TLDR Aave borrow rates now exceed sUSDe staking yields by up to 2%. Nearly $1B in sUSDe looped DeFi trades are exposed to negative carry. Many sUSDe positions are within 5% of liquidation thresholds. Utilization spikes in USDT and USDC pools are raising borrowing costs. A sharp drop in DeFi borrowing rates after the October [...] The post DeFi Traders Face Losses As $1B In sUSDe Loops Near Liquidation Point appeared first on CoinCentral.TLDR Aave borrow rates now exceed sUSDe staking yields by up to 2%. Nearly $1B in sUSDe looped DeFi trades are exposed to negative carry. Many sUSDe positions are within 5% of liquidation thresholds. Utilization spikes in USDT and USDC pools are raising borrowing costs. A sharp drop in DeFi borrowing rates after the October [...] The post DeFi Traders Face Losses As $1B In sUSDe Loops Near Liquidation Point appeared first on CoinCentral.

DeFi Traders Face Losses As $1B In sUSDe Loops Near Liquidation Point

2025/10/29 16:45

TLDR

  • Aave borrow rates now exceed sUSDe staking yields by up to 2%.
  • Nearly $1B in sUSDe looped DeFi trades are exposed to negative carry.
  • Many sUSDe positions are within 5% of liquidation thresholds.
  • Utilization spikes in USDT and USDC pools are raising borrowing costs.

A sharp drop in DeFi borrowing rates after the October 10 market crash has placed nearly $1 billion in sUSDe loop positions at risk. These trades, which once profited from positive yield spreads, now face mounting losses as the borrowing cost on Aave exceeds the staking yield from Ethena’s sUSDe. The unwind of such positions could trigger broader stress across decentralized lending markets.

Leveraged sUSDe Strategies Under Pressure

The loop strategy involving Ethena’s staked USDe (sUSDe) has become less profitable after the recent decline in DeFi funding rates. Traders typically deposit sUSDe as collateral on lending platforms like Aave and Pendle to borrow stablecoins such as USDT or USDC. These borrowed stablecoins are used to purchase more sUSDe, which is again deposited as collateral. This cycle repeats, increasing yield through leverage.

However, after the October 10 crash, the cost of borrowing has risen above the yield generated by staking sUSDe. Sentora Research reported that borrow rates on Aave v3 Core are currently around 2.0% for USDT and 1.5% for USDC, while sUSDe yields remain lower. As a result, the strategy now generates negative carry, where the cost of borrowing outweighs the return from staking.

Negative Yield Spread Increases Risk of Liquidation

With the yield differential now negative, leveraged sUSDe positions are incurring ongoing losses. According to Sentora, this creates pressure on looped positions, especially those close to liquidation thresholds. Many traders are within 5% of forced liquidations, raising concerns about a wave of automatic asset sales if borrowing costs remain high.

Sentora’s note warned, “As the spread remains below zero, looped positions that borrow stablecoins to buy sUSDe start to incur losses.” The research firm added that these losses could lead to a broad unwinding of positions on Aave, which may exceed $1 billion in exposure. A sudden wave of liquidations could reduce liquidity across DeFi markets and increase volatility.

Utilization Spikes Could Accelerate Stress

The current borrowing rates are influenced by utilization levels in USDT and USDC lending pools. If more traders exit or reduce their looped positions, the pool utilization may rise further. This would push borrowing costs even higher, deepening the negative yield and increasing the chances of liquidation.

Sentora also noted an increase in utilization across major pools. This trend, if it continues, may further pressure looped positions. Traders and platforms alike are watching for sustained changes in utilization and borrow rates, as this will influence the stability of the DeFi lending ecosystem.

Monitoring the Spread is Key for Traders

Traders are being urged to closely track the yield spread between sUSDe staking rewards and the Aave borrow APYs for USDT and USDC. A continued negative spread may lead to additional deleveraging. The broader concern is that such unwinds could impact not only individual traders but also platform liquidity and token prices.

Sentora emphasized that the sustainability of looped sUSDe positions depends entirely on the positive carry. Without it, the strategy becomes loss-making, increasing systemic risk across DeFi protocols where these positions are concentrated.

The post DeFi Traders Face Losses As $1B In sUSDe Loops Near Liquidation Point appeared first on CoinCentral.

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.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

Pavel's humanity, and Ton's challenges

Pavel's humanity, and Ton's challenges

I really like what Pavel mentioned about not using a mobile phone. Essentially, this is an "information fasting" approach to the challenges of information overload, contrasting with the "food fasting" that everyone loves using apps. One is metaphysical, the other is physical, but ultimately, both affect the mind and body, influencing hormones like cortisol. Now and in the future, attention is the scarcest resource. Being able to freely disconnect from electronic devices is a luxury, a freedom with its own barriers. Pavel is also an extreme craftsman. The advantage of being a craftsman is that you can lead a small team to create a killer app. However, the limitation is that Telegram, as the largest instant messaging software outside of China and the US, cannot become another Tencent platform. This same culture has also influenced its Web3 project, TON. By the way, let me talk about my close observation of TON over the past four years as the first Chinese institutional investor in the world. 1. The wrong technological path was taken. TON's stubborn insistence on using C++ seems like a kind of technological purist obsession. Historically, Russians have repeatedly taken the wrong turn on the "data technology tree": the Soviet Union failed to adapt to the transistor revolution, became obsessed with vacuum tube performance optimization, and missed the entire chip wave. They often overemphasize performance and control, but neglect the ecosystem and development experience. TON's SDK, toolchain, and documentation ecosystem lack standardization, making the development threshold too high; this is not a syntax problem, but a problem of lacking platform thinking. 2. Uneven ecological composition. Currently, it's basically only Russians and Chinese who are active, but resource allocation is clearly biased towards the Russian-speaking region. This is something everyone is already familiar with. 3. Oligopoly. Funding, traffic, and narrative resources within the ecosystem are concentrated on a few "top" companies/projects. Everyone knows they must curry favor with the "top" teams, but mid-tier projects are severely squeezed out. There is also a long-term power struggle between foundations and the oligopolistic "top" companies, resulting in constant internal friction. 4. Failure to accept oneself. Accepting and reconciling with oneself is crucial for any individual or organization. Only on this basis can you face yourself honestly and leverage your strengths while mitigating your weaknesses. However, TON seems obsessed with pitching to Musk, persuading American investors, and getting to the White House. The truth is, no matter how hard it tries, in the eyes of others, TON remains a public chain with a Russian background. In contrast, BNB didn't try to play the "American" role. Instead, it first became the most popular chain in the Eastern Time Zone, simultaneously creating a sense of FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) among Westerners, before smoothly expanding internationally—a much more effective approach. 5. The story of "adoption for 1 billion users" has been told for four years, and it's still just a story. Pavel keeps telling a grand story of "connecting Telegram's 1 billion users with the blockchain world," but this story has yet to truly materialize. The reason isn't that the vision is false, but rather structural constraints: In order to survive and ensure Pavel's personal safety (in recent years, Pavel has become increasingly obsessed with his physical safety, given several incidents, including the recent events in France), Telegram must maintain a "superficial" separation from TON to avoid crossing regulatory red lines; this separation prevents TON from ever truly integrating with Telegram's ecosystem. Even stablecoins like USDE have maintained a supply of only a few hundred million—indicating that the story is grand, but the reality is small. TON possesses the perfectionism of engineering geeks, yet lacks the warmth of ecological collaboration; it has a massive entry point, but is hampered by regulatory realities; it has its own advantages, but has not yet reconciled with itself. It has a narrative and ideals, but these need to be transformed into a sustainable balance of systems and incentives. I wish the TON ecosystem will continue to improve.
Share
PANews2025/10/30 14:00
MoonBull, Brett, and Dogwifhat Compared

MoonBull, Brett, and Dogwifhat Compared

The post MoonBull, Brett, and Dogwifhat Compared appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Crypto News 18 September 2025 | 05:15 Explore MoonBull Whitelist, Brett token, and Dogwifhat price action. Learn why MoonBull’s best crypto whitelist is live now with big FOMO potential. Ever wondered why meme coins stir so much hype in the crypto jungle? Traders, students, and even seasoned blockchain builders keep chasing the next peanut pile of gains, hoping their bags turn into bull-sized fortunes overnight. In today’s scene, names like Brett and Dogwifhat grab the spotlight, while MoonBull lights up conversations with its whitelist buzz. Each of these projects carries its own flavor, yet the energy they generate reveals how meme culture keeps shaking financial markets. Brett became a crowd darling by spinning internet humor into tokenomics. Dogwifhat turned playful memes into market waves, pulling traders in with viral appeal. Both show how lighthearted memes can fuel serious capital flow. Yet the chatter doesn’t stop with them. MoonBull now appears, sparking urgency with its whitelist, creating noise louder than a hippo splash in shallow waters. MoonBull’s whitelist offering exclusive early perks, the crypto crowd feels the tug of FOMO stronger than ever. This first-come, first-served invite could be a rare second shot at a moonshot. MoonBull Whitelist is Live: Your Chance to Join the Best Crypto Whitelist MoonBull ($MOBU) has entered the arena not as just another meme coin but as a project built with the precision of Ethereum’s secure backbone. Designed for those chasing explosive upside, MoonBull stacks its chips on elite staking rewards and secret token drops. Its whitelist isn’t simply a sign-up form; it’s a ticket into Stage One of the presale, where entry comes at the lowest price possible and doors swing open to bonus allocations. Being whitelisted is like being a penguin in the front row of a bull stampede. Whitelist members aren’t just joining…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 10:17