Morpho price

Recently, many people have misinterpreted Morpho's modular lending, which is indeed quite outrageous. Of course, there are factors like the traditional camp (Aave) leading the narrative, and DeFi is also a world full of grudges. More likely, it stems from a lack of understanding of its mechanisms. The modular lending represented by Morpho is not simply permissionless lending or isolated pools; permissionless gives a chaotic impression, while isolated pools seem to imply that capital efficiency is not as high as in pool models. In reality, Morpho's permissionless nature does not mean that curators can do whatever they want. For instance, if you want to curate your vault on Morpho's front end, the curator must obtain a whitelist, which requires multi-signature and the most basic time lock (7-day benchmark). This ensures at the contract level that curators will not suddenly add toxic markets, leading to the risk of exit scams. Fund allocation can only be configured within the deposit market, which defines the risk scope. Additionally, in isolated pools, collateral cannot be lent out. For borrowers, compared to pool models, the cost of capital may be slightly higher, but the customization is higher, and the collateral ratio will also be higher, so these two factors somewhat offset each other. Since deposits and loans are decoupled, the deposit side relies on various vaults for capital aggregation configuration, with curators acting as managers. This is similar to a fund model, where curators configure the lending markets for deposits and can also allocate idle capital usage limits, allowing specific markets with extremely high capital utilization to obtain additional capital dispatch from authorized vaults. This is somewhat akin to a central bank providing discount windows for commercial banks to facilitate emergency capital allocation. These models actually provide highly customized deposit combinations and also offer a very modular and flexible lending market, representing a significant innovation in DeFi currency markets. Aave's self-operated model controls everything from the top down, so there are very few things it can do, focusing only on mainstream assets in large categories; whereas Morpho's model, akin to a Taobao model, covers all demands from mainstream to long-tail, making it more like the infrastructure for lending, which Coinbase can directly deploy and use. Both self-operated and Taobao models have their pros and cons; it's not a matter of one having what the other lacks. This time, the synthetic asset crisis was a major misstep for Morpho, as it gave too much endorsement to whitelisted curators, leading to moral hazard, with depositors treating this endorsement as a guarantee from Morpho. I estimate that they will subsequently strictly limit their front-end vault curation, encouraging curators to manage the front end themselves, thereby removing this implicit endorsement and moral hazard.