ETHEUR
Ethereum / Euro
crypto Composite

> Still have seen zero compelling responses to David Hoffman’s critiques of ETH’s nonexistent value accrual mechanism.
Fees are currently tiny because the network's capacity has increased faster than demand. This is just temporary, and to be honest I struggle to believe that Hoffman doesn't understand that.
The transaction fee is primarily a tool to reduce congestion, when there isn't enough 'space' for all the transactions being submitted then the base fee automatically increases to disincentivize low value transactions, reducing the network load. If there is plenty of 'space' available then the base fee drops to a minimal amount so that the highest number of users can afford to use the chain.
> Get angrier. Demand protocol level changes that optimize for ETH value.
Getting angry about the current burn rate is like getting angry at your government for building more infrastructure to futureproof the transport links or water supply or whatever.
> This whole thing goes to shit if number doesn’t go up.
Demand for blockspace has never stopped increasing and we know that as more and more of tradfi builds on Ethereum this trend will continue. Larry Fink was talking at Davos this year about bringing the entire financial system onto 'one common blockchain' and has since then Blackrock have announced two more RWA tokenization projects, built on Ethereum L1.
At some point the demand for gas will again exceed the capacity and the network will again burn lots of ETH through increased base fees. The asset will again become deflationary, and the concern trolls will switch again to complaining that fees are too high.

As someone new to ETH...when is this going to happen? lol

I'm thinking about trying [fortisx.fi](http://fortisx.fi) but why is the APY% so high? Like for SOL it's \~22.05%, BTC is \~17.5%, and ETH is \~20.28%. What's the catch, other than Defi hacks and such? Seems like a no-brainer otherwise.

> Still have seen zero compelling responses to David Hoffman’s critiques of ETH’s nonexistent value accrual mechanism.
Fees are currently tiny because the network's capacity has increased faster than demand. This is just temporary, and to be honest I struggle to believe that Hoffman doesn't understand that.
The transaction fee is primarily a tool to reduce congestion, when there isn't enough 'space' for all the transactions being submitted then the base fee automatically increases to disincentivize low value transactions, reducing the network load. If there is plenty of 'space' available then the base fee drops to a minimal amount so that the highest number of users can afford to use the chain.
> Get angrier. Demand protocol level changes that optimize for ETH value.
Getting angry about the current burn rate is like getting angry at your government for building more infrastructure to futureproof the transport links or water supply or whatever.
> This whole thing goes to shit if number doesn’t go up.
Demand for blockspace has never stopped increasing and we know that as more and more of tradfi builds on Ethereum this trend will continue. Larry Fink was talking at Davos this year about bringing the entire financial system onto 'one common blockchain' and has since then Blackrock have announced two more RWA tokenization projects, built on Ethereum L1.
At some point the demand for gas will again exceed the capacity and the network will again burn lots of ETH through increased base fees. The asset will again become deflationary, and the concern trolls will switch again to complaining that fees are too high.

As someone new to ETH...when is this going to happen? lol

I’m building a **long-term DeFi portfolio focused on ETH accumulation and stablecoin yield**, mainly on **Base** to keep fees low.
The strategy combines a defensive stablecoin base with ETH exposure and a few controlled yield-enhancing components.
**Strategy**
**Allocation**
**Purpose**
**wstETH core holding** 15% Conservative ETH accumulation and staking yield
**Fluid wstETH/ETH light loop** 15% Extra ETH carry with correlated collateral and debt
**WETH/rETH pool** 10% Low-maintenance ETH-based LP with lower impermanent loss
**Uniswap V3 ETH/USDC LP** 25% Main yield booster through trading fees
**Aave Umbrella USDC** 20% Higher stablecoin yield, accepting protocol slashing risk
**Yearn / Morpho / stable vault** 15% Automated stablecoin yield and diversification
**Uniswap V3 setup** The Uniswap ETH/USDC position is split into two ranges on the same **ETH/USDC 0.3% fee pool**:
**Position**
**Allocation**
**Range**
**Narrow range** 10% of the portfolio (Around ±10–15% from current ETH price)
**Wide** **range** 15% of the portfolio (Around ±35–45% from current ETH price)
The narrow range is designed to capture higher fees when ETH trades sideways, while the wide range keeps the position active during larger ETH moves and reduces the need for constant rebalancing.
**About WETH/rETH pool**
I’m adding a **WETH/rETH liquidity pool** as a more conservative ETH-denominated LP.
Compared to ETH/USDC, it should have:
lower impermanent loss;
higher ETH correlation;
lower maintenance;
lower expected yield;
better long-term fit.
It acts as a middle ground between simply holding ETH and taking more active LP risk.
**Expected profile**
The expected return is around **8–10% per year** in favorable conditions, with a more conservative long-term estimate closer to **7–8.5%**.
The estimated risk is around **4.7–4.9/10**.
The main risks are:
Uniswap V3 impermanent loss;
LP positions going out of range;
Fluid loop liquidation risk if leverage is too high;
Aave Umbrella slashing risk;
smart contract risk;
rETH / Rocket Pool risk;
bridge risk on Base.
**Management**
This is not a fully passive portfolio, but it should be manageable with a check every **12–15 days**.
The main things to monitor are:
Uniswap V3 ranges;
Fluid LTV / health factor;
APYs on stablecoin vaults;
whether the WETH/rETH pool is still liquid and paying reasonable yield;
overall ETH exposure.
**One-sentence summary**
The idea is to use **stablecoin yield as the defensive base**, **wstETH and rETH exposure for long-term ETH accumulation**, **a light ETH loop for extra carry**, and **Uniswap V3 ETH/USDC as the main yield enhancer**, while keeping leverage and active management under control.
Wdyt?

One thing I’ve noticed talking to LPs lately is that everyone agrees management matters, but nobody seems to agree on how much.
Some people are running volatility filters, automated rebalances and constantly adjusting ranges.
Others have ETH/USDC positions that haven’t been touched for months and are still happy with the results.
Feels like there is a point where extra optimisation starts creating its own problems.
More rebalances.
More fees.
More chances to get the decision wrong.
More time spent managing the position.
The strange thing is that both groups can show good results depending on the market.
Makes me wonder if a lot of LP performance comes down to avoiding unnecessary decisions rather than making more of.
How often are you actually changing your LP positions today, and what makes you decide it’s worth intervening?