frequent, and this halt in bridging functionality is primarily due to security considerations, allowing the team to focus resources on monitoring the main usage chains.

*Note: The cross-chain infrastructure aggregated by Bedrock is ChainLink CCIP.

-

What other chains might be on the chopping block next?

According to the Bedrock dApp data dashboard, over 99% of uniBTC is held on five major blockchains, which are:

➤ Ethereum: 2983 uniBTC (65.45%)
➤ BOB: 701 uniBTC (15.39%)
➤ Base: 497 uniBTC (10.91%)
➤ BSC: 194 uniBTC (4.28%)
➤ Bera: 152 uniBTC (3.35%)

Less than 1% of the total uniBTC is scattered across: Solana, B2, Merlin, Mantle, RootStock, Optimism, Arbitrum, Aptos, Hemi.

If you hold uniBTC on any of the above 9 blockchains, it's advisable to keep an eye on official updates or actively bridge to Ethereum in advance.

Directly selling is not recommended, as liquidity impacts may lead to significant slippage, or you might not find a place to sell at all; the main trading environment still resides on Ethereum.

CCIP bridging typically takes about 5 to 20 minutes to settle, and with the current low gas fees on the mainnet, the bridging cost is around 1U from the source chain.

-

Summary

Abandoning low-usage chains is also a step for Bedrock users to reduce protocol risk, such as avoiding the possibility of uniBTC being maliciously inflated due to contract risks.

I personally recommend moving uniBTC to Ethereum, the most liquid environment, as soon as possible for ease of entry and exit, providing the most security and efficiency in the current bear market.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA); users should operate based on their own risk tolerance and proceed with caution in the investment market, DYOR.

● Images sourced from Bedrock.

#Bedrock #BR #uniBTC $BTC $BR

【Bedrock Yield Vault vs. Solv BTC+，who's more worth putting $BTC into?】

When it comes to BTCFi transforming into a Bitcoin vault, Solv Protocol, as the front runner in the race, can definitely be seen as a pioneer, having launched BTC+ as early as 2025/7, offering services similar to Bitcoin asset management.

As soon as it launched, I immediately deposited my Bitcoins, considering it a simple lazy holding strategy, until the 2026 Q1 Binance wallet x Native's WBTC deposit event prompted me to shift my position.

With Bedrock @Bedrock Yield Vault set to release in the future, Solv will naturally be one of its competitors. Here's a quick comparison of the two:

➤ Core Mechanism

Bedrock: Tri-party credit + loss guarantee (Cap Protocol)
Solv: Hybrid strategy vault, including staking, lending, liquidity, basis trading, RWA

➤ Yield Mechanism

Bedrock: Speculated USD yield (institutions paying USDC interest)
Solv: BTC yield (BTC+ appreciation)

➤ Expected Annualized Return

Bedrock: Estimated 3 ~ 5% (institution fixed-rate interest)
Solv: 2 ~ 5% (currently 3.08%)

➤ Core Risks

Bedrock: Concentration risk, funds mainly routed through Cap Protocol
Solv: On-chain risk, with current BTC+ reserves reaching 83% utilized in SolvBTC.STRK

➤ Liquidity Unlock

Bedrock: uniBTC unlocks in about 8 days
Solv: BTC+ unlocks in about 7 days, allowing direct on-chain trading of SolvBTC

-

Summary

The biggest advantage of Solv BTC+ lies in its extremely low fees, with only staking fees of 0 ~ 0.3%, and no performance fees. Although its earning capability isn't the top tier, it’s a stable way to accumulate yield, making it ideal for lazy one-click staking.

The advantage of Bedrock Yield Vault is its potential for larger lending volumes, significantly higher than the liquidity of BTC+. If institutions are paying 3~5% interest, it’s highly likely to allocate a higher yield cap to users.

The core difference is that Bedrock places $BR into it for empowerment, while Solv BTC+ lacks relevance to its governance token $SOLV .

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should operate according to their own risk tolerance, DYOR and participate in the investment market with caution.

#Bedrock #Solv #BR #BTC

【Bedrock Yield Vault vs. Lombard Bitcoin Earn, in a bear market, should you choose institutional yields or DeFi yields?】

Bedrock 2.0 @Bedrock is the first to launch Yield Vault, aiming to invigorate the value of $BTC through a third-party credit structure, while the governance token $BR empowers token value as a means for yield enhancement and exclusive access.

However, back when BTCFi faced a downturn, many Bitcoin staking protocols gradually shifted to Bitcoin vault strategies, with Lombard reaching a community discussion peak of 4% ~ 5% BTC yield.

This article briefly compares Bedrock Yield Vault and Lombard Bitcoin Earn, looking at which type of users they suit best and examining the future empowerment value of BR:

➤ Core Mechanism

Bedrock: Third-party credit, users deposit BTC to receive uniBTC, Bedrock uses uniBTC as collateral deposited in Cap, earning interest from institutional borrowers.

Lombard: DeFi Vault, users deposit BTC to receive LBTC, Lombard invests funds into DeFi money markets and provides liquidity.

➤ Yield Sources

Bedrock: Underwriter premium paid by institutions (priced in USD, about 3-5%+)

Lombard: DeFi Yield (priced in Bitcoin, about 2-5%)

➤ Risk Exposure

Bedrock: In case of institutional default, uniBTC used as collateral will be liquidated.

Lombard: DeFi Protocol failure, liquidity cannot be withdrawn.

➤ Yield Formats

Bedrock: USDC (interest from institutions paid in USD stablecoins)

Lombard: BTC (appreciation of LBTC)

-

Quick Review

I believe the current core difference lies in the yields. With DeFi liquidity flowing out, overall yield capacity is gradually declining; for instance, Lombard Bitcoin Earn's APY has dropped to 2.49% in the last 30 days, making a recovery difficult in the ongoing bear market atmosphere.

On the other hand, Bedrock Yield Vault provides stable payments of 3-4% APY from institutional parties, with better sustainability that won't be affected by the cyclic nature of on-chain liquidity. However, the downside is the high single risk, as I mentioned before, with over 50%+ of Bitcoin deposited in Cap Protocol for third-party credit use.

Furthermore, there's a preference for yield format; Lombard can retain Bitcoin yields, which is equivalent to having the opportunity to benefit from BTC's continued appreciation.

-

● The content above does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should operate according to their own risk tolerance, DYOR, and participate in the investment market with caution.

#Bedrock #BR #lombard #BTC $BARD

【Why is 2026/6/20 the next high volatility day for $BR ?】

Yesterday, we discussed how BR had been quiet for nearly half a year, and then in March 2026, it experienced a doubling rally. Interestingly, the starting point of this rally was right after the team and investors had a significant token unlock.

According to Rootdata, on 2026/3/20, Bedrock @Bedrock unlocked a whopping 121.87M BR, which included tokens from the team, investors, and strategic reserves that were previously under a one-year lock-up.

The explosive rise of BR started on 2026/3/21, soaring from 0.055 to 0.18 (on 3/23), completely shattering the impression that token unlocks lead to heavy sell pressure and a downward trend.

This aligns with what I mentioned yesterday; the price action of this token may be heavily influenced by market makers or whales, mainly because its circulating market cap isn't high, which makes the cost of creating sharp price swings relatively low.

According to the tokenomics, the next large unlock will be on 2026/6/20, which is when the team and investors have their quarterly unlock share, around 40.62M BR.

This total is significantly less than the last unlock, only about 1/3, so it might not lead to the same kind of doubling rally as before, but high volatility is inevitable. I recommend not trying to use high leverage to long or short BR around 6/20.

Note: BR is currently available for contract trading on Binance and spot trading on Binance Alpha.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should operate based on their own risk tolerance, DYOR, and participate in the investment market cautiously.

● Attached image sourced from Rootdata.

#Bedrock #BR #BinanceAlpha #BinanceWallet

【Why it’s not suitable to long/short via contracts recently $BR ?】

On 2026/5/11, the Binance wallet launched the BR airdrop, allowing Binance Alpha users to spend points to claim 225 BR.

After more than a year, the Binance wallet once again rolled out related activities for Bedrock @Bedrock , likely to hype up Bedrock 2.0 by pumping funds into the Binance wallet for promotional activities.

Back on 2025/3/20, when Bedrock first launched the BR token, it was through the TGE section of the Binance wallet, selling initial tokens on PancakeSwap.

Then, from 2025/9 to 2026/2, trading volume was sluggish for six months, and the price was flat, but in 2026/3 we saw a doubling rally, with volatile spikes continuing until 2026/5.

In the absence of a significant increase in overall trading volume, the trend creators are more likely market makers rather than retail investors.

From the team's perspective, if funds have already been invested to hype Bedrock 2.0, the best outcome would naturally be to generate trading volume to push BR into actual spot trading on Binance.

If one were to easily long or short $BR amidst the bearish market fluctuations, the risk of getting liquidated from sudden spikes is extremely high.

Note: BR's recent daily volatility has been between 5% to 10%, with a daily increase of 10% not being uncommon.

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA), users should operate based on their own risk tolerance, and DYOR before participating in the investment market.

● Attached image sourced from Bedrock

#Bedrock #BR #BinanceAlpha #BinanceWallet

【Supplement | Why I think Yield Vault might have a negligible impact on $BR ?】

Based on TVL data from Bedrock & Cap, @Bedrock has invested over 50% of platform assets ($BTC ), which poses a high concentration risk within a single protocol, leading to the following impacts:

➤ Existing User Risk Appetite
In the current market environment, with frequent DeFi security incidents, Crypto users are showing a trend towards risk mitigation in their investment preferences, especially cautious of complex risk sources.

From Bedrock's perspective, they naturally believe they have fulfilled their duty to audit counterparty risks of institutional capital; however, from the perspective of uniBTC users, Bedrock, Cap, and institutional capital, which involve third-party credit, are all sources of risk.

Thus, the first point of concern would probably be: when existing users realize their invested BTC is heavily concentrated in Cap credit loans, will there be a wave of user fund withdrawals?

➤ Allocation of Existing Funds
According to Bedrock 2.0, it will introduce at least four vault strategies, but just the Yield Vault alone has already consumed over 50% of existing funds, crowding out the deployment capabilities of other vault strategies.

From this perspective, if existing funds are largely deployed in a single strategy, can other strategies still achieve a good leverage effect to create returns that outperform the market with a smaller amount of capital?

➤ Uncertainty of Incremental Funds
Considering the above two points, once existing funds are nearly fully allocated, the breakthrough move would be to attract new capital.

However, given the current market atmosphere, it's impossible to predict how long the bear market will last; the cash is king mindset is becoming a consensus in the market. Do market users have idle Bitcoin on hand? And are they willing to expose it to DeFi risks?

-

● The above content does not constitute investment advice (NFA). Users should operate according to their own risk tolerance, DYOR and participate in the investment market cautiously.

● Attached image is sourced from Cap

#Bedrock #CAP #BR