Hey @Teeb, sorry for not getting back to you sooner.
I think it’s a fair question. On the surface, a ~$20m TVL after two years doesn’t look particularly impressive.
The nuance is that eUSD has spent the last six months transitioning away from an incentive-driven growth model. As incentives were removed, a significant amount of DeFi liquidity left the system, largely masking continued growth from UglyCash.
While headline TVL has looked relatively flat, UC’s eUSD balances have generally grown in the region of 5-10% month-on-month. In effect, one source of demand has been shrinking while another has been expanding. The incentive unwind is largely complete, meaning future growth in fintech balances should translate much more directly into eUSD supply growth.
I’d also push back slightly on the idea that eUSD lacks focus. Since the turn of the year we’ve seen renewed engagement from UglyCash through quarterly reporting, changes to the revenue share model and now the new Mandate & Methodology RFC.
If you haven’t already, I’d encourage you to check out the latest quarterly report and the new RFC. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts.