Tron Industry Weekly Report: Inflation pressure continues, BTC may test new lows again, detailed analysis of the innovative on-chain risk engine Flying Tulip with over $200 million in financing

3월 31, 2026 15:22:51

Share to

I. Outlook

1. Macroeconomic Summary and Future Predictions

This week (March 23 - March 28), the macroeconomic focus is on three main points: "high inflation pressure + policy wait-and-see + geopolitical and trade disturbances": The Federal Reserve maintained interest rates and raised inflation expectations, clearly indicating that the space for short-term rate cuts is narrowing, and the market began to reprice the path of "maintaining high rates for a longer time"; at the same time, the situation in the Middle East and fluctuations in energy prices have increased inflation uncertainty, while the Trump administration's push for a new round of tariff policies has raised expectations, making the risk of "imported inflation + economic slowdown" stagflation heat up again. Overall, the global macro environment remains in a transitional phase of tight monetary policy and intertwined uncertain shocks, with increased volatility in risk assets but not yet entering a trend reversal point.

In the coming week, the market's core will revolve around the repricing of inflation paths and policy expectations: In the short term, the Federal Reserve is likely to continue its wait-and-see approach, maintaining high interest rates, and the market will be more sensitive to oil prices, the pace of tariff implementation, and changes in employment data; if inflation data continues to be strong, risk assets may come under pressure, while if there is marginal relief, it may trigger a phase rebound. The overall judgment is: the macro environment remains "tight + uncertain," asset prices will primarily fluctuate, and directional choices still need to wait for clearer inflation or policy signals.

2. Market Movements and Warnings in the Crypto Industry

This week (March 23 - March 28), the crypto market is largely dominated by macro policies and regulatory expectations, with significant increases in volatility: On one hand, the Trump administration's push for a new round of tariffs and economic policy expectations has caused crypto assets to continue to exhibit "risk asset attributes," with the market being highly sensitive to trade frictions; on the other hand, the increasing divergence in U.S. regulation of stablecoins (such as restricting interest earnings and promoting regulatory frameworks) has put significant pressure on related assets and concept stocks, while also reinforcing the narrative of "stablecoins = national financial competition tools." Overall, the market has entered a stage dominated by macro drivers and policy games, with a cautious risk appetite for funds.

Key warnings for next week: First, the further implementation of tariff policies or the announcement of detailed rules may continue to amplify market volatility (historically, similar policies have triggered significant fluctuations and liquidations); second, progress in stablecoin regulation and legislative games will directly affect the flow of funds and DeFi/payment narratives; third, policies and geopolitical events (such as the situation in the Middle East and abnormal capital in prediction markets) may trigger short-term emotional shocks.

3. Industry and Track Hotspots

This week, the primary market continues to focus on on-chain trading and liquidity infrastructure upgrades: Derive completed a $6.8 million financing (led by GSR, LayerZero, and Framework), focusing on a self-custody trading architecture based on exclusive Rollup; Euclid received $3.5 million in support (with participation from KuCoin, Gate, and OG Labs), aiming to build a decentralized liquidity consensus layer for the entire chain; while Flying Tulip entered the higher-level on-chain risk and liquidity management with a large financing of $255 million (led by Amber and DWF), creating a risk engine centered on "executable liquidity."

II. Market Hotspot Tracks and Potential Projects of the Week

1. Overview of Potential Projects

1.1. Analysis of Total Financing of $6.8 Million, Led by GSR, LayerZero, and Framework — Self-Custody Trading Infrastructure Driven by Exclusive Rollup: Derive

Introduction

Derive is a self-custody, high-performance cryptocurrency trading platform that supports options, perpetual contracts, and spot trading. The platform consists of three parts: Derive Chain, as the trading settlement layer, is built on the OP Stack and secured by the Ethereum mainnet as an Optimistic Rollup, governed by the Derive DAO; Derive Protocol is deployed on Derive Chain, providing a permissionless, user self-custody margin trading settlement protocol, also governed by the Derive DAO; Derive Exchange is responsible for efficient matching and settles transaction results to Derive Protocol, operated by Derive Trading Co.

Core Mechanism Overview

Derive Protocol

Derive Protocol is a collection of smart contracts that together build a decentralized, user self-custody derivatives protocol.

The protocol mainly consists of three core components:

Accounts: ERC-721 asset accounts held by users, used to store their assets (including cash, derivatives, and underlying assets). All accounts must subscribe to a manager.
Risk Managers: Responsible for managing the margin requirements of subscribed accounts. When an account falls below the specified margin level, the manager will be responsible for liquidating that account.
Assets: Contracts used to define the attributes and rules of various assets and derivatives (such as options and perpetual contracts).

In addition, the protocol also has a Security Module for storing reserve funds. In the event of trader bankruptcy leading to bad debts, this module will be used to repay uncovered debts. As a return for providing a safety net for the system, the protocol charges fees to traders through the manager and uses these fees to continuously expand the scale of the security module.

All margin calculations are executed on-chain in a trustless manner, with relevant calculation parameters set by the governance mechanism.

1) Positioning and Responsibilities: Derive's "Settlement Layer"

The core role of Derive Chain is to execute and settle transactions and clearing results generated by Derive Exchange/Protocol in a low-cost, high-throughput manner on L2, while anchoring security to the Ethereum mainnet (the trust root of Optimistic Rollup is on L1). Derive officially defines it as a settlement layer based on OP Stack, secured by the Ethereum mainnet, and governed by the Derive DAO.

2) Key Links of OP Stack Rollup: Sequencer → Batcher/DA → Derivation

Derive Chain inherits the typical pipeline of OP Stack:

Sequencer: Responsible for receiving user transactions, ordering them, and quickly providing L2 block confirmations (the experience of "quick confirmation" mostly comes from here).
Batcher + Data Availability: Packages L2 transaction data and submits it to Ethereum L1 (as calldata or blobs), ensuring that anyone can reconstruct L2 from L1 data. Ethereum's description of Optimistic Rollup is that L2 execution is completed off-chain/on-chain, but data is published to the mainnet for security and verifiability.
Derivation Pipeline: OP Stack nodes "derive" consistent L2 blocks and states from the data published on L1; this is the core responsibility of Rollup nodes in validator and sequencer modes, ensuring that L2 states are replayable, verifiable, and can cope with L1 reorganization.

Intuitively, Derive Chain's "authoritative truth" ultimately comes from the available data on L1 + determined derivation rules, rather than just the sequencer's "say-so."

3) Security Model: The "Challenge/Error Correction" Approach of Optimistic Rollup

As an Optimistic Rollup, Derive Chain optimistically accepts L2 execution results by default, but its security comes from:

L2 transaction data being available on L1;
The protocol design and proof/challenge mechanisms of OP Stack (specific implementations vary with OP Stack/chain configurations), allowing erroneous states to be identified and corrected in principle;
Thus, the final security of Derive Chain is anchored on the Ethereum mainnet.

(On the product side, this means: quick confirmation ≠ final certainty; withdrawals/cross-domain messages usually need to wait for the corresponding finality window and protocol process.)

4) System Contracts and Cross-Domain Communication: Enabling L2 and L1 to "Talk to Each Other"

OP Stack chains typically contain a set of system contracts/bridge contracts within L2, used to handle messages, deposits, withdrawals, and fee aggregation between L1 and L2, with some being automatically updated during the derivation process (for example, system information related to L1 states).
For Derive Chain, this set of system contracts is the key infrastructure that enables it to "use Ethereum as a security anchor and L2 for high-performance settlement."

5) Fees and Economics: Transaction Fees, L1 Data Costs, and Fee Aggregation

Under the OP Stack model, user transaction fees on L2 typically consist of two parts:

L2 execution costs (computational/storage consumption on L2)
L1 data publishing costs (the cost of publishing transaction data to Ethereum, which rollup must pay)

Additionally, the OP Stack system generally has different fee vaults/aggregation contract designs to handle fee flows (such as base fees, sequencer fees, etc.).
For Derive Chain, this fee model directly determines whether high-frequency trading/clearing on-chain is "economically feasible."

6) Governance and Upgrades: The Control Aspect of Derive DAO

Derive officially states: Derive Chain is governed by Derive DAO.
In the OP Stack architecture, governance typically affects:

Chain parameters (gas, fee models, block times, etc.)
The upgrade pace of system contracts and bridges
Security-related configurations (such as the route of challenge/proof systems, the advancement of decentralized sequencers, etc.)

Derive DAO

1) Governance Objects and Boundaries of the DAO

The positioning of Derive DAO is to design, build, and govern Derive's derivatives ecosystem (chain, protocol, governance framework, and funds). Its structure consists of five parts: governance system, tokens, protocols, treasury, and service providers.

2) Source of Governance Power: DRV → stDRV (Governance Rights Obtained After Staking)

DRV is the base token for governance and incentives; staking DRV to obtain stDRV is required to participate in governance.
stDRV grants two types of powers:

Proposal right: Initiate proposals
Voting right: Participate in voting and support delegation, allowing part or all of the proposal/voting rights to be delegated to more professional members to retain the efficiency advantages of "committee-style" governance.

stDRV has governance security designs: non-transferable, a 28-day unlocking period, and supports "20% penalty for immediate unlocking."

3) Proposal System: LEAP (Standard Proposals Affecting Protocol/Treasury/Governance)

Derive unifies proposals that affect the protocol, treasury, or governance framework as LEAP (similar to EIP/BIP industry standard formats).
Each LEAP needs to include: summary, motivation, specifications, design rationale, test cases (for code), copyright waiver, and other standardized elements to ensure proposals are reviewable, executable, and accountable.

4) Governance Process: Forum LRFC → Snapshot (Optional/Binding in Some Scenarios) → On-Chain Voting → Automatic Execution

Derive's governance process is divided into:

LRFC (Forum Draft) discussion and consensus formation
Snapshot: Used for quick, low-cost public opinion testing; for some matters that do not require on-chain contract calls (such as adjustments to trading/liquidity reward formulas), it can serve as the final and binding vote.
On-chain voting: Votes cast by stDRV holders
Execution: Automatically executed through timelock for approved proposals

5) Execution and Security: Governance Contracts + Strategy Contracts + Dual Timelock + Cross-Chain Executor

Derive uses a set of on-chain governance contract systems to handle "proposal creation --- vote counting --- meeting standards --- queuing --- execution."
Key security and execution components include:

Governance Strategy: Calculates proposal/voting rights (including delegation)
Short / Long Timelock Executor: Differentiates execution delays and permission boundaries for different categories of proposals (short timelock can execute protocol changes and treasury proposals; long timelock handles stDRV and meta-governance proposals)
Cross-Chain Executor: Supports orchestrating proposal execution to other networks (the document mentions Optimism/Arbitrum executor mechanisms)
Guardian Cancellation Rights (Early Fuse): Before execution, the community multi-signature controlled guardian account can cancel proposals as an initial protective measure.

6) Treasury: The "Funding and Incentive Hub" of the DAO

Derive Treasury is defined as the financial backbone of the ecosystem, with core functions including:

Funding trading incentives, market-making/liquidity plans, and other ecosystem growth budgets
Using part of the protocol and rollup fees for DRV buybacks (described in the document as a periodic buyback mechanism)
Unused rewards flowing back to ensure long-term self-sustainability
stDRV supervising fund allocation through on-chain governance

7) Service Providers: The "Outsourced Execution Layer" of the DAO

Any individual/team can apply to become a service provider through LEAP, requesting budgets from the DAO and delivering work.
Proposals must specify: service content, funding needs, value type (direct/indirect), team background, milestones, and reporting mechanisms; the approval process is community discussion → Snapshot → on-chain voting → funding and delivery after approval.

8) "Chain-Level Governance Touchpoints": Derive Chain Contract Deployment Whitelist

Derive Chain has a Deployer Whitelist (integrated by sequencers), and only addresses approved by the DAO can deploy contracts; applications need to post in the forum and initiate Snapshot voting, and after approval, the infrastructure party will add the address to the whitelist.

Tron Comments

Derive's core advantage lies in its three-layer architecture of "exclusive Rollup (Derive Chain) + self-custody settlement protocol (Derive Protocol) + high-performance order book matching (Derive Exchange)," combining centralized exchange-level matching efficiency with DeFi's self-custody and verifiable settlement, while enhancing the system's resilience in extreme market conditions through on-chain margin calculations, risk manager liquidation mechanisms, and security module backing.

Its main disadvantage is the complexity of the architecture and high system coupling, with a stronger reliance on sequencers, order book operators, and risk parameter governance, and the derivatives market being highly sensitive to liquidity and market-making depth, which may still face experience and stability challenges during cold starts or periods of extreme market volatility.

1.2. Analysis of Total Financing of $3.5 Million, with Participation from Kucoin, Gate, and OG Labs — A Decentralized Liquidity Consensus Layer for the Entire Chain: Euclid

Introduction

Euclid is an open-source, decentralized liquidity consensus layer designed to allow any application to access a shared liquidity framework. By building a consensus-driven underlying network to connect different blockchains, Euclid promotes the formation of a collaborative ecosystem, enabling participants to achieve deeper liquidity, faster settlement speeds, and a more seamless trading experience.

Additionally, Euclid's modular architecture allows dApps to call large-scale liquidity from any integrated chain and easily interact with cross-chain tokens within the entire ecosystem.

Architecture Analysis

Integrated Chains Layer

Factory Contract

The Factory smart contract is the core component of Euclid on each integrated chain, used to manage user interactions with liquidity pools and execute swaps.
Its main responsibilities include: receiving user requests and forwarding them to the Router contract. The Factory simplifies user operations by providing a unified entry point, including:

Swap
Add liquidity
Remove liquidity

Each chain that connects to Euclid will have a Factory contract deployed by Euclid.

Single Entry Point

The Factory contract is the only communication point between the chain and VSL (Liquidity Consensus/Settlement Layer), which brings three key benefits:

1) More consistent and orderly request processing

All requests from the same chain are processed uniformly by the Factory, avoiding conflicts and inconsistencies caused by multiple entry points and ensuring operations are executed in the correct order.

2) Stronger security

All cross-layer messages must pass through the Factory, making it easier for the system to implement unified security checks to ensure request legitimacy.

3) Simpler developer experience

Protocols integrating Euclid only need to interact with one contract (Factory), significantly reducing integration complexity.

Workflow (Using Swap as an Example)

The execution path of a swap request is as follows:

The user sends a swap request to the Factory
The Factory forwards the message to the Router through a dedicated channel
The Router forwards the message to the VSL, where the swap calculation is completed
The VSL returns a confirmation (acknowledgement) to the Router
The Router returns the ack to the Factory through a dedicated channel
The Factory forwards the ack to the Escrow, which releases tokens to the user
Escrow Contract

The Escrow smart contract is an extremely simple structure used to hold a single type of token.
Each chain that connects to Euclid will deploy a corresponding Escrow to hold the token liquidity on that chain.

When a swap is successfully completed, the Factory contract on the respective chain will forward the message from the Router to the Escrow, requesting it to release the corresponding tokens to the user who initiated the swap.

Collaboration with Virtual Liquidity Pool (VSL)

The Escrow establishes a communication relationship with the Virtual Pool (VSL) through the Factory and Router, receiving messages and executing token transfers when conditions are met.

When a user swaps Token A for Token B, one of two situations will occur:

Transaction successful

The Escrow holding Token A successfully holds A
The Escrow holding B on another chain (or the same chain) releases Token B to the user

Transaction failed (high slippage or timeout)

The Escrow returns the user's deposited Token A back to the user

Cross-Chain Release Capability

Euclid allows users to specify at the time of transaction initiation:

On which chains to release funds
The specific amount to be released on each chain

Thus, the Escrow that ultimately releases tokens to the user can be located on any integrated chain, not necessarily the same as the chain where the user initiated the transaction.

Virtual Settlement Layer (VSL)

The VSL consists of two core parts, jointly responsible for cross-chain swap calculations and account consistency:

Virtual Liquidity Pools (VLP)

VLP is responsible for all swap calculation logic for a particular token trading pair
Including price calculation, exchange quantity, slippage judgment, etc.
VLP does not directly hold real assets but models the entire network's liquidity in a virtual layer

Virtual Balances

Virtual Balance is used to record all balance changes between users and VLP
Ensures that asset changes in each swap are correctly accounted for
Guarantees that assets are not lost, duplicated, or created out of thin air under any circumstances

Tron Comments

Euclid's core advantage lies in its abstraction of multi-chain liquidity into a shareable unified framework through the "liquidity consensus layer + virtual settlement layer (VSL)," achieving consistency, scalability, and a smoother developer integration experience for cross-chain swaps through Factory single entry + Router routing + VLP unified pricing + Virtual Balances global accounting + each chain's Escrow holding real assets, thereby enhancing settlement flexibility.

Its main disadvantage is the reliance on multiple system components and long cross-chain message links, which depend heavily on communication reliability and security assumptions, and the global ledger and virtual pool mechanism of VSL require sufficient multi-chain and deep liquidity access to realize scale advantages, potentially facing cold start, delays, and execution complexity challenges under extreme market conditions in the early stages.

2. Detailed Explanation of Key Projects of the Week

2.1. Detailed Analysis of Total Financing of $255 Million, Led by Amber & DWF, with Participation from Well-Known Institutions like Coinfund and Selini — On-Chain Risk Engine Centered on Executable Liquidity: Flying Tulip

Introduction

Flying Tulip is an on-chain financial system aimed at unifying and standardizing pricing, credit, and risk management around a complete set of products, covering spot trading (AMM and CLOB), lending, perpetual contracts, insurance, and settlement tracks for cross-product clearing. Its core settlement layer is ftUSD: a delta-neutral, yield-bearing stable asset, targeting a peg of $1 and reducing liquidation risk by balancing long and short exposures (e.g., supply/staking/lending cycles).

The design goal of Flying Tulip is clear: to reuse the same collateral system across multiple functional modules; to use real executable on-chain liquidity as the primary pricing source, rather than static risk tables or lagging oracles; and to transparently and programmatically return the cash flows generated by the system to the tokens, thereby forming a sustainable on-chain financial closed loop.

Core Elements Analysis

ftUSD (Flying Tulip)

Product Overview

ftUSD is the dollar-pegged token of Flying Tulip, designed with a "stability first" goal and optional yield:

Unstaked ftUSD: defaults to stable, non-interest-bearing, and can be used as a composable on-chain dollar within the ecosystem for trading, settlement, and collateral.
sftUSD: the receipt token obtained by users after staking ftUSD, used to accumulate staking pool yields (yields are voluntarily chosen by users).

The yields generated by unstaked ftUSD belong to the protocol, used to support operations and deepen liquidity; stakers receive allocated yields. Both ftUSD and sftUSD are fully on-chain, auditable, and transparent system designs, not relying on oracles or centralized components.

Why Choose ftUSD

Stable pricing unit: targeting a peg of $1, serving as the settlement currency for the entire Flying Tulip product system.
Optional yield: stake to earn sftUSD for yield; if not staked, it remains purely stable with instant liquidity.
Resilient design: adopts a delta-neutral architecture, balancing long and short exposures and conservative position sizes to reduce liquidation risk.
On-chain transparency: collateral, parameters, and fund flows can all be verified on-chain.
High composability: ftUSD can be used across various products in Flying Tulip (trading, settlement, collateral, liquidity provision, etc.).

How ftUSD Works (Core Mechanism)

ftUSD maintains its dollar peg through a set of balanced delta-neutral strategies:
The strategy combines conservative money market yields with staking yields while using hedged shorts to offset directional risks, keeping the overall net exposure close to 0, achieving net gains (after costs) while controlling risks.

Example Strategy Flow (Illustrative)

One possible strategy path is as follows:

Deposit the underlying collateral asset into a money market (e.g., USDC → Aave) to earn low-risk interest.
Borrow a hedging asset against that collateral (e.g., Sonic's S), forming a short leg (you owe S).
Stake the borrowed asset (e.g., S → stS) to earn staking yields, forming a long leg.
Conduct prudent cycles (e.g., depositing stS back into the money market) to improve safety margins and carry.

Longs (staking) and shorts (borrowing) will be paired proportionally to offset directional risks and reduce liquidation probabilities. The system constrains tail risks through risk controls (position limits, rebalancing ranges, venue restrictions, etc.).

Spot (Flying Tulip Spot)

Product Overview

Flying Tulip's Spot is the trading engine and price source for the entire ecosystem:
It is responsible for completing exchange transactions, carrying liquidity supply, and providing core signals for the system's pricing, funding rates, and risk management.

The design of Spot does not fix a single AMM curve "betting the market will behave," but allows AMM to adapt in real-time:

In stable markets, the goal is to provide a low spread experience close to professional market makers;
In times of increased market volatility, the curve will increase "curvature" to buffer impacts and protect LPs.

Spot also provides:

Adaptive AMM
CLOB (Centralized Limit Order Book): supports limit orders

Transactions can be fully executed in AMM, fully executed in CLOB, or a mixed routing of both to obtain the optimal price executable under the current order size.

Trading Experience: Optimal Routing of AMM + CLOB

When you initiate an exchange, the router will simultaneously check two sets of "ledgers":

If there are better-priced limit orders on CLOB, it will prioritize those orders for execution
The remaining portion will be executed according to the adaptive AMM curve

Before the final execution of the transaction, the router will simulate the transaction on-chain to check if it exceeds:

Slippage tolerance
Pool risk guardrails

If a single execution impact is too large, the order can be split and executed in slices by block to more gently traverse depth.
Transaction fees will also dynamically adjust with market conditions:

Lower during stable periods to encourage trading volume
Higher during turbulent periods to compensate LPs and suppress toxic trading

Lend (Flying Tulip Lend)

Product Overview

Lending in crypto is simple: you lend assets, others borrow, and interest connects supply and demand. Most protocols stop here.
Flying Tulip's FT Lend places the familiar lending model into an adaptive market that "understands" depth, volatility, and real executable prices—these contexts determine how much you can safely borrow, what the borrowing costs are, and how to unload positions when liquidation is needed.
The result is an experience similar to familiar lending but behaves more like accessing a "living market."

Dual-Layer Lending Structure: Permissionless + Permissioned

FT Lend exists in two forms:

1) Permissionless Layer

As long as there is a trading pair on Spot, a corresponding lending market will automatically be generated.
For example, if there is an ETH/USDC pool on Spot, a lending pair of ETH↔USDC will automatically appear without the need for governance whitelisting.
The system will calculate "scale-sensitive borrowing capacity" based on Spot's depth: the feasibility and risks of small and large borrowings will yield different lending spaces.

2) Permissioned Pool

Covers a selected group of assets that the protocol is willing to widely cross-collateralize and preset risk parameters.
This is the collateral backbone of the entire system: CLOB, Futures, settlement, and clearing logic all align with it.
Key capability: a single deposit can be used simultaneously for lending, order collateral, and futures margin, eliminating the need to move funds between different products, reducing "idle capital."

Futures (Flying Tulip Futures)

Product Overview

Perpetual contracts allow you to trade with leverage without an expiration date. Most platforms rely on external oracles for pricing: oracles update every few seconds, determining liquidation and safety states, which brings two typical problems:

Delay: Users may be liquidated at "expired prices" during volatile markets.
Expanded risk exposure: Errors in oracle integration, governance delays, or upstream failures can transmit to positions.

Flying Tulip Futures takes a completely different approach: it does not borrow prices from external sources but uses its own Spot trading as the price truth.
If ETH trades at $1800 on Spot, that is the settlement price for the perpetual contract. No need to wait for oracle ticks.
The direct result of this design is: quotes are more real-time, settlements are sub-second (<500ms), and liquidations are based on truly executable prices, significantly reducing oracle lag and manipulation risks.

Collateral and Leverage: Isolated or Cross-Collateralized

FT Futures supports two margin modes:

Isolated Margin: Provides collateral for a single market separately, isolating risks.
Cross-Collateralization: Achieved through permissioned Lend pools, allowing a single deposit to simultaneously support:
Perpetual positions
CLOB limit orders
Lending positions

More importantly: in cross-collateralization mode, your collateral assets can continue to accumulate money market yields while supporting trades, achieving higher capital efficiency.

Maximum leverage is not a fixed table but dynamically contracts or expands based on TWAR depth and volatility windows; snapshots will limit when opening or adjusting positions to avoid retrospective changes in rules during the holding period.

Funding Rates: Tied to Real Borrowing Costs, Not External Speculation

The role of funding rates is to pull perpetual prices back to spot.
FT Futures' funding rates are anchored to the real economic conditions within the system:

Actual borrowing costs in the Lend market
Long and short crowding levels reflected by Spot and Lend

When longs are essentially "borrowing dollars to go long," and borrowing costs are higher, the funding rate will reflect this reality; when shorts are crowded, the funding rate may reverse.
Users can see the sources of funding rate inputs, update cycles, and why they pay/receive funding rates.

Who Bears the Settlement Counterparty: Optional Settlement LPs

Perpetual contracts require counterparties for settlement. FT solves this with optional settlement pools:
LPs deposit ftUSD, voluntarily taking on settlement liquidity in exchange for fees per settlement (the document example is about 0.05%, subject to policy).
The system balances exposure distribution among LPs, who can adjust parameters or exit.

The significance of this design is:

No one is forced to bear unwanted risks
The launch of new markets relies more on "Spot liquidity + ftUSD settlement supply," rather than waiting for oracle integration committee scheduling

Insurance (Flying Tulip Insurance)

Product Overview

Traditional crypto insurance resembles a subscription model: one-time payment, fixed term, hoping nothing goes wrong. FT Insurance adopts a completely different design—it operates insurance as a market-driven lending pool.

Buyers do not "buy a policy for a period," but open an insurance position, paying premiums only as needed for protection.
Capital providers supply capital to the pool, continuously earning premium income.
The insurance scale can dynamically expand or contract within minutes.

The result is a protection system that "breathes with the market":
When returns are high, capital naturally flows in; when demand arises, coverage capacity expands, aligning user costs with their real risks.

Tron Comments

Flying Tulip's core advantage is that it does not piece together spot, lending, perpetuals, and insurance separately but uses Spot as the pricing hub for real executable liquidity, integrating Lend, Futures, Insurance, and the ftUSD settlement layer into the same "depth-sensitive" risk and cash flow system: LTV, leverage, funding rates, and liquidations are dynamically adjusted based on on-chain transactions and reserve windows, reducing systemic errors caused by oracle lag and static risk control tables, and forming a sustainable closed loop through a token-first income return mechanism.

Its main disadvantage is the highly complex architecture and strong module coupling, with a very high reliance on Spot liquidity and market depth. If early depth is insufficient or extreme market conditions are encountered, pricing, liquidation, and insurance adjudication may all come under pressure simultaneously, and while cross-product cross-collateralization improves capital efficiency, it may also amplify portfolio risks and governance parameter setting difficulties.

III. Industry Data Analysis

1. Overall Market Performance

1.1. Price Trends of Spot BTC vs ETH

BTC

ETH

IV. Macroeconomic Data Review and Key Data Release Points for Next Week

Macroeconomic Review This Week (March 23 - March 28)

PMI data release (Europe and the U.S./Global): Reflects the prosperity of manufacturing and service industries, serving as a core growth indicator for this week.

U.S. Initial Jobless Claims: Marginal changes in the job market remain a focus.

Michigan Consumer Confidence Index (Final Value): Confidence weakened under energy price shocks.

Global macro main lines:

Middle East situation + oil price fluctuations → Raise inflation expectations
Market focuses on Federal Reserve statements and policy paths

Key Data for Next Week (March 30 - April 3)

Key (High Impact):

🇺🇸 JOLTS Job Openings (3/31) → Labor demand
🇺🇸 ISM Manufacturing PMI (4/1) → Economic prosperity turning point
🇺🇸 Non-Farm Payroll Report (4/3) → The most core data

Secondary Key:

🇺🇸 Initial Jobless Claims (4/2) → High-frequency employment indicator
🇺🇸 Trade Balance (4/2) → External demand and dollar impact
🇺🇸 ISM Non-Manufacturing (4/3) → Strength of the service industry

V. Regulatory Policies

United States

Regulatory framework clearly shifts to "loose + legislative-led"

SEC/CFTC introduces a new classification system for crypto assets (Token Taxonomy):
Most crypto assets are classified as commodities, payment tools, etc., rather than securities
Significantly reduces the SEC's regulatory scope
Regulatory focus shifts from "enforcement crackdown" to "legislative norms," promoting:
Stablecoin framework (GENIUS Act)
Market structure bill (Clarity Act)

Impact:
The U.S. is entering a phase of "de-enforcement + clear legislative framework," which is favorable for institutional funds to enter, but disputes over investor protection are increasing.

Divergence in stablecoin regulation still exists

Discussions in Congress have emerged:
Restrictions on stablecoin yields (similar to bank deposit regulation)
Raising compliance thresholds

Impact:
Stablecoins have become the regulatory focus this week, with directions not yet fully unified.

High-level policies strengthen crypto strategic positioning

The White House establishes a higher-level technology advisory system (including crypto policy)
Promoting:
National-level crypto strategy
Policies such as Bitcoin reserves

Trend Summary:
The U.S. is incorporating crypto into the national strategic technology competition framework.

United Kingdom