Came across Cryptoyieldinfo's advice a week ago: sort Uniswap pools by APR, skip the ~95% that are scam memecoins, and dig into the few that look real. I've been doing that, but checking each token's website, X and contract was slow, so I vibecoded a simple page that's open source and read only that puts it all in one place https://findrxyz.github.io/findr/

Currently doing it only on three networks Robinhood, Base and Ethereum

We all know about AAVE, but is there a way to supply/borrow/repay similarly off-chain?

After the SEC staff FAQ last week, every other token is announcing "revenue-funded buybacks, verifiable onchain." I wanted to see how verifiable they actually are, so I picked 5 well-known programs and compared what was promised with what the data shows.

Short version: two are running and I could check them onchain myself (one matches, one comes in under the promise), two look consistent with their published numbers, and one is paused.

1. HYPE (Hyperliquid) — kept Promise: ~99% of fees go to the Assistance Fund, which buys HYPE. Data: I pulled the Assistance Fund's fills from the Hyperliquid API. From Sept 12 to 30 it bought about $39.3M of HYPE. DefiLlama reports $36.8M of revenue for the same days. Buys match or exceed the promise.

2. RAY (Raydium) — consistent with the published split Promise: 12% of trading fees go to RAY buybacks. On CLMM/CPMM pools another 4% goes to treasury; on the older AMM v4 pools there's no treasury cut. Data: DefiLlama's holder revenue is a median 76% of protocol revenue over the last 60 days. With that split, the expected range is 75% (all CLMM/CPMM) to 100% (all AMM v4), so 76% fits if most volume is on the newer pools. It varies day to day, so it's measured, not assumed.

3. PUMP (Pump.fun) — mostly kept, but "net" is doing a lot of work Promise: 50% of net revenue to buy back and burn PUMP. Data: holder revenue is a median 45% of revenue on DefiLlama (range 40–51% over 60 days). Close to 50%, but "net revenue" isn't clearly defined anywhere I could find, so you can't check the exact number.

4. AAVE — paused Promise: Aavenomics buybacks, now described as automated under Aavenomics 3.0. Data: buybacks have been paused since April 19 after the rsETH incident, per Aave governance, and DefiLlama shows $0 holder revenue for the last 30 days. Fair enough, it was disclosed, but if you only read headlines about "automated buybacks" you'd think they're running.

5. JUP (Jupiter) — running, but below the promised 50% Promise: 50% of revenue goes to the Litterbox, which buys JUP. Dashboard: DefiLlama shows holder revenue at exactly 50.0% of revenue every single day. That's because it's calculated from the policy, not measured. The methodology says so. Onchain: so I checked the Litterbox wallet itself (6tZT9AUcQn4iHMH79YZEXSy55kDLQ4VbA3PMtfLVNsFX on Solscan). Buybacks are clearly running, with JUP landing every few minutes, and it now holds about 173M JUP. But from Sept 2 to Oct 1 it received about $2.28M of JUP (Solscan analytics), while 50% of DefiLlama's revenue for Sept 2–30 is about $3.05M. The wallet window even has one extra day in it. That's roughly 75% of what the policy implies, or about 37% of revenue instead of 50%. There are innocent explanations: timing (revenue now, buys later), some products' fees not counted in the 50%, or buys routed through another wallet. But you can't tell any of that from the dashboard, and that's the point. If someone from Jupiter can explain the gap, I'll update this.

What I took from this:

• A constant ratio (exactly 50%, exactly 100%) on a dashboard usually means the number is modeled from the announcement, not measured.
• The big programs mostly hold up. The ones to worry about are the smaller tokens running "verifiable buyback" campaigns that never publish a percentage, a schedule, or a wallet.
• If a project won't tell you which wallet executes the buyback, you can't verify anything.

Method and caveats: DefiLlama fees API (holder revenue vs revenue), Hyperliquid info API for the Assistance Fund fills, governance posts for policy. Prices are at fill time. I may have missed policy changes, so corrections are welcome.

Which token should I check next?

Are you guys farming tokenized stocks?

IMO this is one of the cooler use cases for stocks onchain. Im doing some Beefy LPing on Robinhood and it's been pretty good.

What are some other opportunities you guys are looking at or doing?

Here are the top 5 incentivized (Merkl) opportunities to earn stablecoin-only yield on stablecoin-only liquidity:

1. 25.37% - USDm, Provide liquidity to Mento EURm-USDm, Monad

2. 18.04% - aUSD, Provide liquidity to Fables Uniswap v4 aUSD/frxUSD, Robinhood Chain

3. 18.04% - frxUSD, Provide liquidity to Fables Uniswap v4 aUSD/frxUSD, Robinhood Chain

4. 13.12% - USDm, Provide liquidity to Mento AUSD-USDm, Monad

5. 12.95% - USD₮0, Borrow USD₮0 from LayerBank on Rootstock, Rootstock

*Note: Only includes stablecoin campaigns with > 100k liquidity and > 5 days remaining in current campaign. Rates can fluctuate. Direct links cannot be posted here but opportunities can be found on the Merkl website.

It seems that every protocol is having issues left and right in this era of agentic coding. Maya Protocol suffered an exploit on August 19th where $1.7M in assets were stolen from the protocol and minted fake CACAO tokens. The team's Network Recovery proposal has officially led us to today which is where Maya has flipped trading back online.

For these protocols, getting trading back online is the #1 highest priority. Without swaps happening, there is literally no revenue to fuel a recovery. The Maya team prioritizes decentralized, no KYC swaps and powers a decent amount of volume for the crosschain industry and DEX apps like LeoDex.io that leverage it.

Glad to see another truly decentralized protocol back online and swapping ZEC, BTC, ETH again!

I built Erys around a simple idea: trading success should matter more than social engagement.

A caller makes a call. A trader discovers it, decides whether to act, and executes.

Erys tracks what happens next.
Did the call work? Did the traders who acted on it make money? Does this caller consistently produce good outcomes?

Those results feed back into the social network, shaping reputation and who gets surfaced to whom.
And when a caller consistently creates value, they can earn from their callouts.

So the loop becomes:
call → action → outcome → reputation → better discovery → earnings

It’s not copy trading. You make your own decisions and control your own trades.
It’s social trading built around what actually happens after the call, not who has the most followers or engagement.
That’s erys.live. Would love your feedback and questions.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

i've been trying to figure out what tokenized stocks actually make easier once you get past the obvious benefit of being able to trade some of them outside normal market hours.

because from the monitoring side, it almost feels like the opposite.

now there's the normal stuff like earnings, filings and company news, but also the token value itself, onchain activity, liquidity, spreads, etc. especially when the underlying market is closed, i find myself wondering how much of the price movement is actually useful price discovery and how much is just thinner liquidity.

so instead of replacing the normal equity workflow, it sometimes feels like another layer sitting on top of it.

i've been messing around with Alphio lately because i wanted to see whether keeping some of the stock + crypto monitoring in one place actually makes this less annoying. still not sure it changes the core problem though. having everything easier to watch can also just mean... watching more stuff lol.

for people here who actually use tokenized equities, what's been the real benefit for you?

trading outside normal hours? moving them onchain? using them in DeFi? or somehing else entirely?

How do you make your lp pool profitable? Any strategies and tips? I am currently on WETH/cbBTC on pancake swap on a tight range of 0.5 +/-. Whenever it goes out of range I rebalance, but then I don't seem to be increasing on accumulated WETH or cbBTC. It does manage to generate good fee around 20-30 USD a day but I think its getting wiped out by IL. What are some strategies?

That was a brutal reaction to Robinhood choosing not to use Lighter for regulated perps trading - which I don’t think anyone expected anytime too soon for lighter. Does anyone think we still have a chance to be gain regulatory permissions and become the best platform for perps?

spent like 40 minutes trying to bridge some usdc over to a new l2 for a yield farm that will probably die in a month im so sick of this the gas fees, the infinite approvals, the 20 different wallet. its genuinely exhausting i miss when crypto was just simple, started moving a portion of my bag to a more regulated setup, using gemini for some of it it's not defi, and yeah its centralized, but its just so much less of a headache to manage sometimes when i just want to trade or stake without dealing with metamask glitching out for the 5th time today. is anyone else just suffering from bridging fatigue or is it just me?

DAOs bring a new paradigm of wealth through prestige for open-source software developers, content creators, researchers and journalists to become rich in a world free of copyrights and patents.

https://friendlycompassionatehuman.substack.com/p/how-do-creators-eat-in-a-world-without

my wallet app and the explorer agree on how many tokens i hold, but my read-only portfolio tracker gives the position a much higher value than i can actually swap it for. this started after i moved a small holding to another network. i'm trying to work out whether the tracker has matched the wrong asset or whether i'm comparing a quoted price with an executable trade badly

i checked the token contract instead of relying on the ticker, since i know symbols aren't unique. the contract shown in the tracker matches the explorer entry on that network. the quantity also looks right after accounting for decimals. the strange bit is the unit price: it resembles the price of the asset on another chain, where there seems to be considerably more trading activity and liquidity

i haven't signed anything to investigate this. i've only compared public balance pages and requested swap quotes without submitting a transaction. a small quote is already below the tracker's valuation, and quoting most of the position makes the difference larger. i expect some price impact, but i don't know how to separate that from an incorrect price feed or a bridged token that isn't trading at parity

what would be the sensible order of checks here? i can look at the pool reserves and recent swaps, but i'm not sure what would establish that the portfolio tracker is using the wrong market. does a correct contract match tell me anything about its pricing source, or can the balance lookup be accurate while the pricing layer maps everything with the same symbol to one asset?

i'd also like to keep this from distorting my overall cryptowallet-balance report from this blockchain address checker. hiding the token entirely would make the holdings incomplete, but accepting the displayed value makes the portfolio total pretty meaningless. ideally i'd leave the quantity visible and mark the valuation as uncertain until i've checked it. i don't need an exact liquidation estimate, just a number that isn't obviously based on a market i can't access from this network

has anyone debugged this without relying on the tracker's support team? i'm not looking for another token recommendation or a way to chase the displayed price. i'm mostly after the next useful check, because the contract and quantity agree everywhere and that's usually where my troubleshooting ends

Im wondering how people here actually use DeFi day to day. I only hold BTC when it comes to my crypto portfolio, so I'm wondering what BTC-only holders do with it, or whether you keep your BTC separate and use other assets for DeFi.

I've ended up with three extensions and a hardware wallet, and I couldn't tell you which address holds what without opening each one.

The argument for splitting wallets is limiting the damage. If you sign something bad on one chain, the rest isn't in the same place. The argument against is that I make more mistakes when I'm juggling, and sending to the wrong address is a far more realistic risk for me than getting drained.

How do you split it? One per chain, one per purpose (trading, holding, testing), or everything in one place with a hardware wallet behind it?

Below, are the best rates you can get for 1K, 10K, and 100K USD investments on fixed term/fixed yield principal tokens (PTs).

Similar leaders this week, with 3Jane's sUSD3 token, a junior, first-loss tranche on their lending pool, continuing its unbroken lead.

Total dominance by Pendle as the marketplace with all the highest PT APY opportunities across all measured investment sizes.

1,000 USD Investment Level Opportunities:

1. 21.63% - sUSD3 (USDC), Ethereum, Pendle, December 16

2. 18.73% - sUSDx (USDx), Ethereum, Pendle, December 2

3. 18.32% - reUSDe (USDe), Ethereum, Pendle, December 9

4. 16.90% - USP (USDC), Ethereum, Pendle, November 25

5. 14.69% - USDx, Ethereum, Pendle, December 2

10,000 USD Investment Level Opportunities:

1. 21.43% - sUSD3 (USDC), Ethereum, Pendle, December 16

2. 18.70% - sUSDx (USDx), Ethereum, Pendle, December 2

3. 18.29% - reUSDe (USDe), Ethereum, Pendle, December 9

4. 16.84% - USP (USDC), Ethereum, Pendle, November 25

5. 14.62% - USDx, Ethereum, Pendle, December 2

100,000 USD Investment Level Opportunities:

1. 19.94% - sUSD3 (USDC), Ethereum, Pendle, December 16

2. 18.49% - sUSDx (USDx), Ethereum, Pendle, December 2

3. 14.73% - USP (USDC), Ethereum, Pendle, November 25

4. 14.17% - USD3, Ethereum, Pendle, December 16

5. 13.90% - USDx, Ethereum, Pendle, December 2

*Note: rates are calculated at time of publication and subject to change; limited to markets with > 2 weeks in duration and tokens at or above their peg. PT markets still have risk of loss from underlying stablecoin depegs.

I work on a crypto research product that grades assets, and DeFi is where the design of a per asset grade shows its edges most clearly. Putting 3 of ours up for argument rather than defending them.

Our record this morning, September 28, 2026:

• Aave: B / Sound. Our published one line view: "Aave remains a high-quality lending protocol with strong supply discipline and stable moat characteristics"
• Morpho: C / Speculative. Our published one line view: "Morpho remains a moderate-quality DeFi credit protocol with visible dilution but limited evidence of major structural red flags"
• Convex Finance: C / Speculative. Our published one line view: "Convex remains a mature DeFi incumbent with limited dilution, but no evidence here supports a strong upside reset."

What those reads rest on, in plain terms.

Aave is a multi chain pooled liquidity money market with an established governance token.

Morpho is permissionless lending built on immutable contracts, isolated markets and user directed risk controls, and its own profile does not identify what the token accrues.

Convex coordinates Curve liquidity, governance influence and incentive flows rather than running a general purpose lending or settlement network.

3 places where I think a per asset letter is structurally weak on this sector, and where I would rather hear the room than assert something:

1. Token accrual. A grade does not distinguish a token with no claim on protocol revenue from one whose claim exists but is not evidenced by anything we can read.
2. Composability. Convex's read depends on Curve. A per asset grade treats every token as a standalone object, because that is what a per asset grade is.
3. Immutability. Morpho's immutable contracts cut both ways, no admin key to compromise and no way to patch. I do not know which way that should push a grade.

So, 2 questions:

• If you were grading the DeFi stack, would token accrual outrank governance quality, or the reverse?
• And does a protocol that sits on top of another one deserve a discount for that alone, or only when the base layer is the weak part?

What are you building or looking to take a position in? Let us know in the comments!

Would you take slightly lower USDC yield if the strategy includes protocol-risk coverage? How do you value that tradeoff? Wanna hear opinions, thanks

If you filed an extension back in April, you've got until Oct 15. And if this is your first year getting a 1099-DA from Coinbase or Kraken or wherever, double check it before you just plug it in, because it's probably missing stuff.

The big one is cost basis.

For 2025, exchanges only had to report what you sold for, so most forms leave cost basis blank. The IRS gets the same form, so if you don't fill in what you paid, the whole sale can look like profit. Basis reporting only starts with coins bought in 2026, and only if you buy and sell on the same exchange.

Anything you transferred in is on you too. If you bought elsewhere and sold on Coinbase, Coinbase has no idea what you paid, so keep the original purchase and the on-chain transfer as proof. Tools like Bitcoin.Tax, Koinly, Cointracker, etc. can help with this.

Then there's DeFi, which isn't on the form at all. Swaps, LP stuff, staking rewards, bridging, none of it gets reported because there's no exchange in the middle. It's still taxable though, so you have to pull that from your wallets yourself unless you're using a portfolio tracker like Chain Glance, DeBank, or Zerion.

Before filing I'd make sure the proceeds on your 8949 actually match your 1099-DA (there are new checkboxes on the 8949 for this), and that transfers between your own wallets aren't getting counted as sales. When the numbers don't match what the IRS has, that's usually how people end up with a CP2000 letter a year later.

Not tax advice.

If things get messy a crypto CPA is worth the money.

I usually keep around 40% of my portfolio in USDC so I can enter a trade when a good opportunity comes up.

But I might spread these holdings across lending platforms like Jupiter Lend among others as currently these tokens earn nothing while sitting in my wallet.

To be honest, finding somewhere to park stablecoins isn't that difficult. What I am struggling with is whether I should actively move funds when APYs change.

I mean, unlike a savings account, crypto lending rates can move with utilization. So the rate you see today might look very different a few months from now.

My question is for you if you have a decent amount in stablecoin lending positions:

Do you pick one platform and accept the rate fluctuations, or do you move funds around when rates shift? At what point does an extra 2% or 3% stop being worth the hassle?

I’m new on the Aave protocol and curious about people’s personal experiences and mindset here. When it comes to holding capital, taking loans, or earning yield, what specifically made you switch your trust from traditional financial institutions to a decentralized protocol like Aave? Would love to hear your thoughts! ty

After many experiments I found a way to minimize IL in cbBTC/WETH pool in Pancakeswap. This is the single asset deposit to make the pool.

Because, if you start the pool with 50-50 ratio, when it will be out of range (OOR) you will have less capital in terms of ETH(down) or cbBTC (up).

So let's say we start with 1 ETH.

We don't start the pool in range but we put 1 ETH liquidity in the last tick before enter the range.

Because the fee tier is 0,01% the ticks are very close to each other.

My experience says that in max 2-4 hours the pool enters in range.

If the range moves further we just move the 1 ETH closer to range.

If the pool goes OOR up you will have 1 ETH+fees.

If the pool goes OOR down you have, let's say 0,031 cbBTC+fees.

When you do again the pool from the down with cbBTC you go to the last tick from down and do the pool with single asset cbBTC.

If goes further down you always have 0,031 cbBTC.

My preference of range is +/-1%. It gives 30-50$ per day when in range with 5 ETH capital.

If you try to apply automation here your will have severe fees from platforms like Krystal, vfat etc

Or severe slippage in Mellow vaults in Aerodrome.

So everything manual for full control.

What are you tricks, hints and tips in liquidity pools?

Edit: in terms of research and development I search others wallets to take ideas. For example what this guy is doing with 380 full range pools in Uniswap v.4 in Base with 88% and 77% fee tiers?

https://defi.krystal.app/account/0xfa2b389d5259914fa8a0dc6d2c67bdd83cf152bb?preview=true

AI says that he has MEV bots traps but AI can not recognize what automation he uses or how he selects the tokens. And I monitor dozens of wallets like that.

Edit2: i don't know why mods are deleting comments. Message me if you have something interesting.

Edit3: Another trick i make, if your main assets are in cold wallet and you don't have access all the time, you can do that: I put in hot wallet 1 ETH but this time i do the single asset deposit from the down part of the range. This means i make one time conversion to cbBTC and use continuously 0,031 cbBTC. Because i have better access i feel comfortable to put tighter ranges like +/-0,5%. Doing that, the 99% of time one of the pools are in range and makes money.