10 publicaciones etiquetados con "DeFi"

TL;DR​

• Restaking is moving from hype to real economics.
• Slashing is live, and Rewards v2 adds clarity.
• Data availability (DA) is cheaper and faster, fueling rollup revenue.
• LRTs provide convenience but introduce peg risk.
• Evaluate slashing risk conservatively to keep portfolios honest.

1) Restaking Narrative​

• Restaking moved from narrative to cash flow. With slashing live on mainnet as of April 17 2025, and the Rewards v2 governance framework in place, EigenLayer’s yield mechanics now include enforceable downside, clearer operator incentives, and increasingly fee‑driven rewards.
• Data availability got cheaper and faster. EigenDA, a major Actively Validated Service (AVS), slashed its prices by ~10× in 2024 and is on a path toward massive throughput. This is a big deal for the rollups that will actually pay AVSs and the operators securing them.
• Liquid Restaking Tokens (LRTs) make the stack accessible, but add new risks. Protocols like Ether.fi (weETH), Renzo (ezETH), and Kelp DAO (rsETH) offer liquidity and convenience, but they also introduce new vectors for smart‑contract failures, operator selection risk, and market‑peg instability. We’ve already seen events of de‑peg, a clear reminder of these layered risks.

2) The 2025 Yield Stack: From Base Staking to AVS Fees​

At its core, the concept is simple. Ethereum staking gives you a base yield for securing the network. Restaking, pioneered by EigenLayer, lets you extend that security to third‑party services (AVSs). In return, AVSs pay fees to node operators and ultimately to the restakers underwriting their operations—a “marketplace for trust.”

In 2025, this marketplace matured significantly:​

• Slashing is in production. AVSs can now define and enforce conditions to penalize misbehaving node operators, turning abstract security promises into concrete economic guarantees.
• Rewards v2 formalizes reward and fee distribution flows, aligning incentives across AVSs, operators, and restakers.
• Redistribution is rolling out, clarifying how slashed funds are handled and how losses are socialized.

Why it matters: Once AVSs generate real revenue and penalties are credible, restaked yield becomes a legitimate economic product—not just a marketing story. The April slashing activation was the inflection point, completing the vision of a system already securing billions across dozens of live AVSs.

3) DA as a Revenue Engine: EigenDA’s Price/Performance Curve​

If rollups are the primary customers for cryptoeconomic security, then data availability (DA) is where near‑term revenue lives. EigenDA, EigenLayer’s flagship AVS, illustrates this:

• Pricing: August 2024 saw a ~10× price cut and a free tier, making it viable for more rollups to post data and increase fee flow to operators and restakers.
• Throughput: Mainnet currently supports ~10 MB/s; roadmap targets >100 MB/s as the operator set expands, signaling capacity and economics trending toward sustainable fee generation.

Takeaway: Cheaper DA services + credible slashing = clear runway for AVSs to generate sustainable fee revenue instead of relying on inflationary token emissions.

4) AVS, Evolving: From “Actively Validated” to “Autonomous Verifiable”​

A subtle but important shift: AVSs are increasingly called “Autonomous Verifiable Services.” This language stresses systems that can cryptographically prove correct behavior and enforce consequences automatically—perfectly aligned with live slashing and programmatic operator selection, pointing to a future of more robust, trust‑minimized infrastructure.

5) How You Participate​

Average DeFi users or institutions have three common ways to engage, each with distinct trade‑offs:

• Native restaking

  • How it works: Restake native ETH (or other approved assets) directly on EigenLayer and delegate to an operator of your choice.
  • Pros: Maximum control over operator selection and AVS coverage.
  • Cons: Operational overhead and self‑conducted due diligence; you shoulder all selection risk.

• LST → EigenLayer (liquid restaking without a new token)

  • How it works: Deposit existing Liquid Staking Tokens (e.g., stETH, rETH, cbETH) into EigenLayer strategies.
  • Pros: Reuse familiar LSTs, keeping exposure simple.
  • Cons: Stacking protocol risks; failure in any layer can cause losses.

• LRTs (Liquid Restaking Tokens)

  • How it works: Protocols issue tokens like weETH, ezETH, rsETH that bundle delegation, operator management, and AVS selection into a single liquid token usable across DeFi.
  • Pros: Convenience and liquidity.
  • Cons: Added risk layers—smart‑contract risk of the LRT itself and peg risk on secondary markets. The ezETH depeg in April 2024 (cascading liquidations) reminds us LRTs are leveraged exposures to multiple interconnected systems.

6) Risk, Repriced​

Restaking promises higher yield for real work; its risks are now equally real.

• Slashing & policy risk: Custom (often complex) penalty conditions require understanding the quality of the operator set and dispute handling.
• Peg & liquidity risk in LRTs: Secondary markets can be volatile; sharp dislocations happen. Build buffers for liquidity crunches and use conservative collateral factors.
• Smart‑contract & strategy risk: Stacking multiple contracts (LST/LRT + EigenLayer + AVSs) makes audit quality and governance power paramount.
• Throughput/economics risk: AVS fees depend entirely on usage; sustained rollup demand is the ultimate engine of restaking yield.

7) A Simple Framework to Value Restaked Yield​

With these dynamics, think of expected return as:

Expected Return = Base Staking Yield + AVS Fees - Expected Slashing Loss - Friction

• Base staking yield: Standard return from securing Ethereum.
• AVS fees: Additional yield paid by AVSs, weighted by your operator/AVS allocation.
• Expected slashing loss: Crucial new variable; estimate as probability of a slashable event × penalty size × your exposure.
• Friction: Protocol fees, operator fees, liquidity haircuts or peg discounts (if using an LRT).

You’ll never have perfect inputs, but estimating the slashing term, even conservatively, keeps your portfolio honest. Rewards v2 and Redistribution make this calculation far less abstract than a year ago.

8) Playbooks for 2025 Allocators​

• Conservative
  • Prefer native restaking or direct LST strategies.
  • Delegate only to diversified, high‑uptime operators with transparent, well‑documented AVS security policies.
  • Focus on AVSs with clear, understandable fee models (e.g., data availability or core infrastructure services).

9) TL;DR​

• Restaking is moving from hype to real economics.
• Slashing is live; Rewards v2 adds clarity.
• DA is cheaper, enabling more rollups to pay AVS fees.
• LRTs provide convenience but add peg risk.
• Evaluate slashing risk conservatively.

10) References​

• EigenLayer Blog – “Introducing Rewards v2” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Overview” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Redistribution Overview” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 FAQ” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Governance Proposal” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Technical Specification” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Tokenomics” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Tokenomics” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Tokenomics” (2024)
• EigenLayer Docs – “Rewards v2 Tokenomics” (2024)