LST

GoodSamoSamo

Grats, you pointed out one of the biggest LST projects in Solana who also runs their own validator client. The exceptions don’t make the rule and your claim that there are all these entities running more than 1 validator is baseless. Even if that was the case, it’s the distribution of stakers and the nakamoto coefficient that matters.

GoodSamoSamo

If you understood Solana, you'd know the design is far superior to many chains and fundamentals are stupid strong (non-vote txs, DeFi TVL, DEX trading volume, NFT volume, original projects across new crypto sectors like AI, DePIN, LST, etc.) Also, this whole idea that "VCs are pumping Solana" is a 50 IQ take from morons who don't know anything about markets or capital markets. Keep the tinfoil hat on.

QueenBaluli

Honestly things like legit liquid staking could be a thing 4 years ago. Now every l1 chain has LST. When i look on these advantages, none of them would attract me to use this chain. They're irrelevant for retail .

chaoticji

- What Lido/rocketpool is to solo staking is what LRT is to eigen staking. You will stake with LRT only if you want your staked ETH to be liquid and you trust LRT - Eigen accepts LST of multiple platforms like Lido, Rocketpool, stadder. You can check on the website. We are locking to Eigen and not some project. Eigen is like a marketplace of projects where we can choose multiple. Since we are noobs and don't know stuff, LRT comes into play. These are not only providing liquidity to our staked eth, but also helps to filter and choose the best ones, manage requirements, dao, slashing inaurance etc. - i don't know much about how slashing will happen. Still not ready yet

FeveredGobbledygook

If you staked 1 Celestia by December 18th 2023 you would have been eligible for 205 Dymension. Some geniuses on twitter had 10-15 wallets each with 5-20 Celestia and they made 10's of thousands. CC2Ventures on twitter is the best airdrop farmer around and I just do everything he does and its been working out like crazy. I got Pyth, Manta, and Dymension so far and it raised my portfolio from 900 dollars to 5.6k. If you hold Ethereum for the love of god stake it with Swell or any tokenless LST protocol, and restake on Eigenlayer. They will have a nice airdrop, plus projects like AltLayer airdropped to people with over 500 Eigen points.

0ne_too

I'm into interop and rollups and that sort of tech. Celestia is next gen tech. Lot of builders working on rollups and rollapps and in the integration of that with the existing chains like eth and it's layer 2s, sol, cosmos, and probably avax. I'm into that because it's fun to move assets around and make decisions which result in Ws and Ls. Fun to follow the tech on twitter. I'm not into enterprise adoption stuff. I don't see crypto being integrated meaningfully with anything other than finance. Stuff like supply chain or nft ticketing doesn't interest me because i don't see it happening if ever. Some people i respect are into Real World Assets on chain, but i think the minute their rwa's get burned by volatility, hacks, or some chain related snafu and they lose a chunk of their value or investment, they're out. I think if banks want to use blockchain they'll build their own, which isn't nearly as hard as it used to be and keeps getting easier as the tech matures. There are some exceptions, i have decent size bags of Akash and a bit of Render which have real world use cases. I'd probably get some Tao but been focused on getting my stTia bags bigger. I do like to use my crypto to make more so just having it sit on exchange waiting for number to go up doesn't scratch the itch (dopamine) that defi does. I've said before if i had the time and more so the energy i'd be balls deep in the L2s or Sol. But i don't so i keep it to Cosmos which is my lane UX and investment($$) wise and has been awesome tbh. Very happy with my portfolio. Within Cosmos i have dex/amm, AI, gaming, LST, NFT, and rollup plays i'm very happy with. They might not be the optimal post bull run hindsight play but i'm confident they'll do well enough.

Django_McFly

I have two wallets for this stuff. One is hot, one is cold. Stader offers liquid staking tokens. I've used it before. I'd buy the tokens with my hot wallet and then send them to my cold wallet. Having a new wallet for every token seems excessive. I have two wallets. One that's cold and will never touch a dapp. One that will interact with dapps. Most of my tokens are in my cold wallet. Some of them are staked. I'm ok knowing that my cold wallet may be eligible for airdrops, but if it requires me to interact with a dapp then oh well, I miss out on it. Having said that, I stake some in my hot wallets to still be able to claim stuff. I have TIA and ATOM which is eligible for a lot of drops. Most of it is in my cold wallet as a LST but I have part of my bags staked on chain in my hot wallet for drops. You mentioned Stader. I have tokens issued by them. I bought them with my hot wallet and then sent them to my cold wallet.

IPerduMyUsername

Depends what you use it for, if you're using it for super concentrated liquidity for LST pairs it's just leveraged yield without even risking liquidations within market volatility.

torvaman

Solana LST

MaximumStudent1839

>That's your definition for decentralisation though. In this space, people often confuse "decentralization" as an ***end in itself*** rather than a ***means to an end***. This is why the space get bogged down on debating decentralization on so many loose dimensions but end up losing the plot. The point is not about "egalitarianism". Crypto is an inherently capitalist system - egalitarianism has never been at its center. For PoS smart contract platform, decentralization's goal is to provide a credibly neutral platform to facilitate permissionless transactions and secure them as written in code. For sound money, decentralization in PoV I defined, is to ensure money production has real economic cost. Now there is also an added element to ensure transactions are secure against censorship and Byzantine fault tolerance. If you don't like it, that is fine. I gave you how the "sound money" market view this issue - for example see check out how Lyn Alden says something similar. > PoS systems cut out this middleman and centralization risk yet I don't see you including this argument. Does it though? We are now entering an era of Liquid Staking providers becoming dominant and practicing MEV extraction. Over time, validators have incentive to join LST cartel and pose risk to the chain. There is a reason why ETH community is sounding the alarm on Lido expansion. >Or that Bitcoin mining is centralized at geographical locations in the world where power is super cheap or almost free. You could say very similar things about PoS. Krake, Coinbase, Binance, etc. are big stakers of all PoS coins. PoS validators are often correlated with geographical locations that had early access to buying in at cheap. >Or the looming risk of the Bitcoin halving system that at some point the price to secure the chain exceeds the reward earned from the system. Ordinal seems to have changed the calculus of it. Think recently BTC Ordinal fees have exceeded block subsidies. >what prevents a super wealthy being of setting up a mining facility in china with fiat money. You see, you aren't following. Sound money isn't about a " perfect egalitarian" outcome. What it wants is money production costing real economic value. In POW case, it is energy consumption. BTC monetary policy doesn't have a passive money generator feature. You need to spend real resources, aka semiconductor chips, to actively compete against others. Holding BTC alone does jack squat on expanding your network control. POS does exactly that with staking. And it gets horribly worse with deflation, like ETH's model. These features are fine if you just want a credibly neutral smart contract platform. But they make horrible sound money because there is little real economic value generated from your share expansion by just staking.

niezam

More LST provider for ETH, everyone lock their ETH to chase the airdrop - eg Blast and Manta. Nobody can sell their locked ETH, ETH shortage and bull.

PizzaPino

Kraken for their support and transparency. If they only had their own LST.

Noematasv

LSDfi narrative faded away for many people but looking at TVLs, it's still something that we shouldn't forget about. Spool's V2 will gather the biggest LST issuers, yield generators etc under one roof. That sounds super bullish to me tbh

JooseBeatz

U can stake directly from the ledger live interface that comes with the wallet. But i prefer to hold LST’s. Liquid Staking Tokens like rETH or stETH or whatever u choose. These are tokens that represent 1 eth, but they automatically earn the staking yield so the price is always Eth price + 4.2% (or whatever staking yield is). I like them better cuz u can use them in defi for lending, borrowing, pooling, etc. just as if theyre regular Eth coins. Also if i think its the top i can just sell for usdc instantly rather than wait 5 days to unstake. 5 days after the top is usually like 30% down lol

justnmirrrs

Might not get as many dropped, but mrgn could pop even higher with how much value is deposited in lending pools They also have LST which is a liquid staking you get for depositing sol into a pool that uses Jito MEV client, and if all that isn't degen enough for you, you can earn 10% apy on bonk if you're willing to lock it up there for six months

Django_McFly

The snapshot was already taken. Too late now. As for what Jito is, it's a liquid staking token for Solana. Their differentiating point is that they run MEV bots and give part of that to people who use the LST, in addition to the normal SOL staking rewards.

AntiquePen9204

I am also excited about CAGA, especially with its most recent listing on Bitget. Let's see how LST performs in the coming months.

Bezgoviciro

LST is an emerging narrative that I anticipate will thrive in the years to come. Similarly, I have confidence in the potential of DiDs projects, with DIA and QANX being notable examples that I'm actively accumulating. Notably, the latter recently announced a 30% token burn of its total supply, a development expected to exert a significant long term impact on its price action.

stormingaround10

LST assets are promising, undoubtedly. Since the space is quite new, we should dedicate some time to exploring. I found some cool options within the DIA Ultimate liquid staking map.

BawceHog

I am confused by your comments. Are you talking about a node operator or a LST holder (rETH holders)? Either way, you can own rETH on a cold wallet.

kuonanaxu

In simple terms, you stake ETH and get an LST like rETH for RocketPool or stETH for Lido which you can use as a tradable asset; usually when you stake traditionally, you're not able to access the assets until you unstake.

NUPreMedMajor

It’s going to be a pump and dump. People who were content with hodling eth have just locked up their staked eth because there is going to be an airdrop. So for them, they might as well since they’d be holding the underlying eth anyways. But once the airdrop comes, they are all leaving instantly Happened with every LST protocol within the past year

sickvisionz

HYSA is undeniably easier. You have to learn nothing about anything. Staking requires you learn about crypto. The main thing for should I stake crypto or stake dollars is that dollars are stable unless you live outside of the USgn country and are arbing dollars vs your local currency. For better or worse, crypto could go up or down in value by 5% in a day. Buy $1k of ETH and dollars on 1/1/2023. Let's pretend today's price is the 12/31/2023 price. 5% APR on dollars leaves you with $1050. ETH with 0% staking APR is worth $1738. Also, there's way cheaper ways of getting a LST than what you did. Could swap into it in a dex on a L2 for like $1 in the worst of days.

sickvisionz

> You keep control of your keys because you received rETH instead and it's still secured by Ledger While true, this isn't really a feature. Getting a token in return is the "liquid" part of "liquid staking". There isn't anyone operating a LST that doesn't work like this.

RickandMowgli

Democracy is an inherently slow version of monarchy. It’s inconvenient for all these people to decide who should lead. The kernel of truth here is that we have representative leadership because it actually IS too slow for everybody to make decisions about everything. But it is still very very important that at the root people influence the direction of leadership. Think about how annoyed you are that $$$ buys political influence? That’s because you think it’s important that people should decide. Decentralized financial systems are the same way. We are trying to build systems which have enough convenience to be practically useful while still maintaining the important influence of the decentralized group of individuals from all over. For all the people who are impatient for crypto to take over the world — don’t be so surprised it takes time to build such systems. Rome(or the internet) wasn’t built in a day and this isn’t some simple problem. The important thing is the community to keep educating itself on the important things. Personally I’m very interested in the fairness/justice of the ethereum consensus system. Things like MEV, block builder centralization, LST centralization, etc are some of the battlegrounds which will determine the fairness of future systems in my opinion. Look at the failures of the current political systems and you’ll see at the root some very real policy failures leading to them imo. Crypto systems are being designed now and I think people will look at some of the fundamental choices as being very impactful in the future. Hopefully we make the right ones.

MinimalGravitas

There are of course some risks with using any DeFi protocols, but the risks of Lido are on a whole extra level. I would suggest swapping out of Lido's LST when you can. There are plenty of better options, dome like Frax or Stakewise even have a higher effective APY: https://simplestakers.info/

ma0za

No. a decentralized provider like Rocket Pool will never have perfectly balanced sides of Node Operator inflow / LST demand for any prolonged period of time thats just not realistic. When something like Lido can just funnel Ether into new Validators Rocket Pool has to match Node Operators able to bond their validators with LST demand and both are variable. What we have right now is not a bad situation we have huge rETH demand, Node Operators are lacking (has been the other way arround not too long ago) but lower Bonded Minipools and Megapools are scheduled which exponentially increases capacity to take in Ether. Pretty great situation for the horrible overall market condition we are in right now.

klanh

Dashboard: [https://dune.com/LidoAnalytical/Lido-Finance-Extended](https://dune.com/LidoAnalytical/Lido-Finance-Extended) Query: https://dune.com/queries/2433350/3997605 I used market share within the LST space, your link is market share of total staked ETH. Just a bit different ways of looking at the same thing.

Valdorff

> Dev team funding is by far the biggest expense and could've been avoided with a different approach to the project. ?? If you have a way to make a strong project without a dev team, that's impressive :P > What actually irks me about RocketPool is all the preachers lambasting users for not "choosing the right LST" and the idiots saying that using RPL is fine since it will outperform ETH. If they are so sure about RPL's price trajectory then they should be investing in it, not in ETH or rETH. Heard. Nobody should be pressured or made to feel bad. I _do_ think there's a strong argument for rETH based on lower tail risks and/or preferred ideology. But that doesn't make it best for everyone. In maturity, RPL will not outperform ETH -- it's inflating and at maturity there's no significant growth driver. Speculating that it will outperform ETH on its path to maturity is perfectly reasonable, and many folks _do_ invest in it as a result. Ofc, it's also perfectly fine to believe it's already fairly valued or overvalued and opt to avoid RPL. > obviously one has to take into account how much of the underlaying tech has been built on previous research/experimentation from projects that came before them I appreciate this point. Diva kicked off with VCs and put in some significant effort to get some tokens widely spread. I think they have some really cool stuff going on. I have some concerns too - but they and Stakewise v3 are the two competitors I'm most excited about. I'll note that RP won't stand still either. We're working on getting better over time, importantly including reducing the remaining components of trust. > when another project with similar ideology but better product comes along This is possible, but I doubt it comes to pass. There's room for plenty of positive projects.

Valdorff

> No, what prevents it is loss of business. It's really not. There is no way for Lido to exit the NO's validators (and even if there were they can also threaten a mass slash in such a case to hold some ETH hostage btw). Lido have been forthright that they don't plan to give any NO more than 1% of total stake. In other words, total stake needs to grow about 6x for revenue to reach what they could achieve via theft. > And yet, Lido staking and security are not exposed to LDO like RP staking and security are exposed to RPL Third time I'm responding this to you -- staking security (aka rETH security) does not rely on RPL value. It would be fine with $0 RPL. > Insisting on your disdain for VC funding doesn't change that, but it does make the irony more visible since both LDO and RPL holders are laughably concentrated. I don't have disdain for VC funding. I do believe it comes with a set of influences, and think other alternatives are viable. Let's consider what it would take to get 20% of vote. For Lido, 5 LDO-holding wallets would get there. For RP, we lie on the orange curve in https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/proposal-switch-to-linear-voting-power-to-resist-attackers/1213/10?u=valdorf and can see it takes over 100 nodes. Looking at votes with delegation instead, it's about 18 voters (assuming that nobody overrides their delegate) -- not great, but much more than 5. > First, there is quorum. Second, Lido is implementing dual-governance Quorum is 5%. The holder list shows single wallets holding 5%. If 2 large wallets voted, it would be the most total vote Lido's aragon instance has seen in a long time. FYI, RP's quorum is 15%. Dual governance is really cool. But it's not a panacea. It's particularly subject to "boil the frog" style stuff. Ie, yes people might revolt if you say "we're gonna triple the commission", but they may not if you multiply it by 1.1x 12 times with multimonth gaps. > how are rETH holders valued at RP governance to protect them against malicious governance (dictated by RPL holders)? They do not have a direct protection, you're right. Their value is enshrined in the pDAO charter https://rpips.rocketpool.net/RPIPs/RPIP-23, but that's about what should be, not what can be (ie, trust based). > Delegation is yet another concentration instrument, it's funny you're proud of it. So... until ossification, there needs to be _some_ way to make changes. I'm somewhat proud of our voting power spread. Delegation (working well) helps empower small holders that can't justify spending the time to research every choice. Importantly, they can vote directly for specific votes if they wish to. Essentially we can think of the good version of delegation as creating new "large" voters out of lots of tiny ones. The bad version of delegation is making "controlling" delegates out of "large" ones -- we haven't seen that yet, but it's certainly a risk. > p.s. I don't even like Lido. It's the misrepresentation of truth that made me reply on this cesspool of a sub (way more than I ever envisaged). If I really had to choose a LST platform for my ETH, it would probably be Coinbase for a host of reasons I'm not going to get into, with all risks of losing the stake etc. I would say I mostly like Lido, fwiw. If they didn't have the "winner take all" mentality, I'd probably have no issues with them at all. Heard in terms of ending up replying muuuch more than desired - me too fren. cbETH is a perfectly reasonable choice -- since they strengthened their ToS earlier this year, I think they're pretty solid (though ofc wholly centralized).

klanh

Dev team funding is by far the biggest expense and could've been avoided with a different approach to the project. I don't judge the devs for taking the approach they did, it's a free market after all though it's not hard to argue that the market is telling them it was the wrong choice. What actually irks me about RocketPool is all the preachers lambasting users for not "choosing the right LST" and the idiots saying that using RPL is fine since it will outperform ETH. If they are so sure about RPL's price trajectory then they should be investing in it, not in ETH or rETH. In a different comment you mentioned Diva and since I wasn't familiar with the project I went to look at their docs. From that very limited research they seem a lot more like what RP should've/could've been, though obviously one has to take into account how much of the underlaying tech has been built on previous research/experimentation from projects that came before them, making such system more feasible today than when RP was first conceived. If I were to make a prediction about future I'd say that RP will more or less fade into obscurity when another project with similar ideology but better product comes along.

klanh

>I agree that ETH collateral is better "in every other way" but funding stuff. Just yknow... can't do anything without funding stuff. The realistic other option is VC money -- and hopefully we all understand VC money isn't free. You might not have noticed but I didn't criticize RocketPool having a higher fee than Lido. It would make perfect sense that more decentralized system comes at a higher fee cut. Overall though your whole sentiment is one of the most baffling things to me in all of crypto, it's a system where "operational costs" ( product delivery, etc ) are basically non existent so what happened to the idea of entrepreneurs taking a risk on their own? Especially a project like RocketPool whose whole shtick is their ideology, why isn't it bunch of people using their savings and/or free time building up something more aligned to their ideology and hoping that over time the protocol grows big enough that whatever fee cut they've chosen to take for themselves will make it possible for them to make it a job for themselves? I think that cbETH is quite a good example of how fees aren't the be-all and end-all when people compare which LST to use. If there was a protocol called "NotLIDO" that had 15-20% fee but worked more like RocketPool I'd probably use it over Lido. Though then again if Lido's market share is such a massive problem then maybe simply having a carbon copy of their model could also work to spread the ETH more across different protocols.

Valdorff

> Rocketpool defenders... I just want to be explicit that RP is _faaar_ from perfect. Builders in the community are keenly aware and we work to improve. It aint fast, but it does get better over time. I'm not gonna tell you our tokenomics are perfect, or there's no other ways to achieve an LST protocol. And I actively welcome healthy competition (shoutouts to stakewise and diva, eg). Fwiw, I don't like RP zealotry either, which sometimes does crop up (especially on twitter).

Astramie

I might be wrong, but after reading a bit more into this, I think their concern is about LST's like stEth cannibalizing Eth. They don't know if liquid staking will keep growing because even if the returns are 0.1%, it's still higher than 0%. There's no reason to say no to a non-zero yield if you are a user disconnected from the costs of maintaining a node. https://notes.ethereum.org/@dankrad/churn-limit

conceiv3d-in-lib3rty

Yeah it’s when one LST hits 100k eth, not all 3.

kuonanaxu

While you’re DCAing into BTC and ETH, don’t fade the opportunity to stake your ETH for yields. With a yield aggregator like SpoolFi already partnering with LST issuers like RocketPool and StakinRewards, users who want to diversify can leverage on that opportunity.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Liquid staking tokens (LSTs) are predicted to replace Ethereum's native cryptocurrency, Ether (ETH). The LST market is currently valued at around $17 billion and has been growing steadily since Ethereum's Merge. LSTs offer advantages over traditional ETH, such as liquidity and flexibility for liquidity providers (LPs) to engage in other activities while earning staking rewards. Additionally, LSTs have a lower cost of entry compared to regular ETH staking, making them appealing to new audiences and smaller investors. The transition to LSTs is expected to happen swiftly, with a growing adoption of liquid staking platforms. This shift could lead to LSTs dominating decentralized exchanges and eventually replacing ETH entirely. The rise of LSTs could attract new users and breathe new life into the industry. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

KBtrae

The title is absolute garbage. If an LST of Eth crushed the price of Eth, then why the flying fuck would people use an LST if its value is equal to Eth’s??

KBtrae

It’s not an Eth killer, it *is* Eth. All this is is a way to use your staked Eth via an LST. End game is to be able to use the value of your staked eth elsewhere.

marsangelo

Yes because not only is their the risk to the native Ethereum network you also have protocol risk, so if an exploit/bug were to be found in either of those things it wouldnt end well. Last year i think a couple times an LST (stETH) depegged and plummeted in price relative to ETH

GreedVault

If everything remained the same and the ETH side took no precautionary action, that could be the case. And let's not neglect the fact that they are just startups that could also go bankrupt. ETH has been around for over 7 years, and it has taken a long time to reach its current market dominance. LST is a newer asset, and it has a lot more to go before it can reach the same level of adoption.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Liquid staking tokens (LSTs) are predicted to replace Ethereum's native cryptocurrency, Ether (ETH). The LST market is currently valued at around $17 billion and has been growing steadily since Ethereum's Merge. LSTs offer advantages over traditional ETH, such as liquidity and flexibility for liquidity providers (LPs) to engage in other activities while earning staking rewards. Additionally, LSTs have a lower cost of entry compared to regular ETH staking, making them appealing to new audiences and smaller investors. The transition to LSTs is expected to happen swiftly, with a growing adoption of liquid staking platforms. This shift could lead to LSTs dominating decentralized exchanges and eventually replacing ETH entirely. The rise of LSTs could attract new users and breathe new life into the industry. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

diomediocre

Generally stETH or other LST's Loan-to-Value (LTV) rates are a little under ETH LTV rates for liquidation cascade controls. E.g. ETH's LTV on Radiant is 80% and stETH's is 70%. Many protocols also limit stETH borrow and deposit pools size as it's stability and exchange becomes more stable but that should only be a short-term issue and should disappear in time.

MajeStyle1

How are you guys pro-crypto but against innovation in crypto? There is still so much to build. I don't see how funding being low can be good news. Being happy about funding being low because less shitcoins is the same as being unhappy about winning the lottery because you pay more taxes. Just a few public goods projects coming up on Ethereum that NEED funding and whose success can pump your bags: -DVT & potentially the first truly decentralized & permissionless LST from Diva -liquity v2 & censorship resistant stables like GRAI - Uniswap v4 I mentioned Ethereum because it may look like it is the chain with one of the highest variety of Dapp choice. Well, guess what, other chains need even more funding!

cinlung

>indirect staking: buy an LST (Liquid Staking Derivative) like stETH or rocketpool's rETH, or make a deposit with the 3rd party staking pool yourself. I read up to this line and then after that my brain started to get jumbled. I think I really need to think this thru. Thank you for TLDR ing it for me. You are awesome.

SporeDruidBray

Instead of making a profit, sometimes all staking offers is non-dilution in a system with positive issuance. This is still technically inflation however, since the purchasing power of units of the currency change. There's really only two forms of staking: direct staking and delegated staking. However delegation can be in-protocol or extra-protocol. Quite a few protocols have native delegation, like Cardano's dPoS. Ethereum: - direct staking: send 32 ETH to the staking contract, along with your validator details. - indirect staking: buy an LST (Liquid Staking Derivative) like stETH or rocketpool's rETH, or make a deposit with the 3rd party staking pool yourself. As an Ethereum staker, you have your validator signing keys and withdrawal keys. I'm fairly sure Near has something similar. Polkadot has four seperate keys/accounts associated with each block producer, but I don't know how they work. Most Polkadot stakers AFAIK run nominators, which contribute stake to block producers. Running votes on-chain is computationally costly, and PoS is essentially voting on blocks. To cap costs so computers of a targetted hardware level (Raspberry Pi, Intel i5, $4000/yr AWC instance, etc) and thus maintain decentralisation, there must be a cap on total voters. Plenty of chains are like Cosmos Hub, where to be in the active validator set (or their equivalent terminology) you just need to be one of the top N nodes on the leaderboard of staked tokens. So depending on the popularity of staking, the ATOM required could be 2000 or 40,000. This is in contrast to the fixed threshold model, like Ethereum where you need exactly 32 ETH to be a validator (this means Ethereum is operating far below capacity, whereas other chains are more efficient at allocating slots for participating in consensus). Finally there's Solana staking, which I don't understand. A big difference with most chains is that Solana's consensus messages are taking up regular blockspace, so it costs about 0.5 - 1.1 SOL per day to run a node that participates in consensus. People say about 80% of Solana's TPS are actually these consensus messages like voting on blocks, but I haven't verified this myself.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Liquid staking has become the largest sub-sector in decentralized finance (DeFi), with a growth of over 131% since the beginning of the year. Liquid staking allows users to stake tokens and earn yields while still retaining liquidity through a liquid staking token (LST). It has surpassed decentralized exchanges (DEXes) to become the leading DeFi sub-sector, with a market share of 24%. Lido DAO (LDO) holds a dominant market share of 75.4% in the liquid staking market. This growth in liquid staking has impacted the market shares of DEXes and other DeFi categories. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

MakeItRelevant

After the Shapella update, I'd easily add Liquid Staking and projects like Rocket Pool, Lido, and Diadata that are highly advancing into this. Dia has a quality Liquid Staking Map, one of my best resources so far. Lido has over 30% of the market share and I'm using their LST stETH on Ethereum.

Giga79

Staking via Ledger IIRC is just swapping ETH for stETH using Lido's smart contract. To learn more you will want to search how Lido functions. You can do this swap at Uniswap or by using Lido. Lido is a massively better option than staking with Coinbase. It is trusting ~60 specialized and permissioned (doxxed) validators instead of ~1 validator (tbf I'm not sure how Coinbase works in the background or how they choose validators). Rocket Pool is a massively better option than staking with Lido, imo. The rewards stETH yields come as new tokens, which are all taxable events. The rewards rETH yields goes into increasing the price of rETH so the only taxable event is when you sell. There are over 3000 Rocket Pool validators and it is permissionless to operate your own validator with as little as 8 ETH. stETH and rETH (and cbETH) are LSD or LST aka liquid staking derivites/tokens. There is no lock-up and you can use these tokens in other dApps like Aave or Eigenlayer to really go hard into the yield (at increased risk). Coinbase takes a 25% cut for themselves/the validator(s). Lido takes 10%. Rocketpool takes 15%. Each have their own risks/rewards so it is wise to research how each operates and make your own judgement call based on your own risk appetite.

MakeItRelevant

Lido is a dominant player in this sphere and one of my favorite picks. I've been using their LST (stETH) on Ethereum. Found it first on a Liquid Staking Map done by Diadata. Now I'm aiming to dive deeper into sfrxETH and vETH, all on Ethereum.

TipTechnicali

I'm a big fan of Rocket Pool. I got closer to it after DIA started to offer an oracle for the rETH LST. What would be the best pick now among Mni, Near, and Rio?

kuonanaxu

I have always been pro Risk diversification and that’s one thing lacking as a single entity in the LSD space; it’s quite distressing having to maintain several portfolios in order to achieve that. Kudos to SpoolFi anyways, for their recent partnership with StakingRewards! This collaboration is a significant step towards achieving risk diversification in LSDs; expecting partnerships with LST issuers to be announced soon too.

ResidentAssumption4

Anyone who talks about how long the cycles will last because they were alive during the last one doesn’t know any more than you do about them. There’s only been a couple cycles and they weren’t similar at all so nobody knows. I’ve had skin in the game since the last bear market (2018), but here is what I learned in these 5 years: - alt L1s have limited value as public blockchains but it doesn’t stop them from pumping irrationally - VCs and whales will dump on you. They were lucky and might seem smart but they are playing with a stacked deck. - nobody else knows how to take profits but says they will on the next bull run. - set exits for anything that won’t really be a thing in 10 years. This is everything not btc or eth or ETH staking related (LST etc) - don’t trust or get burned by centralized entities because it’s a matter of time until something happens. This includes centralized pool staking like Lido. Oh and protect your keys, rotate wallets, use offline wallets and secret sharing to back up your shit. Have a wallet for trading and interacting with contracts and one that only sends and receives transactions.

ec265

Binance are going to enable withdrawals on 4/19 but it will still take time after that I have no experience with Exodus but you can stake by just swapping in to an LST like rETH

ec265

Lysergic acid diethylamide? My favourite LST is rETH

Nonocoiner

I'm feeling bullish about it. I think ETH underperformed the past couple of months relative to BTC due to the withdrawal FUD, and that sentiment will flip soon after withdrawals are live. In addition to that LST's have been creeping up to their fair value, so most of the stakers that want to get out have already been able to do so recently.

Nonocoiner

Will move some from Kraken and Coinbase staking to add more to decentralized LST's. No hurry though, will only move at fair value or better rate. Not planning to sell any, unless the price sky rockets maybe.

Giga79

By scaling through rollups. Rollups will pay the outrageous gas prices for the blockspace they consume, because it's to collect fees on the 100s of people's transactions they compressed and not *1 guy's NFT*. A *new* L2 can either deploy as a new L1 and spend more on less security, or deploy as an ETH L2 and spend less on more security with instant access to all users. That's the new business model. It doesn't matter how much or little ETH blockspace costs to a rollup because at any price there will be demand for *1/100 that* so rollups are always in profit (ie, non inflationary economics unlike most L1 incentives). Eventually all users will be on these compressed L2 transactions. As the base layer continues to upgrade the cost to run an L2 and cost for us using one will drop substantially (30-100x), namely from www.eip4844.com, then also 'The Surge/Purge' upgrades further in the roadmap. The base layer will be mostly for staking - in which case, as a staker you'd be securing the equivilant of possibly 1000s of blockchains at the same time. This should be more valuable than securing *an NFT*, or fewer transactions in general - the more fees that go to a staker the higher the APR goes, and then more people buy ETH to stake. Also as a staker new things like the Eigen layer will let you use your 32-ETH-validator to secure *other protocols* in parallel with your ETH staking job, at an increased *ETH*-slashing risk if you fail to secure that other protocol. This is effectively leasing out the security backing Ethereum POS, and in return increases ETH's security with greater incentives. A great place this would work, every L2 needs honest validators to decentralize and who better to trust than an existing L1 validator. Ethereum has gone from being able to do just 15 transactions per second two years ago, to over 150 TPS (on L2's) today. It should do around 5,000 TPS by the end of this year (EIP4844), and over 100,000 TPS likely before the end of the decade (full-danksharding + single slot finality + purge). *All* of these transactions will be paying for (and reliant on) ETH's security, driving more value to ETH as one massively secure monolith settlement layer. Decentralized protocols like Rocket Pool allow anyone to stake ETH in any amount. With even $1 you can stake and earn yield, and with 8 ETH you can run a 32-ETH validator by taking the rest from that $1 pool - both sides need each other and share the staking rewards. The person who has their $1 ETH in the validator is given $1 in $rETH that generates yield and can be traded at any time - these are called *liquid* staking derivites (LSD) or tokens (LST). dApp support is growing quickly for LSD's - especially on L2's where the fees to *sell one* are very small relative to their yields. You can use your rETH in Aave the same way you use ETH to Aave, and then you earn Aave yield *while earning staking yield*. I imagine one day most people will be staking this way - why hold $ETH if you aren't using it in a validator or settling an L2 batch transaction - if you can do everything most people do today using a yield-bearing ETH. Another point to make is the gas fee L2's collect from users is arbitrary. They could collect USDC (or nothing) as long as *it* has enough ETH to pay for its blockspace. Enabling users to be able to spend rETH or stETH or an equivalent *in place of ETH as gas* wouldn't be contentious or very difficult at all. This still drives demand for ETH and aligns with its values. If there's demand for LSD and *most people* are holding them over ETH I'm sure we will see POS-tech continue to be built out this way.

ec265

Why not stake using an LST from the comfort of your Ledger?

ferah11

Is that spelled UR MOM ATE ME LST NITE

dali01

LST (Lunar Standard Time)

CLT_CPA

No, you just don’t understand what I’m saying. I’ll help you out. Basel III requires banks to calculate liquidity to ensure if a liquidity squeeze did occur, banks could liquidate assets fast enough. This is done via LCR and LST reporting . Basel III requires banks to maintain a specific LCR (Liquidity Coverage Ratio). What I was saying, which you were unable to understand, is that rehypothecated assets are not allowed to be include in the LCR;therefore, it doesn’t matter how much the bank holds.

kissthesky303

I do not understand the fuzz about Litecoin. It was the second crypto on the market, but still my Grandma never heard about it. If I were you, I would shift my LTC at the next peak to more promising projects in terms of adoption: 5% each on NANO, VET, LST and BAT. Maybe consider GET as well...