How long a DeFi protocol can survive mainly depends on whether its risk control system is solid enough. The multi-layered risk management architecture of a leading Liquid Staking protocol is worth dissecting.



First is the smart contract layer. Key processes such as collateral valuation and liquidation triggers are fully automated on-chain, minimizing human intervention—this directly mitigates a lot of operational risks. For example, their DEX has set a 3% price deviation warning threshold. If an asset experiences abnormal fluctuations, the system immediately pauses exchanges to prevent liquidity pools from being drained.

But technology alone isn't enough; governance must keep pace. Token holders have voting rights, allowing them to directly modify core parameters like fee rates and collateral lists, enabling the system to quickly adapt to market changes. During the previous stablecoin de-pegging incident, an emergency proposal was swiftly initiated to trigger liquidation mechanisms, effectively halting the risk from spreading—this demonstrates the practical role of community-driven governance.

The structural design also considers robustness. The liquid staking tokens adopt a 1:1 redemption mechanism, ensuring underlying assets can always be redeemed; multiple oracles provide price data, reducing the risk of single points of failure. Although some innovative collateral types still involve off-chain valuation steps, overall, this framework is built around decentralization and automation, providing a significant level of security for user assets.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
zkProofInThePuddingvip
· 01-14 07:04
3% warning line? If you can really hold it, I might believe it. It depends on whether a black swan crashes down later.
View OriginalReply0
RuntimeErrorvip
· 01-12 19:18
Solid risk control is indeed effective, but I still don't trust those off-chain evaluation processes; it still feels like there's a black box.
View OriginalReply0
screenshot_gainsvip
· 01-12 16:48
Solid risk control is indeed sustainable, but honestly, off-chain evaluation still poses a hidden risk.
View OriginalReply0
DaoResearchervip
· 01-11 08:57
Based on the on-chain data of governance proposals, this 3% alert threshold design can hold within a 95% confidence interval, but I still want to ask—can multiple oracles really solve the MEV problem?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-40edb63bvip
· 01-11 08:55
No matter how good the risk control is, it can't withstand human greed. The key still depends on whether anyone dares to bet real money.
View OriginalReply0
FreeRidervip
· 01-11 08:49
What’s going on, starting to talk about risk control again. I really don’t believe this approach can withstand a black swan event.
View OriginalReply0
DYORMastervip
· 01-11 08:36
That's right, the risk control system is the lifeline of a DeFi project. Without a solid foundation, a crash is only a matter of time.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)