Transcript: Risk Harbor X Anchor Protocol Community Call

Risk Harbor
Risk Harbor

Finn 0:42
Hello and welcome to The Ether. Today is Thursday, February 3rd 2022. This episode of The Ether is brought to you by Orbital Command, a community validator on Terra dedicated to educating, expanding, and promoting the LUNAtic community. Visit OC’s What We Do page using the link in the show notes to take advantage of some of their other educational resources including weekly meetups to discuss Terra protocols, strategies, and concepts, the Terra Luna Intel Report on Telegram, and YouTube explainer videos on Terra concepts. You can also support their community efforts by considering them next time you’re delegating or redelegating your LUNA. Find out more at This episode of The Ether is also brought to you by Talis. Talis Protocol is the NFT platform for independent artists on Terra. Talis helps to provide artists with the tools and resources needed to transition from traditional arts into the NFT world. With their V1 launch coming soon, Talis will be the place to see real world art reflected on Terra. Be sure to join their Telegram and follow Talis on Twitter for updates on their roadmap, validator, and other Talis news. Find your next favorite artist on TerraSpaces appreciates the support of all our sponsors. Today on The Ether we have the Risk Harbor Ozone Anchor Community AMA, let’s take a listen.

Anchor Protocol 2:00
What’s up everybody. How’s everyone doing?

bitN8 2:02
All right, looks like we’re all here, doing great. How’s everyone?

Fyodor 2:07
Doing great.

bitN8 2:08
Hey, Max.

Max Resnick 2:10
Hi, how’s it going? Doing really well.

bitN8 2:12
Awesome. Awesome. Excited to kick this off, everybody, let’s just give it a minute for some more people to trickle in here. We’re kinda low on numbers right now. We’re typically over a few hundred. So I think I’ll just start off chatting about some random stuff. Why insurance is important is kind of highlighted just by the recent Wormhole vulnerability that we saw. Although it was minor, and it strengthened the protocol and thankfully it was early on, that just shows that, really, it’s hard to predict these things, and this is what we call black swans so to speak, where we just don’t have any idea how to project out that they’re going to happen. And that’s kind of where insurance products come in. Right?

Fyodor 3:04
That’s right, Nate. Certainly in the real world, we have car insurance, we have health insurance, we have life insurance, property insurance, so in crypto how do you protect yourself? This is just one of those ways that I think a lot of people can wrap their heads around, and really make sense for some of the folks that don’t just want to jump in and risk it all going to zero.

Max Resnick 3:24
I think, I mean the thing to realize is that there can’t be reward without risk. And so anytime you see these yields, there’s going to be inherently some risk associated with it. And also another thing to realize, no matter how good the devs are on a project… I mean, the Wormhole devs are really a great team, very smart guys, backed by some really smart investors. And they had a bug in the code, and that can happen in any code base. And so it’s important to recognize these risks are here in DeFi, they’re here in TradFi as well, and just, there’s always a risk anywhere you go.

bitN8 4:00
Exactly. Exactly. And yeah, like you said, risk is proportional to the reward in a lot of ways. So that’s certainly why, just for all of you that are aware, I was early in on the Anchor community, I was following the project well before it even launched, bugging the guys over at TFL about it. And as soon as it launched, I was the pioneer behind getting this insurance project going. And really, I met with Do and met with people over at TFL, and it really just started to morph into this bigger thing, right. And then it morphed into Ozone and then it morphed into having a billion dollars behind it. And now it’s this decentralized product that’s separate from Anchor itself, which I think is tremendously important. Max, maybe you can walk us through a little bit about how the partnerships arted and what that entailed and just kind of… And a lot of people are curious because you guys have been hard at work creating this amazing product, it takes a lot of scrutinizing work, right, a lot of attention to detail, a lot of prudence. So kind of maybe tell people where you guys came into the equation and kick it off?

Max Resnick 5:19
Yeah for sure. So I think… I mean, the story kind of starts with the Ozone product and the inception of this idea that we could build something that would protect users on Anchor Earn and would allow the protocol, Anchor itself, the Terra ecosystem to thrive by bringing in more risk-averse investors and institutional investors, right. And so the Terraform Labs team started building out this Ozone product, there was a lot of discussion about it. And along the way, at the same time, the Risk Harbor team was hard at work building our V1 on Mainnet. And I think the key difference between our solution and what was going on in the rest of the DeFi insurance space, with Nexus and with the old Ozone product was we had this idea that we could completely eliminate all human interaction from the claims process. So that the only thing you need to do when you file a claim is that we have a smart contract check it. And this is a much better system, I think much more decentralized system. And it really uses the power of this whole crypto ecosystem that we have. So these two things are happening at the same time, we have this need for some kind of insurance product on Anchor, and we have Risk Harbor team building on mainnet. And I think what Do and the rest of Terraform Labs realize it’s, this is a great product, and it would be a great insertion into the ozone project as well. And we realized we want to be a part of Anchor ecosystem, and really importantly, we have this… One of our main products was a big Anchor protection and UST protection pool that we had on mainnet ETH, that was doing a lot of volume and that was a very successful product. And I think we both recognize that would be a great partnership where we could come in and help each other.

bitN8 7:32
Yeah. It’s really exciting because it kind of overlaps with what Do and I were seeing was this idea of an automatic claim, right. Why do we just try to replicate the TradFi insurance industry, right. If we look at all the other… I shouldn’t say all because I’m not familiar with them all, but the major ones out there, they’ve got overhead costs. Maybe not analogous to TradFi, but they still have overhead costs that they actually have to have people who look at these things, evaluate them, make sure that people vote to pass that claim. All of this is cost that eventually is passed on to the user, right. So the more you can automate and leverage the power of decentralization, the more you can pass that savings on to the user. Isn’t that right, Max?

Max Resnick 8:16
Yeah, that’s exactly right. I think the original attempts at this, exactly, as you said, are trying to bring this traditional insurance paradigm onto the chain. And in order to do that, to achieve decentralization, you have to have many more people evaluating claims, and you had to have in a traditional finance system where some people are trusted, right. So you have these governance token holders voting on the validity of claims, which, first of all was really slow, and they had this conflict of interest, where oftentimes the governance token holders were also the underwriters on the insurance protocol. So if they voted that a claim was valid, they would have to pay out their own money. And so obviously, they didn’t like to do that very much. And you could go investigate yourself on some of these insurance protocols, whether they like to pay out claims very often, and they definitely didn’t. So we said, instead of multiplying the number of people who have to evaluate a claim for it to be successful, why don’t we just eliminate those people entirely, multiply it by zero? And that’s what we did.

bitN8 9:14
Yeah, it’s kind of like a reverse moral hazard in that sense, right. They’re disincentivized to actually do what they’re supposed to do, because they get rewarded higher with shield binding or anything like that. So it’s really interesting that you make that point. Another point that I think is really important is decentralization as a key cornerstone of UST, right, and we see that coming up a lot in the news right now. With the US regulatory framework, starting to… The tone’s starting to shift pretty heavily towards possibly regulating some of these big stablecoin issuers and these big stablecoin issuers cozying up, like Circle, to the US regulators, and so this kind of goes hand in hand, right. We’re gonna have decentralized money, shouldn’t we have a decentralized insurance protocol as well?

Max Resnick 10:08
Yeah, exactly right. Decentralized money needs decentralized protection, right?

bitN8 10:12
Absolutely. So kind of on that line, I know that you guys have been hard at work and building. So there’s kind of this vacuum that exists within the community that people insert their own ideas of what they think is happening. And this is where all these great thoughts come up. So this is kind of our thought to kind of clear some of that up, clear the water, get everyone on the same page, I myself… Because you guys are working on it, I’m a core protocol researcher at Anchor, I don’t even know 100% what’s going on. So it just shows… I think it’s important, right, because it shows that… As a separate party, it shows it’s decentralized, and that they’re not having any kind of conflict of interest with the actual protocol itself. But with that said, one of the big things that has come up is like, “Okay, where did the billion dollars go? And why are… So little insurance right now? There’s a lot of questions, but maybe let’s start with actually how that money was transferred, and how you actually had your own overhead funds and things like that, that the money wasn’t commingled in any way. I think that’d be great to dive into probably in a high level overview, and then maybe actually go down into the granular details a little bit for the community.

Max Resnick 10:16
Yeah, I think the first thing to note is that the development was funded entirely by the Risk Harbor team, and also by Terraform Labs. So none of it was from community funds. And then, the other thing to note is that the 10 million that’s in there, that’s like a test that is certainly not the final amount that’s going to be in there. So we use all our own resources at Risk Harbor to build this for the community, and it wasn’t the other way around. So that’s the big first point. And then the second point is that 10 million, that’s just a test to make sure that these contracts are sound. The last stage of testing in prod, and then we’re going to get more funds, hopefully, from the community. So the community, that billion dollars has not been allocated yet to us. There’s going to be a proposal and that will be when the billion dollars come in, so it hasn’t come yet. It’s not like it’s been squandered or anything. We haven’t even got anything yet.

bitN8 12:41
Yeah, I think that’s a really good point, right. How could you spend the money if you don’t have it? And that’s all on-chain data, right. It’s like, it has to go up for governance for it to be transferred. [chuckle]

Max Resnick 12:52
Yeah, yeah. So we’re working on a mechanism, as well, that’s gonna diversify some of those funds to be used for UST peg protection. So right now we’re covering Anchor smart contracts, and Anchor stability. But there’s also this aspect of UST protection that can also help the protocol and the Terra ecosystem. So we’re also working on mechanism for that, that’s gonna have a diverse basket of different assets, some other decentralized stablecoins, possibly some other centralized stablecoins, certainly other very high liquidity cryptocurrencies that are maybe not stable like Bitcoin and ETH. So all that stuff is gonna go into a mechanism for securing the UST peg.

bitN8 13:12
Is that a little alpha, you’re dropping there? Is that kind of what Do has been hinting at a little bit with fractional reserves for UST?

Max Resnick 13:56
Yeah, I wouldn’t say we’re dropping too much alpha for that. Because I think we’ve been talking about mechanisms like that on a lot of AMAs, and I think Do has talked about some of it, too. But yeah, so definitely stay tuned. A lot of exciting stuff.

bitN8 14:13
Yeah, that’s definitely really exciting. So maybe you could talk a little bit more about are you going to allocate more than 10 million, even before the billion comes in to do a second round of testing, or are you gonna just rely on this 10 mil, wrap your testing up and then put a proposal up?

Max Resnick 14:32
Sorry, can you repeat that question?

bitN8 14:34
Yeah. Are you guys gonna deploy any more before you actually deploy the actual billion amount that has to go up for proposal? So you got 10 million now, is that correct? For insurance and coverage? Are you gonna ramp up more before you request the actual billion? Or are you going to just keep testing with what you have now?

Max Resnick 14:55
Yeah, so I don’t want to go too much into that but I think we have an announcement that’s coming next week that’s going to go into all the details of this. We’re doing our due diligence, and we’re making those decisions right now. But there’s gonna be an announcement next week that’s gonna cover all of these details from our side.

bitN8 15:12
Okay, cool. I won’t push you any further on that, I understand. Maybe we can hop on to a few more questions. There seems to be a lot of questions asked. I think one of the main things to say is, peg insurance on Anchor is not included in this, that kind of piggybacks to what you were just saying. But maybe we could just, on a high level, quickly overview what it does cover because about a month ago we had the… A little more than a month ago, we had the oracle malfunction, which caused some liquidations to go through and there was some misunderstanding and that that might be covered. Maybe you could talk about what exactly is covered just for the community?

Max Resnick 15:58
Yeah, so it’s actually quite simple. When you deposit UST into Anchor, you get back this aUST token, okay. And that’s in some proportion, I think it’s 1.18 UST per aUST right now. And so… I do want to note that we were actually… I believe we were the first people to notice the exploit on the oracles. And so we actually notified people about that, I think. Anyway, yeah. So back to this point, you have your UST deposit, and you get aUST back, okay. And so always that aUST should be redeemable for some amount of UST, according to that ratio. And what we’re actually doing is we’re basically checking whether your aUST is redeemable for the amount of UST that it should be redeemable for. And if it’s not, we’re going to pay you out. And if it is, then we’re not gonna pay out. So it’s a very simple mechanism. But really we’re covering that aUST to UST ratio.

bitN8 17:08
Yeah, I think that’s really clear. I think where people might get a little confused is about how you peg it in different tranches, is that correct, right, like every so many months, you’re gonna peg it to… Because aUST is obviously continually accruing in value. So you have to, at some point, peg to a level at which you’re going to accrue what you’re going to benchmark that to. And you’d obviously be over insuring for some users, if they bought insurance, let’s say three months after you had already issued it at a lower aUST right. Just for everyone that doesn’t know, the balance of aUST is continually going up, right. So it’s 1.1-something right now. And it was just 1.0 to begin with. So it’s always going to go up in time, because it’s autocompounding in that way. So maybe just cover a little bit about how that works.

Max Resnick 18:02
Yeah, so I think right now, we have like a one to one coverage, which is maybe 85% of the value of aUST is supposed to be. But that’s just on a test pool, when we launched the main pool, it’s going to be starting at 95% of the value. And that’s going to decay only slightly over the three month period. And then we’re going to relaunch the vault as we are building out new features. So when we relaunch the vault, we’re going to update that again to be at the 95% level. So it’s gonna be in that 95% range, 95%-93% range all the time, because we’re just gonna be updating it when it falls too far. Yeah.

bitN8 18:48
So just so I’m clear, you’re not actually insuring interest. Let’s…

Anchor Protocol 18:53
We may have lost him there. He’s had some difficulties with Twitter Spaces in the past. I don’t know what it is with Twitter and Android devices. But that’s what ends up always end up kicking Nate off of the call here. So maybe we’ll wait for him to jump back.

PFC 19:10
It’s always Nate. No one else has these kind of issues, though. It’s Nate, it’s not the phone, it’s Nate.

Anchor Protocol 19:17
Yeah, it might just be Nate.

Max Resnick 19:19
Yeah, maybe the question was, I think whether we’re insuring interest or whether we’re insuring the principal. We’re really insuring the principal, but because we’re updating these parameters every time we relaunched the vault, which is gonna be, we think right now every three months. As you accrue interest in the first three months, we’re gonna update our parameters, and you’re gonna have protection on the interest you occured in the previous three months in the next three months. But really, we’re focused on protecting your principle and not the interest because, in principle, an attack or a hack could happen anytime within the vault deploy time, so we can’t really know how much interest you’re supposed to have accrued, right. So we’re just focused on protecting that principle.

bitN8 20:12
That makes complete sense. And I see, I’m doxxed as a Android user, again, or now just a Nate user. So maybe we can hop into a little bit about how you guys calculate your risk. I was curious myself, are you using…

PFC 20:28
So just filling in the dead space, what kind of things do you think do people think that you insure but actually you don’t? So what are some of the common misconceptions of stuff that you keep on getting asked?

Max Resnick 20:44
Yeah, I think people ask about liquidations a lot. Liquidations are just a natural way that the protocol maintains its balance sheet. So we’re not protecting against liquidations at all. And we’re not really protecting against your bLUNA being taken, although, indirectly, you could use our instrument to hedge that risk. What we’re really protecting is just the value of your UST deposited, and making sure you can get that out from the IOU aUST token that they give you. That’s the thing we’re protecting. And we’ll have some announcements about UST depeg as well, in the future, as we’re working on that.

Anchor Protocol 21:35
So just to clarify, I’m curious myself as an individual investor, so if there is to be a hack of Anchor Protocol, is the principal balance covered then? Or is it just basically covering if there’s any difference or movement in the aUST to UST ratio?

Max Resnick 21:56
Yeah, so it will be… If you are an investor, and you’ve put your UST in the protocol, and you have a bunch of aUST, and that aUST is no longer redeemable for the UST that it should be, then you’ll be paid out. So we’re not covering on the protocol side of risk, we’re covering on the individual side risk, which is really where a lot of the demand is.

Fyodor 22:18
So what kind of scenario, just out of curiosity, would lead to that type of situation?

Max Resnick 22:23
Yeah, this is a great question and I think it’s one where the answer is super interesting, and maybe it’s not talked about very much. But Anchor really is a lending protocol. And it acts in some ways like a bank, where people will deposit their bonded LUNA and their ETH, and then their Lido ETH. And they will use that to borrow UST and in some ways to leverage on the staking yields and on the exposure to the assets themselves. And what that means, simply put, is that at any given time there may be the case that Anchor Protocol has more aUST obligations outstanding than it has UST sitting in its reserves. And that’s similar to a bank, right. You go to the bank, you put in $100, and then they take $90 of it and lend it to somebody else. And they’re only holding $10 of it. So if you want to go back and get your $100, your… If everybody wanted to go back and get their money from the bank at the same time, you’d have a bank run. And we can see exactly that same type of thing happen in a protocol like Anchor if things go really wrong. So that’s one of the things that can happen and it can cause the Anchor Protocol not to have enough reserves to pay you out.

Max Resnick 23:44
I think we saw something kind of like this happen for one day with MIM where there was some loss of confidence and people were kind of withdrawing a bunch of their collateral from the protocol. So MIM is not a bank, but we could see something like that happen. And that would be kind of a loss of solvency for the protocol. And then the other thing that can happen, and they’re kind of intertwined, is that the value of the variable priced assets, so your LUNA, your ETH, those can fall very rapidly. And you can have what’s called a deflationary spiral, which means the price of LUNA falls, and then the liquidators come in, they pay UST to buy off the LUNA and take the loan off the balance sheet, but then they have to sell the LUNA to reduce their own directional exposure. That drives the price of LUNA down further and the whole process can repeat again and again. So that’s a deflationary spiral. And again, these are really worst case scenarios, we don’t expect these to happen, but these are the kind of things that could happen that would trigger a payout.

bitN8 25:07
Yeah. Black swan risk, right. And so that kind of leads me to the question of how are you pricing that in? Marginal solvency capital requirements and things like that? Typically, insurance agencies, three standard deviations once every 200 years, what are you guys looking at to price that risk?

Max Resnick 25:28
Right, so for us… Well, there’s two aspects. There’s pricing these things, which in a risk-free world is just the expected loss, okay. And then there’s managing your portfolio. And we’re lucky that the Terra Community Fund is going to be doing the underwriting here. And so that… It’s over collateralized, so we’re always gonna be able to pay out. And that’s for now. We have on our mainnet V2 implementation, we have a system in place for leveraging, for allowing the same amount of reserve capital to be used to underwrite multiple protocols. And I’m happy to get into that. But for now, for this V1, it’s all overcollateralized. So we’re just… There’s no risk that a black swan is gonna take us out and we’re not going to pay out. There’s zero risk, because we’re always gonna have the funds to pay out, it’s overcollateralized. We have a million in capital and a million in notional insurance. So that’s always going to be at least more capital to pay out than the notional insurance demand for that capital.

Anchor Protocol 26:12
Another question I had was around the the actual testing deployment that you guys had put out, and then really, the question is when can we expect more to be rolled out? So you can… There’s more capacity, basically, there’s more supply that people can use to protect their aUST?

Max Resnick 26:12
Yeah, so we’re gonna have an announcement that goes into all the specifics of this. And that’s going to be coming out next week. So I don’t want to get into it too much. But stay tuned. There’s a lot of exciting stuff in that announcement next week about the capacity. Yeah.

Anchor Protocol 26:12

Fyodor 27:21
On that question, Would you be able to just talk about some of the factors that influence capacity, just like a high level? Why you are constrained in some circumstances? And in the future, 5 years, 10 years, what is the max, or where are we headed on a high level?

Max Resnick 27:35
Yeah, yeah, it’s our… By the way, increasing capacity is our P0, right. And we see that the demand right now, we put on 10 million, and it was almost immediately eaten up. So we clearly see there is demand from the community. And so way too much demand for their current capital that we have. And we’re really looking forward to increasing it. So definitely stay tuned for that announcement. I’ll talk more generally about how these markets work. Basically, we have underwriters, who are taking the risk on, and we have protection purchasers who are selling the risk. And so in order for there to be capacity, there has to be somebody who’s willing to take on the risk, and somebody who’s willing to sell the risk. And the person who is selling the risk has to believe that they’re actually getting the coverage that they’re paying for. And so you can do some clever mechanisms that make it so that you don’t have to have one to one coverage there. And that’s what we’ve done on our V2, and actually I was on a call today with one of our newest team members at Risk Harbor, who’s a brilliant Rust engineer, and we’re building out those solutions in Rust so we can bring it to the Terra ecosystem and we can have this leverage, which is improving capital efficiency and making sure we can provide as much protection as possible. But the core limitation is always going to be if you sell X many units of insurance on an event, you have to at least have X many units of capital to pay up that insurance if it happens. So that’s always going to be a limitation. But if you have a bunch of events that are somewhat independent, you can use the same capital to sell protection on all of those events. And that can cut down your capital constraint a lot. And that’s what we’ve done with our Risk Harbor AMM in Risk Harbor V2.

bitN8 29:40
What you’re talking about there is solvency capital requirements, correct? You’re actually levering up, right. So you’re really only insuring a portion of it because the probability of a three standard deviation event like that is low enough that you have the capital to ensure that percent of that happening.

Max Resnick 29:57
Yeah, that’s exactly right. And I think the important thing to recognize though is, with these type of events, and we see it with some of the credit derivatives and in Trad markets, too, is that three sigma of deviation is actually coming from correlated protocol failure. So you’re you always have to maintain enough capital, or at least enough value on hand that you can pay out. If one of them happens. And really the thing that’s gonna maybe cause a default is if everything happens together in a black swan type of event.

bitN8 30:40
Yeah, and then we hope the gold in our backyard that we buried is still there. [chuckle]

Max Resnick 30:47
Yeah, then we buy treasury bills, right. Because it’s all over at that point.

bitN8 30:50
Exactly. [chuckle]

Anchor Protocol 30:53
So why don’t we… We have some people that have requested to speak here. Max, if you’re alright with us, we can start taking some questions from the community as well.

Max Resnick 31:01
Yeah, absolutely.

Anchor Protocol 31:02
Alright, so we got Advias Protocol, if you have a question.

Advias Protocol 31:07
Oh, no, I’m just looking. I just want to get attention as a speaker.

Anchor Protocol 31:11
All right. I guess we will bring up the next person here, William. William, can you hear us? If you have a question?

William Jennings 31:19
Yeah, I can hear you guys. So yeah, I just discovered Anchor a few days ago here. And I’m trying to understand. So Anchor is a lending protocol that essentially has a bunch of money from deposits, and then is lending out X amount of money, and then also has two other ways of making money. But the question is, is the protocol running at a at a deficit? And if so, how much of the interest rate would get dropped on the APY for that to sustain? Does that make sense?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 32:08
Can you just repeat the last part one more time?

William Jennings 32:11
Yeah. So if the protocol is running at a deficit, how much of the APY would have to be cut in order for it to sustain and scale?

Anchor Protocol 32:23
Yeah, so he’s asking… And this is a question for Anchor Protocol, and basically the profitability of Anchor Protocol at the current moment, and then moving forward, does the actual Earn rate need to be adjusted to make the protocol sustainable in his view?

William Jennings 32:41

bitN8 32:42
Yeah. So essentially, what happens is that if the yield reserve goes to zero, then the market dictates that rate based on the utilization ratio and everything in there. So currently, I haven’t looked at the numbers today, but I think we’re somewhere around 9% or 10% at what that would be. It really all depends, because it’d be more of a dynamic rate at that point.

Max Resnick 33:07
Yeah, and maybe I’ll give an outsider perspective, from somebody who’s not directly working on Anchor Protocol. I think, in general, when you have a yield like Anchor, which is much higher than the yields that are available in the rest of the market, you’re going to have this osmosis type effect where the capital is constantly flowing into Anchor, because the yields are higher. And so you can’t really have a big differential forever, because what’s going to happen is Anchor is gonna become a huge protocol, because capital is going to flow in chasing this yield. So I think, eventually, you have to look at what other similar protocols are doing. And the yield there… Either that yield is gonna have to come up, or Anchor yield is going to have to attenuate slightly because there’s this osmosis effect in the markets where they try to equilibrate these yields.

Fyodor 34:11
The way I think about it, in some respects, is that certainly at the moment, on the current trends, I think everyone understands where things are headed. But the great part about this protocol is that it’s community driven. And there are really, really good ideas, from all our members that are posting in the forum, that folks are continually working on that are driving new sources of borrow, that are thinking of creative ways to address these solutions. So just because we’re sitting in a space today doesn’t necessarily mean that’s where we’re gonna be tomorrow, or in a week, or a month, or six months from now.

bitN8 34:42
Yeah, and 20% as a crazy high APY, so I think it’s assumed that over time, eventually that will come down. And we’ve seen borrow rates that make the earned rate somewhat sustainable if the borrow picks up and if the market turns up to be higher, right, than the majority of protocols out there.

Anchor Protocol 35:08
Thanks for the question, William. Let’s take the next one up here, who is Andrew. Andrew, do you have a question? Seems like your mic might not be working, Andrew, we’ll bring up the next speaker here. Cryptographur? Cryptographur, do you have a question?

Cryptographur 35:22
Sure. Thanks. I tuned in a little late, so I don’t know if you answered it, but I’ve been keeping an eye on the Ozone pool for when the insurance is going to be reupped. I’m sure you’ve probably mentioned it, and I missed it. But I assume that you guys are planning on refilling it at some point soon. And I was just curious if there was a timeline on that.

Max Resnick 35:45
Yep. So we’re gonna have an announcement on this in the next week. So stay tuned for that. Very exciting announcement on this.

Cryptographur 35:51
Cool. Thank you. And yeah, I think it’s awesome. I love the Terra ecosystem and Anchor. That’s what got me into Terra initially, and then I think it’s gonna go a long way. I’m stoked about it.

Max Resnick 36:05
Yeah, awesome ecosystem, right. And I think just to reiterate, that’s our P0 is getting this capacity up. And there’s so much demand from retail users and also from… In some internal conversations we’ve had with some institutional investors as well, who are really, really ready to jump into the ecosystem as soon as their risk quotas are met by this Ozone insurance.

Anchor Protocol 36:28
Super exciting. Great question, Cryptographur. Next one is going to be RIP. RIP, do you have a question?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 36:37
Hey, yeah, thanks for bringing me up. I just want to confirm that… So if I as a user deposit, let’s say, $500 in Anchor, and then everything after that… So the interest that I earned would not be insured until I hit three months later. And then my interest will be insured for that past three months. And then I’d have to wait another three months. So for instance, $100 deposit, in three months, I earned $7 interest, $107 would be insured, and then I’d have to wait another three months, maybe it’s $116 would be insured? Is that how that works? And my second question, is there going to be tokens for Ozone?

Max Resnick 37:32
Yeah. So I think that’s exactly the right way to think about it basically, is you deposit your… Say, you deposit $100, so the math is easier. And then you purchased insurance right at the beginning of the three month vault, and then you earn like 4%, right, ’cause I think current rate is 19.5% or something, so you earn 4% in three months. And then at the end of the three months, we’ll up the covered… The payout ratio, so that the interest that you’ve earned is part of your principal now. So we’re compounding every three months, so… Yeah, so now you’ll have the equivalent of if you purchase protection on…

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 38:26
Okay, and is that going to also be for these… Something like Alice and Outlet? Are they going to have a similar kind of insurance thing where what their users deposit through Anchor? Is it similar in that respect? And what about institutions as well as? Is it all going to be the same for everybody? Or is it going to be different tiers or levels?

Max Resnick 38:51
Yeah, I mean, we don’t have any plans to do any different tiers. I think we’re still working on the details of peg protection, but it may be that that will become an optional add on. So you can get both the peg protection and the smart contract protection or just the smart contract protection, or maybe just the peg protection. But the details of that are not finalized yet, but we don’t have any plans to give some special coverage to a TradFi person, because they’re a TradFi person. We’re gonna treat everybody equally for sure.

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 39:26
Okay, is it possible that there’s so many depositors that you’re not able to cover potentially every one of them who wants insurance? If that makes sense. So like, Anchor is going cross-chain. All these institutions eventually going to be using it, all these neobanks eventually going to be using it. Is there a scenario where… I mean, I’m sure there is but what are your thoughts behind that?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 39:58
Sorry, can you just sort of repeat that?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 39:59
Yeah. So with potentially all these users and dApps, using Anchor and depositing, is there going to be an issue if we have all these cross-chain dApps, institutions coming in, neobanks coming in, to be able to cover the deposits? If that makes sense.

Max Resnick 40:28
Yeah, so, is there gonna be enough capacity, right?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 40:30
Yeah, yeah, exactly. For people that want the insurance.

Max Resnick 40:33
Right. So, it’s hard to say that for certain, it’s a forecasting exercise. But what I can say is, there’s a way that we can tune the price of insurance so that the insurance goes to the people who really need it. And in some ways, the people who really need it are the institutional investors who have risk quotas or the small retail investors who also have a risk quota. It’s not a formal risk quota like the institutional’s but it’s… They’re investing their college fund or something. So those two types of people on opposite ends of the spectrum, have these really hard to get around risk quotas. And those are the people who are really going to demand the insurance, and they’re going to be willing to pay slightly higher prices. And in the middle, the hedge funds, and the people who are less risk averse, they’re going to demand the protection less, and they’re not going to be willing to pay as much. And so the way that we target, if we have not enough capacity to fill everybody who wants this, the way that we can target it is by setting the price so that if the market clears, right, very economical sense of the market clearing.

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 41:19
Got it. Okay, and just last question, is there a token that’s going to be associated with Ozone?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 42:06
Oh, yes. So there’s gonna be a Risk Harbor token. And there’s going to be ways that you can earn that token through the Ozone protocol.

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 42:13
Great, thanks. Appreciate it.

Anchor Protocol 42:16
All right. Thanks for the question, RIP. We got Mr. B coming up here, connecting.

Mr. B 42:21
Hi, guys.

Anchor Protocol 42:21
Mr. B, do you have a question?

Mr. B 42:23
Yes. Can you hear me okay?

Anchor Protocol 42:24

Mr. B 42:24
Excellent. Well, first of all, thank you so much for hosting this. It’s been pretty informative. I missed out the beginning. So I look forward to listening to the recording. Is there gonna be a recording of this?

Anchor Protocol 42:37
Yeah, hopefully Terra.. I’m not sure if TerraSpaces is in here or not. Usually they record all the Terra Twitter Spaces, I’m not sure if they caught this or not. We recorded it though. So hopefully we’ll be able to get it out there either way.

Mr. B 42:50
Okay. Cool. Well, I have a couple of questions. I guess one of them is for Anchor Protocol. And it’s about the yield reserve, I’m not sure if you can answer that for me. But basically, I’ve been watching it for days and I can see it depleting down from around $70 million to about $23 million or so today. And I tuned in a bit late and I kind of heard you answer this question from someone else. But so this yield reserve is used to keep the interest rates stable at around 20%. That’s my understanding. And when there’s less borrowers that are contributing interest and more depositors that are receiving interest, that yield reserve is being used up to keep it as close as possible to 20%. So my question is now, first of all, this is my understanding, and please correct me if I’m wrong. But when, let’s say in two weeks, or three weeks, if the situation remains the same, and then that revealed reserves goes down all the way to zero, at that point, it’s just that the interest rate that we’re receiving as a depositor will be reduced. It’s not that something can… It’s gonna affect the peg in a certain way, right? That’s the significance of the yield reserve.

Anchor Protocol 44:13
Yeah, that’s correct. Yeah. And actually Do Kwon did a great thread on this for anyone that wants to go check that out, where he kind of broke everything down, because there’s… Obviously a lot of people had concerns over the yield reserve going down. But the yield reserve being used in times like this is actually the perfect time for it to be utilized. And it’s exactly what it’s meant to be doing. So it going down isn’t something to be too concerned about in that sense. If it does go down, what will end up happening… If it goes to zero, for instance, what will end up happening is it’ll go to a variable rate, and that rate will likely be higher than a lot of the other rates that you can get on other protocols as they stand today anyways, and so it’ll still be a very attractive Earn rate from that sense.

Mr. B 45:05
Okay, because that earn rate is made up of the borrowers on one hand, and then the staking mechanism plays a role as well?

Anchor Protocol 45:14
Yes, that’s correct. So the yield is coming from the liquid staking derivatives that people are putting up as collateral on the borrow side. So if you look at the collateral types that we have today, things like bLUNA, bETH, those yields are being redirected to the Earn side through Anchor Protocol. And that’s where part of that yield comes from. And then the rest of the yield is coming from the actual interest that borrowers are paying in the form of UST when they pay back the loan or get liquidated.

Mr. B 45:43
Okay. Okay, great. My last question on this side, before I have one more on Ozone, on Risk Harbor is… So my last question on Anchor Protocol is, assume the yield reserve goes down all the way to zero, the interest rate drops significantly, and we see a lot of withdrawals from the existing deposit base of around $5 billion, I believe it is at the moment, around $5.28. Let’s say that drops significantly and people start redeeming, could that have an effect on anything, in terms of default, or no?

Fyodor 45:43
We lost Nate again here, unfortunately. I think certainly in black swan events we’ve talked about, all bets are off the table. But I think as we saw just this past a week or two, if you look at the deposits, they did drop half a billion dollars, a billion dollars as a result of the MIM situation. And right, everything was actually unfazed. And funny enough, it actually made the protocol a bit healthier, because we have to pay out the depositors, right, if we lose depositors, all of a sudden, right, you can pay out a lower balance. So in that event, right, where there is a 10%, 20% drop, which we just experience, right, you can see not really any effect at all, even a little bit of a boost. Certainly I think, maybe a 90% drop will probably be a little bit different. But no, I think the protocol is relatively stable from that perspective, and relatively immune, unless you account one of those downward cycles that Max talked about earlier. Other than that, it should be able to hold up relatively well.

Mr. B 47:25
Okay, okay. Fair enough. No, it’s completely understood. I mean, I’m a banker. And I know that compared to the deposits versus the collateral, what Anchor Protocol has is significantly better situation than most banks out there, in terms of their ratios. So like you said, I think barring a black swan event, and a massive drawdown, I think it sounds like it should be okay. Just wanted to confirm that. Thank you for answering that. My other question on Risk Harbor is, so as an insurance… So I understand this is similar to… Because I’ve only checked out the ones that are on the Anchor Protocol website where you can protect protect your deposit. I don’t believe Risk Harbor was on there. I’ve only seen Unslashed, and Nexus Mutual, and InsurAce, and Bridge Mutual. But does it work the same way in the sense that I’m protecting my deposit against a peg or a smart contract failure?

Max Resnick 48:32
Yeah. So I think we’re going to be on the website soon. Just as we are scaling up the product, I think we’re going to be the biggest provider of insurance for Anchor. So of course, we’ll be on the website. The way it works is actually slightly different from the other governance based insurance. So we have a smart contract based claims assessment. We have written code that looks at whether there’s a default event or not, and pays out if there is and doesn’t pay out if there isn’t. Whereas a lot of other protocols, they have this massive overhead, Nexus in particular, where you have this governance process that decides whether to pay out or not. So that’s a big difference. And then the other difference right now we’re offering Anchor protection right now, smart contract protection, but we’re working and hoping to launch quite soon that UST peg protection as well. And so those are both going to be there and they’re going to protect principle in much the same way but with what we think is a better mechanism, which is use a smart contract to evaluate the claim considering this is a whole ecosystem of smart contracts. So we will rely on the security of the blockchain, not the security of human actors.

Mr. B 49:57
Okay, I see. And what I can ensure is basically my equivalent of aUST?

Max Resnick 50:03
Yeah, you can ensure that your aUST is going to be at parity with the UST, plus some copay. So you’ll be able to recover almost all of the principle that you deposit against peg protection.

Mr. B 50:22
Really? Because I thought the aUST you’re given is just a fraction, I think maybe 20% less than the UST that you deposit? Am I miss reading this?

Max Resnick 50:35
Yeah, so that’s on the test pool right now. So we only have $10 million in there. But when we are actually scaled to the full height, it’s gonna be around 95% of the principle, and that 5% difference there, it’s basically an economic mechanism that’s common in almost all types of insurance called a copay. This makes sure that people who are using this are actually people who want the insurance. So it’s just a little bit of a check, 5% check to make sure that you really do need this and you see it in health insurance, in car insurance, and all over the place. So yeah.

Mr. B 51:15
Okay. And the protocol is not active now? Because I am on the website and trying to just price it up and stuff. But for some reason it doesn’t… It’s connected to my wallet, but doesn’t show me my aUST balance. Is it not live at the moment? Or is there something wrong with my system?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 51:36
Yeah, the protocol is live to the best of my knowledge. So.

Mr. B 51:40
Okay, I’ll play around with it. It’s okay.

Max Resnick 51:42
I think the thing is, we’re at capacity right now. So all of the available protection has been purchased. So you may not be able to purchase protection on my right now, because there’s no capacity. But once again, to reiterate, stay tuned, everybody on the call, for the announcement next week about capacity.

Mr. B 52:01
Great. Thank you so much, guys. Yeah, I appreciate it.

Anchor Protocol 52:05
Let’s take Micha now. And then we’ll take a few more questions. I want to be mindful of time. We’re approaching an hour here. So we’ll take a few more questions, and then we’ll close her up.

Micha Ober 52:16
Okay. Thanks. Can you hear me?

Anchor Protocol 52:20

Micha Ober 52:20
Okay, great. So my first question would be, is there an option, or will there be an option to automatically renew the pool? So if a new pool is deployed, the old one is expired, and you want to deploy to automatically… To propose buy protection and provide protection, to automatically transfer the funds or the insurance to the next pool? Or is this always a manual step I have to do?

Anchor Protocol 52:49
Yeah, I think Max covered that earlier. So yeah, they’re going to be building that in the compound mechanism that you’re talking about. So you don’t have to withdraw, repurchase insurance at the same rate for the next three months. Is that correct, Max?

Max Resnick 53:04
Yeah, yeah, we have already in our pipeline, some mechanisms that are going to help you purchase this protection on a rolling basis, and make sure you’re reupped. So that’s…

Micha Ober 53:16
Okay. Sorry, I didn’t get it. So, yeah, thanks. So another question is, if I look at Risk Harbor core protocol now for aUST and click on the file claim tab, it says, “This pool is not in a hacked state, claims cannot be processed.” So what will switch the pool to hacked state? So before you said, it will try to redeem the aUST and if that fails, you get paid out, but so first the pool has to be set to a hacked state. So in which step does that happen?

Max Resnick 53:53
Yeah. So for the Anchor protection of ETH mainnet, there’s a bit of a complication where we have to go through the bridge to Terra to check this thing. So that’s why there’s a difference on ETH mainnet from what I described. But the one that’s native on Terra, we don’t have to go through the bridge, we can really just check it right in the contract, right. For the one that’s on mainnet, we have to go through the bridge and that’s why there’s that barrier there. But the one that’s on Terra, because it’s on Terra, you can just go straight to the blockchain or just check directly with the contract, ’cause it communicates with each other.

Micha Ober 54:35
Okay, but then how would it work for Core? If I try to… Of course you can easily check the UST peg by checking the oracle, Chainlink oracle, okay, but how about redeeming the UST tokens? How would that work now if I want to file a claim?

Max Resnick 54:54
Yeah, so the UST peg, I’ll talk about that first, we go and we check the Uniswap time weighted average price. And I think we also do a check on Chainlink as well. So we’re basically checking the oracle price there. And we can see that on mainnet. And then for the Anchor side, we send this… There’s this built in part of the Anchor Protocol, which goes through the bridge automatically. And that is what we are checking. So it takes a long time to go through.

Anchor Protocol 55:40
All right. So let’s take the next question here. Thanks for your questions, Micha. We’re gonna take one from Fusion here, and then maybe one more after that, depending on time, and then we’ll close her up. Right.

Fusion 55:53
Thanks for taking my question. I just have a quick one regarding the default ratio for the Terra Risk Harbor insurance. And just basically, you mentioned earlier that the insurance is protecting against the price variation between aUST and UST, so basically, the default triggers when aUST price goes below UST. And I guess the question is regarding whether that will be updated as the UST price goes along. So currently, I think aUST is like 1.18, but as the time goes by it will increase. And will the default ratio also increase?

RIP Thich Nhat Hanh 56:48
Sorry, could you repeat the last part again?

Fusion 56:50
Yeah. My question is whether the default ratio will increase as time goes by, to kind of track a probability of default. Does that make sense?

Max Resnick 57:07
Yeah, yeah. Okay. So the way that we’re gonna adjust the default ratio over time, we’re gonna adjust it to account for the additional yield that’s been earned on the aUST. But I don’t think we’re going to adjust too much the actual percentage there, because we don’t really… If it’s 95% that… We are expecting to get 95% or more, but we’re expecting it back, there’s not a lot of events that would cause it to be 96%, but not 95%. So there’s not a lot of reason to change it around in that interval. Because there’s just… In terms of the way Anchor Protocol works, it’s usually going to be either nothing or everything, not a lot of time that we’re gonna get 97%, or something.

Fusion 58:05
Yeah, because… So when the first tranche of the Terra native insurance launch, I think that default ratio was one aUST to one UST, and payout ratio was 1.14, if I’m not wrong. So I think that translated to a default ratio… Or the insurance get triggered when I think the aUST price drops about 80%. And the payout ratio would be about 95%, 96%. But my question is about the default ratio on whether that will be updated. Because I know you mentioned that the copayment will always kind of remain about 95%, 96%. But the default trigger is triggered by that 80%. But will that be updated?

Max Resnick 59:04
Yeah, so that’s gonna be updated as well. And it’s going to be updated every time when we launch the vault to account for new yields. And then the other thing is, that can wiggle a little bit, because just based on the way Anchor works, the probability that we see a default return value between 90 and 70 is very low. It’s either gonna be very low number, like 1% or 0%, or 100%. So in some ways, we could put that anywhere in the range, and the functionality would be almost identical just based on the way the protocol works. But yes, we’re going to update that to the same level as the payout ratio, and we’ll be updating it every time.

Fusion 59:49
Oh, right, right, right. Okay. So because you see as the risk being all or nothing, so it’s not a huge importance to kind of update that frequently?

Max Resnick 1:00:02
Yeah, I mean, I think we’re gonna update it because it’s not a big deal to update it when we’re already updating the payout ratio. But from a mechanics perspective, and from a theoretical perspective, there’s almost no difference between it being at 80%, and 95% for the how this payout work.

Fusion 1:00:21
Alright, that makes sense.

Anchor Protocol 1:00:23
All right, awesome. Thanks for the question, Fusion. We’re gonna close her up here. Thanks, Max for coming on and discussing Risk Harbor with us. We really appreciate you taking the time, man.

Max Resnick 1:00:34
Yeah, thanks so much for having me on. We’re super, super excited about this partnership and just bringing new levels of security to Anchor and bringing new entrants into the protocol and the Terra ecosystem as a whole. And thanks for all the great questions from everybody.

bitN8 1:00:51
Yeah, it was awesome. Thanks so much. This cleared up a lot even for me. I think it was really, really successful. So everyone have a great evening, or morning wherever you are in the world, and we’ll be back again next week.

Fyodor 1:01:02
Wen capacity, Max. Wen capacity. That’s the take away.

Max Resnick 1:01:06
Wen capacity. Everybody make sure you stay tuned to the announcement. It’s gonna be next week about capacity. Very exciting stuff.

Anchor Protocol 1:01:12
There you go. Follow them on Twitter, guys, and ping them for notifications as well so you can get the updates on when they drop the alpha there. We’ll see you guys later.

Finn 1:01:23
Thanks for checking out another episode of The Ether. That was the Risk Harbor Ozone Anchor Community AMA. Recorded on Thursday, February 3rd 2022. This episode of The Ether was brought to you by WeFund. WeFund is a community crowdfunding cross-chain incubator on Terra, and it’s the first launchpad that implements a milestone funding release system to protect investors. All money raised for projects is deposited in Anchor Protocol and it’s refundable, and all decisions are based on community voting power. WeFund is community focused and designed to be a user friendly experience for both project creators and investors. Be sure to follow them on Twitter and join the Telegram for more information. Links are in the show notes and check them out online at This episode of The Ether is also brought to you by Luart. Luart is the first gamified NFT platform built on the Terra network. Luart provides a seamless minting and trading experience all while earning you rewards just for being a user. Be sure to follow them on Twitter and join the community in the Discord server for the most up-to-date news and announcements regarding all the hot new NFT launches, platform upgrades and new projects hitting the secondary marketplace. Are you ready to #PutYourHelmetOn and join the movement? Find out more at TerraSpaces appreciates the support from all our sponsors. For, I’m Finn. Thanks for listening.