You are reading an excerpt from our free but shortened abridged report! While still packed with incredible research and data, for just $40/month you can upgrade to our FULL library of 60+ reports (including this one) and complete industry-leading analysis on the top crypto assets. 

Becoming a Premium member means enjoying all the perks of a Basic membership PLUS:

• Full-length CORE Reports: More technical, in-depth research, actionable insights, and potential market alpha for serious crypto users
• Early access to future CORE ratings: Being early is sometimes just as important as being right!
• Premium Member CORE+ Reports: Coverage on the top issues pertaining to crypto users like bridge security, layer two solutions, DeFi plays, and more
• CORE report Audio playback: Don’t want to read? No problem! Listen on the go.

Intro

In the evolving landscape of DeFi, the significance of rigorous protocol design and its impact on user security cannot be overstated. Stakeholders in protocol development have a vested interest in optimizing design to safeguard end-user assets. It's critical to recognize that a user's loss, whether from a computational glitch or a flawed design decision, results in the same detrimental outcome. Thus, while security experts often concentrate on identifying coding errors, a broader perspective that encompasses potential design flaws is equally vital.

Currently, discussions on optimal DeFi protocol designs are emerging, marking a significant stride in understanding the economic underpinnings of these systems. This discourse is crucial as it addresses both theoretical and applied aspects of protocol safety and efficiency. For those keen on delving deeper into DeFi economic modeling, resources such as the yAcademy Discord channel and various online repositories provide a gateway to a plethora of research materials.

Toxic Liquidation Spirals

This paper is essential for anyone involved with borrowing/lending protocols. It builds on findings from a 2019 OpenZeppelin audit of Compound Finance and further analyzes the November 2022 CRV bad debt incident at Aave. The study highlights the inherent risks in liquidation incentives present across platforms like Aave and Compound Finance. It suggests that effective management of these risks could prevent the accumulation of bad debts, illustrated through various scenario-based design choices in the accompanying diagrams.

Mitigating Decentralized Finance Liquidations with Reversible Call Options

This paper proposes a novel mechanism, termed MIQADO, to mitigate liquidations in lending protocols. By introducing reversible call options, this design aims to encourage users to fortify unhealthy borrowing positions by contributing additional collateral. This mechanism differs from traditional options by allowing the seller to end the contract prematurely at a premium, offering a potential reduction in liquidations as demonstrated through simulations using historic data.

Attacks on Dynamic DeFi Interest Rate Curves

Focusing on dynamic control systems such as PID controllers, this paper explores vulnerabilities to manipulation attacks. It discusses the potential for users to exploit these systems, thereby affecting interest rates and overall protocol stability. The paper proposes several mitigation strategies to increase the costs associated with such manipulations, supported by visual data.

Shill-Proof Auctions

The integrity of auction systems in DeFi is scrutinized in this paper, which suggests that Dutch auctions, as opposed to English auctions, offer robust resistance to shill bidding—a tactic where sellers place bids to artificially inflate the price. The analysis supports a broader implementation of Dutch auctions based on their strategic resilience and efficiency.

Automated Market Making and Loss-Versus-Rebalancing

The final paper discussed provides an analytical framework akin to the Black-Scholes model for automated market makers (AMMs). It introduces the concept of "loss-versus-rebalancing" (LVR), which highlights the disparities between automated and manual trading strategies on centralized exchanges. The paper critically assesses the economic efficiencies of liquidity provision, advocating for designs that minimize the LVR gap to enhance overall capital efficiency.

Mitigating DeFi Risk

Diversification

Diversification is a cornerstone of risk management in both traditional finance and DeFi. Despite the high correlation across cryptocurrencies, risk-adjusted returns can vary significantly among different coins. Diversifying a portfolio across multiple assets can help mitigate the impact of market overreactions and large price swings, which are more common in crypto markets than in traditional equities.

In DeFi, cross-protocol diversification is crucial for mitigating tail risks such as security vulnerabilities. A qualitative approach that considers key parameters like Total Value Locked (TVL) and the duration of a protocol’s operation without security incidents can help assess the reliability of different protocols. Price correlation metrics can also identify coins with low or inverse correlations, providing potential hedges within a diversified portfolio.

Stop-Loss Orders

Automated stop-loss orders are an effective tool for limiting potential losses by selling assets when their prices drop to predetermined levels. Most crypto trading platforms, both centralized and decentralized, offer stop-loss functionalities. However, lending protocols like Aave and Compound do not natively support stop-loss orders, although third-party protocols like DeFi Saver can provide similar functionalities.

Hedging Risks in DeFi

Hedging strategies in DeFi involve using financial instruments or other methods to offset potential losses:

• Derivatives: Utilizing perpetual futures and options to hedge against price fluctuations. For instance, purchasing put options can protect against declines in asset values. Derivatives allow access to leverage, enhancing trade efficiency but requiring high-frequency monitoring to manage liquidation risks.
• Lending Protocols: Similar to spot margin positions, lending protocols allow users to lend one coin and borrow another in an over-collateralized manner. This method offers a way to long or short pairs supported by the protocol, benefiting from lower and more stable borrowing rates compared to derivatives.

Conclusion

DeFi risk modeling, while a nascent field, is pivotal for the advancement of secure and efficient protocol designs. As the complexity of these systems increases, understanding the economic implications of design choices becomes crucial. The integration of economic analysis at the inception of protocol development can significantly enhance the comprehension of potential design flaws during security reviews. The future of DeFi could see a more robust integration of such analytical frameworks, ensuring the resilience and sustainability of decentralized financial systems.