USDe经济模型与潜在风险解析

The author's source is a semi-centralized stable currency that defines full mortgage. There are many classification methods of stable currency, such as full mortgage and insufficient mortgage, centralized custody and decentralized custody chain issuance and centralized agency issuance with or without permission, and there will be some overlap and changes. For example, in the past, we thought that the supply and circulation of stable currency were completely controlled by the algorithm. According to this definition, most stable currencies belong to the stable currency with insufficient mortgage, but there are exceptions, such as despite its casting and circulation. The destruction price is regulated by the algorithm, but the collateral provided by the agreement vault is not less than the anchoring value, which has two attributes: the algorithmic stable currency and the fully mortgaged stable currency. Another example is that when the collateral is a chain asset, it belongs to the decentralized custody stable currency, but after the introduction, some collateral is actually controlled by the real entity and changed into the centralized and decentralized mixed custody stable currency. Based on this, we can strip off the complicated classification and abstract it into whether there is a fully mortgaged stable currency or not, and whether permission is not required. Compared with other common stable coins, there are some differences in these three attributes. If we think that decentralization needs to meet the two conditions of issuing without permission and trusteeship at the same time, it is not in conformity, so it is appropriate to classify it as a semi-centralized stable coin with full mortgage. The first question is whether there is sufficient collateral. The answer is obviously yes, as stated in the project document, the collateral is encrypted assets and corresponding empty space. Future positions's synthetic assets as collateral synthetic assets value spot value short future positions value in the initial state spot value future positions value hypothesis basis is collateral value. After a certain period of time, the spot price rises USD and future positions value rises USD, which can be negative position value basis. It can be seen that if it remains unchanged, the intrinsic value of the position will not change. If it is positive, the intrinsic value of the position will rise and vice versa. In addition, for delivery contracts, It is said that the basis is generally negative in the initial state, but the basis will gradually become without considering the transaction friction by the delivery date, which means that it must be positive. Therefore, if the basis is a synthetic position at the delivery date, the value of the synthetic position will be higher than that in the initial state. The asset portfolio holding spot short futures is also called current arbitrage. This arbitrage structure itself is risk-free, but there are external risks. According to the current data, we can obtain about low-risk annualized returns. Back to whether to use delivery contract or perpetual contract, I have not found an accurate definition in official website. Considering the depth of the transaction, the probability of perpetual contract is relatively high, but the chain address and distribution of collateral are announced. In the short term, there will be some differences between the two methods. Delivery contract will provide a more stable and predictable rate of return, while perpetual contract is a product with fluctuating interest rate, and the daily interest rate may also be negative under certain circumstances, but from the experience of perpetual contract. The historical return of arbitrage will be slightly higher than the delivery contract, and both of them are neutral futures airdrops. The essence is that lending funds can't keep interest rates or negative interest rates for a long time, and this position piles up the risk of risk-centered exchanges, so the risk-free rate of return of the necessary rate of return US dollars is subject to variable yield to maturity needs to pay an additional risk premium. Based on this, it is worried that it is insolvent or the analogy is completely wrong. According to the collateral risk assessment introduced at the beginning of the article, At present, the core narrow mortgage coefficient of the estimation framework is that the generalized mortgage coefficient can reach the potential negative rate after taking into account the circulation market value of $100 million, which will cause the collateral to shrink, and it is not a big problem. According to the law of large numbers, as long as the time is long enough, the frequency will inevitably converge to the probability, and the collateral will keep converging to the growth rate of the average capital rate for a long time. In other words, you can draw one card from the playing cards indefinitely. If you draw the big and small kings, you will lose dollars, and if you draw other cards, you can earn dollars. In the case of principal dollars, do you need to worry about bankruptcy because too many kings and kings are drawn? It is more intuitive to look at the data directly. In the past month, the average contract rate has only been below the level twice. The historical winning rate of arbitrage is much higher than that of playing cards. Now we have made it clear that the collateral risk is not worth worrying about, but this does not mean that there are no other risks. The most noteworthy is the potential limitation of the contract market capacity pair. The first risk is liquidity risk. The circulation is about $ billion, which means that the short position of $ billion needs to be opened under the condition of complete hedging is directly proportional to the scale. The current permanent contract position is about $ billion, and the reserve is deposited in the assumption that the utilization of funds is even, which means that the short position of $ billion needs to be opened, which has already accounted for the position. Or if the position size of other derivatives exchanges accounts for too high a proportion, it will have many negative effects. The response may lead to greater trading friction, unable to cope with large-scale redemption in a short period of time, pushing up the supply of short positions and affecting the rate of return. Although some institutionalized design may be able to mitigate risks, such as setting a time-based casting destruction upper limit and dynamic rate, this mechanism has been introduced, but a better way is not to put yourself in danger. According to the combination of these data trading pairs, the market capacity that can be provided is very close to the limit, but it can also be cited. Enter multi-currency and multi-exchange to break through this limit. According to the data, it occupies the share of derivatives trading market. According to the data divided by the total contract positions in other currencies, it is about three times. According to these two data, it is estimated that the theoretical upper limit of market capacity is $100 million. The bad news is that there is a capacity upper limit. The good news is that there is still room for growth from the upper limit. Based on these two upper limits, we can divide the scale growth into three stages. To achieve this scale, we need to expand the collateral to the market depth. The top mainstream currencies make full use of the market capacity of other exchanges of more than 100 million yuan, and need to rely on the growth of the market itself to introduce additional collateral management methods, such as lending market positions. It should be noted that if we want to truly decentralize stable currencies, we must at least surpass them to become the second largest stable currency, and the latter's current total issuance is about 100 million US dollars, which is twice the capacity limit in the second stage, which will be a relatively big challenge. Another controversial point is that the agreed funds are managed by a third-party institution, which is based on the compromise of the current market environment. Therefore, the total contractual positions shown by data are only 100 million 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=53412