Eastern Time, September 17, the Federal Reserve Chairman Powell's interest rate decision pressed the "low interest rate acceleration button" for the global capital market— the target range for the federal funds rate was lowered by 25 basis points to 4.00%～4.25%. This not only fulfilled the market's half-year expectation of a rate cut but also made the consensus of "another 50 basis points cut within the year" mainstream. For ordinary investors, this decision means that the "yield ceiling" of traditional conservative investments continues to sink: bank savings interest rates have fallen below 1%, the yield on 10-year U.S. Treasuries has dropped below 3.5%, and money market funds generally hover around an annualized rate of about 2% for 7 days. The anxiety of "asset scarcity" has spread from institutions to individuals, and everyone is looking for new paths that can "preserve principal and earn returns."
While traditional financial markets face an 'income dilemma', stablecoin wealth management in the Web3 world has emerged with 'abnormal' high yields. Whether it is liquidity mining in decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols or fixed-term wealth management in centralized digital asset platforms (CeFi), products based on USD stablecoins such as USDC and USDT generally maintain an annualized yield of 5% to 15%, with some quality projects even reaching 20%. This characteristic of 'anchoring the dollar to preserve the principal while yielding far more than traditional wealth management' makes stablecoin wealth management a 'new asset option' in the low-interest-rate era. However, questions arise: How can stablecoins, strictly pegged 1:1 to the US dollar, provide interest rates far exceeding bank deposits? Is this a fleeting bubble or a disruptive innovation in the Web3 financial model? In-depth analysis from the Bitget Wallet Research Institute will dissect the model, source of returns, and risk assessment to unveil the true nature of stablecoin wealth management.
I. The 'high-interest demand deposits' of the digital world: Three mainstream models of stablecoin wealth management and their comparisons.
Before delving into the logic of returns, it is essential to clarify the core definition of 'stablecoin wealth management': it is essentially 'digital deposits' in the Web3 world — investors deposit stablecoins pegged 1:1 to the US dollar (such as USDC issued by Circle, backed by cash and short-term government bonds, and USDT issued by Tether, with reserves including commercial paper and bonds) into specific platforms while ensuring the stability of the principal's purchasing power, obtaining interest through the operation of the platform or protocol. Most products also support 'deposit and withdraw at any time', balancing returns and liquidity, perfectly meeting the triple needs of investors in the low-interest-rate era for 'capital preservation, profit generation, and high flexibility'.
Currently, stablecoin wealth management products in the market can be divided into three main models based on the underlying operational logic and asset custody methods, each with its advantages and suitable demographics:
(1) Native DeFi model: A fully transparent 'on-chain bank' where assets are controlled by the user.
The native DeFi model is the 'technical root' of stablecoin wealth management, with representative platforms including Aave, Compound, MakerDAO, and other decentralized lending protocols. Its core logic is 'users directly participate in on-chain liquidity pools, with returns determined by market supply and demand':
Operational process: Investors must first create a crypto wallet (such as MetaMask, Trust Wallet), transfer stablecoins from exchanges to the wallet, then connect the wallet to the DeFi protocol to deposit stablecoins into the 'deposit liquidity pool' — at this point, these stablecoins become the borrowing funds for other users, and investors earn interest paid by borrowers based on the 'deposit ratio'. The interest rates fluctuate in real-time (usually between 5% and 12%), and returns are automatically credited in stablecoin form, available for withdrawal at any time.
Core advantages: ① Complete autonomy over assets, private keys are in the user's hands, no reliance on any platform's credit, avoiding the risk of 'platform collapse'; ② Fully transparent and traceable processes, fund flows, lending records, and interest calculation rules are all on-chain, with real-time traceability through blockchain explorers (such as Etherscan), eliminating 'opaque operations'; ③ Flexible ecosystem, in addition to basic interest, some protocols also issue additional platform tokens (such as Aave's AAVE, Compound's COMP), allowing investors to enhance overall returns through 'interest + token rewards'.
Potential thresholds: High requirement for users' blockchain knowledge, familiarity with wallet operations, Gas fee settings, and on-chain interaction security (such as preventing phishing links), and interest rates can be quite volatile. If market borrowing demand decreases, returns may fall below 5%.
(2) CeFi custodial model: Wealth management like using mobile banking, prioritizing convenience.
CeFi custodial models are the 'popularized version' of stablecoin wealth management, with representative platforms such as Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, and other compliant centralized exchanges, operational logic highly similar to traditional bank wealth management:
Operational process: Investors only need to complete real-name authentication (KYC) on the platform, deposit stablecoins into their platform account, select the corresponding product in the 'wealth management area' (such as 'USDT 30-day wealth management, annualized 8%'), and after confirming the investment amount, the system automatically calculates the returns. Upon maturity, both principal and interest are returned to the account, supporting withdrawal at any time (some fixed-term products may incur fees for early redemption).
Core advantages: ① Zero technical threshold, interface design is consistent with mobile banking apps, operations can be completed with a few clicks, suitable for blockchain newcomers; ② Stable returns, most products indicate 'expected annualized return rates' that do not fluctuate significantly like DeFi, with some platforms offering 'automatic reinvestment of returns'; ③ Many additional services, allowing direct operations such as 'exchange wealth management returns for other cryptocurrencies' and 'withdraw stablecoins to bank cards' on the platform, making fund circulation more efficient.
Core risk: Assets are held in custody by the platform, and investors lose control over their private keys. If the platform encounters operational issues (e.g., the FTX bankruptcy incident) or is attacked by hackers, the safety of funds may be threatened; also, fund operations are not transparent, and the platform will not disclose 'the specific investment directions of stablecoins', leaving investors to rely solely on the platform's credit endorsement.
(3) Ce-DeFi hybrid model: Attempting to balance 'convenience' and 'safety' as an intermediate solution.
The Ce-DeFi hybrid model is a recent 'compromise choice', with representative platforms such as Bitget Wallet, OKX Wallet, etc., focusing on 'using the convenience of CeFi to tap into the high yields of DeFi':
Operational process: After registering on the platform, investors do not need to manually manage wallet private keys (the platform provides a 'custodial + self-managed' dual mode). After selecting a 'stablecoin wealth management' product, the platform will automatically invest funds into selected DeFi protocols (such as Aave, Curve), and investors only need to wait for their returns while being able to view the 'specific holdings and return details in the DeFi protocol' in real-time via the platform.
Core advantages: ① Reduces operational thresholds, no need to learn on-chain interactions, the platform completes the integration of DeFi protocols and fund management on behalf of users; ② Assets are relatively secure, with some hybrid models adopting a 'non-custodial' design, where funds remain in the user's wallet, and the platform only provides an 'operational channel', avoiding the risk of fund aggregation; ③ Guaranteed returns, the platform conducts risk assessments on partnered DeFi protocols (such as TVL, historical security, team background), and may also subsidize part of the returns to stabilize the product's annualized yield at 8% to 15%.
Potential risks: Layered risks may face vulnerabilities from underlying DeFi protocol smart contracts, as well as potential 'screening errors' or 'operational issues' from the platform, and some platforms may set 'lock-up periods', resulting in lower liquidity compared to pure DeFi products.
Comparison table of mainstream stablecoin wealth management models.
Comparison DimensionsNative DeFi ModelCeFi Custodial ModelCe-DeFi Hybrid ModelAsset Control RightsUser-controlled (private keys in hand)Platform custody (no private keys)Partial autonomy (non-custodial wallets)Annualized Yield5%–12% (floating, including token rewards)4%–10% (fixed, few floating)8%–15% (fixed + platform subsidies)Operational DifficultyHigh (must understand blockchain and wallet operations)Low (similar to mobile banking)Medium (platform simplifies operations)TransparencyFully transparent on-chain (can trace fund flow)Opaque (platform operates in a black box)Semi-transparent (can check underlying protocol holdings)Risk TypesSmart contract vulnerabilities, market volatilityPlatform collapse, hacker attacksProtocol risks + platform screening risksApplicable DemographicsExperienced blockchain users, moderate risk preferenceWealth management novices, pursuing stability and convenienceModerate users, balancing returns and safety
II. Source of returns: Taking Aave as an example, dissecting how DeFi protocols support 5%-20% annualized returns.
If we set aside the short-term marketing subsidies of CeFi platforms (such as exclusive high returns for new users), the 'sustainable high return foundation' of stablecoin wealth management fundamentally comes from the 'on-chain financial operations' of DeFi protocols. Among them, lending protocols are the core carriers — their logic is highly similar to traditional commercial banks' 'earning interest spreads', but blockchain technology reduces intermediary costs and enhances capital efficiency, ultimately allowing investors to achieve higher returns. Taking Aave, the current 'leader' in the DeFi lending field, as an example, its operational mechanism and scale are sufficient to explain the sources of returns for stablecoin wealth management.
(1) Aave: The 'on-chain banking giant' with a 40 billion TVL.
Aave's origin can be traced back to 2017, founded by Finnish entrepreneur Stani Kulechov, originally known as ETHLend, and rebranded in 2018 to focus on decentralized lending. Today, it has become the 'keystone' of the DeFi ecosystem: DefiLlama data shows that as of September 17, 2025, Aave's total locked value (TVL) has surpassed 40 billion USD, ranking first among all DeFi protocols; its operations cover 14 mainstream blockchain networks including Ethereum, Solana, and Avalanche; net deposits (total deposits - total loans) exceed 70 billion USD, with a 30-day loan transaction volume reaching 270 billion USD — this scale is comparable to that of a medium-sized commercial bank, establishing itself as a benchmark for 'on-chain banks'.
(2) Core operational logic: A closed loop of 'deposit - lending - interest spread sharing'.
Aave's stablecoin wealth management returns come from the 'interest spread sharing between depositors and borrowers', which can be broken down into three steps.
Deposit end: Stablecoins injected into the liquidity pool earn 'deposit interest rates'.
Investors deposit stablecoins such as USDC and USDT into Aave's 'stablecoin liquidity pool', and the system provides real-time deposit interest rates based on the current 'supply and demand' relationship within the pool (usually ranging from 5% to 8%). For example, when there are many borrowers in the market and few depositors, the deposit interest rate will automatically increase to attract more funds; conversely, it will decrease in the opposite scenario. This interest rate is automatically calculated by smart contracts, is fully transparent, and is free from human intervention.
Lending end: Borrowers pledge assets and pay 'loan interest rates'.
Users needing stablecoins (such as cryptocurrency traders, project parties) must use mainstream crypto assets like ETH and BTC as collateral (the collateral ratio is usually between 50% and 75%, e.g., if pledging 100,000 USD worth of ETH, they can borrow up to 50,000 USD in USDC), borrowing stablecoins from the liquidity pool and paying interest at the 'loan interest rate' (usually between 8% and 15%). The loan interest rate is also determined by market supply and demand, and is higher than the deposit interest rate, forming an 'interest spread'.
Revenue distribution: After deducting fees from the interest spread, all is allocated to depositors.
The interest paid by borrowers is first deducted by the Aave protocol's fees (usually 10% of the interest, used for protocol maintenance and development), with the remaining 90% allocated to depositors in the liquidity pool according to the 'deposit ratio'. For example, if a stablecoin liquidity pool has a deposit interest rate of 6%, and there is 1 million USD in interest income that month, after deducting 100,000 USD in fees, 900,000 USD will be distributed according to each investor's deposit share, ensuring 'more deposits lead to more earnings and real-time interest calculation'.
Additionally, Aave enhances returns through 'liquidity mining rewards' — depositors earn basic interest while also receiving Aave platform tokens (AAVE) as rewards. AAVE, being one of the top 20 cryptocurrencies by market cap, possesses intrinsic market value. Selling it or holding it long-term can increase the comprehensive annualized return rate to 12% to 15%, which is a key reason Aave attracts large amounts of capital.
(3) Risk control: How can we 'protect the principal'?
The 'capital safety' of stablecoin wealth management relies on the risk control mechanisms of DeFi protocols. Taking Aave as an example, its core risk control measures include:
Over-collateralization: Borrowers must pledge assets worth more than the loan amount. If the price of the collateral falls and the 'collateral ratio drops below the safety threshold' (such as 35%), the smart contract will automatically liquidate the collateral, prioritizing the repayment of principal and interest to depositors, ensuring that the deposit end incurs no losses.
Diversified liquidity pools: Aave's liquidity pools are independently divided by 'currency type', with stablecoin liquidity pools' funds used solely for stablecoin lending, avoiding mixing with funds from other high-volatility currencies, thus preventing cross-currency risk transmission.
Smart contract auditing: Aave's core code has been audited by several top security companies such as CertiK and OpenZeppelin, and has not experienced any major security incidents since its launch years ago, demonstrating historical safety.
III. Opportunities and risks: 'Considerations' for choosing stablecoin wealth management in the low-interest-rate era.
In the low-interest-rate era, stablecoin wealth management indeed provides investors with a 'high-yield alternative', but it is not a 'risk-free arbitrage tool'. When choosing, three points must be emphasized:
Distinguishing 'sustainable returns' from 'short-term subsidies': CeFi platforms often launch activities like 'new users 15% annualized' and 'limited-time interest hikes', which are mostly short-term marketing strategies. After the expiration, returns will revert to normal levels, requiring rational views to avoid blindly investing due to 'high return temptations'.
Prioritize compliance and transparent platforms: DeFi protocols should prioritize those with high TVL, long launch times, and comprehensive audits (such as Aave, Compound); CeFi platforms should prefer those with compliance licenses (such as US MSB, Singapore MAS) and large user bases to reduce 'platform risks'.
Control positions and do not blindly pursue high returns: While stablecoin wealth management is less risky than cryptocurrency trading, it still faces risks such as smart contract vulnerabilities and market volatility. It is recommended to treat it as 'part of asset allocation', with positions not exceeding 30% of total funds to avoid excessive concentration in a single asset.
The asset anxiety of the low-interest-rate era is essentially a 'balancing dilemma between returns and safety'. Stablecoin wealth management offers a new solution to this dilemma through Web3 technology, but it is not a 'perfect answer' and requires investors to rationally assess risks and returns based on an understanding of its operational logic.
If you want to learn more about the comparison of different stablecoin wealth management platforms, practical tutorials on protocols like Aave, or get the latest high-yield compliant product recommendations, follow Crypto Old East, as we will provide deeper Web3 wealth management insights and practical guides to help you manage your assets steadily in the low-interest-rate era.
