Rari Capital — A way to expand the new market of long tail asset lending

23 min readDec 6, 2021

1. Highlights of the report

1.1 Core investment logic

Rari Capital’s current business is focused on the long tail asset lending track. Its business development is in line with the development trend of the industry. With rapid short-term growth, it is expected to further expand to the interbank lending market of B to B or Dao to Dao in the future. The project does not have any VC investment background, and its scale growth is mainly based on business self-growth as the core, without token incentive assistance. The team style tends to be more serious and less marketing content. In addition, the team also has a sense of social feedback, aiming to use 50% of the protocol yields for donations. Overall, the project deserves long-term attention.

1.2 Main risks

The main risk of the current project comes from the risk that the oracle price of long-tail assets is easily manipulated.

1.3 Valuation

Compared with traditional decentralized lending platforms, the current market valuation is in a reasonable position based on Rari Capital’s own development space and future risks,.

*All opinions in this article should not be used as investment advice.

2. Basic situation of the project

2.1 Project business scope

Rari Capital is a set of decentralized financial protocols, whose main products are yield aggregator and Fuse interest rate protocol. Its governance token is RGT.

Rari Capital mainly provides the following three types of products:

Fuse: Customized interest rate protocol that allow users to customize their own lending pools. Customized content includes but is not limited to asset, whitelist, oracle, collateral coefficient, and liquidation incentive and other parameters.

Yield aggregator: Based on USDC, DAI, and ETH assets respectively, it obtains optimal yields through algorithms from various lending protocols (Compound Finance, Aave, dYdX, mStable, and Fuse Pools).

Tranches: A tiered stablecoin pool created by Saffron Finance based on Rari Capital.

2.1.1 Fuse lending pool

Fuse is an open interest rate protocol that allows users to lend and borrow digital assets. The Fuse protocol enables anyone to create and deploy their own lending pool immediately. This protocol allows users to select all custom parameters. It is completely insulated from the risks of other Fuse lending pools, which is different from the unified large lending pool used on traditional lending platforms. Each lending pool is independent, and its creators can customize their lending pools according to their risk preferences without compromising or affecting the security of other lending pools. According to the creator preference, a lending pool can be public or private. As shown in the figure below, it is the asset pool situation of Fuse lending pool №18. The left side is the supply side assets, and the right side is the loanable assets.

In essence, each pool has a specific set of assets that can be “provided” to earn loan interest, which can also be held as loan collateral at the same time. By using the provided assets as collateral, users can borrow from the same set of assets. The creator of a lending pool not only constructs these asset sets, but also selects certain parameters, such as the asset collateral coefficient (also expressed as LTV: loan-to-value ratio). This ratio defines the maximum number of tokens in the pool that can be borrowed through a specific collateral.

For example, if the LTV of RGT in the pool is 85%, then for every 1 RGT worth of collateral, the borrower can borrow other tokens worth 0.85 RGT in the pool. If the price of the asset provided by the user drops or the borrowed asset increases, it will cause the borrowed amount to exceed the LTV limit and the user’s position will be liquidated. This makes it essential to monitor borrowing limits and to borrow carefully within the limits.

2.1.1.1 Interest rate curve

If the provided tokens are also borrowed by other users in the pool, the party offering the position earns interest from the borrower’s payment. The rate at which users earn or repay interest is determined by the asset interest rate curve selected by the pool creator for the asset and the asset’s utilization ratio. This is consistent with the interest rate pricing curve of AAVE and other lending platforms.

In order to achieve a healthy utilization percentage, the curve has an inflection point around 80%, and the curve starts to rise sharply (slope increases) at each utilization step. Essentially, when the utilization ratio exceeds about 80%, the lending rate will rise sharply. This is to prevent a “bank run”. When there is not enough liquidity, high utilization ratio will prevent users from exiting supply positions. Therefore, a high supply interest rate will encourage more liquidity supply, and a high borrowing interest rate will stimulate repayment of loans, both of which can affect asset utilization ratio.

To create a Fuse pool, the creator can set the following parameters:

• Custom assets

As long as there is an oracle (a price oracle machine supported by Fuse), Fuse pool can support the quotation of the asset.

• Custom oracle machine (Chainlink, Uniswap/Sushiswap TWAPS, Keep3r, etc.)

Fuse supports multiple oracles, and the creator needs to select a specific oracle for his or her asset.

• Platform fees

10% of all accrued expenses is allocated to the treasury owned by the $RGT community.

• Management fee

Fuse pool creators can choose to add an additional management fee over the protocol fee.

• Liquidation incentives

This is an additional collateral provided to the liquidator as an incentive for the liquidation of underwater accounts. For example, if the liquidation reward is 1.1, the liquidator will obtain an additional 10% of the borrower’s collateral for each unit closed.

• Whitelist

If they wish, Fuse pool creators can select pools that allow specific Ethereum addresses. This may be for KYC purposes to help develop capital entry in future partnerships.

• Upgradability

When the upgradeable function is enabled, users canmodify the underlying Fuse pool smart contract, as well as any pool parameters set in the pool creation phase.

• Collateral factor

The collateral coefficient ranges from 0 to 90%. Generally speaking, the collateral coefficient of large assets or liquid assets is high, while that of small assets or assets with poor liquidity is low. If the collateral factor of the asset is 0%, it cannot be used as collateral (or seized in liquidation), but it can still be borrowed.

• Reserve factor

This is converted from the borrower’s interest percentage of the protocol reserve. A reserve represents a portion of historical interest retained as liquid cash, which can be withdrawn or transferred through the governance of the protocol. A small portion of the borrower’s interest will accumulate in the protocol, determined by the reserve factor.

• Administrator

This is the deployer and owner of the pool. This can be a single Ethereum address, multi-signature, DAO contract, etc. The address that owns and manages the lending pool is used for parameter maintenance.

2.1.2 Yield Aggregator

Rari Capital’s yield aggregator automatically optimizes asset yields across various DeFi lending protocols (such as Compound Finance, dYdX, KeeperDAO, mStable, yEarn, Aave and Fuse Pools) to make the best profit for users. Currently, the platform provides yield aggregation pools for three assets: USDC, DAI and ETH.

The specific implementation is as follows. Users deposit their assets into the corresponding asset pools, and Rari will convert these assets into similar assets in the asset pool (USDC, DAI or ETH) through the decentralized exchange. By automation strategy, it will identify the most profitable farming strategies right now (the underlying protocols include Compound Finance, dYdX, KeeperDAO, mStable, yEarn, Aave and Fuse Pools), and automatically compound interest. Finally, the Rari platform will charge 17.5% of the profit.

Although the yield aggregator of Rari Capital involves multi-strategy farming, its overall strategy design is relatively common without innovation.

2.1.3 Tranches

To access Saffron Finance through the Rari Capital interface, there are three levels of risk from high to low: S Tranche, AA Tranche, and A Tranche. Tiered products are not the main products of Rari Capital, and the overall risk of tiering is also high (except AA grade), so it is not recommended for ordinary users.

The early positioning of Rari Capital is intelligent investment advisor. Its early business focused on yield aggregator. However, due to its limited innovation in its aggregators, there was no further leverage mechanism for its products. As a pure application layer, the imagination space was limited. Since Rari Capital founded Fuse in March of this year, its TVL has only started while maintaining a state of rapid and healthy growth. The main business of Rari Capital has shifted from a yield aggregator to a refined lending platform. In just two months, its TVL has grown from US$150 million to US$1 billion. Compared with the current rough lending market, Rari Capital’s refined lending business still has a lot of room for development. It is currently in the early stage of development, with a promising future.

2.2 Project history and roadmap

2.3 Business development

In Rari Capital’s three main businesses, Fuse has been developing best. Since the launch of Fuse in March, Rari Capital’s TVL has begun to move in a positive cycle, growing from US$10 million to the current US$1.3 billion, of which Fuse’s TVL accounts for about 92%, or about US$1.2 billion. Therefore, the report will focus on the analysis of Fuse’s business situation.

The current concentration of the Fuse lending pool is very high, and the development of the long tail asset pool has just started.

Fuse pools are divided into two categories, community audited lending pool and unaudited lending pool. There are 23 Fuse lending pools with a scale of more than US$1 million, of which 21 have been audited and only 2 are unaudited. The figure below shows the historical growth of TVL in each pool. The current TVL is mainly concentrated in the top 5 pools, namely Tetranode’s Locker, Olympus Pool Party, FeiRari, ChainLinkGod’s, Frax & Reflexer Stable Asset Pool. The total TVL of these five major Fuse pools is approximately US$900 million, accounting for 75% of the TVL of all Fuse pools.

As can be seen from the above figure, the TVL of Tetranode’s Locker pool ranked №1 has grown far more than other pools. It has a TVL of US$460 million, accounting for about 35% of the total TVL. Within it, the TVL of SOHM’s single asset is about US$400 million, accounting for 87% of the TVL of Tetranode’s Locker pool and 33% of the TVL of all lending pools.

The high proportion of SOHM is mainly due to the fact that SOHM is currently the only mining channel directly connected to OHM project in the Fuse pool. Therefore, SOHM in Fuse can obtain super high mining yields, and can also be used as collateral to borrow other assets in the same pool.

PS: SOHM is a token certificate obtained by staking OHM.

The overall capital utilization ratio in the Fuse lending pool is low, at about 20%. Compared with traditional lending platforms, the low capital utilization ratio in the long-tail asset lending market is reasonable. Each small Fuse pool is equivalent to dividing the liquidity of assets. While refining the borrowing and lending demands, it will further hinder the overall capital utilization ratio. This problem has also been taken into consideration by the community, which plans to develop a small tool for cross-pool liquidity in the future to optimize the liquidity of assets between pools.

Now Fuse is still in its initial stage of development, and its early business development is completed without token incentives, which is relatively rare in the beginning of Defi projects. The lending business related to long-tail asset market has just begun. The high concentration of Fuse in the early stage is very easy to appear. With the development of more and more OHM-like mining tools and cross-pool asset optimization tools in the later stage, the long-tail asset pool will have more room for development and flexibility, and asset concentration will gradually decline.

2.4 Team situation

The Rari Capital project was co-founded by 3 college students, who all have had successful entrepreneurial experience before and about 3 years of relevant experience in the blockchain industry.

David Lucid, co-founder of Rari Capital. He served as CTO of CRAFT Scooter from October 2018 to February 2020. He engaged in some smart contract and web development work during December 2015 to April 2020. Currently he is studying at the McCombs School of Business at the University of Texas at Austin.

Jai Bhavnani, CEO of Rari Capital. He is the founder of Ambo and the vice president of strategy at MyCrypto. Initially, he learned programming by playing Minecraft and developed applications, which he used to fund his Ambo app that simplifies the cryptocurrency. Since then, Ambo was acquired by MyCrypto.

Jack Lipstone, Co-founder and Chief Operating Officer of Rari Capital. Currently he is studying at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Prior to this, he was the co-founder and Chief Marketing Officer of Ambo, which was later acquired by MyCrypto. After that, he was transferred to director of business development until April 2020.

In addition to the above three founders, Rari Capital has gradually become Dao governance, and the governance structure is shown in the figure below. Judging from the development path of Rari Capital, the team has been working hard and innovating continuously, with excellent community activity and order management.

Source: Rari Capital official disclosure

3. Business analysis

3.1 Industry space and potential

3.1.1 Open up the long-tail asset lending market

The working mechanism of the traditional decentralized lending market is to allow users to deposit their assets in a large pool, from which other users can borrow and provide yields to depositors. This single pool brings together the liquidity of all collateral assets to form a consistent lending rate for single assets. This approach provides maximum liquidity, but it also allows everyone to share the risk thus losing the corresponding flexibility. If a certain type of asset goes wrong, or a vicious liquidation occurs, the risk will spread to the entire pool, and everyone needs to share it. This is why Compound and Aave protocol require strict screening of eligible asset categories, which limits their ability to expand the business of long-tail assets.

Unlike large asset lending pools such as Aave and Compound, Fuse lending pools allow users to create their own small lending pools on Fuse. This method can not only bring more assets the opportunity to participate in the lending market, but also isolate risk from other assets in the Fuse pool. There are only 18 types of assets listed on the Compound platform, and each additional type of asset adds a certain amount of risk to the entire system. However, on the Fuse platform, these pools can keep up with the token hotspots on the market at any time because the risks between these pools are isolated. The fast access of OHM is a good example. At the same time, the current hottest tokens such as gamefi and socialfi can also quickly establish corresponding lending pools. As shown in the figure below, this is a gamefi-themed lending pool, which contains the current hot gamefi tokens. With this flexibility, the lending liquidity of various new types of long-tail assets can be revitalized.

Risk isolation is just a way of risk splitting, and it cannot eliminate the risks caused by the high volatility of these tokens. Users should carefully select asset pools based on their own perceptions and judgments. In response to such problems, Rari Capital has developed a custom risk rating mechanism to score the risk rating (RSS) for each pool. The RSS rating will take into account the market value, liquidity, volatility, and staking rate and other factors of the asset, and finally give an A-F rating. The specific scoring mechanism can refer to: Rari Safety Scores (https://medium.com/rari-capital/rari-safety-scores-17893c4d998).

3.1.2 Differentiated pricing

When users use different assets as collateral, or under different asset staking rate risks, the loan interest rate that users are willing to pay should be different. This cannot be done on platforms such as Compound and AAVE, which can only control the overall risk by restricting the types of collateral assets and setting a unified asset staking rate, rather than differentiating pricing and stratification for lending behavior.

We know that each Fuse pool has different asset classes, and the highest staking rate of each asset can also be different. This means that users participating in each pool bear different risks, so the corresponding lending rate will also be different.

Compare the asset collateral coefficient of Pool 6 and Pool 18:

Regarding to borrowing USDC, we can compare the difference in lending interest rates between Pool 6 and Pool 18:

Pool 6 has more asset classes than Pool 18 (not fully shown in the screenshot), with higher overall asset risk. At the same time, the asset collateral coefficient of Pool 6 is much higher than that of Pool 18, and its overall loan interest rate is also significantly higher than the latter. Therefore, we can see that the Fuse lending pool has better layered the borrowing and lending needs of users, and further made Pareto optimization on the basis of the original “eating from the same big pot” (the equalitarianism), so that users with different types of assets and different risk preferences can choose a more suitable pool and interest rate for lending.

PS: Pareto optimization, also known as Pareto Improvement, refers to making at least one person better without making anyone worse off.

3.1.3 Skillfully establish the foundation of credit loan

The establishment of a Fuse pool needs the signature, with an individual or organizational credit component attached to it. The current lending platforms on the blockchain are all over-collateralized lending. We all know that the asset utilization ratio in this way is low, but this is the only safe method without the development of on-chain credit. This type of lending platform cannot easily increase the asset staking ratio, which will increase the risk of the entire pool. However, the emergence of the Fuse pool has brought new credit concepts and new ecological possibilities to this ecosystem. The following two points can reflect the new ecosystem brought by Fuse in credit lending.

First, in the Fuse pool creators can establish their own token incentives.

As shown in the figure below, the token pool established by the Fei community now has their own token incentives to promote the liquidity of their own tokens, similar to the incentives of Pool 1. In the future, more and more Fuse pool creators will continue to create liquidity for their pools. Fuse is just a tool, and the creator will become the true manager of the pool, bringing his credit component into both yields and risks.

Second, Dao to Dao’s micro credit loan model, from P2Pool to B2B.

Fuse can not only define its own highest staking rate, but also set a whitelist. This means that you can do loan business with people you know offline. Such flexibility is equivalent to indirectly transferring offline trust to online. Under the current blockchain ecological development model centered on Dao governance, there will be more and more cooperation between Dao and Dao. Take Tokemak (a new generation of liquidity management platform) as an example. Tokemak needs to cooperate with DAOs of many other projects, involving some loan business between Dao and Dao. The flexible Fuse lending pool can become their preferred tool for future business development. I believe that there will be more and more demands for such cooperation. This kind of similar micro credit loans and inter-bank lending will be an important part of both the traditional financial world and the on-chain financial world.

3.2 Comparative analysis of projects

At present, the overall lending market is growing slowly. In addition to the established decentralized lending platforms led by AAVE and Compound, the long-tail asset lending market has become a battleground for new cutting-edge lending platforms. Cream Finance, Euler, Beta Finance and other lending platforms all point to the long-tail asset lending market. Among them, Euler has not yet released a product, and Beta Finance is still in the early stage of development and exploration. Cream Finance is the long-tail asset lending platform with the longest development and the largest lending scale.

Cream Finance is not only based on the long-tail lending market, but also making further efforts in Dao to Dao lending, with a high degree of business overlap with Rari Capital’s Fuse platform. This article will focus on comparing the business development differences between Cream Finance and Fuse.

Cream Finance offers lending services for approximately 100 token and LP asset pairs. Unlike Fuse, Cream Finance’s lending model is similar to traditional Compound. It adopts a large pool model without risk isolation mechanism, and the staking rate and reserve factor (the percentage of interest drawn by the platform) of each asset are uniformly determined by the platform. The following figure shows the collateral factor and reserve factor of some Cream Finance assets, where the reserve factor is generally between 25% and 40%, much higher than the 10% commission rate of the Fuse platform.

Based on the data on Defipulse, as shown in the figure below, the TVL of Cream Finance is US$500 million, about 40% of that of Fuse. Fuse has grown rapidly and steadily in just a few months, mainly due to its B2B business model. Fuse pool has risk isolation and very high flexibility, which is very attractive for many DAOs. They can use the Fuse platform to better bring liquidity to their own tokens and increase the utilization ratio of their assets. At the same time, it is also more conducive to the expansion of inter-bank lending business and micro-lending business. Cream Finance, which also wants to open this market, is still under the unified management mode of large pool, making it more difficult to control the overall risk and greatly reducing its flexibility.

The risk of hacking is the biggest risk of long-tail lending platforms. Judging from historical data, Cream Finance’s TVL has experienced several ups and downs, mainly due to multiple hacker attacks. Cream Finance has a lightning loan function, and it also opens a whitelist mechanism to open zero-collateral loan business for some high-credit addresses (mainly institutional addresses). Cream Finance’s relatively radical business innovation model increases its business risks.

So far, Cream Finance has experienced three hacker attacks. In February, it was attached by hackers and lost US$37.5 million; another hacker attack happened in August with a loss of US$18 million; it suffered a third hack in October, losing US$130 million. After multiple hacking incidents, the token price of Cream has been in a slump since August.

Rari Capital has also encountered two hacking attacks. One was a cross-chain attack on the ETH yield aggregator in May. It lost 2,600 ETHs, which is equivalent to 60% of user funds at that time, and its token (RGT) price fell about 50% within an hour. The second time was an oracle attack targeted at the Fuse lending pool in early November. This pool adopted the price of Uniswap V3. However, due to the shallow trading depth of the long tail asset, the hackers manipulated the price of VUSD (an asset in pool 23) on Uniswap V3 to make the Fuse fund pool suffer losses. Subsequently, the Dao organization of Rari Capital assumed all user losses through issuing bonds.

Rari Capital is still slowly exploring the oracle risk. They try to use multiple price sources and a time-weighted method (TWAP) to reduce the risk of attacks as much as possible. For now, however, this kind of risk still exists. The risk isolation feature between the Fuse pools makes the platform more fault tolerant, where users can reduce the concentration of risk by distributing their funds to each pool.

3.3 Token model analysis

The native token of Rari Capital is RGT, and the total amount of native tokens is fixed at 10 million, which has been basically released.

Due to some hacking incidents, the Rari Capital community passed a new proposal on August 28, which will issue an additional 2.5 million RGTs to Dao’s vault every year for three consecutive years, for a total of 7.5 million RGTs. With the initial 10 million tokens, the total number of tokens released now stands at 12.5 million. The purpose of the additional token issuance is to build up the Dao organization team in the future, liquidity incentives and to deal with some unexpected risks.

The initial distribution of 10 million RGT tokens is divided into two parts, and the details are as follows:

1) 87.50% of the tokens will be distributed to the community through liquidity mining. RGT liquidity mining started on October 20, 2020, and ended on December 19, 2020, for a period of 60 days, and has been fully released so far.

2) 12.50% is used for team rewards and will be released within 2 years.

Among the top 100 token holding addresses, the total proportion is about 40% after deducting the proportion of the top 10 contract addresses. This indicates that the dispersion of token holding addresses is good.

The role of RGT tokens

1) Participate in the governance and proposal of the Rari Capital protocol;

2) The Rari protocol will automatically obtain 10% of all interest income on all platforms, 50% of which is used to buyback and burn RGT (there is no burn plan or burn at present), and the remaining 50% is used for the overall management of the foundation, mainly for donation to corresponding charities.

3.4 Risks

3.4.1 Risk of oracle attack

The liquidity of long-tail assets is usually small, thus the price is easily manipulated. Rari Capital always faces the risk of hacking by oracles. This is an unchangeable fact for long-tail assets related businesses. Fuse’s risk isolation feature prevents this risk from spreading to other pools. It is hoped that there will be a better risk prevention mechanism in the future.

3.4.2 Risk of initial liquidity

The establishment of the Fuse pool of long-tail assets requires the activation of initial liquidity, otherwise it will be difficult to carry out the lending business. At present, Fuse mainly relies on cooperation with some projects DAO to complete the activation of initial liquidity. The quality of liquidity is highly dependent on the willingness and ability of the pool creator, which is also the reason for the high concentration of the current pool. If Rari Capital can better solve the initial liquidity problem, its business development will enter the next stage of rapid growth.

3.4.3 Risk of merger with Fei

Recently, Rari Capital and Fei Protocol initiated a proposal to merge RGT with the latter’s governance token TRIBE. The proposal points out that the main bottleneck for Fuse’s growth is the initial liquidity of the liquidity leading pools and the oracle price risk of long-tail assets. Fei Protocol says that it can help the Fuse pool to provide initial liquidity, and it can also help Fuse obtain an anti-manipulation all-round embedded TWAP oracle by quickly and cheaply generating deep liquidity on Uni v3 or Balancer v2. At the same time, Fei Protocol is also willing to repay Rari Capital’s losses caused by hacker attacks through Fei.

The price of the above proposal is that RGT and TRIBE will be exchanged at the market price of 1:1. The existing RGT treasury can be covered by the existing TRIBE treasury, and the rest will be newly minted TRIBE. This means that if this proposal is passed, Rari Capital’s governance token will be absorbed by Fei Protocol’s governance token TRIBE, and the two will be combined into one.

This proposal will dilute the value of RGT tokens to a certain extent, which is not conducive to the interests of current RGT holders. The merger of governance tokens will make RGT lose control of Rari Capital. This will suppress the price of RGT. The current market price has made a negative response, since the price of RGT tokens has fallen by more than 20%.

4. Preliminary valuation

4.1 Five core questions

4.1.1 What business cycle is the project in? Maturity stage or the early and middle stage of development?

The current project development is in the early and middle stage, and the B to B business has just started. Many projects and their DAO organizations have just begun to establish their own Fuse lending pools on the Fuse platform, which can not only expand the lending market of long-tail assets, but also better conduct inter-bank lending cooperation. The future business development prospect is promising. In comparison, the current lending scale is still small.

4.1.2 Does the project have a solid competitive advantage? Where does it come from?

So far, Rari Capital is the best among the same track projects. At present, it has established cooperative relations with Olympus DAO, Pendle Finance, Vesper Finance, Harvest Finance, Tokemak, BarnBridge, NFTX and other projects, laying a good foundation for future business development.

4.1.3 Is the medium and long-term investment logic of the project clear? Is it in line with the industry trend?

The development logic of Rari Capital is relatively clear, and it is also in line with the general trend of the industry. It has shifted from extensive lending business to a more detailed market, with the form of credit and corporate loan.

4.1.4 What are the main variables in the operation of the project? Are these variables easy to quantify and measure?

The operational difficulty of Rari Capital is mainly in risk control and initial liquidity management. The former cannot be quantified and judged, while the latter is affected by the comprehensive influence of the team relationship network and market demand. At present, the team resources are excellent, and the market demand is slowly opened.

4.1.5 What is the management and governance of the project? What is the level of DAO?

At present, the team is mainly governed by DAO, with high community participation and enthusiasm, good overall management level, strong business innovation ability and good business execution. The team style tends to be more serious and less marketing content. In addition, the team also has a sense of social feedback, aiming to use 50% of the protocol yields for donations.

4.2 Valuation level

Due to the limited availability of Rari Capital relevant data, it is impossible to compare the valuation from the perspective of PS/PE. Considering that its development is still at an early stage, the main risks such as oracle attacks in the future cannot be well quantified, so the valuation part will be weakened, and this content is for reference only.

This valuation uses the MC/TVL ratio to compare the valuation levels of similar projects horizontally. Comparing the ratio of the market cap to the locked volume of Aave, Compound, Cream Finance and Rari Capital, Rari Capital’s valuation is relatively higher.

Unit: billion U.S. dollars. Source: Defipulse and CoinGecko

Compared with other lending platforms, Rari Capital has more business growth points in the future. No matter it is B to B, Dao to Dao business, micro loans or inter-bank lending business, all have great potential for future business scale growth. Although the value capture capability of RGT is currently limited, as long as there is no problem with the business logic and good scale growth, the governance value of the token will also increase. Considering that Fuse needs to face a large number of oracles risks in the future, and the current concentration of pool and assets is too high, Fuse runs for a short time, so its relevant experience has not been well reflected. Therefore, the current valuation of the RGT market should not be too high. On the whole, the current market valuation is in the range of rational valuation, and subsequent market valuation changes will depend more on the actual development of its business.