You know, I have been thinking a lot lately about how quickly the crypto space is changing, and especially about how collateral protocols are evolving. I remember when I first heard about MakerDAO – it felt like magic. You lock your ETH, get DAI, and suddenly you have liquidity without selling assets. At that time, it seemed like a revolution, and it was. But to be honest, using it was difficult – the interface was not for everyone, high fees, constant fear of liquidation. I remember sitting and calculating my collateral level every day during market downturns, and it was real stress. Then Liquity appeared, and I thought – great, it will be easier now. They made everything more efficient in terms of capital, you could take more liquidity with less collateral, which sounded wonderful. But again, it was a protocol for a single asset, with certain limitations, and although it was better than its predecessors in some aspects, it still felt like something was missing.
And now I look at @falcon_finance and understand that this is already the third generation that absorbs all the lessons of its predecessors but takes a step further. What really impresses me about $FF is their very approach to universality. They don’t just say, "drop ETH and get a stablecoin"; they are building infrastructure where various liquid assets can be brought, and importantly – tokenized real assets too. This is no longer just a crypto game; it’s a bridge between traditional finance and the on-chain world. When I think about it, I see how the very philosophy is changing. MakerDAO was like the first iPhone – it showed what was possible but was imperfect. Liquity is like Android, making things more optimized and accessible. And Falcon Finance is similar to what we have now in technology – where you no longer have to choose between convenience and functionality, between security and efficiency.
I am particularly struck by how they approach the issue of capital efficiency. At MakerDAO, there was a need to maintain a huge collateral reserve – 150% or more – to feel secure. Part of your capital was just sitting as dead weight. Liquity improved this, but with Falcon Finance, I see that they think about it quite differently. When you can use different types of assets as collateral, including RWA, you create a more resilient system. It's like portfolio diversification, but at the level of the entire protocol. One asset drops – others hold. And it's not just theory; it's a practical thing that makes USDf more stable.
Another point that strikes me is profitability. In old protocols, you locked assets, took stablecoins, and that was it. If you wanted profitability, you had to go to other protocols, farm, and take risks. With #FalconFinance, I see that they are embedding this into the architecture itself. Your collateral can work, generate income, and at the same time, you still have liquidity through USDf. This is true composability, which everyone talks about, but few implement properly.
When comparing governance, there is also much to consider. MakerDAO with its complex voting system, where you need to have a bunch of MKR to make any decisions, and where processes take months – is already an outdated model, to be honest. It works, but slowly, and regular users are detached from decision-making. Liquity took a different path, almost without governance, which is also debatable. Falcon Finance seems to be looking for balance – giving the community a voice while making the system flexible enough to adapt quickly. I haven’t seen the full picture of their governance model yet, but the very concept of universal infrastructure already implies greater openness and involvement of different participants.
There is also a technical difference. MakerDAO is a complex system with many modules that have been built over the years, and there is technical debt, that's known. Liquity is simpler but less flexible. Falcon Finance, judging by what I see, is being built from the ground up with modern security standards, gas optimization, and cross-chain capabilities in mind. This is important because the crypto space is moving forward rapidly, and if your code was written five years ago, you are already falling behind.
And you know what fascinates me the most? It's the vision. MakerDAO wanted to create a decentralized stablecoin. Liquity wanted to make it more efficient. And Falcon Finance seems to want to build a real financial infrastructure for the entire Web3. This is not just another collateral protocol; it’s a foundation on which other applications, protocols, and services can be built. When I think about the future of DeFi, I envision such an architecture – modular, open, that works with any assets, be it your ETH, your tokenized house, or company shares.
Of course, Falcon Finance is still a young project, and we will have to see how it withstands the test of time. MakerDAO and Liquity have gone through market crashes, hacks, and regulatory challenges. But that’s why I talk about evolution – each new generation learns from the mistakes of its predecessors. They have seen what went wrong and can build better. Honestly, I am curious to observe how @falcon_finance develops because in this project, I see not just technical improvements but a different way of thinking about what decentralized finance should be. Perhaps in a few years, we will be talking about the fourth generation of protocols that will take something from Falcon and move further. But right now, this approach – universality, composability, integration of the real world with on-chain – looks like the logical next step. And I am glad that I can observe this in real time rather than just reading about it in textbooks ten years later.
#FalconFinance @Falcon Finance $FF
