Gönderi

Why yesterday's crash is a positive for Lighter First, I want to support all the traders who were liquidated. This was truly a black swan. Major take profits on PerpDEXs after the crash: - Lighter went down - LLP decreased ~5% - Hyperliquid forcefully closed short positions - HLP rose 15%, adding $40M Let's take it one step at a time: 1. Lighter went down The website simply stopped allowing users to access the terminal. But this happened after the main move; many had access to the terminal during the main movement. Furthermore, the team promised to refund users' losses. I'd be a fool if they didn't keep their promise. As a reminder, Lighter launched in Public Launch just 10 days ago and was in closed beta for 8 months. For such a young project, I think they handled it quite well. This is their 1st serious stress test, and they passed it with flying colors. Moreover, their metrics remain quite strong. - TVL remained unchanged - OI dropped to $1.2B Lighter is more than alive. 2. LLP decreased 5% Many are unhappy that LLP lost some of its funds. But this is a key aspect, demonstrating the project's balance between traders and LLP investors. Lighter could have initiated ADL (auto-deleveraging) processes to protect LLP investors. However, in that case, successful short traders would have lost their profits. ---------------- Now the key question for any PerpDEX: - Will a trader stay on the platform if they know that they, and LLP investors, are a priority? - In the long term, no. ---------------- Ultimately, LLP investors put money into a risky pool because traders could start beating the market. This isn't a lending protocol with its secure deposits by economic design. LLP investors receive their yield, and quite a high one, precisely because they're willing to take on this risk. So why should PerpDEX take responsibility for them? Lighter chose to protect traders. 3. Hyperliquid forcefully closed short positions Hyperliquid activated ADL mechanisms to reduce economic risks for their platform and HLP investors. Moreover, this phenomenon occurred en masse. The question arises: why did HL, with its organic volumes, start doing this? Look at the metrics before the crash: - OI around $15B - HLP $0.4B OI/HLP ratio: 37.5x Essentially, traders on HL overextended themselves with leverage - the platform simply didn't have enough liquidity to survive without ADL. By comparison, Lighter's OI/LLP was: 5x Clearly, this is a more manageable and stable conditions. In short, without ADL, HL could have suffered enormous problems and losses that it would not have been able to cover. 4. HLP grew by 15%, adding $40M This point follows from point 3. HL chose to cut traders' positions because it was forced to do so. Otherwise, HLP could have been depleted. In fact, Hyperliquid was forced to side with HLP investors, not traders. It was a matter of the project's survival. ________________ Conclusions: - Everyone was shouting about the high OI on HL, regardless of other metrics. Ultimately, traders ended up losing this war, while HLP investors won and are enjoying their profits. As a result, OI fell from $15B to $5B, and OI/HLP fell to 11x. - Traders won't stay on platforms that build their algorithms to protect LPs. HL was rewarding traders while Lighter was protecting them. Traders want the protection Lighter provides. - More attention needs to be paid to LP TVL. A proper balance between OI/LP is needed. This metric signals the platform's stability. HL had it excessively high. - Lighter weathered this "black swan" event well. Yes, there was a terminal display glitch and LPs suffered losses. But all backend operations worked perfectly, as did risk management. PerpDEXs should learn this lesson.