🦅 Let's talk about the WLFI staking proposal; many people may only see the surface.
In the past few days, the voting has basically no suspense, with support rates consistently above 99%.
Many people focus on the 2% base APR, and their first reaction is: too low. When seeing the node thresholds of 10M and 50M WLFI, it feels even more like it's keeping ordinary people out.
However, if we only focus on these two numbers, it's easy to narrow our view.
First, let's discuss why large funds are willing to enter the market.
The qualification for a 10M WLFI node essentially translates to a stablecoin arbitrage channel:
Can be exchanged 1:1 for USD1
Also can receive about 15 bps of arbitrage subsidy
If reaching the 50M level, it’s more like directly obtaining an ecological agency seat, allowing participation in real scenarios like payments and remittances.
In other words, large holders locking WLFI are not doing it for that small APR, but for the long-term yield rights within the stablecoin system.
Currently, the circulation of USD1 is already over 4 billion, targeting the entire stablecoin market.
For institutions with large capital, this feels more like obtaining a “channel license” by using WLFI.
So, are retail investors only able to watch from the sidelines?
Actually, looking at it from the other side, the logic becomes simpler.
If large holders want to enjoy the stablecoin dividends, they must lock $WLFI for the long term.
A large amount of chips locked into nodes naturally absorbs some of the market selling pressure.
In simple terms:
Whales are locking up, while retail investors are in the circulating supply.
This will make the market structure quite interesting.
There’s also a small design that many people overlook: square root voting.
Previously, many projects operated on the principle of “whoever has more money gets to decide,”
but under this mechanism:
Funds are magnified 100 times
Voting rights are only magnified 10 times
In other words, the governance advantage of large holders is significantly compressed.
If willing to lock for 180 days, retail investors can not only earn basic returns, but more importantly, the cost-effectiveness of governance rights increases.
So looking at this matter from a different angle:
1️⃣ Large funds lock up for the long-term interests of the stablecoin ecosystem.
2️⃣ The more locked, the lighter the market selling pressure.
3️⃣ Retail investors can enjoy the dividends brought by structural changes in the circulating supply.
No need to compete with whales on node thresholds, and no need to worry about the size gap; just quietly be a long-term runner. $WLFI
In the past few days, the voting has basically no suspense, with support rates consistently above 99%.
Many people focus on the 2% base APR, and their first reaction is: too low. When seeing the node thresholds of 10M and 50M WLFI, it feels even more like it's keeping ordinary people out.
However, if we only focus on these two numbers, it's easy to narrow our view.
First, let's discuss why large funds are willing to enter the market.
The qualification for a 10M WLFI node essentially translates to a stablecoin arbitrage channel:
Can be exchanged 1:1 for USD1
Also can receive about 15 bps of arbitrage subsidy
If reaching the 50M level, it’s more like directly obtaining an ecological agency seat, allowing participation in real scenarios like payments and remittances.
In other words, large holders locking WLFI are not doing it for that small APR, but for the long-term yield rights within the stablecoin system.
Currently, the circulation of USD1 is already over 4 billion, targeting the entire stablecoin market.
For institutions with large capital, this feels more like obtaining a “channel license” by using WLFI.
So, are retail investors only able to watch from the sidelines?
Actually, looking at it from the other side, the logic becomes simpler.
If large holders want to enjoy the stablecoin dividends, they must lock $WLFI for the long term.
A large amount of chips locked into nodes naturally absorbs some of the market selling pressure.
In simple terms:
Whales are locking up, while retail investors are in the circulating supply.
This will make the market structure quite interesting.
There’s also a small design that many people overlook: square root voting.
Previously, many projects operated on the principle of “whoever has more money gets to decide,”
but under this mechanism:
Funds are magnified 100 times
Voting rights are only magnified 10 times
In other words, the governance advantage of large holders is significantly compressed.
If willing to lock for 180 days, retail investors can not only earn basic returns, but more importantly, the cost-effectiveness of governance rights increases.
So looking at this matter from a different angle:
1️⃣ Large funds lock up for the long-term interests of the stablecoin ecosystem.
2️⃣ The more locked, the lighter the market selling pressure.
3️⃣ Retail investors can enjoy the dividends brought by structural changes in the circulating supply.
No need to compete with whales on node thresholds, and no need to worry about the size gap; just quietly be a long-term runner. $WLFI