今天發現一個有趣的新提案 EIL：

EIL（Ethereum Interop Layer）可以大致看成是建在 ERC-4337 之上的「帳戶層跨鏈互通標準」。它不是在發明新的 bridge，也不是新的 cross-chain messaging，而是希望讓使用者在「只簽一次名」的前提下，就能在多條 L2 上完成一串操作（轉資 + swap + mint…）。而且整個流程都維持 Ethereum 自己的安全假設，由使用者自己的 smart account 在各鏈上發送交易，再配合去信任化的 liquidity / paymaster 方案（XLP + CrossChainPaymaster），把目標鏈上的錢與 gas 準備好。

詳細資料：https://ethresear.ch/t/eil-trust-minimized-cross-l2-interop/23437

2/ 我目前對 EIL 的理解是，它是一個偏「帳戶層、使用者導向」的互操作性標準。它讓使用者可以只簽一次名，就在多條 L2 上執行操作，而且是用自己那個 smart account 在每條鏈上送交易。

ZeroDev 現在其實已經有類似的「single-signature, multi-chain execution」模式；EIL 比較像是把這種做法標準化，再在 ERC-4337 之上加上一層可信度更高的流動性/ paymaster 協議（XLPs）。

在這個意義上，EIL 比較像是「使用者側」的 intent-based 跨鏈協議替代方案：兩者都在解決 cross-chain UX，但 EIL 把「真正呼叫應用合約的那一步」留在使用者自己的帳戶裡，而不是外包給 solver/ relayer 來幫你執行。

不過，如果是合約對合約（contract-to-contract）的跨鏈互動，EIL 並沒有 cover 到，它本身不是 messaging protocol。所以在「合約之間需要跨鏈溝通」的 use case 裡，LayerZero / Chainlink CCIP 還是主導這一塊。

3/ 前陣子也有稍微想一下，純粹從「使用者角度的跨鏈資產流動」來看，message-based 跟 intent-based bridge 的版圖會長什麼樣子。

不管是 cross-chain solvers，還是這篇裡講的 XLP（cross-chain LP），本質上都要做 inventory management 跟 hedging：要決定在哪幾條鏈、持有哪些資產、持多少部位。這會自然把他們的重心推向大型、流動性好的資產（USDC, WETH, WBTC…），對於比較 niche / long-tail 的 token 就相對不友善。從最近的一些數據來看，intent-based bridge（例如 Across）的主要成交量，也確實大多集中在主流幣種。

所以我目前對未來 cross-chain transfer 光譜的結論還是：

Messaging protocols（如 LayerZero, CCIP）
  → 比較適合機構、RWA、收益型穩定幣、大額且資產種類多樣的場景

Intent-based protocols（如 Across）
  → 比較偏向零售流量、較小金額的 intents，以及 USDC / WETH / USDT 這類主流高流動性資產

Across Dune Dashboard: https://dune.com/risk_labs/across-protocol-stats

Ethereum Interop Layer Sharing

Yesterday, I shared an incredible indexing tool, @envio_indexer, with @xuedao_tw. For the demo, I spent about 2 hours building an analytics dashboard https://ping-analytics-web.vercel.app/ for $ping @pingobserver.

💻 Code:
- Indexer: https://github.com/kevinsslin/ping-envio-indexing 
- Dashboard: https://github.com/kevinsslin/ping-analytics-web 

Quick Data Insight from the Dashboard:

Current stats: 18.3K holders | 659K transfers 

Tracking the Transfer-to-New Account ratio:
• Oct 24: 12,093 new users | 267,359 transfers → Ratio: 22:1
• Oct 25: 7,607 new users | 122,449 transfers → Ratio: 16:1

It's still a niche tool for traders but could serve as a good starting point for raising awareness of the x402 standard from @coinbase. 

What's your take on x402 meme coins? Consolidation or trend reversal? 🤔

Indexing Tool Envio Sharing

Maybe Fukuzawa’s sequence—ideas, institutions, material culture—applies to personal growth, too. In my early twenties, I’m exposing myself to more of the world—not to get numb to it, but to sharpen my sense of what’s real and what matters. It’s about changing how I think, how I operate, and what I use. Still figuring it out as I go.

Personal Growth Through Exposure

Just wrapped up @jackmallers' interview last night—two points really stuck:

1️⃣ “Bitcoin is the best expression of currency debasement—it’s the best way to short the dollar.”

2️⃣ “Within the next 5 years we’ll see global trade settled—or at least priced—in an asset that isn’t the dollar…think gold and Bitcoin.”

 🔗https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3blxCG8X6U&t=1068s

1️⃣ “Bitcoin is the best expression of currency debasement—it’s the best way to short the dollar.”

Mallers explains his family’s lifelong hedge against USD erosion.

- 1970s-2000s: real-estate holdings and ownership stakes in the exchanges that profit from every inflation-driven trade (CME/CBOT).

- 2020s: graduate to a 21 million-cap, bearer-asset with no issuer risk.

If the goal is to bet on the dollar losing purchasing power, Bitcoin is the most direct, supply-capped, permissionless instrument the family has ever owned.

2️⃣ “Within the next 5 years we’ll see global trade settled—or at least priced—in an asset that isn’t the dollar…think gold and Bitcoin.”

Why such a drastic call?

- Credit fatigue: “The biggest problem the U.S. government has right now is that no one’s willing to lend it money anymore.”

- Treasuries aren’t safe: Holding the 10-year “won’t retain purchasing power in real terms” once policy forces negative real rates.

- Policy pivot: Tariffs failed; capital controls & withholding taxes are next. The inevitable result is capital flowing out of U.S. stocks, real estate—even out of Treasuries—in search of sound collateral.

Mallers sees a neutral-asset era where gold provides the old-world anchor, Bitcoin the digital rail, and the dollar steps back from its post-WWII monopoly.

Insights from Jack Mallers

一直覺得 intent 就是鏈上版的 PayFi，跨鏈等幾小時已經讓人既不安又不爽了（快還要更快🏎️），於是就有了 intent。但現在的 escrowed 方式又有資本效率問題，Solver 需要等 origin chain oracle settle 才能回收資金，資金 turnover 太慢。

Paradigm 又提了一個 Bonded Model，我自己理解下來的核心差異如下：

🔹 資金重用條件 (Reuse constraint):
　• Escrow: 等 Oracle settlement（數小時⏳）
　• Bonded: 等 Challenge period（通常更短⚡）

🔹 資本效率 (Capital Efficiency):
　• Escrow: 低（需準備更多沉澱資金）
　• Bonded: 高（資金釋放更快，資金需求自然更低）

🔗 Full paper: https://www.paradigm.xyz/2025/05/across-prime

Escrowed vs. Bonded Model for Intent Solution

🧵 Cross-chain infra is bifurcating

At Token2049 Dubai, a discussion with friends reminded me of an insightful talk I heard at ETHTaipei about cross-chain intents.

Cross-chain infra is clearly splitting into two distinct directions:

🔹 Messaging protocols (LayerZero @LayerZero_Core)
→ Institutions, RWA, yield-bearing stablecoins, large-volume & diverse assets
🔸 Intent-based protocols (Across @AcrossProtocol)
→ Retail, smaller intents, mainstream & high-liquidity tokens (USDC, WETH, USDT)

It’s not better vs worse—it’s about fitting infra design to user & asset types. 🛠️

1️⃣ Messaging protocols (e.g. LayerZero)
	•	Lock-and-mint model (OFT natively integrated or use Adapter)
	•	No need for pre-funded liquidity
	•	Scales horizontally with integrations, not liquidity
	•	Enables universal coverage: even long-tail tokens

Ideal for large-scale, multi-chain asset routing and institutional-grade use cases


2️⃣ Intent-based protocols (e.g. @AcrossProtocol)
	•	Solver network model (like a P2P marketplace)
	•	Ultra-fast & Cheap
	•	Solvers pre-fund transactions and take execution risk
	•	Relies on RFQ or auction-based matching

Ideal for retail-sized, high-frequency swaps.

But… capital constraints limit token diversity.

Because solvers must pre-fund liquidity, intent systems tend to concentrate on:
	•	A few high-liquidity tokens (USDC, WETH, USDT → Over 90% of transaction volume)
	•	A few well-supported chains (Ethereum, Unichain, Base, Arbitrum etc.)

⚠️ Long-tail assets and low-liquidity chains are rarely supported & Large-volume intents dominated by few solvers

dune: https://dune.com/risk_labs/across-protocol-stats

Highly recommend this deep dive from @KatoGoki at ETHTaipei—
clearly explains intent-based protocol dynamics, solver economics, and decentralization trade-offs:

🎥 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex8h15bXY3w

Cross-chain infra is bifurcating

Securitize and Ethena are transforming DeFi yield benchmarks by merging U.S. Treasury yields with crypto funding rates to create a new, dynamic standard.

@convergeonchain: Using USDe as the native gas token can significantly increase the on-chain USDe supply. This boost enhances Ethena’s assets under management (AUM) and revenue potential. More USDe also drives demand for USDtb. Currently, of the $1.4B USDtb issued, 97% is held by Ethena itself. USDtb is backed by the BUIDL fund, managed and issued by BlackRock, with @Securitize serving as the transfer and placement agent, providing essential operational and technical infrastructure.

@ethena_labs: By leveraging deep liquidity and strategic partnerships with major CEX platforms like Binance, Bybit, and OKX, Converge becomes the seamless gateway that brings institutional-grade DeFi yields directly to every investor.

Projects eager to access this powerful liquidity flow will form strategic collaborations. They will jointly market the ecosystem and redirect airdrops and staking incentives back to ENA stakers, ultimately delivering substantial value and upside for ENA holders.

DeFi Yield Benchmark Transformation

Nice sharing from @SteakhouseFi →
The Color of Money: ROE decomposition across stablecoins https://kitchen.steakhouse.financial/p/the-color-of-money

Everyone talks about stablecoins.
Few understand how radically different their business models are.

Think of a stablecoin as an optimization problem:

Maximize Return on Equity
➕ subject to liquidity & solvency constraints
➕ where demand = monetary yield + non-monetary (utility) yield

Now let’s break down what drives ROE for Tether (USDT), Circle (USDC), and Sky (USDS) 🧵👇

1/4 💰 Net Interest = Who keeps the yield?

• Tether doesn’t pay users—so it keeps the yield. That’s the power of network effects.
• Sky pays users yield, but if not everyone opts in, it waterfalls back to the protocol.
• Circle offloads the yield to partners—great for ecosystem building, but weakens ROA.

Who owns the yield defines who earns the return. 💡

2/4 🔁 Other returns: Risk or upside?

• Tether books unrealized gains (gold, BTC). More yield, more volatility.
• Sky & Circle play it safe—no major non-interest income or commodity bets.
• No one provisions credit losses, but surplus acts as a buffer.

Higher return ≠ better product. Depends on risk profile and transparency. 🤔

3/4 🧮 Leverage = Capital efficiency engine

• Tether plays it safe (10x).
• Circle takes on more (22x), still within TradFi comfort zone.
• Sky maxes out (50x), enabled by crypto-native mechanics:
  - Off-balance sheet user funds
  - Transparent, over-collateralized lending
  - Fully on-chain surplus logic

On-chain transparency enables what would be impossible in TradFi. ⛓️

4/4 🧠 Final Thoughts:

ROE isn’t just accounting—it’s design. Each stablecoin reflects strategic choices:

• Tether: Capture yield with a utility moat
• Circle: Build an ecosystem with partner economics
• Sky: Optimize capital efficiency through a crypto-native structure

Decoding Stablecoin Business Models

1/
It's interesting to see @ethena_labs allocating most of USDe's backing assets to other yield-bearing stablecoins like sUSDS and USDtb.

TL;DR
- $USDe is now backed by at least 28.3% sUSDS and 22.8% USDtb to adapt to the low funding rate market.
- The current sUSDe yield is 3.53% compared to sUSDS and BUIDL, both at 4.5%.
- TVL of $USDtb and $BUIDL surged to $1.43B and $1.93B respectively due to this shifting (b/c USDtb is mostly backed by BUIDL).

A quick look at Ethena’s transparency dashboard reveals a dramatic shift in their “Liquid Stables” allocation—from less than 10% two months ago to 65% today.

2/
This makes me wonder: What kinds of Liquid Stables are they investing in? 🤔 I know that Ethena is the largest holder of $USDtb. So I found this address: 0x2d4d2A025b10C09BDbd794B4FCe4F7ea8C7d7bB4, thanks to the @Dune dashboard from @EntropyAdvisors.

Dashboard link: https://dune.com/entropy_advisors/ethena-usdtb

3/
This address holds around $1.54B in $sUSDS and $1.24B in $USDtb, which together make up ~51.1% of $USDe’s total backing. 

4/
Additionally, the TVL of $USDtb and $BUIDL have surged to $1.43B and $1.93B respectively (with USDtb mostly backed by BUIDL).

5/
Overall, Ethena’s reallocation towards these yield-bearing stablecoins not only aims for better returns but also reflects a strategic response to current market conditions. The numbers speak for themselves—this is one shift to watch in the evolving DeFi landscape. 👀

USDe Allocation to sUSDS and USDtb

“USDtb will be eligible for use as margin collateral in Bybit.”

USDtb is backed by BUIDL @BlackRock (if you’re not familiar with BUIDL: https://x.com/Slutsky___/status/1861660979970613270).

As a more efficient form of money, it’s a must-happen move. I doubt that within two years, we’ll see this kind of T-bill yield-bearing stablecoin start to be accepted in more payment scenarios in both B2B and B2C cases.

Next step, I believe yield-bearing stablecoins should be accepted for settlement via Crypto Card (U Card). 💳
@ethena_labs @usualmoney @ResolvLabs @StablesLabs @elixir @OndoFinance @Bybit_Official

https://x.com/ethena_labs/status/1896871124715376928