Lombard price

Bitcoin capital markets are moving on-chain and the fulcrum looks clear → @Lombard_Finance Quick context to frame the runway: - ~89% of BTC sits idle, despite BTC carrying >50% of crypto’s mcap - BTC accounts for roughly 0.5% of DeFi activity, a comically small footprint for the asset that anchors the entire ecosystem - LBTC is already paying ~1% APY in native BTC yield, turning cold storage into productive collateral Market structure checkpoint: - $BARD FDV sits around $939M - Compare that with ETH land, where no staking/restaking solution controls even 25% share yet several names trade at multi-billion FDVs - Lombard holds ~58% of staked BTC market share today, making it the current liquidity and trust center for yield-bearing BTC How the design compounds: - Dual-utility primitives: stake BTC for security, route the position into restaking layers (e.g., EigenLayer integrations) or deploy it to credit rails - One coin, many jobs → yield, security, and collateral at once - Capital efficiency accelerates without ballooning supply; builders gain a reliable base asset to back liquidity; users earn in the numeraire they actually want Why this matters for the next cycle: - If BTC’s share of DeFi activity expands from 0.5% to even low single digits, you’re looking at multi-fold growth of the “productive BTC” segment - With 58% share, Lombard becomes the default venue institutions screen first when they finally realize BTC can earn and safeguard credit at the same time - Liquidity gravity wins in infra, and security + depth beats boutique features when the allocators show up Signals worth tracking right now: - Exchange surface area: $BARD spot went live on OKX, broadening access and deepening order books - Community penetration: sustained engagement through yappers + programmatic rewards has bootstrapped a sticky core - Integrations velocity: routes into restaking, credit, and settlement venues will be the multiplier; composability is the moat that compounds What I’m watching next: - Share stability: does Lombard defend/expand that ~58% in staked BTC as new competitors emerge - Real yield continuity: can LBTC maintain and increment its native BTC APY in a variety of market regimes - Institutional pipes: custody partnerships, risk frameworks, and segregated flows tend to unlock the bigger check sizes Risk notes: - Smart contract and peg mechanics around LBTC - Counterparty and bridge connectivity risk across integrations - Governance agility vs. security conservatism trade-offs as TVL scales Thesis in one line: BTC wants a home for yield and credit; the market will coalesce around whoever standardizes safety, depth, and composability first, and today that scoreboard favors @Lombard_Finance If BTC’s idle float wakes up, the leaders in dual-utility BTC won’t re-rate linearly, they’ll gap higher. $BARD sits where the infra optionality outpunches the current FDV, IMO. DYOR, but I’m paying attention to the flows, not the noise

Top 300 losers in 24h: $ASTER, $APX, $OPEN, $PI, $FARTCOIN, $BARD, $PUMP, $BRETT, $TWT, $OM, $TOSHI