Maple Finance review

This is credit, not a money market

Everywhere else in this table lends against over-collateralised positions. Maple underwrites borrowers: named pool delegates assess institutions and set terms, and depositors take credit risk rather than only market risk. That distinction is the single most important thing to understand before depositing, and it is where the sector's 2022 losses came from.

2022, plainly

Borrower defaults caused documented depositor losses in affected pools. The model was subsequently tightened towards collateralised lending with stricter underwriting. The protocol did not pretend the losses away, and the reporting since has been more detailed than most of its peers manage.

What the current book looks like

Collateralisation varies by loan and is disclosed per pool, borrowers are identified at institution level, and rates are set by the delegate and published with the loan terms. You can read what you are lending into, which is more than any custodial lender offers.

Who it suits

Depositors who want credit exposure deliberately and will read pool reporting. Anyone treating it as a savings account has misread the product.

What to read before depositing

The pool's loan composition, the delegate's underwriting record and the collateralisation of the specific loans. All are published, and skipping them turns a credit product into a guess.

How to size it

As a credit allocation with a real default probability, not as a yield-bearing cash equivalent. That framing is what the 2022 losses cost people who lacked it.