The Risks and Realities of Leverage Staking

by DeLeverageJuly 8th, 2025
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

This section presents a formal analysis of leverage staking strategies, highlighting user variability and real-world deviations from standard scenarios. Appendix B offers a broader model.

People Mentioned

Mention Thumbnail

Coins Mentioned

Mention Thumbnail
Mention Thumbnail
featured image - The Risks and Realities of Leverage Staking
DeLeverage HackerNoon profile picture
0-item

Abstract and 1. Introduction

2. Related Work

3 Background

3.1 Blockchain and DeFi

3.2 Ethereum PoS

3.3 Staking Options

3.4 LSD

3.5 DeFi Lending Protocols

4 System Model and 4.1 System Participants

4.2 Leverage Staking with LSDs

5 Analytical Study

6 Empirical Study

7 Cascading Liquidation

7.1 stETH Price Deviation and Terra Crash

7.2 Cascading Liquidation and User Behaviors

8 Stress Testing

8.1 Motivation and 8.2 Simulation

9 Discussion and Future Research Directions

10 Conclusion and References

A. Aave Parameter Configuration

B. Generalized Formalization For Leverage Staking

C. Leverage Staking Detection Algorithm

5 Analytical Study

This section conducts an analytical study on the leverage staking strategy. We also offer a generalized formalization encompassing other potential scenarios in Appendix B.



Figure 4: The illustration of direct leverage staking loops. The user completes the kth loop via a sequence of actions: {stake, deposit, borrow, (re)stake}. In parallel, an indirect leverage stake loop is characterized by the sequence {swap, deposit, borrow, (re)swap}. Within these frameworks, the (re)stake/(re)swap is crucial in completing the respective loops.






In addition to the standardized scenario discussed above, real-world applications of leverage staking can vary significantly among users. For instance, a user might choose not to reinvest all of their received stETH on Aave. For a more detailed exploration of this variability, please see the generalized formalization in Appendix B.


Authors:

(1) Xihan Xiong, Imperial College London, UK;

(2) Zhipeng Wang, Imperial College London, UK;

(3) Xi Chen, University of Sussex, UK;

(4) William Knottenbelt, Imperial College London, UK;

(5) Michael Huth, Imperial College London, UK.


This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license.

[8] https://docs.aave.com/risk/liquidity-risk/borrow-interest-rate

Trending Topics

blockchaincryptocurrencyhackernoon-top-storyprogrammingsoftware-developmenttechnologystartuphackernoon-booksBitcoinbooks