Yield Indexes and Benchmark Comparison - Stablecoin Assets February 2023

This document is updated each month and provides information and a comparison of Coinchange yield against different comparable indexes. We selected the components within the indexes to be direct, indirect or closely related to yield generation (DeFi and CeFi) and interest generation while maintaining strict requirements on funds availability, small to no investment minimums and high liquidity for stablecoin assets like USDC, USDT, DAI, BUSD.

We also provide a historical comparison of the rate across the indexes to provide some perspective on performance over time.

Yield Indexes

February Comparison

For the month of February, Coinchange has a higher average rate than all the indexes except for the CeFi Yield Index which is +2.28% higher and the DeFi Yield Index being +0.34% higher than Coinchange rate of 4.64% which saw a decrease of -0.64% from January rate. Our rate remains multiple higher than the CeDeFi index while not having any lockups, minimum investments requirements and being fully liquid and soon being non-custodial. The DeFi lending index increased by +0.76% from January standing at 2.82%, while the DeFi Minimum Risk Rate (DMRR) has increased by around +0.56% highlighting the continued interest rate hike operated by the Fed. The DeFi yield index has increased from last month by +0.89% to reach 4.98% due to the market volatility and volume increasing in the recent relief rally. The CeFi Yield Index has almost not budged since last month at 6.92%, recording a streak of 4 consecutive months above 6% APY. Unsustainable or continued appetite from hedge funds and traders is still a question, when most of the institutional money and funds have put crypto on “hold” since all the events that happened in 2022. 

In February FTX/Alameda bankruptcy seems to be an old story alongside what at the time seemed like the final bankruptcy with Genesis Global Holdco and its lending subsidiaries. Now we had bank runs and banks shutting down (Silvergate, Signature, SVB). Those events materialized as a choppy market since the end of January, highlighting investors' indecisions and doubts. If you want to learn which metrics investors look at in such market conditions head over to our blog where we cover the subject. For February, we removed a couple of pools in the DeFi Yield Index since they came below our threshold. One component of the CeDeFi Yield Index also has its TVL close to the limit threshold.

The chart below provides a snapshot of the rate across indexes and standalone rate for the month of February. We then describe the component within each index and standalone rate via a legend. The methodology to calculate the rate is the monthly average over the time period (Feb 1-28) for USDC, USDT and DAI. The exceptions are the DeFi Minimum Risk Rate which uses a 30 day average TVL weighted stablecoin 30 day average lending rate, and Coinchange which uses a weighted average rate (explained in its dedicated section).

We organize the indexes into 3 categories of risk. 

• Minimal risk: Risk-Free Rate non-adjusted for inflation as well as DeFi Minimum Risk Rate fall under this category. 
• Low risk: DeFi Lending Index and Coinchange rate are parts of the low risk category.
• Medium to High risk: CeDeFi yield, CeFi yield and DeFi yield are found in this category.

‍

All Yield Index comparison - February

Indexes Legend 

Minimal Risk Indexes:

DeFi Minimum Risk Rate 

• Calculation method: 30 day average TVL weighted 30 day average stablecoin lending rate (USDC, USDT, DAI)
• Index components: Compound on Ethereum and AAVE on Ethereum, Avalanche, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism
• Requirements details: Markets are fully liquid (can be withdrawn within minutes) without minimum investment with highest liquidity in DeFi. 
• Risk information: The index reflects the minimum level of risk an investor in DeFi can take to earn yield. The methodology and reasoning behind the DMRR is explained at the bottom of the document and aims to function as a benchmark for DeFi, similarly to how the ‘Risk-free Rate’ functions for traditional finance.
• Data sources: For AAVE and Compound rates we use Dune analytics query. For the TVL we use the aggregate numbers for AAVE v1, 2, 3  from DeFi Llama CSV export. For Compound TVL we use a Dune analytics query.

Risk-Free Rate non-adjusted for inflation

• Calculation method: 30 day average 10 year U.S Treasury note yield, non adjusted for inflation.
• Index components: 10 year U.S Treasury note rate, non adjusted for inflation. 
• Requirements details: Highest amount of liquidity in the investable landscape, redeemable when the U.S market is open. Minimum investment can vary  depending on broker & dealer but generally the minimum is 1 bond worth $1,000.
• Risk information: Investment product carrying the minimum amount of risk an investor is willing to take to earn yield in TradFi. It is used as a benchmark in the traditional market to calculate and compare investments against each other. 
• Data sources: We use the non adjusted for inflation 10 year U.S Treasury note from the U.S Department of the treasury website.

‍

Below is the historical performance of the indexes mentioned above since January 2022.

Historical Minimal Risk Indexes comparison

Low Risk Indexes

‍

DeFi Lending Index 

• Calculation method: 30 day average stablecoin lending rate (USDC, USDT, DAI)
• Index components: Compound on Ethereum; AAVE on Ethereum, Avalanche, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism; Venus on Binance Smart Chain
• Requirements details: The markets are fully liquid (can be withdrawn within minutes), without minimum investment and have among the highest liquidity in DeFi across networks. 
• Risk information: The main difference between the DMRR and DeFi lending index is the amount of risk taken via the component of the index. By adding more lending platforms to the index that still satisfy requirements, we gradually increase the risk of insolvency or risk of loss for the calculated rate. 
• Data sources: For AAVE and Compound rates we use Dune analytics query. For Venus rates we use DeFi Llama CSV export and manual recording for historical rates from Nanoly (H1 of 2022).

Coinchange Yield

• Calculation method: Weighted average stablecoin rate (USDC, USDT, DAI) across diversified & non-correlated DeFi strategies.
• Index components: Coinchange on Ethereum, Avalanche and Binance Smart Chain
• Requirements details: Coinchange does not have lockups or an investment minimum. Withdrawals are processed during the same day of the request. All funds are deployed in DeFi without CeFi counterparties and are fully on-chain. 
• Risk information: Coinchange’s strategies within each Earn account have protocol and blockchain diversification at the core. Strategies are non-correlated, meaning that it is diversified across market mechanisms as well. Learn more in our Asset Allocation Report - January  and Asset Allocation Report - February.  
• Data sources: Directly pulled from Coinchange backend, the same rate as the one earned by Coinchange users.

Below is the historical performance of the indexes mentioned above since January 2022.

Historical Low Risk Indexes comparison

Medium to High Risk Indexes:

CeDeFi Yield Index 

Comment on the index: 

This month all Spool Finance vaults used are under $1M in TVL. The average TVL for the 6 vaults used was $340k. If this trend continues, certain Spool Finance vaults that fall under $500k-$300k will be removed from the index calculation.

• Calculation method: 30 day average stablecoin rate (USDC, USDT, DAI) 
• Index components: Centralized companies operating in Decentralized Finance to generate yield: Coinchange, Idle Finance, Spool Finance and Swissborg.
• Requirements details: All platforms do not have lockups or an investment minimum while having high liquidity, except for Swissborg rates. We chose the rate that does not require a stake of Swissborg’s token. They enable higher yield but require lockups of 12 months and its platform token to be staked in various amounts to get to a certain tier account providing increased yield and reduced fees. 
• Risk information: In this index the only Low Risk rate is Coinchange whereas the others are medium to high risk. The primary risks are bankruptcy due to poor asset management practices with either too much leverage or lack of safeguard measure in place.
• Data sources: Wayback Machine snapshots for some historical rates but not all components have allowed the Wayback Machine to capture snapshots of their website. Hence we mostly use the rates displayed on the component’s web UI every week to calculate a 30 day average while saving screenshots in the database as proof. 

DeFi Yield Index 

Comment on the index:

Two of the three Yield Yak vault’s TVL are close to or below the $500k-$300k threshold. One of them has been removed from the calculation because it fell below. Only one pool out of the three normally used for Autofarm has been used this month because TVL fell below threshold, and one has been deprecated by Autofarm. 

• Calculation method: 30 day average stablecoin rate (USDC, USDT, DAI, BUSD, MAI, MIM, sUSD) 
• Index components: Decentralized platform offering yield or aggregating yield across protocols and platforms: Yearn Finance, Beefy Finance, Autofarm, Yield Yak
• Requirements details: None have lockups or an investment minimum. Only pools with good liquidity, secure assets and safe protocols have been selected for each index component.
• Risk information: DeFi yield aggregators have varying degree of risk from medium to high depending on a multitude of factors such as: smart contract security, team relevancy, source of the yield generated, aggregation method for the yield, ownership and security of smart contracts. 
• Data sources: Yearn.Vision, maintained by Yearn.finance devs, is used to populate the rates. Displayed 30 day average rate on web UI is used for Beefy, while for Autofarm we manually record daily rates to calculate the 30 day average. Yield Yak rates are coming from DeFi Llama CSV export.    

CeFi Yield Index 

Comment on the index: 

Maple Finance rate only uses Maven 11 permissionless pool since November. Two borrowers fully repaid their loan in the beginning of February where Flow Traders was the principal. Regarding TrueFi, since TruefiDAO stopped lending entirely since TrueTrading (the only borrower) is restructuring its loan agreement with Detl.ai since January and has not reached a final settlement as of the end of February. Thus the only option left is USDC.homes vault managed by The Tighe law firm with 230k TVL since 200 days ago.

The index rate has increased by 1.53% from November to February due to changes in the calculation method. 

• Calculation method: 30 day average stablecoin rate (USDC, USDT, DAI)
• Index components: Centralized companies generating yield via lending interest primarily: Nexo, TrueFi, Maple Finance public pool, Goldfinch senior pool, Coinbase Earn. 
• Requirements details: Nexo does not have lockups or investment minimums but it has an investment maximum $100k after which, the rate decreases dramatically. This standard “retail rate” has been selected for the index. Nexo offers higher yield if chosen to earn in $NEXO rather than in kind along with holding a certain percentage of your portfolio value in the token indefinitely over time. Maple Finance pools selected are not permissioned to have the least amount of barriers to redeem funds. Goldfinch senior pool is selected because it has the lowest risk and highest liquidity available. Coinbase Earn USDC rate does not have an investment minimum.
• Risk information: Due to the business model of CeFi platform they carry significant amounts of risk, such as: borrowers default, bankruptcy risks, no asset control and low to no transparency, just to name a few. We have seen the extent of the damage this can cause with the bankruptcy of Celsius, Voyager, YouHodler, BlockFi and Genesis Global Holdco and two subsidiaries in January.
• Data sources: We use Wayback Machine snapshots of their website for some historical rates but not all components. We also use the rates displayed on the component’s web UI every week to calculate a 30 day average while saving screenshots in the database as proof. Lastly we use DeFi Llama CSV export when available and if accurate as per numbers displayed on the components UI. 

 Below is the historical performance of the indexes mentioned above since January 2022.

Historical Medium to High Risk Indexes comparison

Performance Overview

Historical commentary:

DeFi related indexes (DeFi MRR, DeFi lending, DeFi Yield) had their rates decrease during Q1 2022 and stabilized in Q2 2022. DeFi Yield index, on the medium to high risk end, stabilized at the end of Q3 2022 while having a short lived uptick in July. 

Regarding CeFi related indexes (CeDeFi Yield, CeFi yield, Coinchange) they followed the same pattern in general as the DeFi related yield indexes except for Coinchange which saw its rate increase up until Q1 2022. CeFi related yield indexes rate stabilized in Q2 2022.

Current performance commentary:

Coinchange saw its rate increase 4 times in September and sustained this rate up until November, which is attributed to the new non-correlated strategy that was launched in September. In November, the strategy’s algorithm determined that with current market conditions it should be rebalanced and thus led to the decrease recorded. In January we saw an uptick in the rate largely because our DEX strategy which has been resumed since last month benefited from the DEX volume increase. In February Coinchange rate remains close to the previous month rate, partly due to the strategy allocation to MMP which saws significant borrowing demand during this month. We further explore our strategies diversification and allocation across protocol types in our Asset Allocation Report - January and Asset Allocation Report - February.

CeFi Yield index remains close to its rate from Q4 2022, partly because Nexo rate remains at 8% since October despite all troubles around their competitions and themselves. It either shows continued borrowing appetite by hedge funds and traders or unsustainable rates that can soon turn into defaults (i.e TrueFi and Maple borrower defaults). GoldFinch senior tranches have had incredible consistency at 7.8% APY since its addition in August 2022 highlighting the borrowing appetite from real world companies in need of efficient financing.

CeDeFi yield index finally starts to decouple from the DeFi Lending Index and the DeFi Minimum Risk Rate, which has not happened since Sept 2022. All three are recording a slow but steady increase in the rates since September due to borrowing activity increasing alongside DEX volume picking up.  

The chart below represents the comparison of historical rates across indexes since January 2022 and aims to provide some perspective on performance over time. For full historical performance of Coinchange Earn Account check here.

Historical All Index comparison

Methodology for DeFi Minimum Risk Rate

A benchmark is a standard against which something is compared. In finance, investors use benchmarks to measure the performance of securities, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, portfolios, or other investment instruments.

Generally, broad market and market-segment stock and bond indexes are used for this purpose. If there is an investment instrument, there is a benchmark to compare it to, otherwise comparison across investment products alone does not provide the full picture.

In crypto, benchmarks do exist as well. The most common are the top 10 or 15 cryptocurrency indexes by market capitalization. DeFi benchmarks exist as well in the form of indexes, most of the time tracking the market capitalization of top DeFi governance token, which can be found for DeFi sub-segments such as DeFi yield, Oracle, GameFi, NFT marketplace, etc.

The benchmark we are seeking here, is one that could serve the same purpose as the “risk-free rate” that exists in traditional finance. In theory, the risk-free rate is the minimum return an investor expects for any investment while not accepting additional risk unless the potential rate of return is greater than the risk-free rate. Determination of a proxy for the risk-free rate of return will depend mainly on the credibility, liquidity size of the product, and availability. In practice, although a completely risk-free rate does not exist, the interest rate on a 10 year U.S. bond is often used as the benchmark for most investors while foreign investors might need to factor in the currency risk. 

In DeFi we can’t name such a benchmark “risk-free rate” since the technology it is built on is rather new and hence does not carry the same credibility as US T-Bill. Hence using “DeFi minimum risk rate” is more suited. Like in the TradFi market, DeFi has large investors seeking low risk returns in non-derivative markets which have high levels of liquidity with full redemption intraday. Protocols that fit the requirement are lending and borrowing protocols as per Credmark research. We should only take into consideration the rate of return of stable assets as the risk-free rate in TradFi is denominated in dollars. 

Hence the minimal risk rate in DeFi could be determined by taking the TVL weighted average rate for USDC, USDT and DAI - as they are the most stable with highest liquidity - on AAVE and Compound - as they are the most secure and longest standing protocols in DeFi with highest Total Value Locked (TVL).

‍