Last year, there were constant complaints about the "bank-like routines" in the crypto space—promise-pushing, parameter tweaks to inflate yields, and then disappearing after liquidity is drained—this was a common scene in 2021. But if you now revisit the old project $FRAX, you'll find that the situation has completely turned upside down. Those once unpredictable operations have been proactively buried by the team themselves. Is this a genuine realization or just a switch to a more advanced gameplay? Let’s analyze it together.



First, my judgment: $FRAX has not abandoned its "routine gene," but has instead formalized its previous guerrilla tactics. Remember, in its early days, as a hybrid algorithm stablecoin, it relied on the AMO mechanism to dynamically adjust collateralization rates—essentially, a trial-and-error approach that also involved "harvesting" liquidity. Back then, the community was complaining—this was even more shady than traditional banks. It wasn't until the Luna crash in 2022, which shattered market liquidity, that $FRAX's strategy did a 180-degree turn, completely dismantling and rebuilding its previous routine-based approach.

Three key transformations have taken place, and understanding these will put you ahead of most retail investors.

**First, a complete abandonment of "semi-collateralized empty talk."** In its early days, some algorithmic collateralization was used, claiming strict risk control, but in reality, it relied on market confidence—essentially, a "try and harvest" approach. Now, the flagship product frxUSD is backed 100% by short-term US Treasuries and cash equivalents. Even more impressively, assets are entrusted to top-tier institutions like BlackRock for custody, with on-chain transparency and regular audits—effectively making the reserves public for everyone to see.

**Second, shifting from "dynamic parameters" to "transparent mechanisms."** Previously, AMO adjustments were often black-box operations. Now, all processes are governed on-chain, and any changes require community voting. This change may sound simple, but it signifies a move from "operations team decides" to "rules take priority."

**Finally, introducing a "third-party audit + risk buffer" dual-layer safeguard.** Besides regular third-party audits, a reserve buffer mechanism has been established, so that in black swan events, the system won't immediately blow up, providing time for response and repair.

With these three steps, $FRAX has transformed from a project that was once considered "a bit shady even by Bitcoin circles" into a relatively regulated stablecoin scheme. Of course, no stablecoin is 100% safe, but this evolution is definitely worth noting.
FRAX-1.46%
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 10
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
Add a comment
Add a comment
zkProofInThePuddingvip
· 01-19 23:41
BlackRock's endorsement is truly full-on; this time it's not the same old chain game hype.
View OriginalReply0
SatoshiNotNakamotovip
· 01-19 15:18
Is this time Frax truly turning over a new leaf or just changing tactics to continue cutting? Listening to BlackRock's endorsement sounds pretty impressive.

After Luna's collapse, everyone learned to be smarter; 100% US Treasuries sound much more comfortable.

Well, whatever, let's wait and see first. Anyway, stablecoins are all about confidence—once it's gone, it's over.

Seems like this time the changes are pretty thorough; on-chain governance transparency is definitely much better than before.

Wait, doesn't that still mean trusting BlackRock? Just another master to serve.
View OriginalReply0
ForeverBuyingDipsvip
· 01-18 22:08
BlackRock custody really seems to have turned a corner, but honestly, it still depends on how they follow through.

The Luna explosion really woke up a lot of people; many projects should have done this long ago.

frxUSD is a promising direction, but I'm just worried it might be another mirage.

On-chain verifiable periodic audits sound great, but how many surface-level promises have we seen?

The key issue is community voting—can it truly constrain operations, or will it just become a formality?

100% US Treasury bond backing is definitely better than those half-baked collateralizations.

If this wave of FRAX can be maintained, it truly sets an example for stablecoins.

Feels like watching a scammer learn to be honest... whether it's genuine remorse or just learning to hide it, only time will tell.
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingersPapervip
· 01-17 00:54
Wait, can I really trust BlackRock's custody? I'm still a bit anxious.

Did they really dismantle the old套路基因 back in the early days? I need to observe this further.

FRXUSD claims 100% backing, I believe it, but I still feel like there's some hidden trap somewhere.

After Luna's explosion, many projects have been pretending to be honest, and FRAX's rapid transformation is a bit too quick.

Honestly, community voting isn't always reliable; the key is who holds the governance power.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidationWizardvip
· 01-17 00:52
Another story of "I've turned over a new leaf"—tired of hearing it.
View OriginalReply0
ReverseTradingGuruvip
· 01-17 00:51
Wait, is it really safe now that BlackRock is custody? I find it hard to believe this logic.
View OriginalReply0
ProofOfNothingvip
· 01-17 00:50
To be honest, I don't quite understand this turnaround; it feels like a change of soup but not a change of medicine.
View OriginalReply0
MetaMaskVictimvip
· 01-17 00:50
BlackRock's custody move still has some substance, but I still don't quite trust this approach.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainArchaeologistvip
· 01-17 00:45
I see, the $FRAX operation, to put it simply, is just being beaten down.

Wait, is BlackRock's custody really happening or is it just another story?

After Luna, who still believes in this?

But on the other hand, moving from a black box to on-chain governance is indeed not that easy.

It just feels like replacing the leek cutter with tweezers, more refined.

The 100% backing of frxUSD sounds good, but the term "short-term US debt" is a bit vague.

Anyway, I still adhere to one principle: stablecoins are not absolutely safe, and there's no doubt about that.

The Luna explosion definitely changed many people's minds in the circle.

That feeling of being fooled back in the early days really won't come back, at least on the surface.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropBuffetvip
· 01-17 00:41
Oh my God, I have to admit that FRAX's recent turnaround is quite interesting.

BlackRock's move to custody is really ruthless, directly blocking those former critics.

But speaking of it, the 100% US debt backing... it's easy to say, but verification really depends on integrity.

Luna's explosion indeed woke up many projects, I believe that.

I lost a lot in Luna's wave, seeing everyone as if they might blow up.

Switching from a black box to on-chain governance sounds comfortable, but the real test is still ahead.

Honestly, compared to other stablecoins, FRAX's transformation route is indeed more transparent.

BlackRock's endorsement sounds different; this is how institutional design should look.

I just want to know when we can see the full audit report—don't want another paper tiger.

The key still depends on whether there will be a real black swan event later; it's too early to say anything now.
View OriginalReply0
View More
  • Pin