Author: thedefinvestor Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain Last week was a bad week for DeFi. It wasn't just because of the market crash. Last week: Balancer, a top DeFi protocol, was exploited, resulting in a loss of $128 million. Stream Finance, a protocol that primarily generates yield through stablecoins, announced the loss of $93 million in user assets and is preparing to declare bankruptcy. Moonwell lost $1 million in an attack. Peapods' Pod LP TVL (Total Value Locked) dropped from $32 million to $0 due to liquidation. So far, the most devastating loss has been to Stream Finance. This is because it affects not only its depositors but also stablecoin lenders of some of the largest lending protocols in the space, including Morpho, Silo, and Euler. In short, here's what happened: CBB, a prominent figure on Crypto Twitter, has begun advising people to withdraw their investments from Stream due to its lack of transparency. Stream is reportedly running a "DeFi market-neutral strategy," but its positions cannot be monitored, and its transparency page has been consistently listed as "coming soon." This triggered a bank run, with a large number of users attempting to withdraw funds simultaneously. Stream Finance has halted withdrawal processing after it recently suffered a massive loss of user funds ($92 million) and was unable to process all withdrawal requests. This caused the price of its xUSD (Stream's interest-bearing "stablecoin") to plummet. This already sounds terrible, but the story isn't over yet. A major problem is that xUSD is listed as collateral in currency markets such as Euler, Morpho, and Silo. Worse still, Stream has been using its so-called stablecoin xUSD as collateral to borrow funds from the money market to execute its yield strategy. With the xUSD price now crashing, many lenders who lent USDC/USDT to xUSD collateral on Euler, Morpho, and Silo are no longer able to withdraw their funds. According to the DeFi User Alliance (YAM), at least $284 million in DeFi debt across various money markets is tied to Stream Finance! Unfortunately, a large portion of this money may be unrecoverable. As a result, many stablecoin lenders suffered heavy losses. What can we learn from this? Over the past two to three years, I have been personally deeply involved in the farming of DeFi protocols. However, following the recent events, I plan to re-evaluate my DeFi portfolio positions and become more risk-averse. Yield farming can be very profitable. I've made some substantial profits from it over the past few years, but events like this can cause you to lose a significant amount of money. I have a few suggestions: Always verify the exact source of income. Stream isn't the only DeFi protocol claiming to generate yield through a "market-neutral strategy." Be sure to look for transparency dashboards or proof-of-reserve reports, where you can clearly see that the team isn't gambling with your assets. Don't blindly trust a protocol just because the team behind it seems good. Consider whether the risk-reward ratio is good enough. Some stablecoin protocols offer an annualized return (APR) of 5-7%. Others may offer over 10%. My advice is not to blindly deposit funds into protocols offering the highest yields without doing proper research. If the strategy is not transparent, or the process of generating returns seems too risky, then it is not worth risking your money for a double-digit annual return. Or if the returns are too low (e.g., an annualized rate of 4-5%), ask yourself if it's worth it. No smart contract is risk-free; we've even seen established applications like Balancer attacked. Is it worth risking everything for a low annualized return (APY)? Don't put all your eggs in one basket. As a general rule, I never deposit more than 10% of my portfolio into a single dApp. No matter how tempting the returns or airdrop opportunities may seem, the impact on my finances should a hack occur. In short, when building your investment portfolio, prioritize survival over making money. It's always better to be safe than to regret.Author: thedefinvestor Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain Last week was a bad week for DeFi. It wasn't just because of the market crash. Last week: Balancer, a top DeFi protocol, was exploited, resulting in a loss of $128 million. Stream Finance, a protocol that primarily generates yield through stablecoins, announced the loss of $93 million in user assets and is preparing to declare bankruptcy. Moonwell lost $1 million in an attack. Peapods' Pod LP TVL (Total Value Locked) dropped from $32 million to $0 due to liquidation. So far, the most devastating loss has been to Stream Finance. This is because it affects not only its depositors but also stablecoin lenders of some of the largest lending protocols in the space, including Morpho, Silo, and Euler. In short, here's what happened: CBB, a prominent figure on Crypto Twitter, has begun advising people to withdraw their investments from Stream due to its lack of transparency. Stream is reportedly running a "DeFi market-neutral strategy," but its positions cannot be monitored, and its transparency page has been consistently listed as "coming soon." This triggered a bank run, with a large number of users attempting to withdraw funds simultaneously. Stream Finance has halted withdrawal processing after it recently suffered a massive loss of user funds ($92 million) and was unable to process all withdrawal requests. This caused the price of its xUSD (Stream's interest-bearing "stablecoin") to plummet. This already sounds terrible, but the story isn't over yet. A major problem is that xUSD is listed as collateral in currency markets such as Euler, Morpho, and Silo. Worse still, Stream has been using its so-called stablecoin xUSD as collateral to borrow funds from the money market to execute its yield strategy. With the xUSD price now crashing, many lenders who lent USDC/USDT to xUSD collateral on Euler, Morpho, and Silo are no longer able to withdraw their funds. According to the DeFi User Alliance (YAM), at least $284 million in DeFi debt across various money markets is tied to Stream Finance! Unfortunately, a large portion of this money may be unrecoverable. As a result, many stablecoin lenders suffered heavy losses. What can we learn from this? Over the past two to three years, I have been personally deeply involved in the farming of DeFi protocols. However, following the recent events, I plan to re-evaluate my DeFi portfolio positions and become more risk-averse. Yield farming can be very profitable. I've made some substantial profits from it over the past few years, but events like this can cause you to lose a significant amount of money. I have a few suggestions: Always verify the exact source of income. Stream isn't the only DeFi protocol claiming to generate yield through a "market-neutral strategy." Be sure to look for transparency dashboards or proof-of-reserve reports, where you can clearly see that the team isn't gambling with your assets. Don't blindly trust a protocol just because the team behind it seems good. Consider whether the risk-reward ratio is good enough. Some stablecoin protocols offer an annualized return (APR) of 5-7%. Others may offer over 10%. My advice is not to blindly deposit funds into protocols offering the highest yields without doing proper research. If the strategy is not transparent, or the process of generating returns seems too risky, then it is not worth risking your money for a double-digit annual return. Or if the returns are too low (e.g., an annualized rate of 4-5%), ask yourself if it's worth it. No smart contract is risk-free; we've even seen established applications like Balancer attacked. Is it worth risking everything for a low annualized return (APY)? Don't put all your eggs in one basket. As a general rule, I never deposit more than 10% of my portfolio into a single dApp. No matter how tempting the returns or airdrop opportunities may seem, the impact on my finances should a hack occur. In short, when building your investment portfolio, prioritize survival over making money. It's always better to be safe than to regret.

What can we learn from the successive collapses of multiple DeFi projects?

2025/11/10 15:00
4 min read

Author: thedefinvestor

Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain

Last week was a bad week for DeFi.

It wasn't just because of the market crash. Last week:

  • Balancer, a top DeFi protocol, was exploited, resulting in a loss of $128 million.
  • Stream Finance, a protocol that primarily generates yield through stablecoins, announced the loss of $93 million in user assets and is preparing to declare bankruptcy.
  • Moonwell lost $1 million in an attack.
  • Peapods' Pod LP TVL (Total Value Locked) dropped from $32 million to $0 due to liquidation.

So far, the most devastating loss has been to Stream Finance.

This is because it affects not only its depositors but also stablecoin lenders of some of the largest lending protocols in the space, including Morpho, Silo, and Euler.

In short, here's what happened:

  • CBB, a prominent figure on Crypto Twitter, has begun advising people to withdraw their investments from Stream due to its lack of transparency.

Stream is reportedly running a "DeFi market-neutral strategy," but its positions cannot be monitored, and its transparency page has been consistently listed as "coming soon."

  • This triggered a bank run, with a large number of users attempting to withdraw funds simultaneously.
  • Stream Finance has halted withdrawal processing after it recently suffered a massive loss of user funds ($92 million) and was unable to process all withdrawal requests. This caused the price of its xUSD (Stream's interest-bearing "stablecoin") to plummet.

This already sounds terrible, but the story isn't over yet.

A major problem is that xUSD is listed as collateral in currency markets such as Euler, Morpho, and Silo.

Worse still, Stream has been using its so-called stablecoin xUSD as collateral to borrow funds from the money market to execute its yield strategy.

With the xUSD price now crashing, many lenders who lent USDC/USDT to xUSD collateral on Euler, Morpho, and Silo are no longer able to withdraw their funds.

According to the DeFi User Alliance (YAM), at least $284 million in DeFi debt across various money markets is tied to Stream Finance!

Unfortunately, a large portion of this money may be unrecoverable.

As a result, many stablecoin lenders suffered heavy losses.

What can we learn from this?

Over the past two to three years, I have been personally deeply involved in the farming of DeFi protocols.

However, following the recent events, I plan to re-evaluate my DeFi portfolio positions and become more risk-averse.

Yield farming can be very profitable. I've made some substantial profits from it over the past few years, but events like this can cause you to lose a significant amount of money.

I have a few suggestions:

  • Always verify the exact source of income.

Stream isn't the only DeFi protocol claiming to generate yield through a "market-neutral strategy." Be sure to look for transparency dashboards or proof-of-reserve reports, where you can clearly see that the team isn't gambling with your assets.

Don't blindly trust a protocol just because the team behind it seems good.

  • Consider whether the risk-reward ratio is good enough.

Some stablecoin protocols offer an annualized return (APR) of 5-7%. Others may offer over 10%. My advice is not to blindly deposit funds into protocols offering the highest yields without doing proper research.

If the strategy is not transparent, or the process of generating returns seems too risky, then it is not worth risking your money for a double-digit annual return.

Or if the returns are too low (e.g., an annualized rate of 4-5%), ask yourself if it's worth it.

No smart contract is risk-free; we've even seen established applications like Balancer attacked. Is it worth risking everything for a low annualized return (APY)?

  • Don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As a general rule, I never deposit more than 10% of my portfolio into a single dApp.

No matter how tempting the returns or airdrop opportunities may seem, the impact on my finances should a hack occur.

In short, when building your investment portfolio, prioritize survival over making money.

It's always better to be safe than to regret.

Market Opportunity
Brainedge Logo
Brainedge Price(LEARN)
$0.006367
$0.006367$0.006367
+8.08%
USD
Brainedge (LEARN) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Trump’s 'desperate' push to rename landmarks for himself is a 'growing problem': analysis

Trump’s 'desperate' push to rename landmarks for himself is a 'growing problem': analysis

President Donald Trump's fixation on adding his name to major landmarks is presenting numerous problems both for himself and his party.That's according to a Friday
Share
Alternet2026/02/07 05:30
Why The Green Bay Packers Must Take The Cleveland Browns Seriously — As Hard As That Might Be

Why The Green Bay Packers Must Take The Cleveland Browns Seriously — As Hard As That Might Be

The post Why The Green Bay Packers Must Take The Cleveland Browns Seriously — As Hard As That Might Be appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Jordan Love and the Green Bay Packers are off to a 2-0 start. Getty Images The Green Bay Packers are, once again, one of the NFL’s better teams. The Cleveland Browns are, once again, one of the league’s doormats. It’s why unbeaten Green Bay (2-0) is a 8-point favorite at winless Cleveland (0-2) Sunday according to betmgm.com. The money line is also Green Bay -500. Most expect this to be a Packers’ rout, and it very well could be. But Green Bay knows taking anyone in this league for granted can prove costly. “I think if you look at their roster, the paper, who they have on that team, what they can do, they got a lot of talent and things can turn around quickly for them,” Packers safety Xavier McKinney said. “We just got to kind of keep that in mind and know we not just walking into something and they just going to lay down. That’s not what they going to do.” The Browns certainly haven’t laid down on defense. Far from. Cleveland is allowing an NFL-best 191.5 yards per game. The Browns gave up 141 yards to Cincinnati in Week 1, including just seven in the second half, but still lost, 17-16. Cleveland has given up an NFL-best 45.5 rushing yards per game and just 2.1 rushing yards per attempt. “The biggest thing is our defensive line is much, much improved over last year and I think we’ve got back to our personality,” defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz said recently. “When we play our best, our D-line leads us there as our engine.” The Browns rank third in the league in passing defense, allowing just 146.0 yards per game. Cleveland has also gone 30 straight games without allowing a 300-yard passer, the longest active streak in the NFL.…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:41
Why Ethereum’s long-term potential remains intact DESPITE 30% weekly drop

Why Ethereum’s long-term potential remains intact DESPITE 30% weekly drop

The post Why Ethereum’s long-term potential remains intact DESPITE 30% weekly drop appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. On the macro side, the market’s risk-off
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/07 05:18