Many new users, when minting sUSDf for the first time, see that they deposited 200 USDf but only received 160 sUSDf, leading to the illusion of a 'loss'. This psychology stems from the unit bias formed in traditional exchanges—people are used to the 1:1 exchange model of stablecoins, and when the quantity decreases, it creates a sense of insecurity.

However, in the Falcon Finance system, this reduced 'quantity' is not a loss, but a value protection mechanism. In fact, it is this seemingly 'expensive' exchange rate that allows the protocol to maintain sustainable growth without sacrificing any user rights, thus attracting large-scale institutional investments.

To understand why a more expensive sUSDf is worth buying, we need to start with its pricing model and protection mechanism.

One, Core Mechanism Analysis: Why is the price of sUSDf not 1:1?

sUSDf adopts the net asset value (NAV) logic of traditional finance's 'Closed-End Fund,' not the quantity logic of stablecoins.

Its essence is:

  • The assets in the treasury are continuously growing (driven by arbitrage gains + RWA gains).

  • The total share of sUSDf does not increase.

  • Therefore, the asset value carried by each sUSDf continuously increases.

This means:

  • Those who enter earlier gain more 'gold content.'

  • Those who enter later need to pay a reasonable premium.

This is not a 'loss,' but a fair pricing structure that ensures each user exchanges according to the real asset value.

Two, Anti-dilution Logic: Why must we protect early comers through 'discount'?

To understand intuitively, let's compare two worlds:

  • A 'Ponzi-style dilution world' without exchange rate adjustments.

  • A fair world of Falcon that follows NAV.

From the comparison, it can be seen:

  • If the exchange rate is not adjusted, later comers will occupy the profits of old users at no cost—this is 'Ponzi dilution.'

  • Falcon's exchange rate mechanism ensures that all entrants purchase at 'share value,' avoiding any form of arbitrage or unfairness.

This is why a decrease in quantity is actually fair.

Three, How value is transmitted: Why is a more expensive sUSDf safer?

Assuming the NAV of sUSDf has increased to 1.25.
You use 200 USDf to mint, and only receive:

200 / 1.25 = 160 sUSDf

Many users feel anxious when they see '160', but the key is value:

160 × 1.25 = 200 USDf

You have no losses.
What is reduced is 'quantity,' while 'value' is maintained.

This means:

  • The higher the exchange rate, the more robust the historical gains of the protocol.

  • The less you mint, the more it represents the accumulated value you are buying.

  • The price you pay matches the real asset value.

This structure inherently shields against short-term arbitrage and speculation, ensuring the protocol achieves long-term stable growth.

Four, Institutional Perspective: Why is this model seen as 'anti-dilution golden structure' by funds and DAOs?

For large funds, what they fear the most is:

  • The protocol issues tokens excessively.

  • Newcomers dilute the rights of existing holders.

  • The value of the rights certificate passively diminishes.

Falcon's NAV pricing model is essentially telling institutions:

  • All gains belong to existing holders.

  • New users must purchase at real value.

  • There is no 'shearing sheep,' only fair exchange.

  • The protocol will not sacrifice the rights of old users for growth.

This aligns very well with institutional investment preferences:

  • Verifiable asset support.

  • Clear definition of rights.

  • Transparent distribution of earnings.

  • Non-dilutive funding curve.

This is the key reason institutions dare to enter USDf→sUSDf→OTF on a large scale.

Five, Value Interpretation: The 'expensiveness' of sUSDf is actually a form of accumulated time value.

The rising exchange rate of sUSDf records every historical gain of the protocol.
Therefore:

  • The longer you hold → the more value accumulates.

  • New users are willing to pay a premium → because it represents past earning capacity.

  • The higher the exchange rate → the more robust the protocol, the lower the risk.

This is an extremely intuitive way of mapping value, visualizing 'time value' as a constantly growing number.

What users are paying for is not a 'more expensive coin,' but rather:

  • The accumulation of past protocol earnings.

  • The time cost contributed by old users.

  • The real net value of the current pool.

This design is fairer and more transparent than fixed-price tokens.

Six, Why understanding this can elevate you from retail to 'asset allocator'?

Retail investors care about quantity.
Investors care about value.

When you realize:

  • What you buy is 'unit value,' not 'token quantity.'

  • You do not need cheap coins; you need a robustly growing NAV.

  • The more expensive the protocol, the safer it is; the more expensive, the more resistant to Ponzi.

  • The higher the NAV structure, the more it attracts institutional participation.

You have moved from 'speculative thinking' to 'asset allocation thinking.'

Falcon has brought the DeFi world into a more mature and professional stage through a simple NAV model—
A world based on mathematics and asset support, rather than hype and inflation.

A more expensive sUSDf is not a trap, but a compression of value.
What you buy is not quantity, but the history of growth.

I am a sword-seeking boat, an analyst who sees only the essence and not the noise.