Author: thedefinvestor Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain Last week was a bad week for DeFi. It wasn't just because of the market crash. Last week: Balancer, a top DeFi protocol, was exploited, resulting in a loss of $128 million. Stream Finance, a protocol that primarily generates yield through stablecoins, announced the loss of $93 million in user assets and is preparing to declare bankruptcy. Moonwell lost $1 million in an attack. Peapods' Pod LP TVL (Total Value Locked) dropped from $32 million to $0 due to liquidation. So far, the most devastating loss has been to Stream Finance. This is because it affects not only its depositors but also stablecoin lenders of some of the largest lending protocols in the space, including Morpho, Silo, and Euler. In short, here's what happened: CBB, a prominent figure on Crypto Twitter, has begun advising people to withdraw their investments from Stream due to its lack of transparency. Stream is reportedly running a "DeFi market-neutral strategy," but its positions cannot be monitored, and its transparency page has been consistently listed as "coming soon." This triggered a bank run, with a large number of users attempting to withdraw funds simultaneously. Stream Finance has halted withdrawal processing after it recently suffered a massive loss of user funds ($92 million) and was unable to process all withdrawal requests. This caused the price of its xUSD (Stream's interest-bearing "stablecoin") to plummet. This already sounds terrible, but the story isn't over yet. A major problem is that xUSD is listed as collateral in currency markets such as Euler, Morpho, and Silo. Worse still, Stream has been using its so-called stablecoin xUSD as collateral to borrow funds from the money market to execute its yield strategy. With the xUSD price now crashing, many lenders who lent USDC/USDT to xUSD collateral on Euler, Morpho, and Silo are no longer able to withdraw their funds. According to the DeFi User Alliance (YAM), at least $284 million in DeFi debt across various money markets is tied to Stream Finance! Unfortunately, a large portion of this money may be unrecoverable. As a result, many stablecoin lenders suffered heavy losses. What can we learn from this? Over the past two to three years, I have been personally deeply involved in the farming of DeFi protocols. However, following the recent events, I plan to re-evaluate my DeFi portfolio positions and become more risk-averse. Yield farming can be very profitable. I've made some substantial profits from it over the past few years, but events like this can cause you to lose a significant amount of money. I have a few suggestions: Always verify the exact source of income. Stream isn't the only DeFi protocol claiming to generate yield through a "market-neutral strategy." Be sure to look for transparency dashboards or proof-of-reserve reports, where you can clearly see that the team isn't gambling with your assets. Don't blindly trust a protocol just because the team behind it seems good. Consider whether the risk-reward ratio is good enough. Some stablecoin protocols offer an annualized return (APR) of 5-7%. Others may offer over 10%. My advice is not to blindly deposit funds into protocols offering the highest yields without doing proper research. If the strategy is not transparent, or the process of generating returns seems too risky, then it is not worth risking your money for a double-digit annual return. Or if the returns are too low (e.g., an annualized rate of 4-5%), ask yourself if it's worth it. No smart contract is risk-free; we've even seen established applications like Balancer attacked. Is it worth risking everything for a low annualized return (APY)? Don't put all your eggs in one basket. As a general rule, I never deposit more than 10% of my portfolio into a single dApp. No matter how tempting the returns or airdrop opportunities may seem, the impact on my finances should a hack occur. In short, when building your investment portfolio, prioritize survival over making money. It's always better to be safe than to regret.Author: thedefinvestor Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain Last week was a bad week for DeFi. It wasn't just because of the market crash. Last week: Balancer, a top DeFi protocol, was exploited, resulting in a loss of $128 million. Stream Finance, a protocol that primarily generates yield through stablecoins, announced the loss of $93 million in user assets and is preparing to declare bankruptcy. Moonwell lost $1 million in an attack. Peapods' Pod LP TVL (Total Value Locked) dropped from $32 million to $0 due to liquidation. So far, the most devastating loss has been to Stream Finance. This is because it affects not only its depositors but also stablecoin lenders of some of the largest lending protocols in the space, including Morpho, Silo, and Euler. In short, here's what happened: CBB, a prominent figure on Crypto Twitter, has begun advising people to withdraw their investments from Stream due to its lack of transparency. Stream is reportedly running a "DeFi market-neutral strategy," but its positions cannot be monitored, and its transparency page has been consistently listed as "coming soon." This triggered a bank run, with a large number of users attempting to withdraw funds simultaneously. Stream Finance has halted withdrawal processing after it recently suffered a massive loss of user funds ($92 million) and was unable to process all withdrawal requests. This caused the price of its xUSD (Stream's interest-bearing "stablecoin") to plummet. This already sounds terrible, but the story isn't over yet. A major problem is that xUSD is listed as collateral in currency markets such as Euler, Morpho, and Silo. Worse still, Stream has been using its so-called stablecoin xUSD as collateral to borrow funds from the money market to execute its yield strategy. With the xUSD price now crashing, many lenders who lent USDC/USDT to xUSD collateral on Euler, Morpho, and Silo are no longer able to withdraw their funds. According to the DeFi User Alliance (YAM), at least $284 million in DeFi debt across various money markets is tied to Stream Finance! Unfortunately, a large portion of this money may be unrecoverable. As a result, many stablecoin lenders suffered heavy losses. What can we learn from this? Over the past two to three years, I have been personally deeply involved in the farming of DeFi protocols. However, following the recent events, I plan to re-evaluate my DeFi portfolio positions and become more risk-averse. Yield farming can be very profitable. I've made some substantial profits from it over the past few years, but events like this can cause you to lose a significant amount of money. I have a few suggestions: Always verify the exact source of income. Stream isn't the only DeFi protocol claiming to generate yield through a "market-neutral strategy." Be sure to look for transparency dashboards or proof-of-reserve reports, where you can clearly see that the team isn't gambling with your assets. Don't blindly trust a protocol just because the team behind it seems good. Consider whether the risk-reward ratio is good enough. Some stablecoin protocols offer an annualized return (APR) of 5-7%. Others may offer over 10%. My advice is not to blindly deposit funds into protocols offering the highest yields without doing proper research. If the strategy is not transparent, or the process of generating returns seems too risky, then it is not worth risking your money for a double-digit annual return. Or if the returns are too low (e.g., an annualized rate of 4-5%), ask yourself if it's worth it. No smart contract is risk-free; we've even seen established applications like Balancer attacked. Is it worth risking everything for a low annualized return (APY)? Don't put all your eggs in one basket. As a general rule, I never deposit more than 10% of my portfolio into a single dApp. No matter how tempting the returns or airdrop opportunities may seem, the impact on my finances should a hack occur. In short, when building your investment portfolio, prioritize survival over making money. It's always better to be safe than to regret.

What can we learn from the successive collapses of multiple DeFi projects?

2025/11/10 15:00
4 min read

Author: thedefinvestor

Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain

Last week was a bad week for DeFi.

It wasn't just because of the market crash. Last week:

  • Balancer, a top DeFi protocol, was exploited, resulting in a loss of $128 million.
  • Stream Finance, a protocol that primarily generates yield through stablecoins, announced the loss of $93 million in user assets and is preparing to declare bankruptcy.
  • Moonwell lost $1 million in an attack.
  • Peapods' Pod LP TVL (Total Value Locked) dropped from $32 million to $0 due to liquidation.

So far, the most devastating loss has been to Stream Finance.

This is because it affects not only its depositors but also stablecoin lenders of some of the largest lending protocols in the space, including Morpho, Silo, and Euler.

In short, here's what happened:

  • CBB, a prominent figure on Crypto Twitter, has begun advising people to withdraw their investments from Stream due to its lack of transparency.

Stream is reportedly running a "DeFi market-neutral strategy," but its positions cannot be monitored, and its transparency page has been consistently listed as "coming soon."

  • This triggered a bank run, with a large number of users attempting to withdraw funds simultaneously.
  • Stream Finance has halted withdrawal processing after it recently suffered a massive loss of user funds ($92 million) and was unable to process all withdrawal requests. This caused the price of its xUSD (Stream's interest-bearing "stablecoin") to plummet.

This already sounds terrible, but the story isn't over yet.

A major problem is that xUSD is listed as collateral in currency markets such as Euler, Morpho, and Silo.

Worse still, Stream has been using its so-called stablecoin xUSD as collateral to borrow funds from the money market to execute its yield strategy.

With the xUSD price now crashing, many lenders who lent USDC/USDT to xUSD collateral on Euler, Morpho, and Silo are no longer able to withdraw their funds.

According to the DeFi User Alliance (YAM), at least $284 million in DeFi debt across various money markets is tied to Stream Finance!

Unfortunately, a large portion of this money may be unrecoverable.

As a result, many stablecoin lenders suffered heavy losses.

What can we learn from this?

Over the past two to three years, I have been personally deeply involved in the farming of DeFi protocols.

However, following the recent events, I plan to re-evaluate my DeFi portfolio positions and become more risk-averse.

Yield farming can be very profitable. I've made some substantial profits from it over the past few years, but events like this can cause you to lose a significant amount of money.

I have a few suggestions:

  • Always verify the exact source of income.

Stream isn't the only DeFi protocol claiming to generate yield through a "market-neutral strategy." Be sure to look for transparency dashboards or proof-of-reserve reports, where you can clearly see that the team isn't gambling with your assets.

Don't blindly trust a protocol just because the team behind it seems good.

  • Consider whether the risk-reward ratio is good enough.

Some stablecoin protocols offer an annualized return (APR) of 5-7%. Others may offer over 10%. My advice is not to blindly deposit funds into protocols offering the highest yields without doing proper research.

If the strategy is not transparent, or the process of generating returns seems too risky, then it is not worth risking your money for a double-digit annual return.

Or if the returns are too low (e.g., an annualized rate of 4-5%), ask yourself if it's worth it.

No smart contract is risk-free; we've even seen established applications like Balancer attacked. Is it worth risking everything for a low annualized return (APY)?

  • Don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As a general rule, I never deposit more than 10% of my portfolio into a single dApp.

No matter how tempting the returns or airdrop opportunities may seem, the impact on my finances should a hack occur.

In short, when building your investment portfolio, prioritize survival over making money.

It's always better to be safe than to regret.

Market Opportunity
Brainedge Logo
Brainedge Price(LEARN)
$0.008982
$0.008982$0.008982
+0.21%
USD
Brainedge (LEARN) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Born Again’ Season 3 Way Before Season 2

Born Again’ Season 3 Way Before Season 2

The post Born Again’ Season 3 Way Before Season 2 appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Daredevil Born Again Marvel MCU fans were thrilled that Charlie Cox’s Daredevil was being brought back to life after his unceremonious execution after his show’s Netflix run, where everything was transitioning to Disney Plus. Born Again felt like a moment that would never come, and when it did, it mostly satisfied fans, with few exceptions. Now, according to a new IGN interview with head of TV Brad Winderbaum, Marvel has greenlit Daredevil: Born Again for season 3, well before season 2 airs in March 2026. Originally, the plan was an 18-episode run across two seasons, but Marvel seems to have much larger plans for Matt Murdoch and his series. This is a combination of two things. First, the positive fan reception to season 1. While there were some hiccups here, where the middle of the season had parts of the previously canned version of the show they had to work around, the first and last few episodes were incredible, and that’s the team making all of season 2 and presumably season 3 going forward. So, that’s great news. Second, this is a move by Marvel to reduce the cost of its endless supply of Disney Plus shows by focusing on more “street level” content. MCU series have been all over the place in terms of their focus and their budgets, culminating in the ridiculous $212 million budget for six episodes of the VFX-heavy Secret Invasion, one of the worst things Marvel has ever produced. Now? The name of the game is lower costs. Agatha All Along was a prime example of this, one of the MCU’s cheapest projects ever but one of its best shows. Disney is investing deeper into the “Daredevil-verse” here, as season 2 of Born Again features Jessica Jones, who might be destined to return for her…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/19 02:29
Fed forecasts only one rate cut in 2026, a more conservative outlook than expected

Fed forecasts only one rate cut in 2026, a more conservative outlook than expected

The post Fed forecasts only one rate cut in 2026, a more conservative outlook than expected appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell talks to reporters following the regular Federal Open Market Committee meetings at the Fed on July 30, 2025 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images The Federal Reserve is projecting only one rate cut in 2026, fewer than expected, according to its median projection. The central bank’s so-called dot plot, which shows 19 individual members’ expectations anonymously, indicated a median estimate of 3.4% for the federal funds rate at the end of 2026. That compares to a median estimate of 3.6% for the end of this year following two expected cuts on top of Wednesday’s reduction. A single quarter-point reduction next year is significantly more conservative than current market pricing. Traders are currently pricing in at two to three more rate cuts next year, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch tool, updated shortly after the decision. The gauge uses prices on 30-day fed funds futures contracts to determine market-implied odds for rate moves. Here are the Fed’s latest targets from 19 FOMC members, both voters and nonvoters: Zoom In IconArrows pointing outwards The forecasts, however, showed a large difference of opinion with two voting members seeing as many as four cuts. Three officials penciled in three rate reductions next year. “Next year’s dot plot is a mosaic of different perspectives and is an accurate reflection of a confusing economic outlook, muddied by labor supply shifts, data measurement concerns, and government policy upheaval and uncertainty,” said Seema Shah, chief global strategist at Principal Asset Management. The central bank has two policy meetings left for the year, one in October and one in December. Economic projections from the Fed saw slightly faster economic growth in 2026 than was projected in June, while the outlook for inflation was updated modestly higher for next year. There’s a lot of uncertainty…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:59
Rap Star Drake Uses Stake to Wager $1M in Bitcoin on Patriots Despite Super Bowl LX Odds

Rap Star Drake Uses Stake to Wager $1M in Bitcoin on Patriots Despite Super Bowl LX Odds

Drake has never been shy about betting big, but on the eve of Super Bowl LX, the global music star took it up another notch by placing a $1 million wager on the
Share
Coinstats2026/02/09 04:00