Ok... I get what you mean now. I agree, using virtual supply instead of HIVE's supply is the wrong way to calculate it. I'm guessing this is a too sensible change to the economic part of the Hive's code and I'm also guessing virtual supply is used in many parts of the code, so it's not easy to change it and then test it and make sure things don't break. It's not something you wanna break (more than it is, I mean). At least we know the debt ratio is a little underestimated by the blockchain code, but to be fair, initially there were proposals to set the haircut at 50% from 10% and the more conservative 30% was chosen. Good that you brought it up. It looks you weren't the only one.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
yes, when the HBD supply was smaller, the impact was less noticeable, but now it has grown. The main thing is that you cant call the Hive virtual supply = Hive Marketcap, as that is not what it is.
That's true. If we want to be fair, the debt ratio is something we calculate at internal level of the blockchain as a safety measure. It doesn't really need to meet any external definition or to apply to Hive market cap, unless it becomes detrimental to the safety of the chain. It can be misleading using virtual supply instead of Hive supply, but it isn't necessarily unsafe (it can become at a certain point, though).
I agree and think there are 2 topics here. The ratios and calculations used by Hive Blockchain and then real world definitions of debt level and market cap. You would never include debt in market cap or in a debt ratio.. that is just ridiculous.
In reality, Hive has a dynamic debt ratio due to the way it's calculated (whether that is good or bad and needed is another conversation).
You can't just say, this is what I believe a debt ratio is and this is the calculation! A debt ratio and market cap are clearly defined calculations, you can't claim your own 😆
For digital assets you may say it's fully diluted market cap, but as HBD is DEBT, you can't even call it that. It is what it is.
Regarding Hive using this dynamic formula, rather than a fixed debt level ratio has huge consequences which many are not aware but seems the core Devs know very well, Hive will fully collapse defending the peg the same as Terra Luna. They need to reduce the debt ratio back to the previous dynamic "10%" ratio at least or put the real 30% ratio thst isnt dynamic!
I agree they are two different topics and they shouldn't be mixed because it creates a lot of confusion.
When the haircut level was increased to 30%, I remember it was mentioned it was an experiment, and if at any point we discover it doesn't work out, we will change that limit. Whether back to 10% or something else is debatable. Right now, I don't think we are at risk, we are just at or close to the low-end of the spectrum and we tend to see everything in red. Things will get better in the uptrend. It is true, we will likely reach that haircut level at some point, if not this cycle, the next one. But that happened even more than once in the same cycle when the haircut was at 10%.
You may not remember how it was with a 10% haircut rule. Having the HBD rewards (SBD back then) cut quite often because the haircut limit was reached generated long and heated discussions, particularly because authors didn't like they didn't receive their liquid rewards as well.