Liquidity management has always been a challenge in DeFi. Automated Market Makers (AMMs) make token liquidity possible, but then the problems arise—what happens when an AMM pool itself faces liquidity issues, or when parameters (such as fees, pool weights, etc.) are not optimally set? Who steps in to rescue the situation?



Some protocols are taking a different approach. Instead of solely focusing on AMMs, they start to "provide liquidity" for other AMMs and liquidity protocols. You can think of this as a kind of "upper-layer protocol" concept.

How does it work in practice?

**First tactic: Extending the life of LP tokens**

Users deposit assets into an AMM pool and receive LP tokens. These tokens seem liquid, but often they are idle and not generating returns. The new approach is to let users layer their LP tokens into a "Meta Treasury." This process becomes more versatile—LP tokens can be used as collateral in lending protocols to borrow stablecoins for reinvestment; yield rights can be sliced off to issue derivatives with different risk profiles; even insurance against impermanent loss can be added to these positions. From a financial engineering perspective, this creates new value-added opportunities for tokens that were previously "dead."

**Second tactic: Cross-pool liquidity scheduling**

Different AMMs have significant variations in pricing and depth for the same trading pair. Some pools have low fees but high slippage, others are the opposite. Traditionally, users judge manually. Now, algorithms can monitor multiple AMMs in real-time and automatically migrate funds between the most optimal pools. In simple terms, this equips the entire AMM ecosystem with a "liquidity scheduling hub," ensuring funds are always in the position with the lowest fees and minimal slippage.

**Third tactic: Parameter optimization as a service**

Emerging AMM pools often have parameters that are not finely tuned. Is it possible for an upper-layer protocol to assist in optimizing fee rates and adjusting liquidity density? This enters the realm of "parameters as a service."

These innovations are not about reinventing the wheel but about using layered and optimized strategies to make the entire liquidity ecosystem run more efficiently.
View Original
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.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
ApeWithNoChainvip
· 10h ago
Hmm... It looks like a nested doll. Wrapping LP tokens in another layer—if you ask me, this will eventually rug pull.
View OriginalReply0
gm_or_ngmivip
· 11h ago
Oh, the YaYa Gold Vault system is basically just a shell game. Everyone ends up paying the price through multiple layers of commissions.
View OriginalReply0
CounterIndicatorvip
· 11h ago
Basically, it's just a nested doll. It feels like the risks are piling up quite aggressively.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityHuntervip
· 11h ago
Hmm, it's quite interesting. The nested gameplay feels like playing a matryoshka doll game in DeFi. In the end, no one can clearly identify where the real risk lies.
View OriginalReply0
BlockBargainHuntervip
· 11h ago
Damn, it's another nested financial mess. Feels like it's about to collapse.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • بالعربية
  • Português (Brasil)
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Español
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Русский
  • 繁體中文
  • Українська
  • Tiếng Việt