DeFi 如何搶佔全球金融主導權？Aave、Pendle、Kamino、Solana Foundation 高層現場對談

0:00開場與來賓介紹

0:00大家好，很高興大家來到現場。我們今天要討論 DeFi、收益、固定利率，還有所有跟 DeFi 相關的話題。我是 Seraphim，來自 Solana Foundation，負責特殊專案，雖然這到底是什麼意思也很難說。今天我們請來賓先自我介紹一下，Luigi 你先開始吧。Hey everyone, it's great to have you here. We're going to have a panel about DeFi, yields, fixed rates, everything concerning DeFi. I'm Seraphim from the Solana Foundation. I do special situations, whatever that means really. And today, perhaps you guys can introduce yourselves very briefly to start with. Maybe let's start with you, Luigi.

0:28大家好，我是 Luigi D'Onorio DeMeo，目前在 Aave Labs 擔任策略暨商務長，加入大約五個月，之前在 Avalanche 做了五年。大家好，我是 TN，Pendle 的創辦人，我們是做利率交易協議的。我是 Cheryl，負責 Kamino 的策略與成長，我們是 Solana 上的信用協議。Sure. Luigi D'Orio DeMeo. I'm Chief Strategy and Business Officer at Aave Labs. Joined about five months ago, and prior to that was at Avalanche for about five years. Yeah, I'm TN, founder of Pendle, we're a rates trading protocol. I'm Cheryl, head of strategy and growth at Kamino Foundation, a credit protocol on Solana.

0:50DeFi 如何與傳統高利率競爭？

0:50那我們就開始吧。現在美國十年期公債殖利率是 5.3%，這個數字非常吸引人，又高又安全又有規模。很多 LP 其實因此都轉去鏈下了。我的問題是，當市場低迷、DeFi 的收益跟全球最安全的市場差不多時，這個產業要怎麼留住資金？Luigi 你怎麼看？All right, let's get started. So, the 10-year treasury right now is 5.3%. That's extremely compelling, high, safe, and scalable. A lot of LPs have actually moved off-chain for that reason nowadays. So I guess my question is, how can we, as an industry, retain deposits in times when the market's down and our yields are roughly comparable with the safest market in the world? Maybe we can start with Luigi.

1:17我的意思是，我認為這是每個人都在努力解決的問題，但我也認為這個問題其實源自於加密貨幣歷史上的需求。過去，這種需求主要是吸收便宜的資本，然後將這些資本投入到更大、更有利可圖的交易中。然而，我認為現在我們看到金融科技公司陸續上線，還有其他非銀行機構也想利用像是收益計畫這類的東西，同時把他們的資金分發到借貸這一端，這等於是市場的兩個面向都進來了。我們其實可以提供更高的淨收益，因為中間不再有一個中介機構試圖收取大量的淨利差。I mean, I think it's a question everybody's grappling with, but I think it's also an issue that stemmed from what the historical demand has been in crypto. Historically, that demand has been soaking up cheap capital and deploying that into larger, more profitable trades. Whereas I think now that we're seeing fintechs come online, other non-banks looking to leverage things like earn programs and also bringing their distribution on the borrow side, there's two sides of the market coming in, and we can actually deliver a net higher yield since there isn't that intermediary trying to collect the large net interest margin in the middle.

1:53所以我認為這其實就是要找到正確的使用情境和分發方式，然後因為沒有那麼大的淨利差收取者，所以我們實際上能夠提供更高的收益。So I think it's a matter of, like, getting the right use cases and distribution, and then because there isn't that large net interest margin taker, that we're able to actually provide a higher yield.

2:09我認為鏈上仍然有許多因低效率而產生的機會。至少就我所見，原生於加密貨幣的一個較大的收益來源，就是來自於資金費率。我認為資金費率很有可能——這是永續合約市場的結果，而現在永續合約市場變得更加活躍且規模更大。不同的平台計算資金費率的方式也不盡相同，所以在各個平台之間會有一些結構性的差異。由於我們觀察到這些資金費率之間存在低效率，因此其中有一些相當有吸引力的收益可以獲取。Well, I think there's still a lot of opportunities that arise from inefficiencies on-chain. At least from where I can see, one of the bigger avenues of yield that is native to crypto is coming from funding rates. I think funding rates will very likely—it's, it's, it's an outcome of perp markets, and with perp markets now becoming a lot more active and bigger in scale. Different venues, they tabulate funding rates differently. So there would be some structural differences between the various venues, and given the inefficiencies that we observe between all these funding rates, there are some fairly attractive yield to be taken.

3:04而且我不認為它的資本化程度非常高，但隨著時間推移，隨著越來越多的工具加入，我確實相信，像這樣的情況可能會變得相當普遍，就是有大約10%、15%的資金只是在交易這些永續合約的資金費率。And I don't believe it's extremely well capitalized, but over time, with more instruments coming on board, I do believe, like, it's probably going to be quite common to have like 10, 15 percent just trading all this funding rates from perp.

3:26是的，這個問題問得很好。我認為，坦白說，要在鏈上提供同樣5%的收益，同時承擔有意義的風險，基本上是不可能的。這種情況是不會發生的。但我認為，幸運的是，我們對網路資本市場的看法是，隨著所有這些資產上鏈，應該會有一個非常健全的多元化策略。所以，請思考一下我們透過網路資本市場所根本實現的整體存取權。一般使用者可以獲得他們原本無法取得的產品，他們過去可能需要一位私人銀行家或美國券商才能接觸到這些產品。所以我認為，根本上這是關於存取權，以及對不同風險與報酬策略的多元化。Yes, good question. I think it's going to be, frankly, it's going to be impossible to actually offer on-chain yield at the same 5% while taking on a meaningful amount of risk. That's just not going to happen. But I think, fortunately, the way we think about the internet capital markets is that as all of these assets come on-chain, there should be a really robust diversification strategy. And so think about the whole access that we are fundamentally enabling by having the internet capital markets. Ordinary users can get access to products that they otherwise wouldn't have had. They probably might have needed a private banker or a U.S. brokerage, for example. So I think fundamentally this is about access and diversification to different risk and return strategies.

4:20機構資金真的進來了嗎？

4:20我們一直在討論機構資金進場，現在主要是透過 ETF，但我還沒看到華爾街真的直接把錢投入 DeFi。感覺好像我們一直被說機構要來了，結果反而是我們在把他們的產品代幣化，然後自己買。你們覺得要怎樣才能讓華爾街直接進來用 DeFi，而不是我們去用他們的東西？Cheryl 你先說。So we have also been talking about the institutional bid for a long time now. It has mostly materialized through ETFs, but we haven't actually seen, as far as I'm concerned, Wall Street directly deploying into DeFi products. It's almost like, I'm wondering, have we been kind of fooled that the institutions are coming, and hasn't it worked out the opposite way where we are tokenizing their products? And we're consuming their products. So my question is, what has to happen for Wall Street to kind of directly deploy into us instead of vice versa? Maybe Cheryl can start.

4:57是的，我認為我們當初在思考華爾街進場的方式時，可能更多是從放貸和存款的角度來看。這也可能是為什麼這裡會有一些誤解。我認為這其實是一個錯誤的思考方式。這個順序幾乎可以顛倒過來，我認為華爾街其實是以借款人、發行人、管理者的身份進場的。舉例來說，在借款方面，我們與一家資產上市公司 Figure Markets 合作，他們基本上是從我們的平台借款，然後投資到像是不動產或汽車貸款等領域。我們也與非常機構級的玩家合作，例如 FalconX，這是最大的主經紀商之一，他們是我們固定利率的試點合作夥伴。Yeah, I think the way that we were thinking about Wall Street coming on was probably more on the lending front and deposits. And that's probably why there's been some misunderstanding there. I think that's kind of the wrong way to think about it. The order could almost be flipped in that I think Wall Street is coming on as borrowers, they're coming on as issuers, as managers. So, for example, on the borrowing side, we work with In asset-listed company, Figure Markets, they essentially are borrowing from our platform in order to invest into whether it's real estate or auto loans, for example. We work with very institutional players like FalconX, which is one of the largest prime brokerage. They are our pilot partner for fixed rates.

5:48像 Galaxy 這樣的上市公司，也是我們平台上的策展人之一。所以我認為華爾街參與借貸、發行、管理等方面的方式有很多，特別是我們看到越來越多 SEC RIA 策展人加入進來，無論是 Bitwise 或是接下來還有不少會陸續加入。華爾街參與的基本形式，我認為，跟我們過去預期的非常不同。他們不會選擇無需許可的資金池，很多人都在尋求有許可、KYC。他們會考慮像是「這是不是具有法律強制力的質押品」這樣的問題。所以我認為這可能會是跟我們想像中不同的形式，但他們絕對正在進場。Folks like Galaxy, a listed company, is also a curator on our platform. So I think there are many ways in which Wall Street is participating on the borrowing, issuing, managing side as well, particularly as we are seeing more SEC RIA curators coming into the fold, whether it's Bitwise and quite a few more to come in the pipeline. The fundamental format of how Wall Street comes on, I think, is quite different from what we have been expecting in the past. It will not be permissionless pools. A lot of them are looking for permissioning, KYC. They think about things like, okay, is this a legally enforceable collateral, for example. So I think it's probably a different format than what we are thinking of, but they are definitely coming online.

6:48我非常同意Cheryl剛才說的。最終，我認為這其實就是需要對這些資產在鏈上的處理方式有更多一點的明確性，這樣大家才會對參與鏈上的機會感到安心。我也認為，另一個潛在的吸引力在於鏈上的實用性。把所有這些底層資產的代幣化表示放到鏈上當然是好事，但如果這些代幣沒有被實際利用，那其實意義也不大。這些代幣必須被用起來，可能一開始是用於借貸。但更進一步來說，重點是設計一些有趣的策略，這些策略可能在鏈下很難執行，或者是在鏈上能夠做到一些全新、完全創新的事情。透過鏈上的可組合性優勢來產生收益，這樣才能真正吸引到流動性。Well, I very much agree with what Cheryl said. Ultimately, I think it boils down to just maybe a bit more clarity on how, like, these assets will be treated on-chain before they feel comfortable participating in on-chain opportunities. And I also think, like, the other potential draw is the utility on-chain. It's like just having all these tokenized representations of the underlyings is good on-chain, but if it's just tokens that are not utilized, then it's not going to be too meaningful. They have to be utilized, maybe lending, borrowing to begin. But beyond that, it's really crafting interesting strategies that you might have difficulty executing off-chain, or something even completely or totally novel on-chain. Generate that yield through the composability advantage on-chain, and make that a good draw of liquidity.

7:53是的，我認為這其實是要真正理解並定義「機構」這個詞，對吧？如果我們在討論像是大型投資銀行把資金存入或借貸到 DeFi，我認為這目前並沒有發生，也不是短期內會發生的事。這對他們來說其實也沒有太大誘因。但如果你說的是非銀行機構、不同類型的對沖基金，甚至是大型的傳統做市商，他們越來越多地把資金存入 DeFi、在 DeFi 進行借貸。不過，這當中還是有很多阻礙這個趨勢成長的因素。首先，最明顯的問題就是無風險利率和借貸利率之間的差距。所以，我認為如果你看到無風險利率回到——你知道，非常低的水準，你就會看到更多機構進場。Yeah, I think it's a matter of really understanding and defining institutions, right? Like if we're talking about, like, bulge bracket banks depositing and lending into DeFi, I think that's, like, not happening right now and is not near term. It's also not really in their interest. But if you're talking about non-banks, different type of hedge funds, even large market makers, traditional ones, they are increasingly depositing into DeFi, lending into DeFi. One, you know, there's a bunch of blockers, though, for that to grow. One is obviously the first question, which is disparity into the risk-free rate and the lending rate. So, like, I think if you saw risk-free rate back—you know, very low, you'd see a lot more institutions come in.

8:42另外一件事情是，像是與合格託管機構的連接。你知道，許多機構需要特定類型的基礎設施，才能夠部署資本，而他們當中有很多目前還沒辦法透過MPCs或各種非託管錢包來做到這一點。他們希望看到自己的資產是放在合格託管機構裡的。因此，我們在Aave所做的一件事，就是我們其實正在與Anchorage以及其他託管機構直接建立整合，這樣資產就可以存放在合格託管機構裡，比如說Bitcoin、ETH或其他數位資產，然後你就可以直接在Aave上借出貸款。所以我認為，這類型的整合對於看到利差收斂是非常關鍵的。But the other thing is, you know, connection to qualified custodians, for example. You know, many institutions need certain types of infrastructure to be able to deploy capital, and a lot of them are not at a level where they can do that via MPCs or different type of non-custodial wallets. They want to see their assets sitting in a qualified custodian. And so, you know, one thing we've done at Aave is we're actually in the process of building an integration with Anchorage directly and other custodians, whereby assets could sit in qualified custodian, let's say Bitcoin, ETH, other digital assets, and then you can draw a loan out on Aave directly. And so I think those types of integrations are key to seeing that spread collapse.

9:30代幣化股票的機會與挑戰

9:30最近很熱門的話題是代幣化股票，像 Robinhood 跟 Solana 都有在推。Aave 和 Kamino 也開始把股票當作抵押品。雖然還在早期，你們覺得哪些用戶最能受益？為什麼在 DeFi 借錢比傳統券商更有吸引力？Cheryl 你先說。I think there's one topic that's quite interesting nowadays, specifically tokenized stocks. So that's a question primarily for, actually for all of you guys. Tokenized stocks has been a huge narrative. We've seen with Robinhood and Solana leading in that regard. I know that. Even Kamino offering now tokenized stocks as collateral in some way? I know it's early days, but which user segment is most likely to benefit from this on-chain, and what makes borrowing in DeFi more compelling than a TradFi broker? So maybe we can start with Cheryl, if you...

10:08我認為有很多全球的使用者，其實根本無法接觸到美國股票。如果你想想大多數亞洲市場，還有拉丁美洲，很多人就是沒有辦法接觸。所以這又回到我們之前討論的「取得管道」這個問題。還有很多原生於加密貨幣圈的人，坦白說，他們寧願有一個平台，同時可以操作他們的加密資產和傳統股票，而且他們希望能在這上面做槓桿操作。所以我認為這正在開放給一群非常不同的使用者。此外，這對傳統券商來說有一個非常明顯的優勢，就是任何清算的機制都非常清楚、透明。很多時候在傳統券商上，你其實不太清楚自己會怎麼被追繳保證金。I think there are a lot of global users that just simply don't have access to U.S. equities. So if you think of most of the Asia market in Latin America as well, a lot of them simply don't have access. So it comes down to access again, which is what we talked about before. There are also a lot of crypto-native people who, frankly, just would rather having one platform for both their crypto-native as well as fundamental stock equities, and they want to take leverage on that. So I think it is opening up to a very different platform of users. On top of that, it is a very clear advantage over traditional brokerages, wherein any of the liquidation methodologies are extremely clear. It's very transparent. Many times on the brokerage, it's not exactly evidence, the ways in which you get margin calls.

11:04是啊，我的意思是，我們其實在幾週前就在Aave上推出了我們的第一批代幣化股票，是在Base上，標的是Coinbase股票和MAG7，也就是七檔股票。為了理解這些股票的預言機設計和清算機制，尤其是週末風險，我們投入了大量心力。我認為，關於這些產品的使用者是誰，其實有幾種。你知道，前面已經提到過一些，比如非美國市場的曝險等等。然後我覺得，這些股票上鏈之後，你可以打造出在傳統金融裡根本無法實現的有趣產品，這真的很有意思。Yeah, I mean, we actually launched our first tokenized stocks on Aave about a few weeks ago on Base with Coinbase stocks, MAG7, so seven stocks. A lot of work went into understanding the oracle design and liquidation of those stocks because of the weekend risk. I think in terms of, like, who are the users for these, I think there's a few. You know, a few already mentioned in terms of, like, non-U.S. exposure, et cetera. And then I think there's just really interesting products that you can build with those being on-chain that you couldn't in TradFi, right?

11:43像是，它們最後會變成結構型商品，比如說你用單一股票作為質押品，在 DeFi 上借出美元，然後把這些美元投入到收益更高的交易裡，基本上就是在做一種人們在比特幣上常見的套利交易，然後再把那個收益重新質押回去，最終在股票的基礎上產生一個淨正收益。所以我認為你會看到這類產品被拿來做應用，不管是中心化交易所、金融科技公司，還是不同的錢包，都會把這種產品當作一個差異化的服務來提供，跟你把股票放在一般券商那邊，讓券商去借出賺取利差相比，是不一樣的。因此我覺得，這跟美元被代幣化、收益被民主化的情況沒什麼不同，你現在也會在股票上看到同樣的事情發生。Like, they end up becoming structured products, like depositing a single stock collateral, borrowing dollars on DeFi and putting that into a higher-yielding trade, basically running a carry trade that people run on Bitcoin, and then re-hypothecating that yield back into the underlying delivers like a net positive yield on the stock. So then I think you'll take a product like that and see, you know, whether it be centralized exchanges, fintechs. Different wallets offer that product as a differentiator versus, you know, putting your stock in a normal brokerage and lending it out so that the broker can actually make that spread. So I think, like, no different than dollars being tokenized and that yield being democratized, you're seeing the same thing with equities.

12:35關於代幣化股票，我們已經做過——我們的第一次實作是與StretchX合作，這是由XStocks發行，底層資產是Stretch。年化收益大約有11.5%。所以這個結果相當不錯。那個特定市場的TVL大概有兩千多萬美元，因為收益率很高，對於想要投機的人來說變得很有吸引力。然而，很多代幣化股票其實並沒有提供那麼高的收益。現在很多很受歡迎的科技股，它們要嘛完全沒有收益、股息收益率，或者低於1%。而如果用我們現有的模式，把股息收益從底層資產中剝離出來，只是為了交易1%的股息收益，對大多數人來說其實意義不大。So, with respect to tokenized stocks, we have done—our first implementation was with StretchX, which was issued by XStocks, the underlying being Stretch. Yielding around 11.5%. So that worked out pretty well. There were maybe 20-odd million in TVL for that specific market because the yield was fat, and it became interesting for people to speculate on that. However, a lot of tokenized stocks, they don't offer that much of a yield. Many tech stocks that are very popular these days, they have, they either give no yield, dividend yield, or sub 1%. And to use our existing model to strip the dividend yield from its underlying and to trade on just like 1% dividend yield is not too meaningful for most people.

13:46所以我們會對我們的機制進行調整，以更好地支援這類資產。我們將需要引入一些新的元素，但大致上，我們希望能夠提供我們的基礎設施，來滿足更廣泛資產的需求，包括代幣化股票。不過，目前我們已經推出了像是Nvidia和Pfizer的市場，但這兩個市場的成長動能其實都相當緩慢。So we will make adjustments to our mechanism to better support that kind of asset. There will be newer elements that we'll have to introduce, but by and large, we want to be able to offer our infrastructure to cater to a broader base of assets, including that of tokenized stocks. But as it is right now, we have launched like Nvidia and Pfizer markets. But the traction has been, traction for both of these markets were fairly slow.

14:25DeFi 固定利率的發展與挑戰

14:25固定利率在 DeFi 至少從 2020 年就有了，最近 Morpho、Kamino、Jupiter、Supernova 等團隊又開始做，但過去大多數固定利率產品都失敗了。為什麼 Pendle 能成功？So that's going to be a big topic. I have a question about fixed rates. So fixed rates and DeFi have been around since at least 2020. There seems to be a resurgence now with Morpho, Kamino, Jupiter, younger teams like Supernova. But historically, most fixed-rate attempts in DeFi have sort of failed. I'm wondering, why did Pendle succeed in that regard when others didn't?

14:52對我們來說，我認為「固定利率」是一個非常廣泛的術語和類別。當然，像借貸市場也有固定利率的產品，而且我們現在也開始看到這樣的趨勢。但對於使用 Pendle 的使用者來說，考量的點還是有些不同。舉例來說，如果我去借貸市場，使用者大概只是想鎖定他們賺取或借出的金額，對吧？但當他們來到 Pendle，這可能就比較偏向於投機的層面。這裡的結果是，沒錯，你也許可以鎖定穩定幣年化收益在五、六個百分點，因為有其他人願意承擔對手方的風險。Yeah, so I—for us, I think the, so fixed rate is a very broad term and category. And of course, like with lending markets, there are also fixed rate offerings, and we're starting to see that. But for users who use Pendle, I think the consideration. In order to obtain that fixed rate, it's still fairly different. Like, let's say if I go to a lending market, users probably want to just lock in the amount they earn or they borrow, right? But when they come to Pendle, it's maybe a bit more on the speculation side. And the outcome here is that, yeah, maybe you can lock in stablecoin yield at five, six percent, because someone else is willing to take the other side.

15:48我認為，這兩個平台的考量其實非常不同，這也是為什麼我覺得「固定利率」這個詞其實涵蓋了很多不同的領域。至於我們如何定位Pendle，我認為在過去幾年裡，我們一直非常用心地跟上趨勢，並且努力調整Pendle，以因應所有這些趨勢。所以有一段時間，我們非常積極參與Lido的stETH和Rocket Pool的rETH。我們也非常積極參與Arbitrum生態系。因此，我們是2023年Arbitrum成長的主要受益者之一。當EigenLayer讓點數變得流行時，我們也重新調整了我們的產品，以滿足點數交易的需求。Now, I do think the considerations are quite different for both of these platforms, which is why I think, like, fixed rate is a fairly broad term to cover all these different verticals. Now, as to how we position Pendle, I think over the course of the last few years, we've been very diligent in keeping up with trends and trying to adjust Pendle to cater to all these trends. So at one point in time, we were very involved in Lido's stETH and Rocket Pool's rETH. We were also very involved in the Arbitrum ecosystem. So we were a big beneficiary of the growth of Arbitrum in 2023. And an eigenlayer popularized the points. We restructured our product to cater to points trading.

16:37所以，讓所有這些代表鏈上活動的點數，在代幣正式上線之前就能夠被交易。然後，合成美元和穩定幣是我們去年其中一個核心產品。今年則更著重於將它調整應用到RWA資產上，我相信未來可預見的一段時間，這方面會有更多的重視。So make all these points that represent activities on-chain, make them tradable before the token's live. And then synthetic dollars and stablecoin being one of our core offerings last year. This year is more about adjusting it to RWA assets, and I believe going forward in the next foreseeable future, it will be a lot more emphasis on that.

17:03是的，我非常同意Tien的看法。我認為，很多時候……我認為，Pendle之所以有這麼多需求，其實是來自於一個獨立的類別，也就是說，這裡有收益、有點數，人們想要對收益型代幣進行投機，而固定利率產品則是這個過程中非常不錯的副產品。在目前這個環境下，正如 TN 所說，很多其實都是關於RWA套利交易。現在在Kamino上，我們有一個針對套利交易的固定利率倍增器，目前規模為五千五百萬美元。我們認為，這背後的動機其實是相當不同的。在這裡，你真正關注的是RWA套利交易，以及更多不同且複雜的交易策略。Yeah, I very much agree with TN. I think a lot of, I think... Where Pendle gets a lot of its demand, it's really from this separate category in which, you know, there is yields, there's points, people want to speculate on the yield token, and the fixed rate product is a very nice byproduct of that. In this current environment, to what Tian said, a lot of it is really about RWA carry trades. And right now on Kamino, we have a fixed rate multiplier available for carry trades, currently at $55 million. We think that the underlying motivation is quite different. Here you're really looking at RW carry trades, looking at more different sophisticated trading strategies.

17:59很明顯地，我認為這當中有一個非常有利的期間，因為很多RWA本身就有一定的存續期間。所以當我們有固定利率時，這對於雙方來說是一個非常好的配對。我認為，很多借款人自然會希望有固定期間、固定利率。這其中很大一部分其實取決於放款人，他們可能必須為這樣的期限溢價支付額外的成本。Obviously, I think there is a very favorable duration to that, in which a lot of RWAs have a duration to them. And so when we have fixed rates, it's a very nice match between both sides of the equation. And I think naturally a lot of borrowers would like fixed duration, fixed rates. A lot of it is really up to the lenders who might have to pay up for a term premium for that.

18:33嗯，不，我認為有幾點。我的意思是，Aave 很早以前就有固定利率，距今已經很久了，而且它現在其實還是可以提供固定利率，只是沒有期限。所以這並不是做不到的事情。關於固定利率這件事，就像我覺得 Cheryl 剛剛提到的，這其實是一個問題，因為在加密貨幣領域，這是一個單邊市場，沒有人想要以固定利率出借資金，尤其是沒有任何真正期限的情況下。也許一個月、兩個月、三個月還有可能，但只要是比較長的期限，基本上沒有人有興趣，因為這個領域的利率變動非常大。Yeah, no, I think a few things. I mean, Aave had fixed rates back in the day, a long time ago, and it also can still provide fixed rates just without duration. So it's not impossible to do. The thing about fixed rates is, like I think Cheryl was alluding to, is it's really an issue in terms of, like, it's a one-sided market in crypto where nobody wants to lend at the fixed rate, especially not at any real duration, like maybe a month, two month, three month potentially, but any real duration, there's not a lot of interest because the interest rates have moved a lot in the space.

19:16在傳統金融中也是如此，因此承擔這種存續期間風險，所獲得的溢價似乎並不值得。另一個問題是，將這套機制建立在點對點的市場上，會讓啟動需求變得非常困難，因為在傳統金融中，固定利率的撮合其實就是有人在承擔利率風險的問題。因此，你真的需要那些想要大規模對利率進行投機的參與者進場，才能真正啟動這個市場。不然，如果你只是撮合自然的買方和賣方，市場就會變成單向市場。And in traditional finance as well, and so taking on that duration risk, the premium hasn't seemed to be worth it. The other problem is building this out on a peer-to-peer marketplace makes it really hard to bootstrap demand, because matching fixed rates in traditional finance is really somebody taking interest rate risk question. And so you really need those participants who want to speculate on interest rates writ large to come in in order to really bootstrap that market. Otherwise, if you're just matching natural buyers and sellers, you'll have a one-way market.

19:55未來六個月的成長引擎

19:55下一個問題是一個「剪輯吸睛」的問題。那麼，請問你們目前正在開發哪一項產品，你認為它會在接下來六個月內為你們的專案帶來爆炸性的成長？請跟我們分享一下。也許我們可以先從TN開始。這個產品也可以是現有的產品。Next question is a clip farming question. So, which product are you working on that you think will drive massive growth for your project in the next six months? Tell us about it. Maybe we can start with TN. So it can be an existing product as well.

20:10我最期待的是我們已經上線一年的 Boros 產品。前面提到鏈上還有很多 funding rate 沒被發掘，Boros 就是做這個。現在各種 perp venue 的 delta 都可以變成可交易資產，Boros 讓用戶可以鎖定 funding rate 差異。雖然現在規模還小，但我們會繼續擴大，尤其是 RWA perp 這塊需求很大。So, yeah, I'm most excited about a product that we're building for us. So it is already live for about a year now. I just think that, so one of the earlier points that I mentioned about yield being relatively undiscovered on-chain, that's mostly from funding rates. That's something that Boros caters to. So with the various perp venues, the deltas now become tradable asset or tradable instrument. With Boros, users can now lock in the funding rate differences. So I think that's a very exciting opportunity. Now the capacity is still relatively small, but we're growing it. Yeah, definitely, especially in the RWA perp space, I think there's quite a lot of demand for that.

21:08我認為還是會以我們在鏈上的RWA（現實世界資產）為主，並且真正將它們與我們現有的許多固定利率乘數交易產品做結合。這部分其實已經有相當不錯的成效。例如，我們有OnRe token，這是一個全球再保險的代幣。我們發現這方面的需求正在持續增加，所以我們對於能夠引進更多有趣的RWA資產來延續這個趨勢感到非常興奮。I think it would be still the RWAs that we have on-chain, and really matching them with a lot of the fixed-rate multiply trade product that we have going on. That has seen pretty good traction. For example, we have that with the OnRe token, which is a global reinsurance token. We find that there's been increasing demand for this, so very excited to bring on a lot more interesting RWA assets in order to carry on this trend.

21:45是的，除了RWA（實體資產代幣化）股票這部分對我們未來來說非常令人興奮之外，另一個重點其實是Aave V4的應用。作為一個模組化基礎設施，這並不是Aave過去一直以來被大家熟知的用途。我們最近有一個治理提案，讓外部策展人進來運營他們自己的市場，叫做Centora。我認為在接下來的六個月內，特別是對Aave來說，會在B2B市場贏得很大一部分市佔，而這個市場過去Aave其實並沒有真正切入。所以我認為這是接下來六個月值得大家關注的重點。Yeah, so aside from the RWA tokenized stocks, which are very exciting for us going forward, the other is really Aave V4 being used. As a modular infrastructure, it's not something that historically Aave has been known to be used for. We recently had a governance proposal for an outside curator come in to run their own market called Centora. I think you'll see over the next six months, for Aave in particular, winning a large share of that B2B market that historically it hasn't really tapped into. So I think that's something to look out for for the next six months.

22:20美國政局變化對 DeFi 的影響

22:20川普政府上台後對加密產業其實蠻有利的，像 Genius Act、Robinhood 推鏈等都帶來更多動能。如果下個週期民主黨重新執政，你們會調整策略嗎？還是照常運作？Cheryl 先說。Trump administration has been in some ways great for crypto ever since he came to power. We've got the Genius Act, Robinhood started to, you know, launch their chain, so there's a lot more traction in that regard. Companies are embracing crypto more now. If Democrats return next cycle, does it require a change in business strategy, or it's just business as usual for you guys? Maybe we can start with Cheryl.

22:49我覺得推動數位資產其實是兩黨共識，差別只在執法速度，但方向已經確立。Kamino 會持續專注把產品做到機構等級、合規準備好，日常運作不會有什麼變化。Yeah, I think pushing for digital assets is relatively bipartisan. Where the difference might come is really probably more in the pace of enforcement, but I think the direction is set. At Kamino, we are focused on making sure our product is institutional grade, is compliance ready. So I would say nothing changes for us on a day-to-day basis.

23:18我認為我們大致上會維持現狀，因為，我這樣說的理由是，像對於 Pendle 來說，它是一個二階導數的產品。通常，這是因為它出現在任何循環的較後期。宏觀環境的變化通常會先影響一階導數，而二階導數要等到之後才會感受到影響。在這種情況下，我認為我們大多數時候只會觀察事情的發展狀況。I think we'll mostly be status quo, because, so my justification there is that, like, for Pendle, it's a second-order derivative. And usually, it's because it's a later part of any cycle. Changes in, like, a macro environment would probably affect the first order derivative much sooner before the second order derivative feels the impact. In this case, I think we will mostly just observe how things are.

24:15我的立場跟Cheryl很類似。我認為即使宏觀環境發生變化，也不會有太多改變。但如果真的有變化，那我們就會從一階導數來觀察，看看事情怎麼發展。在我們實施任何改變之前，Luzi先生。對，我的意思是，我其實也認同他們的看法。這真的取決於情況，我不認為所有民主黨人都討厭加密貨幣，但我確實認為，如果遇到一個非常敵對的政府，那當然就需要採取不同的行動方式。不過，我覺得我們是建設者，最終我們還是會找到一條合理的建設道路，基本上就是隨機應變。My stance is similar to Cheryl. I don't think there will be too many changes if the macro environment changes. But if there were, then we will just take the cue from the first order derivatives, see how things work out. Before we implement changes, Mr. Luzi. Yeah, no, I mean, I think I echo their sentiments. Like, it really depends on, you know, I don't think all Democrats hate crypto, but I do think, like, if you have a very adversarial administration, then obviously it requires a different mode of action. However, like... You know, I think we're builders, and at the end of the day, we're going to find the path to build whatever makes sense, and, you know, we'll kind of roll with the punches, basically.

24:53東西方市場的未來選擇

24:53最後一個問題，我們可以簡短一點。既然我們現在在新加坡，如果你必須在接下來五年只選擇加碼西方或亞洲，你會選哪一邊？為什麼？既然 Cheryl 在笑，我們就先請你回答。Final question, we can keep it quick. Since we're in Singapore, if you had to double down exclusively on West or Asia for the next five years, which one would it be and why? Since Cheryl is laughing, we can go with you.

25:06我以前待在Dragonfly，Dragonfly非常以東西方的結合為傲。Dragonfly是少數同時在紐約和新加坡設有辦公室的創投公司之一，這點他們非常自豪。這也呼應了我們對TOKEN2049的看法，我們剛剛在台下也有討論到，擁有紐約和新加坡這兩個據點真的很重要。我會說，目前美國在監管明確性方面，可能正為這個產業中的許多機構樹立一個有趣的先例。而在全球，每個國家都在關注。新加坡和香港的監管體系也在快速演變，像是香港最近就發放了VATP和穩定幣的相關牌照。So I used to be at Dragonfly, where Dragonfly really prides itself on East and West coming together. Dragonfly is one of the VCs out there that really prides itself on having both a New York office and a Singapore office. It sort of echoes what we think about TOKEN2049, where we were just talking about it offstage, wherein it's really important to have both New York and Singapore. I would say that the U.S. right now is probably setting an interesting precedent from a regulatory clarity perspective for a lot of the institutions in the space. And globally, every country is watching. Singapore and Hong Kong have also been having rapidly evolving regimes as well, with Hong Kong giving out, you know, VATP and stablecoin licensing.

26:01在加密貨幣領域，許多原生的加密資本來自亞洲，這一點並不令人意外。最終，作為一個建設者，我們真正專注的是打造人們會使用的產品。我個人住在新加坡，非常高興能以這裡為基地，也很期待能在亞太地區推動更多的採用。It's no surprise that in crypto, a lot of the crypto native capital really comes from Asia. And ultimately, as a builder, we are really focused on building products that people use. Personally, I live in Singapore, very happy to be based here, excited to increase adoption in APAC.

26:21是啊，我的意思是，如果我要選一個讓話題更有趣的話，我會說是西方。我認為那裡的資本池更深厚。我也認為，那裡擁有讓全世界其他地方的人最感興趣的資產，而他們也想要取得這些資產的管道。所以，這並不是要忽略其他地區，因為我們其實是在努力全球發展，畢竟加密貨幣本來就是全球性的。但如果說人力資源有集中配置的話，很明顯我們的分配重點就在那裡。Yeah, I mean, if I had to pick to make it interesting, I would say the West. I think the capital pool is deeper. I think also it's where the assets that are most interesting to the people in the rest of the world are, and they want access to those assets. And so it doesn't mean to dismiss, like, another area because we're trying to grow, you know, globally, and crypto is in fact global. But if there is a concentration effort by way of headcount, it's pretty clear where we're allocated.

26:55我也是偏向西方，主要是因為流動性集中在那邊。Yeah. I'm also more on the west side, more immediately, just because of the concentration of liquidity.

27:08感謝大家，謝謝！Gotcha. Thanks, everyone. Cheers.