I learned a decade ago to focus on customers, not competitors, as a principal engineer at @awscloud. Amazon built one of the best companies in the world, an e-commerce and cloud juggernaut that delights customers every day with the everything store and almost free 2-day shipping.
House of Zedge
Your opportunity to be early is shrinking anon… soon the normies are going to be reading about $GP in their newsletters and buying it on CEX. Your bloodline won’t forgive you if you fumble this bag.
Aura
$GP just got its own revenue category on @DefiLlama. Stats are wrong but with 7.67% going to GP it’s hard to beat this buy back at current MC. Currently sitting at 378 FDV with 1.5 M+ 24 hr fees generated we can see why it’s undervalued. GP to $10 +
OneKey
CDP: The Classical Aesthetics of Stablecoins
As of 2025, stablecoins remain the most promising opportunity in crypto. Their massive scale has turned them into a strategic battleground — even among nations. According to data from Artemis, out of the $250 billion total stablecoin supply, $USDT and $USDC together still command a staggering 88% market share, while hundreds of new stablecoins have yet to make a meaningful dent in their dominance.
Among the remaining contenders in the decentralized stablecoin space, two prominent names— $DAI and $USDS — stand alongside the rising star $USDe, collectively representing over $8.5 billion in circulation. Both $DAI and $USDS originate from the same protocol: MakerDAO (now rebranded as Sky).
Despite increasing competition from both legacy and emerging players, MakerDAO has managed to maintain its dominance—largely thanks to a structural mechanism it pioneered early on: CDP (Collateralized Debt Position). In the previous bull market, stablecoins built on CDP architecture accounted for nearly 20% of the total market, a remarkable figure given the high concentration of stablecoin dominance at the time.
Today, this seemingly old-school mechanism continues to be adopted by multiple stablecoin protocols, spawning various derivatives and adaptations.
Why does it still work? What problem does it solve so elegantly that others still rely on it?
This article unpacks the foundational logic of CDP — both from a design perspective and through the lens of real user behavior.
What Is a CDP?
CDP stands for Collateralized Debt Position, a mechanism that allows users to mint stablecoins by locking up their existing assets as collateral. Fundamentally, it’s a structure that enables users to issue stablecoin debt against their crypto assets. The process involves several key steps:
Overcollateralization: Users deposit crypto assets—such as $ETH, $WBTC, or $USDC — into a CDP protocol. Taking MakerDAO as an example, the collateral ratio must stay above 150% to keep the position safe and avoid liquidation. This overcollateralization serves as a buffer against market volatility, ensuring the system remains solvent even when collateral prices drop sharply.
Debt Issuance: Once the collateral is locked, the protocol allows users to borrow—typically in the form of decentralized stablecoins (e.g., $DAI from MakerDAO, now branded as $USDS). This process effectively mints new stablecoins and brings them into circulation.
Repayment and Collateral Redemption: To unlock the collateral, the user must repay the borrowed stablecoins along with a stability fee. This fee represents the cost of maintaining the peg and is displayed as an annualized percentage yield (APY) on the debt position. Once repaid, the borrowed stablecoins are burned, and the collateral is unlocked and claimable.
Why Use a CDP Protocol?
The core appeal of CDPs lies in their ability to transform the price appreciation potential of an asset into immediately usable on-chain liquidity—without requiring the user to sell or unwind their position. For DeFi users, this unlocks greater strategic flexibility while maintaining long exposure. The most common use cases include:
Leveraged Positions: This is one of the primary use cases for CDPs. Users deposit a volatile asset as collateral and borrow stablecoins against it. They then use those stablecoins to purchase more of the same volatile asset, effectively creating a leveraged long position. For example, you could lock $ETH into a CDP, borrow $DAI, and use it to buy more $ETH—amplifying your exposure to $ETH price movements.
Yield Strategies: Stablecoin issuance is the core component of CDP systems. At the same time, the most competitive stablecoin protocols today are locked in a race of relentless innovation—and in this environment, any stablecoin without embedded yield will struggle to gain adoption or build serious traction.
At the same time, CDPs are capital-inefficient—users must overcollateralize heavily and not all users are willing to take on directional risk merely to improve capital efficiency. That’s why protocols often try to “make their stablecoins work harder” by integrating them into broader DeFi yield ecosystems.
Take MakerDAO, the original CDP pioneer, for example. As part of its recent brand transition to Sky (@SkyEcosystem), it introduced a redesigned stablecoin: $USDS, which replaces $DAI as the core debt asset. Around $USDS, a number of yield-focused strategies are emerging, such as:
· Simple Saving
Although CDP protocols form the foundation of stablecoin issuance, participating in their yield opportunities doesn’t necessarily require opening a collateralized debt position. To expand liquidity and accessibility, many protocols offer alternative, more user-friendly ways to gain exposure.
In the case of MakerDAO, users can earn yield directly through the “Savings” module on sub-DAO lending protocol, Spark (@sparkdotfi). This yield is sourced from stability fees generated by CDP borrowing, returns from U.S. Treasury bills, and interest payments within Spark itself. According to official documentation, the current APY stands at 4.5%, and it remains fixed regardless of utilization on the lending side.
· Token Farming
Incentivized farming has long been a staple of stablecoin bootstrapping. In most cases, the process follows a familiar pattern: acquire the stablecoin → stake it → earn governance or reward tokens.
Naturally, the performance of farming is highly dependent on the price performance of the farm token itself. Volatility tends to be significant. For example, in Spark’s recent farming program, the APY fluctuated dramatically from 7% → 17% → 12% within just a week. Temporary spikes in yield don’t necessarily reflect sustainable returns. Always confirm whether positions can be exited freely, and scrutinize the fine print before committing capital.
Improper Usage Risks:Many CDP-based stablecoins are fully decentralized. Compared to centrally issued stablecoins like $USDT and $USDC, $DAI has always held a distinct position in the crypto landscape. However, this regulatory resistance also makes it particularly attractive to malicious actors.
As a result, $DAI often appears following major exploits or protocol hacks—serving as the stablecoin of choice for attackers looking to quickly move or launder stolen funds.
The Difference between CDP and Lending Protocol?
Many users tend to confuse CDPs with lending protocols like Aave or Compound when they first encounter them. After all, both allow you to collateralize assets in exchange for liquidity, and both can generate returns through interest rate.
However, a CDP isn’t about “borrowing” — it’s about “minting debt against yourself.” In contrast, lending protocols let you borrow funds provided by others. This fundamental difference shapes the economic behavior behind each model.
For loan sources, when you borrow from Aave or Compound, you’re drawing from a liquidity pool funded by other users — the assets come from other lenders. The protocol charges interest from these pools and redistributes it to the lenders. In contrast, the stablecoins borrowed through a CDP protocol aren’t pre-deposited by others. Instead, they are freshly minted by the smart contract when you collateralize assets like $ETH. In other words, you’re creating new debt, not consuming someone else’s deposits.
For interest rate mechanisms, lending protocols rely on supply-demand dynamics and interest rate curves, which can lead to sharp short-term fluctuations. CDPs, however, have interest rates determined by protocol governance, making them relatively stable over time. This means your cost of capital is more predictable when using a CDP.
For risk bearing, if a borrower on Aave fails to repay, their collateral is seized to offset the loss — but any shortfall is ultimately absorbed by the protocol and its suppliers. In a CDP system, however, the risk is fully borne by the individual who minted the stablecoins. If the collateral ratio falls below the liquidation threshold, the smart contract will automatically liquidate the position.
Even CDPs Can Collapse Under Extreme Market Conditions
As one of the foundational structures of DeFi lending systems, CDPs appear robust on the surface — but in complex market environments, they harbor significant hidden risks. The most common threat users face is liquidation risk triggered by a sudden drop in collateral ratio, leaving them no time to top up. Other dangers include oracle delays leading to “false liquidations,” yield mismatches causing failed arbitrage strategies, or network congestion rendering all actions ineffective. In extreme scenarios, these risks often erupt simultaneously.
The most iconic disaster occurred on Black Thursday in 2020, when MakerDAO experienced a systemic liquidation failure.
That day, $ETH’s price plunged 43%, triggering widespread panic. A flood of transactions caused gas fees to skyrocket and the network to become severely congested. Worse still, MakerDAO’s oracle updates lagged behind. When the new price finally fed through, a large number of vaults instantly fell below their liquidation thresholds. Liquidation bots — known as Keepers — were supposed to step in, but they became paralyzed due to soaring gas costs. Their scripts lacked the flexibility to adapt to such extreme conditions.
This created a critical vulnerability in the system. Malicious actors exploited the situation, seizing $8.32 million worth of $ETH for zero cost, effectively looting MakerDAO’s vaults. The protocol was left with $5.67 million in bad debt.
This incident not only exposed the fragility of CDP systems under extreme stress but also served as a wake-up call for the entire industry. It highlighted the importance of robust risk management, resilient oracle infrastructure, and fault-tolerant liquidation mechanisms — providing hard-earned lessons that continue to shape the evolution of DeFi today.
End
CDPs were one of the earliest lending primitives in DeFi and still serve as the foundational blueprint for many newer protocols. While they may no longer be the brightest star in the stablecoin space, for DeFi newcomers, they remain a valuable sandbox for understanding risk, efficiency, and trust.
Disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. DeFi protocols carry significant market and technical risks. Token prices and yields are highly volatile, and participating in DeFi may result in the loss of all invested capital. Always do your own research, understand the legal requirements in your jurisdiction, and evaluate risks carefully before getting involved.
Track your Maker’s price history to monitor your holdings’ performance over time. You can easily view the open and close values, highs, lows, and trading volume using the table below.
Currently, one Maker is worth $2,127.40. For answers and insight into Maker's price action, you're in the right place. Explore the latest Maker charts and trade responsibly with OKX.
What is cryptocurrency?
Cryptocurrencies, such as Maker, are digital assets that operate on a public ledger called blockchains. Learn more about coins and tokens offered on OKX and their different attributes, which includes live prices and real-time charts.
When was cryptocurrency invented?
Thanks to the 2008 financial crisis, interest in decentralized finance boomed. Bitcoin offered a novel solution by being a secure digital asset on a decentralized network. Since then, many other tokens such as Maker have been created as well.
In a push towards decentralization, governance tokens have emerged as a cornerstone of many crypto projects, allowing token holders to stake and vote on protocol modifications. MKR is the governance token for MakerDAO, which plays a pivotal role in ensuring the efficiency, transparency, and stability of DAI, a decentralized, collateral-backed stablecoin.
What is MakerDAO
MakerDAO is a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) that administers the DAI stablecoin through the Maker Protocol. This protocol enables the minting and management of DAI stablecoins while maintaining their peg to the US dollar using over-collateralization and other mechanisms. The primary responsibility of MKR holders is to vote on changes to the Maker Protocol, which directly impacts DAI. MKR's governance role ensures that the protocol adjusts and evolves in response to the market's demands and potential risks.
The Maker team
Maker was created in 2015 by Rune Christensen, a Denmark-based entrepreneur. He graduated from the Copenhagen University with a degree in biochemistry. He also studied international business at the local Copenhagen Business School. Before founding MakerDAO, he co-founded Try China, an international recruiting company.
How does MakerDAO work
MKR holders are at the heart of the MakerDAO system, actively participating in Executive Voting. Successful votes translate into changes within the protocol. For instance, these token holders set the DAI savings rate, directly impacting the incentives for those who stake DAI. Contributors are rewarded for their active involvement.
MKR tokenomics
MKR tokens, capped at 977,631 in supply, are central to the MakerDAO ecosystem. They empower holders with governance rights, allowing them to shape the system's direction. Beyond governance, MKR is crucial in maintaining DAI's stability, ensuring its value remains pegged and resilient to market fluctuations. Notably, in situations of undercollateralization, MKR is auctioned to cover the deficit.
Furthermore, MKR tokens are used to settle stability fees, which are essentially interest charges on DAI loans. These MKR tokens are subsequently burnt, gradually reducing their overall supply and adding an element of scarcity.
MKR distribution
The distribution breakdown for MKR is as follows:
69.5 percent: Founders and the project
15 percent: Team
4 percent: Seed round 1
6 percent: Seed round 2
5.5 percent: Seed round 3
Disclaimer
The social content on this page ("Content"), including but not limited to tweets and statistics provided by LunarCrush, is sourced from third parties and provided "as is" for informational purposes only. OKX does not guarantee the quality or accuracy of the Content, and the Content does not represent the views of OKX. It is not intended to provide (i) investment advice or recommendation; (ii) an offer or solicitation to buy, sell or hold digital assets; or (iii) financial, accounting, legal or tax advice. Digital assets, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk, can fluctuate greatly. The price and performance of the digital assets are not guaranteed and may change without notice. OKX does not provide investment or asset recommendations. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition. Please consult your legal/tax/investment professional for questions about your specific circumstances. For further details, please refer to our Terms of Use and Risk Warning. By using the third-party website ("TPW"), you accept that any use of the TPW will be subject to and governed by the terms of the TPW. Unless expressly stated in writing, OKX and its affiliates (“OKX”) are not in any way associated with the owner or operator of the TPW. You agree that OKX is not responsible or liable for any loss, damage and any other consequences arising from your use of the TPW. Please be aware that using a TPW may result in a loss or diminution of your assets. Product may not be available in all jurisdictions.