In the ecosystem of lending protocols, what do active users really look like? By tracking the actual behavior of on-chain addresses, many interesting patterns can be uncovered.

Generally speaking, users can be divided into three groups: one is the frequent hedging arbitrageurs who focus on the spread between borrowing costs and returns, rapidly repaying loans and chasing every tiny interest difference; another is the long-term yield chasers who prefer to collateralize assets and then cycle operations to achieve compound growth; the third group consists of users who truly need liquidity—after collateralizing and borrowing, they withdraw directly to exchanges or use the funds for payments, rarely engaging in complex DeFi nested operations.

Interestingly, the latter two groups are actually the real backbone of protocol stability and cash flow. Especially the yield chasers, whose behavior patterns are most worth paying attention to. They typically maintain relatively high collateralization ratios, are less sensitive to fluctuations in borrowing rates, but have an almost obsessive focus on additional yields and potential airdrops. Thanks to their long-term locking, the protocol can sustain a stable total locked value and has a buffer to withstand market volatility.

The liquidity demand group, on the other hand, represents capital flows from the real world—they are the key to driving lending protocols into application layers and truly breaking out into mainstream adoption.

From this perspective, the governance focus of the protocol should be on meeting the needs of these two core user groups—optimizing the user experience of yield aggregation, and creating more convenient fiat on/off ramps—rather than blindly pursuing short-term data growth and attracting arbitrage capital. Truly understanding the composition of your users allows for a more accurate assessment of the protocol’s resilience in market fluctuations and its long-term development trajectory.