Gearbox is a great example of why you shouldn’t confuse lack of attention with lack of progress, the market hasn’t exactly treated them kindly, but while everyone moved onto the next narrative they just kept grafting on the same core architecture. This RWA leverage solution they’ve just released is where that strategy is really going to pay off imo. I’ve spent a bunch of time looking into the different approaches being built here but what @GearboxProtocol has done is by far the most elegant design I’ve seen. It’s not just better looping ux, looping naturally assumes the underlying asset is liquid and everything settles atomically so you borrow, buy the asset, deposit it again and repeat, which is great for crypto native assets but doesn’t really work for RWAs where you have different redemption timelines, transfer restrictions, KYC requirements and in a lot of cases barely any secondary liquidity. So gearbox gets around all these issues by using the credit account to borrow the full amount upfront and subscribe directly with the issuer. Instead of needing 5 or 10 or however many separate loops and waiting through the settlement process each time, you can create the entire leveraged position in one go and redeem the entire thing in one go on the way out. What I really like about this is that leverage no longer needs to depend on secondary market liquidity to the same extent, because it was always pretty silly to expect an issuer to bootstrap $50m or $100m of dex liquidity before people can take levered positions on the asset. With this model the position can scale against available credit instead because the credit account is interacting directly with the issuer, which means the lending side can support assets that would have been impossible or just really inefficient to support through the normal loop model. Even the asset specific stuff like KYC, transfer restrictions, redemption and specialised liquidation logic can sit inside gearbox’s infra rather than the lending protocol having to figure all of that out. And because gearbox is separating the asset specific execution and risk machinery from the funding layer, I think the bottleneck for lending protocols changes quite a bit too. Because the problem is no longer whether an asset has enough secondary liquidity to be listed and what really starts to matter is whether somebody can actually originate good borrow demand against the liquidity sitting there. If an issuer can bring the asset, gearbox can handle the market specific plumbing and a lending protocol can provide the funding, which is just a more efficient way of creating leverage around assets that never really fit the normal money market model in the first place. These guys have done a great job of addressing the actual market specific pain points and creating a structure where everybody wins, RWA issuers get leveraged distribution without needing deep secondary markets first, stablecoins get a new structural source of borrow demand and lending protocols get access to a much wider set of credit opportunities. What I’m really excited to see now is how much leverage this can support in practice, because if you can get a decent amount of leverage on assets that were basically unleveragable before then you open up a pretty massive new market. Really excited to see how this plays out and wishing the chads at gearbox all the best with this launch.