Asymmetric Comparison: In-depth Analysis of Usual and Luna

As the Usual protocol enters the【Yield Discovery】stage, the ultra-high APY returns have amazed countless DeFi players, with the protocol's TVL increasing by over 70M in just 7 days.

This has also led to new users' concerns, with some drawing parallels to the high-yield stablecoin black swan Luna, worrying that Usual might carry similar risks.

Let's analyze this in depth ⬇️ ⬇️ ⬇️

Will Usual repeat Luna's fate?

First, the answer: No. The analysis process is as follows:

⭐ First, although both belong to the stablecoin sector, it's essential to distinguish clearly:

The $USD0 issued by Usual is a stablecoin supported by 1:1 RWA real assets, while Luna's $UST is an "algorithmic stablecoin." The two have fundamental differences, and forcing a comparison between them is quite unfair and asymmetric.

⭐ Secondly, why did Luna collapse?

In the Luna protocol, destroying an amount of $Luna worth 1 dollar would mint 1 $UST, and vice versa, the effect is reversed.

This creates the logic of the $UST algorithmic stablecoin, where "the left foot supports the value of the right foot." There exists a significant hidden danger: $Luna must have value support; otherwise, when faced with collective FUD moments, both tokens will collapse.

⭐ Does Luna have value support?

At least initially, it did not. Later, the Luna Foundation purchased assets like BTC as value reserves, but this was far from sufficient compared to the circulating market value of $Luna.

Then, the black swan appeared, Luna faced FUD, and both tokens spiraled into collapse.

⭐ Why won’t Usual repeat Luna's fate?

The answer lies in: $USD0 is supported by 1:1 RWA real assets (short-term US Treasuries). No matter how much FUD occurs, it won't lead to a collapse because there are US Treasuries as a safety net, which is one of the charms of the RWA sector.

As for why the return given by $USUAL is so high, we'll break it down next time~