作者Pascal Hügli和Brick Towers在比特币市场不断成熟和各种收益产品不断涌现的背景下开始思考如何推动比特币的金融化进程，同时保持其本土特性。通过讨论比特币的本土共识、资产和收益，他们强调了不同类别的比特币收益产品的重要性，以及本土化设计在降低信任依赖和交易对手风险方面的作用。
通过以Brick Towers项目为例，Pascal Hügli展示了如何结合本土比特币共识、资产和收益，实现接近完美的比特币契合度。他强调了在数字货币金融化进程中平衡创新和风险管理的重要性。尽管面临着挑战和未知因素，比特币作为一种开放和去中心化的协议，其本土化设计和基础特性将继续引领金融技术的发展方向。
对于比特币的本质，存在多种观点，有人认为它是日常交易的货币，有人认为它是现代黄金用于储存价值，还有人认为它是一个保护和验证链外交易的去中心化全球平台。然而，越来越多的人开始将比特币视为一种数字基础货币。
比特币类似于实物黄金，作为持有资产、通货膨胀对冲工具，并提供类似美元的货币面值，正在重新塑造货币基础资产的概念。与传统法定货币相比，比特币的透明算法和固定的2100万单位供应确保了一种非自由裁量的货币政策，与传统货币管理的不确定性和可预测性形成鲜明对比。
对于比特币支持者来说，2100万的供应上限是神圣不可侵犯的，改变这一上限将从根本上改变比特币的本质。因此，比特币社区普遍对杠杆化比特币持怀疑态度，许多人认为这会破坏比特币的核心原则。
2022年，一些基于杠杆的比特币借贷公司如Celsius和BlockFi的倒闭进一步强化了对杠杆化比特币风险的担忧。这些事件暴露了集中化收益工具的问题，强调了对透明度、信任以及流动性、市场和对手方风险的关注。
在这种情况下，比特币收益产品不是可选项，越来越多的比特币支持者开始思考如何在比特币协议之上开发信贷和收益机制，以支持比特币的经济愿景。这突显了比特币收益产品在推动以比特币为中心的经济增长中的重要性，同时也带来了一些挑战和风险。We need a comprehensive framework to differentiate between different levels of Bitcoin implementation. When considering Bitcoin returns, it is important to understand that these options can be built along a triple trust spectrum. The main focus should be on:
1. Consensus
2. Assets
3. Returns
Evaluating Bitcoin-related assets and Bitcoin income products based on the degree of Bitcoin nativeness provides a valuable framework to assess their consistency with the spirit of Bitcoin. Assets and products that score higher on this spectrum usually minimize trust and reduce reliance on intermediaries, instead relying on transparent and flexible code.
This shift reduces counterparty risk as dependence shifts from off-chain intermediaries to code. The transparency of the code enhances flexibility compared to the need for trust in intermediaries.
This is a development direction worth exploring, as creating native income options for Bitcoin should be the gold standard and ultimate goal of the Bitcoin community.
Consensus Perspective
Based on the consensus consistency of the Bitcoin blockchain, Bitcoin income products can be divided into four categories.
No Consensus: This category refers to infrastructure that is still centralized off-chain platforms. Examples include centralized platforms like Celsius or BlockFi, which have complete control over users’ assets, exposing users to counterparty risk and reliance on intermediaries. Although these platforms use Bitcoin, their income strategies are primarily executed off-chain through traditional financial mechanisms. While these platforms are a step towards Bitcoin adoption, they are still highly centralized, similar to traditional financial institutions, but often lacking regulation.
Independent Consensus: In this category, the infrastructure is decentralized and represented by public blockchains such as Ethereum, BNB Chain, Solana, and other blockchains. These blockchains have their own consensus mechanisms independent of Bitcoin and are not explicitly tied to Bitcoin’s consensus.
Inherited Consensus: In this category, the infrastructure is decentralized and represented by distributed consensus representatives of Bitcoin sidechains or Layer-2 solutions. Although these sidechains have their own consensus mechanisms, they are designed to align more closely with the Bitcoin blockchain. Examples include federated sidechains such as Rootstock, Liquid Network, or Stacks.
Native Consensus: This category relies on Bitcoin’s own consensus mechanism as the basis of its security model. It does not use independent blockchains or sidechains but leverages off-chain state channels linked to the Bitcoin blockchain through cryptographic means. The Lightning Network is a significant example of this approach, providing a high level of trust minimization by fully relying on Bitcoin’s consensus.
Bitcoin income products that are closer to Bitcoin’s native consensus are seen as having a higher degree of trust minimization. However, in the categories of independent consensus and inherited consensus, there are subtle differences in the decentralization level and security of the infrastructure.
Overall, decentralized and trust-minimized levels are lowest in the no consensus category, while native consensus is considered to provide the highest level of trust minimization. However, considerations of consensus security and decentralization require further analysis.
Asset Perspective
When considering the assets used in Bitcoin income products, their alignment with Bitcoin can be divided into three categories.
Non-BTC: This category includes solutions that use assets other than BTC, resulting in lower alignment with Bitcoin. An example is the stacking options of Stack, where the native token STX is used to generate BTC income.
Tokenized BTC: Here, the asset used is a tokenized version of BTC, which increases alignment with Bitcoin compared to non-BTC assets. Tokenized BTC can be found on public blockchains such as Ethereum (WBTC, renBTC, tBTC), BNB Chain (wBTC), Solana (tBTC), etc. Additionally, tokenized BTC is hosted on Bitcoin sidechains with inherited consensus mechanisms, such as sBTC, xBTC, aBTC, L-BTC, and RBTC.
Native BTC: This category of assets is on-chain Bitcoin (BTC) without involving any tokenized versions, providing the highest level of alignment with Bitcoin. Various CEX solutions and Babylon’s Bitcoin collateralization protocol directly utilize BTC. Babylon aims to enhance Bitcoin’s security by adapting proof-of-stake mechanism for Bitcoin collateralization. Additionally, projects like Stroom Network leverage the Lightning Network to enable streaming collateralization, where users can earn Lightning Network income by depositing BTC and minting wrapped tokens like stBTC and bstBTC on EVM-based blockchains for a wider DeFi ecosystem.
Income Perspective
When examining the income aspect of Bitcoin income products, the issue of alignment with Bitcoin arises, leading to similar categorizations as in the asset perspective: non-BTC, tokenized BTC, and native BTC.
Non-BTC Income: Babylon provides income through its proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchain’s native assets, enhancing the security of the blockchain through Babylon’s staking mechanism.
Tokenized BTC Income: Stroom Network provides income in the form of lnBTC tokens. Sovryn, running on Rootstock, facilitates Bitcoin lending by using tokenized BTC (RBTC) as income. On the Liquid Network, Blockstream Mining Note (BMN) provides income in BTC or L-BTC upon maturity, offering qualified investors a way to gain Bitcoin hashrate through EU-standard-compliant USDT security tokens.
Native BTC Income: Stacks offers various options, including income paid in tokenized BTC in certain income applications using sBTC. However, for stacking options in Stacks, income accrues in native BTC. Similarly, some centralized income products offered by CEX distribute native BTC as income to users.
The Golden Standard for Bitcoin: Full Nativeness
Considering the ideal Bitcoin-based income products, the gold standard products would combine the following three characteristics: native Bitcoin consensus, native Bitcoin assets, and native Bitcoin income. Such products would closely mimic a perfect alignment with Bitcoin.
Currently, such solutions are just beginning to be developed. One actively developing project is Brick Towers. Their vision for an ideal Bitcoin-based income product encompasses achieving a close alignment with Bitcoin by incorporating native Bitcoin consensus, assets, and income. Brick Towers focuses on positioning Bitcoin as a long-term savings solution and aims to provide customers with a trust-minimized and native approach to leverage Bitcoin.
Their planned solution revolves around generating native income within Bitcoin by utilizing Brick Towers’ automated services for other nodes on the Lightning Network. By optimizing the economic benefits and strategically allocating capital to meet the liquidity needs of other network participants, capital efficiency is optimized while minimizing counterparty risk.
This approach not only facilitates the growth of the Lightning Network but also enhances the utility of Bitcoin as an asset, providing customers with a seamless and secure way to earn income from holding Bitcoin. Importantly, Brick Towers’ solution avoids the use of wrapped tokens, further reducing counterparty risk and reinforcing their commitment to the native Bitcoin ecosystem.
