Pendle price

📌 I saw someone in the group asking about the collateral for Boros, which should also be a point of confusion for some Boros users: @boros_fi Since it is a funding rate market, why can't we use USDT as collateral to open positions like in common contracts? Based on Grandma @pendle_grandma's reply, I would like to add a few points of my understanding—— 1️⃣ Funding rate market ≠ ordinary lending market The logic of traditional DeFi lending protocols is that the liquidity pool has unified collateral; as long as the assets are safe and have low volatility, they can generally be used as collateral. However, Boros's design philosophy is different; it requires that the collateral assets for each market must be consistent with the pricing assets of the trades. The reason is simple: 👉 to prevent cross-asset liquidation risks. For example—— If you open a long position of 10 BTC (worth 1.1 million USDT) on an exchange, to hedge the funding rate, you only need to short 10 YU-BTC on Boros. ⚙️ At this point, the hedging relationship is "BTC against BTC," with consistent pricing units, and the profit/loss changes on Boros directly correspond to the funding rate fluctuations on the exchange, making the risk model simple. If you use USDT as collateral, the problem becomes much more complicated—— For the same long position of 10 BTC, you would need a corresponding position of 1.1 million YU-USDT to hedge the funding rate, which brings three issues: 1) The hedging calculation is more complex and requires constant conversion of BTC prices. 2) The volatility of the collateral and the volatility of the funding rate are not on the same dimension, making the risk model difficult to establish. 3) The user experience becomes more chaotic, and liquidation and risk control become less intuitive. If BTC's price plummets, the value of USDT won't change, but the collateral ratio will instantly become unbalanced, forcing the system to either liquidate or require complex re-collateralization logic. So from a risk efficiency perspective, the vast majority of users playing in the coin-based market on Boros will find better cost-effectiveness. Boros's native asset collateral market can provide higher leverage because the risk control model is more predictable. 2️⃣ Why does only Hyperliquid's funding rate support USDT collateral? I estimate that some people may not have noticed that on October 3rd, Boros launched a USDT market specifically for Hyperliquid, and the team must have considered a lot: If you look at Hyperliquid's funding rate curve, you'll find that it is almost the most volatile in the entire market. It can flip several times in a day, and traders' position update frequency is also very high. This frequent interest rate fluctuation is precisely the raw material that the funding rate market needs most—— The more volatile it is, the larger the trading space, the higher the trading density, and the stronger the hedging demand, the more trading value it has, which aligns with Boros's appetite. Boros chose to first implement USDT collateral on Hyperliquid, which I feel is a small-scale test: Using the fastest-reacting market to test the sensitivity, depth, and participation of the funding rate market. Once this runs smoothly, it may just be a matter of time before they onboard more markets. After analyzing the above, I feel that the @pendle_fi team has done a remarkably fine job in operating Boros, balancing safety, matching, and user experience; this is the level of detail that a mature protocol should have, and it deserves a thumbs up! Additionally, Boros launched a new term funding rate market yesterday (expiring on November 28, 2025), providing a longer hedging window. It would be good to check if there are any pricing differences between long and short-term contracts, as there may be opportunities for cross-term arbitrage. 📍 I previously wrote a series of tutorials on Boros; interested friends can refer to them! In the new Boros communication channel opened by Pendle, I discovered many hidden experts who provided a lot of strategic insights. I recommend joining; you can really learn something!

Pairs with MACD CrossOver/CrossUnder in the last 30m $XAN $FLOCK $EUL $IP $ENA $PENDLE $DYDX $CROSS $SNX $MANA $1000LUNC $GMX $LTC $BNT $AVAX $AERO $PHB $0G $GAS Get more updates at

The fixed-income layer of DeFi DeFi built billion-dollar liquidity markets but never solved the core financing problem: predictable borrowing costs. Protocols like @aave, @MorphoLabs, and @compoundfinance use floating rates, which distort leverage and risk planning. @TermMaxFi introduces an on-chain fixed-rate borrowing and leverage layer, built on a three-token model (FT, XT, GT) and AMM-based matching. In short: DeFi mastered floating yield. TermMax is building the infrastructure for cost-locked credit, turning DeFi into a true capital market. Borrowers lock in rates until maturity; lenders earn fixed returns through tokenized bonds (FTs). This design modularizes yield, risk, and leverage: • FT – zero-coupon-style fixed-yield token • GT – NFT representing debt and collateral The result: composable fixed-income markets where strategies are reproducible and capital costs are known upfront. Beyond borrowing, TermMax integrates with @pendle_fi PT markets (eUSDe, wstETH, USDC, etc.), turning idle PT positions into fixed-rate collateral and creating triple-yield loops, native yield + borrowing spread + XP rewards. Backed by Cumberland (DRW), HashKey, Decimal, and LongLing, @TermMaxFi positions itself as the fixed-income layer of DeFi; bridging yield trading, structured leverage, and institutional borrowing under one model.