The traditional hedge fund's 2/20 fee model is, to put it bluntly, relying on information asymmetry to cut leeks. 2% management fee + 20% performance fee is only a bright number, plus various channel fees, custody fees, audit fees and other hidden costs, the income received by investors is directly cut by 40-50%. But now, an on-chain protocol called Lorenzo Protocol has completely turned this gameplay upside down.
Lorenzo's rate structure is simple and crude: 1.2% management fee + 15% performance fee. The key is the distribution mechanism - the 1.2% management fee goes to veBANK holders, the 15% performance fee is 30% for strategy developers, and the remaining 70% goes to veBANK holders. Converted? The actual cost borne by investors is only 0.84%+10.5%, which is less than a quarter of that of traditional funds.
Even more ruthless is transparency. The annual report of traditional funds is 200 pages at every turn, full of nonsense and vague words. What about Lorenzo? One line of code can be checked: how much money was made today, which strategy contributed, how much the developer shared, how much veBANK holders shared, and how much the insurance fund increased - the whole chain is open and zero.
The data is more convincing. Lorenzo's current TVL has reached $1.64 billion, and the annualized fee income is $246 million, which is accurately distributed to 27,000 veBANK addresses. Average annualized rate of return of lock-ups? 89%。
This creates a fatal problem: when the income from holding protocol tokens far exceeds the investment protocol product itself, the last fig leaf of the traditional asset management industry is gone. Investors don't need a fund manager at all, they just need to directly hold the "on-chain asset management company" that is more profitable than the fund.
Lorenzo is not doing DeFi innovation. It is using blockchain to drain the profit pool of the entire asset management industry.
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.
9 Likes
Reward
9
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GateUser-ccc36bc5
· 2025-12-12 13:07
Really, 89% annualized return? This number definitely deserves a question mark; it's too good to be true.
View OriginalReply0
NotSatoshi
· 2025-12-12 09:37
This is the real blow to the traditional funds; this fee structure should have been shattered long ago.
View OriginalReply0
TokenomicsTrapper
· 2025-12-10 04:03
alright actually if you read the vesting schedule... 89% apy is textbook exit pump pattern ngl
Reply0
GateUser-e19e9c10
· 2025-12-10 04:01
Wait, is this 89% annualized rate true? Is it possible that it's just hype data?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-2fce706c
· 2025-12-10 03:55
I have long said that the traditional fund set is to cut leeks, and I predicted the logic of Lorenzo three years ago, and now there is finally a general trend of product verification. 89% annualized return is there, don't miss the opportunity, brothers.
View OriginalReply0
ContractBugHunter
· 2025-12-10 03:45
89% annualized? This number sounds a bit suspenseful, you have to look closely at the underlying logic
But to be honest, the set of hidden fees of traditional funds is really disgusting, and audit fees and custody fees alone can eat half of the income
That's why I've always felt that on-chain transparency is king, and one line of code is better than 200 pages of nonsense
The most feared thing is this kind of high return, there is no actual product support behind, and investors are still smashed when the token valuation is speculated
Lorenzo's distribution mechanism is a bit interesting, but it depends on whether the smart contract has loopholes, which I pay attention to
View OriginalReply0
BTCBeliefStation
· 2025-12-10 03:40
89% annualized? This number is really fake, and I always feel that something is wrong
The traditional hedge fund's 2/20 fee model is, to put it bluntly, relying on information asymmetry to cut leeks. 2% management fee + 20% performance fee is only a bright number, plus various channel fees, custody fees, audit fees and other hidden costs, the income received by investors is directly cut by 40-50%. But now, an on-chain protocol called Lorenzo Protocol has completely turned this gameplay upside down.
Lorenzo's rate structure is simple and crude: 1.2% management fee + 15% performance fee. The key is the distribution mechanism - the 1.2% management fee goes to veBANK holders, the 15% performance fee is 30% for strategy developers, and the remaining 70% goes to veBANK holders. Converted? The actual cost borne by investors is only 0.84%+10.5%, which is less than a quarter of that of traditional funds.
Even more ruthless is transparency. The annual report of traditional funds is 200 pages at every turn, full of nonsense and vague words. What about Lorenzo? One line of code can be checked: how much money was made today, which strategy contributed, how much the developer shared, how much veBANK holders shared, and how much the insurance fund increased - the whole chain is open and zero.
The data is more convincing. Lorenzo's current TVL has reached $1.64 billion, and the annualized fee income is $246 million, which is accurately distributed to 27,000 veBANK addresses. Average annualized rate of return of lock-ups? 89%。
This creates a fatal problem: when the income from holding protocol tokens far exceeds the investment protocol product itself, the last fig leaf of the traditional asset management industry is gone. Investors don't need a fund manager at all, they just need to directly hold the "on-chain asset management company" that is more profitable than the fund.
Lorenzo is not doing DeFi innovation. It is using blockchain to drain the profit pool of the entire asset management industry.