Having been involved in the DeFi space for 6 years, the most painful question is never about how much profit I make, but rather "why did the borrowing costs eat up all the profits." My approach in the first five years was quite fixed: collateralize mainstream public chain ecosystem tokens to borrow stablecoins for investment, but I ended up in a dead end—when the market is good, I earn the spread by borrowing tokens for yield farming; when the market dips, I face liquidation pressure; if I want to hedge risk with stablecoins during downturns, the lending interest gradually erodes the principal like a termite.

It wasn't until mid-last year that I realized a key point: **Not all collateralized rights can effectively hedge borrowing risks**. The true breakthrough is to establish an inverse pegging relationship between rights and stablecoins, creating a complete closed loop of "borrowing cost hedging - liquidation risk coverage - multi-dimensional yield amplification." When the market fluctuated by up to 35% in the second half of last year, I applied this logic to achieve a 32% asset appreciation, with zero drawdown throughout the process—profits came not from luck with price swings or one-time arbitrage, but from the full-cycle feedback of rights supporting borrowing.

In simple terms, it's about upgrading stablecoins from mere "liabilities" to "robust income carriers." The logic behind this isn't complicated, but 99% of people haven't thought it through. Ordinary users often stumble in DeFi lending because they fail to link rights management with risk hedging. Instead of passively taking hits, it's better to proactively build a reverse binding mechanism between rights and borrowing, ensuring every loan has a safety net. This is also why more and more experienced players are re-examining the full value chain of rights pegged to stablecoins.