Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/08/10赛道影响@Its_Dammydee @AngleProtocol @Dune @merkl_xyz Thanks a lot for the effort on this! Really appreciate you doing what we’re not doing because we’re all in on @merkl_xyz
But yeah because we’re sure of our 100% collateralized claim, we didn’t spend much time trying to convince people of this
AI：偏主题投资表达，释放对基础设施与新叙事的偏多信号。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/08/07市场影响You'll never hear us claim that the capital @merkl_xyz helps you attract is not mercenary and will stay forever.
Whether someone allocates to a position comes down to three things:
• the yield, current and projected (points that may convert into an airdrop count here)
• the risk they perceive
• how passive or active they have to be to hold the position
Everyone weighs these differently. I personally optimize hard for passivity when I farm, and I'll give up yield to avoid the mental load. But it always reduces to those three variables.
So when someone parks capital in what looks to you like a suboptimal opportunity, it's not loyalty. It's either information asymmetry (they don't know what else exists) or they're simply weighing the curve differently than you are.
Which is why I'm skeptical of the idea that an LP network is a moat for retention. If the people in that network are actively looking for opportunities, they are optimizing by definition. That is what mercenary means.
"Mercenary" is in fact probably too harsh a word for it and there's nothing wrong with any of this. But everyone in DeFi is mercenary to some degree, and it's better to build with that assumption than to be surprised by it.
Which brings me to what we actually optimize for at Merkl. Beyond the infrastructure, letting anyone distribute yield exactly how they want, however custom the logic, the other half of the problem we're solving is discoverability.
Because if mercenary capital is the baseline, then the leverage is not in retention. It's in making sure the right people find you in the first place. If your opportunity is genuinely superior on yield, risk, or passivity for some segment of users, the only thing standing between you and that capital is whether those users know it exists.
That's the network we've built. Not a network that will hold your position out of loyalty, but a large network of qualified LPs who are aware enough to recognize a real arbitrage when they see one. Mercenary, obviously. That's the point. Mercenaries show up fast when the terms are good.
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/08/06赛道影响RT @merkl_xyz: Provide liquidity to @RobinhoodApp Stock Tokens on @Uniswap, earn rewards.
Uniswap v4 pools are live on Robinhood Chain, wi…
AI：偏主题投资表达，释放对基础设施与新叙事的偏多信号。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/28观点输出1inch Aqua launch powered by @merkl_xyz!
AI：延续个人公开立场，强调长期主义、执行效率与行业方向判断。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/23观点输出👀
AI：延续个人公开立场，强调长期主义、执行效率与行业方向判断。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/21观点输出@drGhostinOO7 @Morpho @SteakhouseFi Not sure
AI：延续个人公开立场，强调长期主义、执行效率与行业方向判断。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/21观点输出@A_Leutenegger @Morpho @SteakhouseFi Donation as the technical way to do incentives
AI：延续个人公开立场，强调长期主义、执行效率与行业方向判断。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/20市场影响Donations are now visible on the @Morpho UI (here on the @SteakhouseFi EURCV vault)
This fixes the "hidden" problem, but none of the other downsides.
Quick refresher: a donation means sending funds to an ERC4626 to push up the share price. Instead of a one-time jump, Morpho can throttle the pace at which the share price rises, so you get a steady APR rather than a spike.
Elegant, but still an imperfect solution:
- You can only cap the APR. It doesn't support the range of payout methods issuers typically need for NIM sharing (typically you don't have a strong guarantee that you spend as much as you earn based on your NIM in real-time)
- It only works if you pay rewards in the vault's asset.
- It targets every vault user indiscriminately, with no way to segment between them.
- No retroactivity.
- It requires dynamic, discretionary management by the curator as market conditions evolve.
- Less capital efficient for issuers (no forgotten rewards).
- It prevents competition if you're an issuer looking to onboard several curators. Here you incentivize one vault, so one curator.
One more thing: this isn't the legal loophole people pretend it is. If you're not comfortable giving incentives, doing it through @merkl_xyz or through donations is exactly the same. Donations were just a way (before this update) to hide that liquidity was being subsidized. Even now, the update still doesn't let you see by how much.
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/20赛道影响@boardyai If you could it’d be really really great, thanks!
AI：偏主题投资表达，释放对基础设施与新叙事的偏多信号。
Pablo Veyrat@pablo_veyrat · 2026/07/20政策影响Another underestimated downside of donations for vault-level incentives is that they can quietly work against you as a stablecoin issuer.
As an issuer, you should line up curators ready to spin up vaults for your asset. But your go-to-market should stay global and actively favor healthy competition between curators, rather than effectively picking a winner for them.
This is exactly where vault-level donations become a problem. When you donate incentives directly to a single vault, all the rewards flow to that one vault and therefore to one curator. Other curators, potentially more effective ones, are shut out from benefiting. You end up concentrating your entire incentive budget on a single player, which runs against a free and competitive market.
The better approach is to incentivize at the market level (@merkl_xyz enables this): reward every market where your stablecoin is used as a lending asset, then let those incentives flow back up to the vault users exposed to them.
For LPs, the payout is the same and the downstream UX is very similar.
But you get far greater competition between curators and, as an issuer, much less lock-in to any single one.
评论
暂无评论