#借贷协议风险 After reading this analysis of USD, I have to say something true—this is the real way to understand the risks of the lending protocol and stablecoin.

Most people look at USDT and ask, "Is it backed by real money?" In fact, they are asking the wrong question. The essence of Tether is that it is an unregulated bank that issues digital deposits on demand and then invests that money to earn interest spreads. I've seen this logic countless times in traditional finance, and now it's just the same old shell moved onto the blockchain.

The issue is this: according to the Basel capital framework of regular banks, its current capital adequacy ratio may only be 3.87% - 10.89%, while truly healthy large banks need to maintain above 15%. In other words, its shortfall could be 4.5 billion or even more. This is not a small number.

The most heartbreaking thing is that the more than 20 billion in retained earnings looks impressive, but for USDT holders, it is basically worthless—this money is at the group level and there is no legal obligation to compensate token holders. When the day of collapse comes, you can only rely on their conscience. It's like a casino owner telling you, "I'm personally very wealthy," just listen and that's it.

My lesson is: no stablecoin is truly stable. As long as lending and asset investment are involved, there is risk. The larger the scale of USDT, the more dangerous it becomes — if it has problems, it will drag the entire ecosystem down. Instead of getting caught up in whether it is currently "insolvent", it is better to ask yourself if you dare to put all your funds into an unregulated institution. I have experienced too many seemingly flawless financial products suddenly collapse. The first rule of surviving on the blockchain for a long time is: never put all your eggs in the stablecoin basket.