Falcon Finance Tops $600M in USDf Supply as DeFi Demand Surges
Synthetic dollar protocol Falcon Finance has announced that the total supply of its USDf synthetic dollar has surpassed $600M. The latest milestone, achieved just five weeks after crossing $500M, highlights the protocol's rapid growth and the increasing demand for its yield-generating asset that is being widely integrated into DeFi protocols.
The total supply of the dollar-pegged USDf has been rising steadily for months and now stands at $648M, with a TVL of $685M, which represents the total value of crypto assets that have been deposited by its users. These assets are backed by a 115% overcollateralization rate that is fully verifiable through daily reserve attestations.
Demand for USDf has been fueled by strong uptake of the Falcon Miles points program, complemented by enhanced transparency measures, such as daily proof-of-reserve attestations and the establishment of quarterly ISAE 3000 assurance reviews by Harris & Trotter LLP.
The recent launch of the first onchain mint using tokenized U.S. Treasuries via Superstate's USTB has bridged real-world assets with DeFi liquidity, while a partnership with BitGo provides secure institutional custody and paves the way for fiat ramps and staking integrations.
In addition, Falcon has expanded its cross-chain presence to XRPL EVM via Axelar and BNB Chain, boosting capital efficiency across the multi-chain landscape. Opportunities to utilize USDf have grown with integrations across DeFi protocols, including a USDf spot market on WOO X and Pendle tokens like PT-sUSDf on Morpho's lending and borrowing platform, allowing users to supply sUSDf as collateral while earning yield.
After depositing stablecoins or crypto assets, including BTC and ETH, Falcon users can mint USDf, which serves as an overcollateralized stablecoin. Users who then elect to stake their USDf can mint a corresponding amount of sUSDf, the yield-generating version of Falcon's dual-token stablecoin.
The yield available on sUSDf is variable but currently stands at an APY of 10.8%. It's designed to remain competitive through diversified sources, including funding rate arbitrage, cross-exchange strategies, and now tokenized real-world assets. Unlike other synthetic dollar protocols that rely solely on positive funding rate arbitrage, the yield distributed to USDf stakers is derived from multiple sources. This ensures a consistent yield regardless of market conditions.
As part of its long-term user growth strategy, Falcon has expanded its Falcon Miles ecosystem-wide points program and is now rewarding activity across minting, staking, LPing, and referrals with up to 60x multipliers. The program includes retroactive drops and has extended to additional onchain integrations with the likes of Pendle, Euler, Morpho, Napier, and Spectra as the Falcon ecosystem evolves.
With more chain integrations, additional vaults, and further expansions to Falcon Miles underway, Falcon Finance is rapidly advancing its goal of making USDf a cornerstone of the DeFi landscape.
Contact
Managing Partner
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why 'Expensive' Ethereum Will Dominate Institutional DeFi
With over 100 layer-2 (L2) blockchains, you're excused for thinking Ethereum is too expensive and too slow. But ask any institution preparing to settle a $500 million interest rate swap where they'll build, and the answer is Ethereum. The reason reveals everything about how institutional DeFi is likely to develop. The metrics that matter for institutional adoption are entirely different to retail. While retail users flee Ethereum's transaction fees for cheaper chains, institutions will gladly pay that premium for security when moving hundreds of millions. The premium that people are willing to pay for a safe infrastructure is not an issue. Ethereum's 'weaknesses' are actually its institutional moat. A tale of two markets Examining the numbers, the difference in perspective between retail and institutional investors makes sense. If you are buying a memecoin for $50, you don't want to pay $10 in transaction fees. But when it comes to settling a $500 million interest rate swap, shelling out $10 to ensure a secure transaction is a small price for that peace of mind. One needs to look no further than TradFi to see this perspective is not new, and the security premium to transact on Ethereum is actually the product. There's a reason why institutions pay more to trade on the NYSE than the Pink Sheets (securities on OTC exchanges), and why they continue to transact through SWIFT, despite its costs. It's all about legitimacy and a proven track record of conducting transactions in a secure and compliant manner. The same will apply to blockchains. The idea of having hundreds of millions of dollars in funds stuck on an inoperable network is the definition of a nightmare for institutions. Many institutions value the battle-tested security of chains like Ethereum rather than ones that focus on speed. If you take one thing away from this op-ed, understand that traditional finance always pays for infrastructure reliability. Preparing for regulations What investors need most is a robust, market tested base-layer blockchain that is widely accepted among financial institutions as a neutral settlement layer. Ethereum gets serious institutional engagement because the network is properly integrated with existing infrastructure. It's what it was built for. One proof point is the number of major banks building on Ethereum, who get regulatory comfort with Ethereum's decentralization, as well as from the pool of developer talent that has been, and will continue to be, concentrated within the Ethereum ecosystem. This just might be a self-reinforcing cycle of institutional adoption. A feature, not a failure We need to stop seeing Ethereum's high fees as a failure – they're a feature that naturally segments the market. Some chains are intentionally optimized for low cost, fast, micro transactions. Institutions need, and will pay for, the digital equivalent of Fort Knox for large ones, where liquidity is available. Instead of looking at metrics like daily active users or translation counts, institutions are taking a more fundamental approach. They are watching where regulated entities are building their infrastructure, and are focused on the big game of institutional settlement. So the next time someone declares Ethereum dead, ask them where they would rather settle a $500 million transaction? The answer reveals why reports of Ethereum's demise are greatly exaggerated – and why institutions betting on 'boring' Ethereum infrastructure will capture the real value in DeFi's institutional in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Solana Eyes 66% Block Size Bump With New Developer Proposal as Network Demand Grows
Solana developers are considering increasing the network's block capacity by 66% as demand for block space on the most widely used network grows. A new proposal, SIMD-0286, floats the idea of increasing Solana's per-block compute limit from 60 million to 100 million compute units (CUs), according to a document posted by core contributors this week. The goal is to let Solana process more transactions and support heavier apps like DEXs, MEV systems, and restaking protocols without hitting compute ceilings. "Block limits' primary purpose is to ensure the vast majority of network participants are able to keep up with the network, by restricting the amount of work a leader is allowed to pack into a block," the proposal's motivation reads. "However, current mainnet traffic is largely not constrained by large block execution times. This proposal aims a substantial increase in block limits to 100 million CUs, in order to provide additional capacity to the network," it adds. Solana currently produces blocks every 400 milliseconds, with strict caps on how much compute can be packed into each one. Earlier this month, the network activated SIMD-0256, which increased the limit from 50 million to 60 million CUs. But developer demand has spiked in tandem, raising the need for even more block space. The new proposal would allow validators to opt into the 100 million CU ceiling via a software upgrade, which is expected to go live in a future epoch once it is adopted. SIMD-0286 only raises the Max Block Units limit, which governs total compute per block. Other limits, such as Max Writable Account Units, stay unchanged. This means the extra capacity will primarily benefit non-vote, parallelizable transactions such as DeFi swaps or NFT mints, without increasing pressure on individual accounts.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Multisig Failures Dominate as $3.1B Is Lost in Web3 Hacks in the First Half
Crypto investors lost around $3.1 billion to hacks in the first half of the year, with the first quarter alone topping all the losses of 2024, according to a report from security firm Hacken. The most intriguing finding was that multisignature wallets, which require several people to sign a transaction before it is executed were frequently compromised due to user interface tampering and signer mismanagement. The infamous first-quarter hack of centralized exchange Bybit resulted in a $1.46 billion breach when a compromised safe‑wallet interface tricked authorized signers. It was the third quarter in a row in which the single largest hack originated from multisig lapses. The first half also saw $300 million in rug pulls. Phishing and social engineering campaigns also contributed heavily, chalking up nearly $100 million. Smart contract vulnerabilities were negligible, accounting for less than 2% of total losses. Smart contract bugs, for example the $223M Cetus overflow, attributed to the majority of attacks in the second quarter of 2025. Access-control issues remain the dominant theme, responsible for over 80% of every stolen dollar this year. Hacken urged a shift from reactive auditing to real-time operational defenses. Its report recommends the use of of AI-powered monitoring systems that continuously validate multisig transactions, detect deviations in signer activity and trigger automated safeguards. It also recommends that both CeFi and DeFi projects treat signer protocols, multisig front-ends, and human workflows as security-critical infrastructure, bolstering them with automation, training and tighter governance.
