Defi技术的成熟已经创造了悖论

随着成千上万的项目建立在越来越标准化的基础设施以争夺有限资本池的情况下，生态系统面临系统性挑战

The maturation of DeFi technology has created a paradox: while battle-tested codebases and rising technical proficiency have lowered the barrier to entry for launching new protocols, securing sustainable liquidity has never been harder.

DEFI技术的成熟度创造了一个悖论：尽管经过战斗测试的代码库和提高的技术水平降低了启动新协议的进入障碍，但确保可持续的流动性从未如此困难。

As thousands of projects built on increasingly standardized infrastructure compete for a finite pool of capital, the ecosystem faces a systemic challenge that threatens genuine innovation and growth.

由于成千上万的项目建立在越来越标准化的基础设施上争夺有限资本池时，生态系统面临着一种系统性的挑战，威胁到真正的创新和增长。

You're reading Crypto Long & Short, our weekly newsletter featuring insights, news and analysis for the professional investor. Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Wednesday.

您正在阅读Crypto Long＆Short，这是我们每周的新闻通讯，其中包括专业投资者的见解，新闻和分析。在这里注册以将其在每个星期三的收件箱中获取。

The multi-dimensional fragmentation problem

多维分裂问题

Liquidity in DeFi is fragmented across protocols, chains and token pairs. For new protocols, securing adequate liquidity is existential — without it, user adoption stalls, costs rise, yields fall and the growth flywheel fails to accrete value. This creates a fundamental challenge: every new DEX, lending platform or yield farm must compete for the same finite pool of capital, further dividing available liquidity. The demand for liquidity vastly outstrips the influx of new capital.

DEFI中的流动性在方案，链条和令牌对之间分散。对于新协议，确保足够的流动性是存在的 - 没有它，用户采用摊位，成本上升，产量下降和增长飞轮无法获得价值。这带来了一个根本的挑战：每个新的DEX，贷款平台或收益农场都必须争夺相同的有限资本池，从而进一步分配了可用的流动性。对流动性的需求大大超过了新资本的涌入。

The traditional finance concept of "cost of capital" has evolved into "cost of liquidity" in DeFi, but without standardized frameworks to price this risk, protocols struggle to acquire the capital they need to launch and grow effectively. Protocols use their native tokens, ecosystem funds and sometimes their own capital to attract early liquidity. Some under-incentivize, failing to attract liquidity providers. Others over-incentivize, depleting treasuries and creating sell pressure when token incentives unlock. Both approaches ultimately undermine long-term sustainability.

传统的财务概念“资本成本”已演变为DEFI中的“流动性成本”，但是如果没有标准化的框架来定价这种风险，协议很难获得他们需要发射和有效发展所需的资本。协议使用其本地代币，生态系统基金，有时甚至是他们自己的资本来吸引早期流动性。有些人不足，无法吸引流动性提供者。其他人则过度诱使，耗尽国库，并在代币激励措施解锁时造成销售压力。两种方法最终都破坏了长期可持续性。

The VC-protocol tension

VC协议张力

This mispricing creates a fundamental tension for projects with VC backing. Investors who fund portfolio companies via simple agreements for future tokens (SAFTs) want protocols to attract sufficient liquidity for growth and utility. However, aggressive liquidity incentive programs directly dilute their token holdings.

这种错误定价为具有VC支持的项目带来了根本的张力。通过简单的未来代币（SAFT）的简单协议为投资组合公司提供资金的投资者希望协议能够吸引足够的流动性来实现增长和公用事业。但是，积极的流动性激励计划直接稀释其令牌持有量。

The result is often unsustainable tokenomics: high initial emissions to bootstrap liquidity, creating artificial success metrics that collapse when incentives decrease. This pattern hampers genuine innovation, as truly novel approaches face disproportionately higher costs to attract capital.

结果通常是不可持续的象征学：引导流动性的高初始排放，创造了人工成功指标，当激励措施降低时崩溃。这种模式阻碍了真正的创新，因为真正新颖的方法面临着不成比例的更高成本来吸引资本。

Market opacity and information asymmetry

市场不透明度和信息不对称

The problem is compounded by lack of transparency. Most significant liquidity arrangements occur through private over-the-counter (OTC) deals with unclear terms. New protocols have no visibility into market rates for comparable arrangements, while established players and insider networks control capital flow.

缺乏透明度使问题更加复杂。大多数重要的流动性安排通过私人非处方（OTC）处理不清楚的术语。新协议对可比安排的市场价格尚无可见，而已建立的参与者和内部网络控制资本流。

Without standardized risk assessment frameworks, liquidity providers struggle to evaluate opportunities effectively. This leads to inconsistent risk premiums across similar protocols and capital concentration in projects with familiar designs rather than superior technology and innovation.

如果没有标准化的风险评估框架，流动性提供者就难以有效地评估机会。这导致在具有熟悉设计的项目而不是卓越的技术和创新项目中，类似协议和资本集中的风险溢价不一致。

Toward a solution: a neutral liquidity layer

朝向解决方案：中性流动性层

What the ecosystem needs is connectivity between capital and protocols — a chain-agnostic, protocol-neutral layer focused on efficient capital routing. Such a system would:

生态系统的需求是资本和协议之间的连通性 - 链条不合时宜的，协议中性层的重点是有效的资本路由。这样的系统会：

Establishing a system like this isn't about introducing new financial products, but creating a shared understanding of liquidity pricing that aligns incentives between capital allocators and protocols.

建立这样的系统并不是要引入新的金融产品，而是对流动性定价的共同理解，该定价与资本分配者和协议之间的激励措施保持一致。

Looking forward

期待

As DeFi matures, standardizing liquidity coordination and risk assessment will be essential for capital efficiency. The protocols that thrive should be those that solve real problems and bring real innovation to the space, not necessarily those with the most aggressive incentives.

随着DEFI的成熟，标准化流动性协调和风险评估对于资本效率至关重要。蓬勃发展的协议应该是解决实际问题并为空间带来真正创新的协议，而不一定是那些具有最积极的激励措施的协议。

The challenge is clear: demand for liquidity in DeFi is effectively infinite and the finite supply is existentially important. Yet the infrastructure, services, and pricing mechanisms that determine how capital flows from holders to users have significantly lagged behind protocol innovation. Addressing this infrastructure gap represents not just an opportunity to increase efficiency, but a necessity for the sustainable growth of the entire DeFi ecosystem.

挑战是明确的：在DEFI中对流动性的需求实际上是无限的，并且有限的供应非常重要。然而，确定资本从持有人流向用户的基础架构，服务和定价机制显着落后于协议创新。解决这一基础设施差距不仅代表着提高效率的机会，而且代表了整个Fefi生态系统的可持续增长的必要性。