Improving Upon Previous Attempts
Competitor Comparison: How The Fedz Stands Out in Decentralized Finance
Last updated
Competitor Comparison: How The Fedz Stands Out in Decentralized Finance
Last updated
Previous attempts at creating algorithmic stablecoins, such as Terra-Luna and Basis, have highlighted both the potential and the challenges of this innovative approach. Terra-Luna utilized a dual-token system where the value of Terra was maintained through the minting and burning of Luna. However, this mechanism proved vulnerable to extreme market conditions, leading to significant instability and eventual collapse. Similarly, Basis aimed to maintain its peg through an algorithmic expansion and contraction of supply but faced regulatory hurdles and operational challenges. These examples demonstrate the fragility and complexity inherent in algorithmic stablecoin systems, which The Fedz aims to improve upon with more robust mechanisms.
In the stablecoin market, 1:1 backed stablecoins like USDT (Tether) and USDC (USD Coin) are prominent examples. These stablecoins operate by backing each issued token with an equivalent amount of assets, theoretically maintaining a one-to-one ratio with the US Dollar. However, these assets are not entirely composed of US dollars; instead, they include a mix of short-term and long-term US debt. This means that while they aim to provide stability, they are not as capital efficient as FUSD. Their reliance on debt instruments introduces a layer of fragility, as significant financial pressure leading to mass withdrawals could reveal vulnerabilities in their backing assets.
Over-collateralized stablecoins like MakerDAO’s DAI and Liquity’s LUSD require high over-collateralization to function effectively. These stablecoins necessitate users to deposit assets worth significantly more than the value of the stablecoins they receive, often exceeding 150% collateralization rates. While this approach aims to ensure stability and mitigate risk, it also introduces inefficiencies and capital constraints. Moreover, in times of extreme market volatility, the value of the collateral can plummet, triggering liquidations and making the system fragile. This high collateral requirement limits their usability and flexibility, posing challenges to scalability and efficiency compared to FUSD.
