Aave、Ethena、Synthetix 創辦人對談：DeFi 機構級突破
DeFi's Institutional Breakthrough
- Stani Kulechov Aave Labs 創辦人暨執行長
- Guy Young Ethena 創辦人暨執行長
- Kain Warwick Infinex／Synthetix 創辦人
- Robbie Petersen a16z crypto 投資合夥人，主持
場次摘要
三位 DeFi 領袖深入探討機構資本進入、資產上鏈與用戶端創新。聚焦成本結構、RWA、AI 與全球儲蓄 App 等未來趨勢。
值得記下的 5 件事
逐字稿
開場與來賓自我介紹
首先，非常感謝大家來到現場。我是 Robbie，A16Z 的投資合夥人之一，主要負責我們的 DeFi 相關業務。今天很榮幸能和這群優秀的討論嘉賓一起同台。我想大家應該都不需要太多介紹，不過我們還是輪流自我介紹一下，然後請各位簡單說明一下目前在做什麼。Stani，我們從你開始吧。Stani Kulechov，Aave 的創辦人暨執行長。So, first of all, thank you all for being here. I'm Robbie, one of the investment partners at A16Z. I lead a lot of our DeFi activities. I'm joined here by an incredible group of panelists. I don't think you need much introduction, but maybe we can quickly go around, introduce ourselves, and then each of you can explain what you're working on. Stani, maybe let's start with you. Stani Kulechov, founder and CEO of Aave.
Aave 是一個借貸協議，大家可以把穩定幣存進協議裡賺取利息，也可以用加密資產或是代幣化資產作為抵押來借出穩定幣。去年我們的淨存款達到 760 億美元，並且已經在多條網路上部署。我們也在打造 Aave App，讓收益能直接分配給用戶。Aave is a lending protocol where you can deposit stablecoins into the protocol, earn interest, and borrow stablecoins against collateral. That collateral can be crypto assets or tokenized assets. Last year, we reached $76 billion in net deposits and are available on multiple networks. We're also building the Aave app, which distributes yield directly to consumers.
我是 Ethena Labs 的創辦人暨執行長。我們大約三年前創立公司，最初的核心產品是一個美元儲蓄組件，全球只要有網路的人都能使用。兩年前我們推出這個產品，去年從零成長到高峰約 150 億美元，是史上成長最快、供給突破 100 億美元的美元資產，也是過去七年唯一做到這點的產品。之後我們也發展了不同的業務線，現在平台上有白標穩定幣基礎設施，讓其他應用、鏈、錢包和企業都能在我們的架構上發行自己的穩定幣。大約一個月前我們宣布了 Athena Paynear Bank，目標是把我們的核心儲蓄產品，以熟悉的行動體驗帶給非加密用戶。I'm the founder and CEO of Ethena Labs. We started the company about three years ago, and the core product was initially a dollar savings component that anyone worldwide with an internet connection could access. We launched the product about two years ago and scaled from zero to a peak of around $15 billion last year. That was the fastest-growing dollar asset ever to surpass the $10 billion supply mark, and the only one to do so in the last seven years. Since then, I've built out different business lines. We now have a white-label stablecoin infrastructure as part of the platform, allowing other applications, chains, wallets, and companies to launch their own stablecoins on our stack. And then about a month ago, we announced Athena Paynear Bank, where we're trying to bring our core savings product to a non-crypto audience in a familiar mobile experience.
很高興今天能來這裡，謝謝邀請。我是 Kain Warwick，雖然我還不是很成功的穩定幣創辦人，但我在 2017 年創立了 Synthetix，最早叫 Havven，是一個美元計價的穩定幣。後來我們專注在合成資產，成為最早在區塊鏈上推出合成股票（也就是代幣化股票）的團隊之一。不過我們當時比較保守，大約一年後就收掉了。三年前我又創立了 InfiniX，一個加密超級錢包，All-in-one App，可以做永續合約、現貨交易，也能資產託管，功能非常多元，基本上涵蓋了你加密生活所需的一切。I'm happy to be here, thanks for the invitation. I'm Kain Warwick. I'm not as effective a stablecoin founder as he is, but I started Synthetix in 2017. It was originally called Havven, a dollar-denominated stablecoin. Eventually, we specialized in synthetic assets. We were among the first to have synthetic stocks—tokenized equities—on the blockchain, but we were a bit too cautious and pulled the plug after about a year. About three years ago, I started InfiniX, a crypto app—a super wallet, an all-in-one app where you can trade perps and spot, and custody assets. It offers a wide variety of features to cover everything you need for your crypto life.
傳統資產上鏈與 DeFi 成長動能
這場討論的主題是 DeFi 的機構級突破。我覺得很有意思，因為我們剛才也聊到，現在越來越多傳統資產開始上鏈。回顧過去六到十二個月，像 Hyperliquid 就是一個很好的例子，有一段時間他們一半的交易量都來自 RWA 永續合約，大家都想交易這些資產。Stani，你們在 Aave 也看到代幣化股票開始有明顯的產品市場契合。Guy，Ethena 現在大部分的抵押品也轉向更傳統的資產。Kain，你們 Synthetix 從第一天就支持 RWA。我很好奇，為什麼是現在？也就是說，這波成長的關鍵催化劑是什麼？Stani，先請你分享。The title of this panel is DeFi's institutional breakthrough, and I find it interesting because, as we discussed earlier, we're actually seeing more and more traditional assets making their way onto the blockchain, right? If you look at the growth of crypto in the last six to twelve months, Hyperliquid is a great example. At times, half of their entire trading volume came from RWA perps that people wanted to trade. Stani, on Aave, you're increasingly seeing tokenized equities finding real product-market fit. Guy, at Ethena, a large portion of collateral has now shifted to more traditional assets. And Kain, at Synthetix, you've supported RWAs since day one. I'm curious, why now? In other words, what was the catalyst for this growth? Maybe we can start with you, Stani.
我認為這是 DeFi 和整個鏈上金融非常有趣的新篇章。我們都見證了這個歷史性的發展。最初我們是從原生加密資產如 Bitcoin、Ethereum 開始，這也是建立這一切的關鍵。像 Aave 這樣的協議，最早就是用 Bitcoin、Ethereum 這些加密資產作為抵押，讓大家能在鏈上借出穩定幣。這個市場這幾年大幅成長，後來又加入了像質押 ETH 這類有收益的資產，進一步推動鏈上金融的成長。我覺得這個階段是必然的，因為這些建立在原生加密資產上的協議，現在都已經歷過市場考驗。Yeah, I think it's a really interesting chapter for DeFi and the entire on-chain finance space. I think we're all witnessing this historic development. We started with native crypto assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum, and that was the key to establishing all this. What Aave, for example, does is create interest markets on the blockchain using crypto collateral like Bitcoin and Ethereum, to borrow stablecoins against those assets. This market has grown significantly over the years, and then, of course, yield-bearing assets like staked ETH came along, which further accelerated the growth of the on-chain finance world. I think this chapter had to happen, because many of these protocols built on native crypto assets have now been battle-tested.
現在最令人興奮的是，我們把原本用在原生加密資產上的技術，像 Aave 協議，開始應用到 RWA 和所有即將上鏈的資產。這真的很令人期待，因為我相信 Bitcoin、Ethereum 和原生加密資產的市場還會繼續成長，尤其是越來越多金融機構開始參與託管和交易，接下來很快就會有針對這些資產的借貸需求。但我現在最興奮的是，DeFi 正在成為代幣化資產的基礎設施。幾週前我們在 Base 上推出了用 Coinbase 代幣化股票作為抵押借 USDC 的功能。Aave 的厲害之處在於，我們在背後其實是有效地接觸到傳統資產，並且提供一條生產性地在鏈上運用這些資產的路徑。The exciting thing now is that we're applying the technology we used for native crypto assets, like the Aave protocol, to RWAs and all the assets coming onto the blockchain. That's really exciting, because I believe the market for Bitcoin, Ethereum, and native crypto assets will continue to grow, especially as more financial institutions get involved in custody and trading, which will quickly lead to lending and borrowing for these assets. But what excites me most now is using DeFi as infrastructure for tokenized assets. A few weeks ago, we introduced on Base the ability to borrow against tokenized equities, like Coinbase tokenized stocks, to borrow USDC. The fascinating thing about Aave is that, in the background, we're effectively accessing traditional assets and providing a productive way to use those assets on the blockchain.
我相信 DeFi 長期來看會用更好的成本結構來改善金融基礎設施。這代表我們能用更低的成本做借貸業務。以 Aave 為例，這幾年處理了超過 4 兆美元的淨存款和 10 億美元的借貸量，卻不需要龐大的後台、結算或信貸團隊，只靠幾百人就能做到。這證明了在區塊鏈上可以用更有效率的成本結構來做金融業務。像在 Aave 上借款利率只有 5%，比起場外 OTC 用 Bitcoin、Ethereum 抵押借款還便宜。我認為這種成本結構未來也會延伸到傳統資產，讓大家用 DeFi 借代幣化股票會更有效率，這正是 DeFi 擅長的地方。因為我們用的是智慧合約和協議，而且是在一個開放、無需許可的生態系，流動性可以非常快速地移動。所以我對股票抵押借貸的成長很有信心，Aave 上這部分已經在成長了。I believe DeFi will, in the long run, improve financial infrastructure with a better cost structure. That means we can run lending businesses at a better cost base. For example, Aave has handled over $4 trillion in net deposits and $1 billion in lending volume over the past few years, without huge back-office, settlement, or credit teams—just a few hundred people. That proves you can conduct financial activities on the blockchain with a better cost structure. A good example is that you can borrow on Aave at five percent, which is cheaper than, say, OTC loans against Bitcoin, Ethereum, and so on. I think this cost structure will, over time, also extend to traditional assets, so you can borrow against tokenized equities more efficiently, because that's what DeFi is really good at. That's because we use smart contracts and protocols, but also because we're building in an open, permissionless ecosystem where liquidity moves very quickly. So I'm very optimistic about equity-backed loans, which are already growing on Aave.
此外，我們還有 Aave Horizon，這是我們的 RWA 市場，大家可以用 RWA 作為抵押，無論是加密基金還是代幣化基金和資產，都能借出穩定幣。我認為這個類別明年就有機會超越加密資產借貸類別。And beyond that, there's Aave Horizon, our RWA market, where you can use RWAs as collateral for crypto funds, as well as for tokenized funds and assets, and borrow stablecoins. So I think this category will eventually, maybe next year, surpass the crypto lending category.
機構資本進場與 DeFi 商業模式轉型
說得很好。也想請你談談，你覺得這波成長的催化劑是什麼？我認為，這是機構資本開始接受這項技術，認同它確實能改善自身產品和業務的成本結構或分銷效率。如果回顧三年前，也就是 2022、2023 年的熊市，有個很有趣的數據點：當時整體穩定幣供給大約下滑了 40%。大家應該還記得，那時加密圈的利率幾乎歸零，但傳統金融的無風險利率卻有 5%。很瘋狂的是，大家沒辦法直接把加密資金轉去賺傳統金融的無風險利率，結果資本大量流出，只為了追逐鏈外的無風險收益。Well said. Maybe a similar question for you—what do you think catalyzed this growth? I think it's the acceptance by institutional capital outside this space that this is a legitimate technology that actually helps improve the cost structure or distribution of their own products and businesses. If we look back three years to the last bear market in 2022 and 2023, there was an interesting data point: the total stablecoin supply dropped by about 40 percent. If you remember, interest rates within crypto had almost dropped to zero, while risk-free rates in the real world were at five percent. It was pretty crazy that you couldn't just take your crypto capital and access those risk-free rates in traditional finance, so there was this huge capital outflow from the system just to chase risk-free yields outside.
有趣的是，這次熊市穩定幣供給從高點只跌了 3%，這對於一個持續一年的熊市、而且市場動盪很大的情況來說，真的很驚人。這代表，這十年來第一次有資本流入系統並且留下來。對我來說，這證明我們比三年前更能提供用戶多元的資產選擇，不再只是比特幣跌價時只能死守。像 Stani 剛剛提到的代幣化股票，還有固定收益證券的範疇也從兩年前的國債擴展到更多種類。我相信這個領域還有很大的成長空間，因為和鏈外市場規模相比，目前鏈上的發展還很初步。The interesting data point for me was that, in this last bear market, the total stablecoin supply only dropped about three percent from its peak, which is pretty incredible for a year-long bear market where a lot was shaken to the core. You actually saw, for the first time in the last ten years, capital flowing into the system and staying there. For me, that's proof that we've done a pretty good job compared to three years ago in giving people a diverse set of things to do with their money, instead of just holding Bitcoin when prices fall. We've seen the development of some tokenized equities, as Stani mentioned, and the universe of fixed income securities has expanded well beyond tokenized government bonds, which is where it started two years ago. I think that's the area where a lot more will come onto the blockchain, as it still feels pretty underdeveloped compared to the market potential outside.
另一個重點是，現在這個領域的創業者和公司，開始意識到不能只靠加密週期來建立長期穩健的生意。早期的 DeFi 應用或中心化交易所，獲利模式基本上就是比特幣或山寨幣價格的衍生品。現在最優秀的加密公司已經找到方法，脫離加密市場的循環，利用加密技術切入傳統金融市場，讓自己的業務更強大。像你剛剛提到的 Hyperliquid，他們調整商業模式，從股票衍生品成長中獲利。又比如 Tether，他們其實不太在意山寨幣價格怎麼走，而是專注用戶規模。我認為這會是未來的趨勢，加密原生公司會思考如何用加密技術打造更有韌性的商業模式，不再只看比特幣每四年漲不漲。Another point is simply the type and approach of founders and companies in this space, who now recognize that their business can't just depend on the crypto cycle to build a sustainable business long-term. The first DeFi applications, the first iterations of these companies, or even centralized exchanges, their earnings profile was basically just a derivative of what happened with the price of Bitcoin or altcoins in the market. I think the best companies in crypto have now found a way to decouple from the cyclicality of the crypto market and use crypto technologies to access TradFi markets that improve their business. Whether it's the example of Hyperliquid you mentioned, where they adapted their business model to benefit from growth in equity derivatives, or someone like Tether, who doesn't really care where altcoin prices are, but focuses on user acquisition. I think that's a trend we'll continue to see—crypto-native companies using their technology from the crypto sector and thinking about how to build more resilient business models that don't just depend on whether Bitcoin goes up or down every four years.
DeFi 代幣經濟與監管未來
我覺得很有趣的是，DeFi 剛開始時我們都說要打造一個平行、效率更高的金融系統。為了建構這個系統，我們需要資本流入，於是就發行了一堆代幣。像我們當初推出 LND 代幣（Aave 前身），還有 SNX、Maker 等等，這些代幣就是為了籌資建設這個平行、效率更高的基礎設施。這個過程確實發生了，但隨著時間過去，這些資產的可投資性越來越受質疑，尤其是和傳統金融資產相比，因為沒有同樣的保障，尾部風險也更高，投機性更強。最終我們用代幣建好了系統，但宏觀環境又推動股票變得更有投資吸引力，於是我們現在反而用這些基礎設施來處理股票交易，這其實也沒問題，效果很好。但這也導致上一輪週期沒有出現真正的 Altseason，因為山寨幣和傳統金融資產比起來，投資吸引力不夠。我覺得很諷刺，沒有這些代幣我們根本無法建好這個平行系統，現在卻是用它來讓原本要取代的系統變得更有效率。Yeah, the interesting thing for me is that at the beginning, especially in DeFi, we said we were building this parallel, much more efficient financial system, right? To build that, we needed capital inflows, so we issued a bunch of tokens. For example, we launched the LND token before it became Aave, we launched SNX and Maker. There were a whole bunch of tokens issued to fund the building of this infrastructure, to create this parallel, much more efficient system, which we did. But as we did that, the investability of these assets became increasingly questionable, especially compared to traditional financial assets, because you don't have the same guarantees, the tail risk is much higher, and it's much more speculative. So ultimately, we built the foundation for the system with tokens, and then the macro shift toward greater investability of equities kind of forced us to use these rails for equity transactions. Tokenized equity transactions, which is actually fine—it works really well, but it kind of led to there not being a real altseason in the last cycle, because altcoins weren't really investable compared to their TradFi equivalents. So I find it a bit ironic that we couldn't have built this parallel system without issuing a whole bunch of tokens, and now that we've built it, we're using it to make the system we were supposed to replace much more efficient.
我認為這還有解方，現在大家都在努力。像我朋友 Robert Leshner 就在嘗試把代幣和股權融合成一種新資產，讓投資人能有更明確的權益保障。如果這能實現，未來新一代代幣和公司就能有更具投資吸引力的架構，既能在我們的系統上運作，又能保有加密原生特性。當然還有很多事要做，但我最期待的是看到現有代幣變得更像股票，雖然這方面最大的阻力還是監管。像今年本來有些法案想推動，但最後沒通過。不過我相信最終我們會有足夠的監管明確性，讓代幣再次變得可投資，這會帶來下一波代幣採用浪潮。I think there's a solution for this, and people are working on it. My friend Robert Leshner, for example, is trying to merge tokens and equity into a single asset, which would give investors much more security in terms of their rights and protections. I think if we can achieve that, we'll have a much more investable structure for new tokens and companies building the next wave of infrastructure to run on our systems, while still being crypto-native. There's still a lot to do, but that's the most exciting thing for me—to see either existing tokens become more equity-like, although the headwind for that has unfortunately been regulatory. And, you know, we didn't get some of the laws we wanted to pass this year. But I believe that ultimately we'll get enough regulatory clarity to make tokens investable again, and that will kick off the next wave of token adoption.
RWA 潛在需求與用戶導向創新
你們剛剛都提到鏈上代幣化實體資產（RWA）的潛在需求。下一個邏輯問題就是，怎麼滿足這些潛在需求，甚至進一步釋放這些價值？我覺得你們三位有個共同點，就是都越來越積極想要直接服務最終用戶。You all alluded to a kind of latent demand for tokenized real-world assets, RWAs, on-chain. The next logical question for me is, how do you serve that latent demand and, beyond that, how do you actually unlock that value? An interesting common thread among the three of you here is that you've all increasingly tried to win over the end user.
從基礎建設到用戶端：DeFi 應用的演進
Aave 最初是以基礎建設起家，對吧？你們最近推出了 Aave App，這是一個直接面向消費者的應用，目標是直接接觸終端用戶。Ethena 你們過去主要是穩定幣發行方，最近也推出了 Ethena Pay，這同樣是你們想要接觸終端用戶的嘗試。Kain，你們 Synthetix 一開始也是以基礎建設為主，不過 Infinex 從一開始就比較像是前端，後端則是整合了很多不同的基礎建設。這次我們不如從你開始，Guy。你們推出 Ethena Pay 背後的邏輯是什麼？你認為它在整個堆疊中帶來的價值在哪裡？Aave started as infrastructure, right? You recently launched the Aave App, your consumer-facing application targeting end users directly. At Ethena, you were historically a stablecoin issuer, and you recently launched Ethena Pay, right? And that's your attempt to also win over the end user. Kain, for you, it was always like that, but with Synthetix it was more about infrastructure, whereas Infinex was from the beginning more of a frontend that aggregates a lot of different infrastructures in the backend. Maybe we can start with you this time, Guy. What's the logic behind launching Ethena Pay and where do you ultimately see the value within the stack?
沒錯。我覺得對我們來說，這比較像是一個發展順序的問題。剛開始時，我們其實就是直接面對消費者，沒有跟交易所或其他 App 整合。最初進來 Ethena 的前 20 億美元，其實都是直接來自用戶，當我們開始擴張時才有這樣的規模。後來我們發現，願意在鏈上操作、願意充值 MetaMask 並使用 DeFi 協議的用戶，實際上只有幾千到幾十萬人，遠遠不是千萬級。你看 Tether 和 Circle 的成功，會發現這些產品的成長都跟大型交易所願意推廣穩定幣密切相關。像 Binance 至今仍是 Tether 最大的持有和分發平台，Coinbase 跟 Circle 的關係也讓 Circle 業務成長到今天的規模。Absolutely. I think for us, it was more a question of sequence as we went along. At the beginning, I would say we were directly consumer-focused. We had no integration with exchanges or apps, and the first two billion dollars that came to Ethena actually just came from direct user contact as we started to scale. Then we realized that the number of users who operate on-chain and are willing to top up a MetaMask account and use a DeFi protocol is unfortunately in the thousands or hundreds of thousands, not in the tens of millions. If you look at the success of Tether and Circle, you see that the success of these products was always closely tied to large exchanges being willing to push stablecoins. For example, Binance is still the largest platform for holding and distributing Tether, if you look at the balances there. The relationship between Coinbase and Circle was obviously an incredible accelerator for Circle's business to reach the size it has today.
所以如果你想從零做到一，直接面對用戶是很棒的，但要從一做到十，就必須跟那些本身擁有數千萬、上億用戶的分銷平台合作。我認為 Ethena 這兩年在進入重要平台、真正能帶動規模這件事上做得不錯。最後我們也意識到，三到五年後我們不希望產品的推廣完全依賴於別人的平台和生意。因為如果終端用戶都在別人手上，作為公司要賺取利潤、決定產品價格的能力就會受限。所以我們開始思考，怎麼樣才能更靠近用戶。So it's great if you want to go from zero to one by doing it directly, but going from one to ten means working with distribution platforms that themselves have tens or hundreds of millions of users. I think Ethena has done a pretty good job in the last two years of getting onto the important platforms that could really move the needle. The last point is the realization that we don't want to be in a position in three to five years where the distribution of our products is entirely dependent on someone else's platform and business. The reason is that the ability to generate margins as a company and set the price for the end product can't always be determined by someone else if they own the end user. So we've been thinking about what our actual approach could be to take that step and get closer to the user.
我們認為，能夠不靠加密貨幣、直接觸及上億用戶的應用，其實只有兩種：一種是新型券商（Neo-Broker）或交易應用，另一種是金融 App，像是存錢、花錢、轉帳這類。第二種比較符合我們的 DNA，也是我們過去擅長的領域，我們對這個方向比較有信心。我們有一個結構性的優勢可以發揮。對我們來說，核心假設就是要讓產品有更高的利潤率，如果能讓用戶留在我們自己的手機 App 裡，這就是最好的形式。雖然這類 App 市場近兩三年已經很飽和，但在加密圈常常有人有好點子，一年內就有上百個人做一樣的事，像 Perp DEX、貨幣市場、穩定幣等都一樣。And from our perspective, there were really only two options for applications that could reach hundreds of millions of users without relying on crypto. It's either a kind of neo-broker or trading application, or a financial app focused on saving, spending, and sending money. I think the second category fit much more with our DNA and the things we've historically done well, and we feel much more comfortable with that. We have a structural advantage that we're pursuing. Yes, the core thesis for us was that we want to generate more margin with the product, and if we can keep the user in our own mobile application, that was the best form factor to achieve that. I think these apps overall represent a pretty saturated market, at least in the last two to three years. That happens a lot in crypto, right? Someone has a good idea and within a year there's a list of a hundred people doing exactly the same thing. You see the same phenomenon with Perp DEXs, money markets, stablecoins, and so on.
但我們還是會問自己：為什麼要贏得這個市場？我們認為，能夠掌控這個領域結構性報酬最高的美元，是吸引用戶、讓他們留在 App 裡的關鍵。因為大家都在比一個很重要的數字，就是 App 裡的儲蓄利率。這就是我們最積極追求的方向。這個產品還很新，才上線一個月左右，目前大概有 3% 的候補名單用戶真的 onboard 了，但我對我們吸引圈外用戶的能力很有信心。對我來說，這就是那個 App 的樣子，說真的，如果要有一億人用這種東西，大概就是這樣：一個大家都能用手機存錢的帳戶。But from our perspective, we try to ask ourselves: what's a reason to want to win this market over others? The ability to control the dollar with the highest structural yield in this area is a powerful tool to attract users and keep them in the app, as everyone else is fighting to compete with a number that matters to people—the savings rate in the app. That's the approach we're pursuing most strongly. It's still pretty new and early. It's been on the market for about a month. I think we've onboarded more than about three percent of users from the waitlist. But I'm very confident in our ability to attract users outside of this area. For me, this feels like the app, and honestly, if you're talking about a hundred million users using these things, if you ask me what that app would look like, it's something like this: a savings account that anyone can access via their mobile phone.
前端還是基礎建設？DeFi 產品定位的抉擇
你剛剛提到 Neo-Broker 和金融 App 這兩種框架，這看起來就是兩大類。我會把你們歸類在接近券商的那一邊。你們可以多談談，為什麼你們選擇不一定要擁有基礎建設本身，而是做一個整合現有基礎建設的前端嗎？Okay, you mentioned this kind of framework of neo-broker and financial app, and those seem to be the two categories. I'd probably put you in the category of near-brokers, you know. Maybe you can say more about why you made the conscious decision not necessarily to own the infrastructure itself, but rather to be a frontend that bundles existing infrastructure.
這確實是一個有趣的取捨。Synthetix 是基礎建設，我們當初刻意不做前端，而是用激勵機制讓其他人來做前端。有一度我們大概有五個不同的介面可以用，但這樣用戶體驗其實不怎麼樣。你想想看，如果 Gmail 有五個不同版本的前端，這其實很荒謬，沒人會覺得這是好主意。做產品就應該自己做，並且垂直整合。早期加密圈有種奇怪的哲學，認為基於去中心化理由，基礎建設跟前端要分開，這樣大家都能用。但很多東西我覺得只是意識形態，實際上不可行。Yeah, that's an interesting trade-off. Synthetix was infrastructure and we deliberately didn't build frontends. We created incentives for others to build frontends. At one point, I think we had five different interfaces you could use. And the user experience wasn't particularly good because of that. Think about it, the resources you'd spend building five different versions of a Gmail frontend would be pretty ridiculous. No one would think that's a good idea. If you're building a product, you should build it and vertically integrate. We had these weird, rather vague philosophical approaches in the early crypto days, where we said: no, let's separate infrastructure and frontend for decentralization reasons, so everyone can use it. There were a lot of things that I think were ideological but not practical.
從 Synthetix 的經驗我們學到，Infinex 就要自己擁有一個垂直整合的產品。雖然我們不擁有基礎建設，這是有意識的選擇，但這樣到底能不能長久還有待觀察。因為你會變成支援所有鏈、穩定幣、Perp DEX，但如果每個人都垂直整合，你要抓住價值就很難，所以這裡有個很大的取捨。不過我同意 Guy 的看法，如果我們要打造能夠擴展到上億用戶的加密原生 App，還是得自己來。做基礎建設的人也要自己做產品，因為他們最懂產品，也最懂怎麼推給終端用戶。這讓 DeFi 領域在這方面進步很快。From that Synthetix experience, we learned and said with Infinex, we're going to own a vertically integrated product. The interesting thing is, as you said, we don't own the infrastructure. That was a conscious decision, but I think it's questionable how viable that is, because you end up in a situation where you support all chains, stablecoins, and Perp DEXs, but if everyone else is vertically integrated, it's very hard to capture value. So there's a pretty hard trade-off there, in my opinion. But I definitely agree with Guy—if we want to build crypto-native apps that scale to hundreds of millions of users, we have to build them ourselves. The people who develop infrastructure need to build the products too, because they're the ones who really understand the product deeply and know how to bring it to the end consumer. That's led to us getting much better at these things in DeFi pretty quickly.
我覺得 Aave 這幾年花了很多時間和資源在提升消費者端的體驗。我們以前這方面真的不太行，必須不斷進化、變得更好，沒有人會幫我們做這件事。如果我們真的相信加密基礎建設更好，就必須自己做出更好的加密原生產品，提供更好的用戶體驗。我相信我們三個人，還有很多其他人，這幾年都意識到這點，決定自己動手做。And I think Aave has spent a lot of time and resources improving the consumer-facing side. We historically weren't particularly good at it. We had to evolve and get better at it. But no one is going to do that for us. If we really believe that crypto infrastructure is better, then we have to build crypto-native products that offer a better customer experience. And I think the three of us and many others have come to that realization in recent years and decided we just have to do it ourselves.
全球儲蓄 App 與 DeFi 的長期機會
我想 Aave App 和整個消費者面向的發展，某種程度上是因為我認為銀行在存款和服務用戶這件事上失敗了。銀行的收入大多來自那些拿不到最高利率的用戶。這個問題確實存在，但我們現在生活在一個生活成本上升、全球通膨加劇的時代，不管是基本食物還是能源成本都在漲，這影響到全世界每個人的生活。我認為金融體系其實是全球連動的，像油價、天然氣價格上漲會推升全球通膨，進而帶動其他一切成本上升，這是很大的問題。大家都很擔心自己的財務未來，現代人都追求財務自由，這往往意味著要自己掌控資金、善用身邊的財務機會。Yeah, I think the Aave App and this whole consumer aspect comes from the fact that, in my opinion, banks have failed people and failed at savings. Banks typically make their revenue from people who effectively don't get the highest yields. So that point exists, but I also think we live in a world where the cost of living is rising and inflation is increasing everywhere. Whether it's basic food or energy costs, that's affecting everyone's life globally. And I think finance is interconnected globally in interesting ways. Rising oil and gas prices increase inflation worldwide, which in turn raises everything else. And I think that's a big problem. People are really concerned about their financial future. We live in a world where everyone is striving for financial freedom. In many cases, that means really taking control of your own funds and taking advantage of the financial opportunities around you.
我認為歐美在儲蓄方面有一些很有趣的產品，但其實還是有很多摩擦。全球還是有很多人無法輕易取得美元帳戶或美元儲蓄帳戶。我們想做的就是打造一個全球儲蓄 App。這不是新型銀行，也沒有發卡，就是一個很簡單的產品。整個想法就是讓用戶把錢從銀行帳戶轉到 Aave，這就是一切的起點。如果我們能讓圈外用戶轉移資金變得又簡單又有吸引力，就能打開很多大門。我覺得這很令人興奮，因為長期來看，最好的財務機會會在 DeFi，因為 DeFi 是一個很刺激的環境，金融演算法彼此競爭、尋找風險調整後的機會。未來隨著 AI 進展，這只會更強化這一點。I think there are some really interesting offerings in the Western world, in Europe and the US, when it comes to savings. But there's still a lot of friction there. And I think globally, there's still a lack of access to dollar-based accounts and dollar savings accounts. What we're trying to do is simply build a global savings app. So it's not a neobank, there's no card, it's a very simple offering. The whole idea is to get users to move funds from their bank accounts to Aave. And that's kind of the start of everything. If we can make it as simple and attractive as possible for users outside of this area, that will open a lot of doors. And I find that very exciting, because I think in the long run, the best financial opportunities will be in DeFi, as DeFi is a very exciting environment where financial algorithms compete and find risk-adjusted opportunities. And in the long run, with AI as an agenda, that's only going to reinforce that.
RWAs 是把價值帶上鏈的一種方式，穩定幣則是把這些價值回饋給用戶。我們從加密貨幣起步，現在正進入資產代幣化的時代，未來大家可以用代幣化股票或其他 RWA 抵押借款、賺取收益，並把這些收益全球分發給用戶。最後一塊拼圖是，隨著 AI 發展，我們正走向一個資源極大化的世界。網路讓資訊極大化，AI 讓智慧極大化，機器人則會讓勞動力極大化。未來我們會有更多自由、工作時間更少，但要先跨過這個門檻。很多支撐未來極大化的資產本身資本成本很高，需要融資。Aave 作為機構級基礎建設的角色，就是讓這些資產（像太陽能、GPU、機器人、自駕車隊等）可以被代幣化，拿來當抵押品釋放流動性，然後把收益全球分配。這也是銀行和傳統放款機構可以看到高科技風險、但同時 Aave 能創造高收益的地方。我認為我們現在就是要對抗通膨和生活成本，DeFi 未來二十年會是金融解方。RWAs are a way to bring value on-chain, and stablecoins are a way to extract that value and return it to users. I think we started with crypto and are now entering an era of tokenized assets, where you can borrow against tokenized stocks or other RWAs, generate yield, and distribute that globally to users. And the last piece of the puzzle is, as we think about where the world is going, with AI we're moving more and more toward a world of abundance. We had an abundance of information through the internet—everyone globally has access to information. AI creates an abundance of intelligence and distributes that globally as well. Robotics will create an abundance of labor in the long term, and so on. So I think we're heading toward a world where we have a lot of freedom and maybe have to work less. But you have to get to that point first. Many of the assets that underpin the future of abundance have high capital costs and need to be financed. I think the future and the area where Aave helps as institutional infrastructure is that these assets—whether it's solar energy, GPUs, robotics, autonomous vehicle fleets, and so on—can be tokenized and used as collateral in Aave to unlock liquidity. And that yield can then be distributed globally. That's where banks and traditional lenders can see there's higher technological risk, but Aave can also generate a lot of yield. I think it's more about living in a world where we have to fight inflation and the cost of living, and I think DeFi will be the solution for pretty much everything in finance over the next two decades.
DeFi 與傳統金融的競爭與優勢
我覺得這整段討論的一個重點是，加密貨幣正在跨入傳統金融領域。這有兩個意義：第一，這代表我們能讓越來越多非加密原生的用戶進入加密圈，這是好事；但同時也意味著你們會越來越多地跟現有大玩家競爭。Dani，這對 Aave 來說，可能就是你們推出 Aave App，開始直接或間接跟銀行和新型銀行競爭。Guy，我會說你們也直接跟很多新型銀行競爭。你們怎麼看自己的 App 相較於傳統業者的結構性優勢？區塊鏈又帶來哪些獨特的可能性，是鏈下做不到的？這次我們從你開始，Guy。I think part of the realization from this whole discussion is that crypto is making the leap into traditional finance. That can mean two things. First, and I think this is a positive thing, it means we're increasingly bringing in more users who aren't crypto-native. At the same time, I think it also means you're probably increasingly competing with established players. Dani, maybe for Aave that means you launch the Aave App and now compete directly or indirectly with banks and neobanks. Guy, I would say you're in direct competition with many established neobanks. How would you both describe the structural advantage of your app compared to traditional providers? And what does blockchain uniquely enable that you couldn't do off-chain? Maybe we'll start with you this time, Guy.
我會說我覺得 Neo Banking 產品之所以有趣，就是因為這個問題有一個很明確的答案，而這在加密 App 裡並不常見。Yeah, I think one reason I found these neo banking products so interesting is that there was a very clear answer to this question, which isn't always the case with crypto apps.
重塑用戶體驗與穩定幣革命
我們嘗試從兩個不同的角度來看這些問題。如果你試圖以區塊鏈或穩定幣為基礎，重新打造用戶的產品體驗，就能創造出十倍更好的用戶體驗。接下來的第二個問題是：如果你能用十倍更好的產品吸引用戶，那你是不是也創造了十倍更好的生意？We're trying to approach these questions from two different perspectives. If you try to rebuild the product experience for the user based on blockchain or stablecoins, you create a ten times better user experience. And the second question that arises is: if you succeed in attracting users with a ten times better product, have you also created a ten times better business?
簡單來說，我認為穩定幣之所以能成為全球數億用戶的真正產品，而不只是投機性加密應用，是因為它能即時、無國界、無需許可地把錢匯給世界上幾乎任何地方的人。這跟現有的匯款手續費和摩擦成本相比，差異非常大。To go through this briefly, I think there's a simple explanation for all the great things about stablecoins and why they've escaped speculative crypto use cases to become the one real product that has reached hundreds of millions of users worldwide. And that's the instant, borderless, and permissionless settlement when sending money to practically anywhere in the world. The simple comparison here is looking at existing remittance fees and the friction that exists there.
你現在可以幾乎免費、在幾秒內把美元匯到世界各地，這對金流來說是巨大的進步。第二個重點是利潤池。傳統銀行的商業模式是靠儲蓄和存款帳戶的惰性，付給你極低的利息，然後放款賺取利差。即使是新型的數位銀行，也很難找到能真正把更多利差回饋給用戶的成本結構。The ability to send a dollar instantly anywhere, arriving almost for free within seconds, is a huge advancement for money transfer. The second aspect is the profit pool. In banking, it's based on the inertia of savings and deposit accounts. The business model of many banks is: we pay you almost zero interest for convenience, then lend out and create a spread on the other side. Even some of the new neobanks that came to market to disrupt the existing model never really found a cost structure that allowed them to pass on a bigger part of that interest margin to users.
現在這些App的設計很棒，只要你參與DeFi的金融組件，實際上可以拿到比Revolut帳戶或類似產品高出十倍的利率。雖然對一般人來說，從0.5%到5%好像沒什麼，但在全球資金流動下，100個基點的效率提升就是很大的差異，因為每一美元都能受益。And I think the beauty of how these apps are now designed is that if you connect to the financial component within DeFi, you literally get a ten times better rate than with a Revolut account or something similar. I think it's these little things—saying you get five percent from an app versus 50 basis points might not sound significant to people, but when you're dealing with money on a global scale, it's a very meaningful difference if you can do things even 100 basis points more efficiently, because every dollar worldwide could benefit.
所以我們這樣看產品體驗：一方面是收益，一方面是用穩定幣自由移動和結算。我認為這就是更好的產品體驗。還有一個很有趣的點是這些公司的營運成本結構。Stani剛才提到，像一兆美元的交易量，只靠幾百行程式碼就能處理。So that's how we think about the product experience: the yield and the freedom to move and settle with stablecoins. I think that just creates a better product experience. And I find the very interesting aspect in the design of these apps is also the cost structure for running these companies. I think Stani mentioned earlier, when he described the trillion dollars—maybe I have the number wrong—but about a trillion dollars in transactions handled with just a few hundred lines of code.
DeFi營運成本與全球擴展
這幾年新型數位銀行最大的成本就是合規和進入每個司法管轄區的監管。要取得法幣銀行基礎設施、監管執照等，往往要花18個月。現在這些DeFi App是真正的全球Fintech，因為你只要在開放、無需許可的區塊鏈上用自管錢包發行穩定幣，根本不需要監管執照，任何國家的人都能持有穩定幣。The biggest cost point for all these neobanks built in recent years is compliance and regulation for entering every single jurisdiction. It's an 18-month process to get fiat banking infrastructure, regulatory licenses, and so on. These are the first truly global fintech apps, because if you launch on an open, permissionless blockchain with self-custodied stablecoin wallets, you don't need a regulatory license for people in any country in the world to hold stablecoins.
這讓你一上線就能從零做到全球化，就像DeFi應用一樣。如果你能省下三千名專職合規員的成本，這些公司營運成本會比傳統Fintech低95%。我覺得這才是真正實現了Fintech當初的理想。過去十到十五年，Fintech其實只是把舊的後端換個包裝，這次才是真的把後端徹底翻新。And that allows you to go from zero to global as soon as you launch the app, just like with a DeFi application. And if you can save the cost of 3,000 compliance employees—companies focused only on regulatory work and opening bank accounts—then the operating costs for these companies are 95 percent lower than comparable existing fintechs. I think this is the true realization of what fintech wanted to be at the beginning. In the last ten to fifteen years, fintech was really just a slightly different paint job on the same backend running in the background. This is the first time you're really ripping out the backend and completely replacing it.
這樣才能真正改變這些公司的損益結構。這就是我們對一開始那兩個問題的思考。說得很好。Dani，你有什麼要補充的嗎？And that's when you really change the profit and loss statement of these companies in a meaningful way. So that's how we've thought about the two questions I mentioned at the beginning. Well said. Dani, do you want to add anything?
沒有，我完全同意。我們不是來跟銀行競爭的，而是要讓他們更努力為你服務。這代表只要有更好的選擇，客戶終究會流動。如果DeFi能提供最好的金融機會、加速財務自由，只要簡單、方便、安全、值得信賴，用戶就會轉向DeFi。我認為這就是未來。No, I completely agree, and I think we're not here to compete with banks. We're trying to get them to work harder for you. That means if there are better offers, customers will eventually move. And if DeFi offers the best financial opportunities and accelerates access to financial freedom, then users will move there as long as it's simple, convenient, safe, and trustworthy. And I think that's the future.
Aave網路效應與DeFi信任
很多人誤解這些協議。以Aave為例，它本質上是一個信貸網路，而網路有網路效應。每當有新節點加入Aave網路，就會帶來更多流動性，進而降低資本成本，讓借款人更有誘因來借款。新參與者能享受既有的流動性網路效應，同時也強化了整體網路。I think a lot of people misunderstand these protocols. If you think of Aave as a protocol, it's basically a credit network, and networks have network effects. That means every time a new node joins the network—in Aave's case—more liquidity is created across the network, which means capital costs go down and it's more attractive for borrowers to take loans. The new participants in the network benefit from the existing liquidity network effects while also reinforcing the overall network.
這就是銀行和信貸網路的根本差異。如果能大規模實現，系統成本會大幅降低。銀行要改善成本結構，最有可能的路徑就是上鏈、用AI。這一段很令人興奮，因為我們從加密資產走到現在，開始擴展到資產代幣化，最終整個金融體系都會上鏈。And I think that's the whole difference between a bank and a network, a credit network. If you can implement this at scale, you can squeeze a lot of costs out of the system. For banks, the way to improve their cost structure is probably moving to the blockchain and using AI. This part is so exciting because we've had this past with crypto assets and now we're expanding to tokenized assets, until ultimately the entire financial system will be on the blockchain.
正如Guy剛才說的，這就是要用更有韌性、更互聯、更可編程的基礎設施，取代現有金融機構的後端。最近我們在Base上推出Coinbase的股票代幣時，不同團隊開始開發新的金融原生工具，像是讓股票也能產生收益。你可以在完全透明的帳本上創造很有趣的產品，這對消費者來說是很棒的價值主張，因為他們會是最大受益者。And I think that's, well, what Guy said: replacing the backends of existing financial institutions and infrastructure with something that's not only more resilient but also more connected and programmable. For example, we recently saw something very exciting: when we introduced tokenized shares of Coinbase on Base, different teams started developing new financial primitives, like earning yield on your stocks. You can create really interesting products on a completely transparent ledger, and I think that's an incredible value proposition for consumers, because they're the ones who will benefit the most.
利差、AI代理人與DeFi商業模式
我們大概還有時間問一個問題。你們的平台都提供某種程度的收益。Guy和Stani，傳統商業模式是靠利差。現在越來越多收益直接回到用戶端，比如Circle就是好例子，USDC的收益100%回到應用，最終會到用戶手上。另一個推特上的敘事是，如果AI代理人很強大，能幫我們管理私人財務，他們會把收益最佳化，屆時很難再找到閒置、不產生收益的美元。這兩點都代表利差這個商業模式未來可能會被壓縮。你們怎麼看這個模式的演變？如果利差變成競爭下的賽跑，長期要怎麼獲利？We probably still have time for one more question here. All of you benefit to some extent or offer some yield on your platform. Guy and Stani, specifically for you two, historically the business model was the interest margin. Now, more and more yield goes directly to end users—Circle is perhaps a good example, where 100 percent of the yield from USDC goes back to the application, which will ultimately reach the end user. The second point is a narrative going around on Twitter: if AI agents become very good and manage our private lives, they'll ultimately optimize this yield, so it'll be very hard to find idle dollars that don't earn anything. Both suggest that the interest margin as a business model could come under pressure in the future. I'm curious how each of you thinks about the evolution of this business model, and if the interest margin is a race to the bottom, how do you plan to monetize long-term?
我認為代理人會把人類不擅長的事都最佳化，這是不可避免的。你說有些活期存款放在銀行，完全沒利息，只因為銀行在小鎮有分行，這種商業模式應該沒什麼未來。錢總是要流向某處，也許最後都流到國債，變成狹義銀行體系。這對我們來說其實還不錯。I think when it comes to agents, the idea of optimizing all the things humans are bad at is pretty inevitable. So the idea that you have demand deposits that for some reason earn zero percent interest and just sit there—maybe because the bank has a branch in a small town or whatever—feels like a business model with no long-term future. But what that means is less clear, because the money has to flow somewhere. Maybe it all flows into government bonds and we end up in a world of narrow banking. I think that looks pretty good for both of us.
也許這些參與者會繼續往風險曲線上走，正如Stani說的，大家都想賺10%、15%、20%，打敗通膨。這時候你就會問，這筆資本的風險調整後報酬是多少？Aave已經存在很久，非常穩定、安全、可靠，如果你把美元或代幣化資產放進類似貨幣市場基金，Aave的表現很不錯。這種品牌優勢很難複製，需要時間累積。Aave作為借貸協議，可以收取風險調整後的品牌溢價，這是傳統金融機構很難模仿的，因為他們玩的遊戲完全不同，他們只想付最低利息，甚至創造誘因讓你接受零利息，自己把大部分利息留著。Maybe these actors will keep moving up the risk curve, because as Stani said, people are trying to earn 10, 15, 20 percent to beat inflation. At that point, you ask: what's the risk-adjusted return you're getting for this capital? We've talked about this before coming on stage. There's a very strong effect with Aave, as it's been around for a long time. It's very stable, very safe and reliable, and if you put your dollars or tokenized assets into a kind of money market fund, Aave looks pretty good, right? That's a brand presence that's hard to replicate. It takes time to build that. So there will be a kind of risk-adjusted brand premium for Aave as a lending protocol, which even traditional financial companies will find hard to copy, because they're playing a totally different game where they try to pay as little interest as possible and, I don't want to say trick people into accepting zero interest, but create incentives where they keep most of the interest.
DeFi信任、風險與AI代理人時代
我認為資金會怎麼被投資，會很大程度取決於這些產品的風險輪廓。像Aave或Athena這類協議，經過三年已經有很強的Lindy效應和市場地位。Dani和Guy，請你們各用一分鐘回應。I think the question of how actors deal with this and where they invest people's money will depend a lot on the risk profile of these things. And things like Aave or even Athena have a lot of Lindy effect and a very strong market position after three years. Dani and Guy, maybe we can keep it to about a minute each for time.
我同意Ken說的大部分。如果我們真的進入代理人極度最佳化收益的極端情境，我認為在DeFi領域，大家其實不會太在意資產差異，只要差距只有十個基點。屆時會有數兆美元從銀行體系流入這類系統，然後再決定資金如何在系統內部分配。只要相信這一點，對這類產品來說就是極大利多，因為它們必然比現實世界的解決方案更有效率，畢竟你是建在Ethereum上，不需要龐大的管理團隊和Stani提到的那些東西。I agree with much of what Ken said. If we really see this extreme scenario of hyper-optimization by yield-seeking agents, I don't think people in DeFi will really care whether it's one asset or another if the difference is just ten basis points. There will be trillions of dollars flowing out of the banking system into these kinds of systems, and then it'll be decided how those funds are distributed within the systems. If you believe that, it's extremely positive for these products, because they have to be more cost-efficient than real-world solutions, simply because you're building on Ethereum and don't need a huge administrative apparatus and all the stuff Stani mentioned.
我完全不同意「收益會變成大宗商品」這種說法，這直接回到一個問題：DeFi除了交易應用外，商業模式是什麼？其實你賣的是信任，因為DeFi本來就很可怕，你可能賺個幾個百分點，但如果智能合約有漏洞，資本就全沒了。這對很多人來說很可怕，所以你必須百分之百專注於不讓用戶在多個週期內虧損。如果你能證明自己能安全可靠地做到這點，你的資本成本就會比新進者低很多。我認為DeFi企業的獲利能力跟大家對你的信任度密不可分。因此，我一點也不覺得這是大宗商品化。大家雖然能拿到同樣的收益，但對風險管理的信任完全不同。I'm actually completely opposed to the idea that yield becomes a commodity, and that goes straight back to the question: what is the business model in DeFi, apart from trading applications? You sell trust, because DeFi is a pretty scary place. You might earn single-digit percentages, but if a smart contract is faulty, it's all gone and you lose your entire capital. That's a scary thought for many, so you have to be 100 percent focused on never losing money over multiple cycles. If you can prove you can do that safely and reliably, your capital costs drop massively compared to new entrants who haven't proven that yet. So I think the profitability of a company in the DeFi sector is inseparable from how much trust people have in you as an operator. In that sense, I don't think it's a commodity at all. People can access the same yield, but the trust in risk management and how those yields are achieved is not the same.
沒錯。我認為AI和代理人世界其實非常有機會讓全球財富分配更平均，給人們更多機會。我甚至相信未來幾年，全球大部分財富都會由AI管理，尤其當它們極度最佳化時。DeFi on-chain是這些代理人最理想的基礎，因為對代理人來說，開DeFi帳戶比開傳統銀行帳戶容易多了，這只是第一步，接下來還有更多事會發生。未來DeFi會因為AI成為管理資金最安全的地方，也是體驗風險調整後收益的最佳基礎。我認為很快就會出現AI代理人主導DeFi交易量超越人類的時刻，這可能比我們想像的還早。Yes, and I think the world of agents and AI can actually be very good at distributing wealth more evenly worldwide and really opening up a lot of opportunities for people. I even believe that in the coming years, the majority of global wealth will be managed by AI, especially as it becomes highly optimized. And DeFi on-chain is the perfect foundation for these agents, because it's much easier to open an account for an agent than to set up a traditional bank account. And that's just the first step—there's a lot more to come. So DeFi will become the safest place to manage funds, thanks to AI, and the best base for accessing risk-adjusted offers. Overall, I think we'll reach a point where there are more transactions by AI than by humans in DeFi, and that moment could actually come sooner than we think.
總結：AI代理人與DeFi資本流
總結來說，如果代理人能最佳化收益，而DeFi又能提供最佳的風險調整後報酬，最終會有大量資本流入鏈上。這是個很棒的收尾點。再次感謝所有與談人，也謝謝大家參與。這場就到這裡。So to sum up: if agents optimize yield and DeFi offers the best risk-adjusted returns, it seems like a lot of capital will ultimately flow onto the chain. That feels like a great point to end on. Thanks again to our panelists here and thank you all for being here. That's it.
