Agreed — is the same for vault models with 2–3 day withdrawal notice create adversarial liquidity.
Short-term behavior is rewarded, while long-term users get penalised in a fully PvP setup.
At D2, whether you’re fast or slow doesn’t matter — every user redeems the same share of the pie on withdraw / deposit window.
Cumulative fees → user PnL
Oh have not realized we already hit 2M gross PNL 🎉
Just use @AaveAave
Just use @HyperliquidX
Just use D2
Hyperliquid 💚
The core issue with the curation vault model lies in the illusion of isolation. Curators are meant to manage distinct strategies and segregate risk, yet in practice, they all end up supplying liquidity to the same underlying lending markets. What is designed to promote diversification instead concentrates exposure, turning one curator’s stress into everyone’s problem.
Despite being framed as modular and independent, the model inherently links all vaults through shared borrower pools. Liquidity from multiple curators merges into a single system, so the decisions or withdrawals of one can ripple instantly across all others as we see with recent issues with xUSD and similar assets. Even a cautious curator cannot escape the fallout from a more aggressive participant operating within the same pool.
When confidence falters or withdrawals accelerate, these shared markets seize up. Utilization shoots to 100%, redemptions grind to a halt, and borrowing rates spike to unsustainable levels. A localized liquidity crunch quickly transforms into a protocol-wide freeze, a DeFi version of a bank run essentially.
This creates a design paradox: a system built for isolation that, in reality, amplifies interdependence. Every vault inherits the risk behavior of the weakest curator, making the entire structure vulnerable when liquidity is most needed.
This model is even amplified by the economic design of these protocols: lower fees or take more risk to create business, otherwise become commoditized.
In contrast, Aave’s architecture achieves the risk segregation that curator models only promise. Each market operates in true isolation, with conservative collateral standards, controlled listings, and transparent onchain governance. Market shocks remain contained, liquidity remains accessible, and the protocol’s record of zero bad debt across billions in total value supplied underscores its resilience.
For vault creators and users, this difference is decisive. Shared-liquidity designs magnify contagion, while isolated-market frameworks contain it. Aave’s conservative design ensures predictable yields, reliable redemptions, and the stability that sustains confidence through volatility.
Just use Aave.
7,27 mil
9
O conteúdo apresentado nesta página é fornecido por terceiros. Salvo indicação em contrário, a OKX não é o autor dos artigos citados e não reivindica quaisquer direitos de autor nos materiais. O conteúdo é fornecido apenas para fins informativos e não representa a opinião da OKX. Não se destina a ser um endosso de qualquer tipo e não deve ser considerado conselho de investimento ou uma solicitação para comprar ou vender ativos digitais. Na medida em que a IA generativa é utilizada para fornecer resumos ou outras informações, esse mesmo conteúdo gerado por IA pode ser impreciso ou inconsistente. Leia o artigo associado para obter mais detalhes e informações. A OKX não é responsável pelo conteúdo apresentado nos sites de terceiros. As detenções de ativos digitais, incluindo criptomoedas estáveis e NFTs, envolvem um nível de risco elevado e podem sofrer grandes flutuações. Deve considerar cuidadosamente se o trading ou a detenção de ativos digitais é adequado para si à luz da sua condição financeira.