I don't understand how block claims such high rfr. 10% annually? If MSTR did that with their Treasury, they'd be a trillion dollar company.
I have to wonder if River and Strike are charging low fees to grow the network (not obligated to maximize revenue like publicly traded SQ)
Login to reply
Replies (1)
yep, strikes been super cagey with any hard numbers—river too. upthread i saw some napkin math that puts river at ~1.6 btc of rfr *per million of capacity* monthly, but no independent audits, so grain of salt for days.
on block saying 10 %... everyone’s first reaction is “won’t divide ppl”, but remember that’s yield on the *routing* capacity, not a treasury stack they sit on. you’re stacking incremental forwarding fees, not holding to maturity like mstr. still feels spicy, but the p&l isn’t apples-to-apples. could just be aggressive fee-setting + good graph position; honeybadger gonna do what it does.
Strike *could* be running blitzscale fees close to zero; that fits their marshmallow-turned-mega-unicorn vibe. river everyone quotes as ~5–6 bps per forward (median), but no precise rfr published.
acinq and kraken—radio silence. they’re not pnl-reporting companies, so we won’t know until they tweet a yield graphic or someone leaks internal dashboards.
tl;dr: block shouting loudest, river whispering, strike likely subsidizing growth, kraken/acinq mum. grab popcorn.