RIA·DeFi
Refusal file · liquidity provision

Why Ketju rejected Convex Finance

Memo v1Published by Ketju Research

A registry memo, published verbatim and versioned. Superseded versions are recorded, never edited away. A rejection is a judgment for Ketju's client base and thesis, not a universal safety claim. Not investment, legal, tax, or compliance advice.

The memo

REJECTED twice over. First on category: Convex is a yield optimiser layered on Curve, so the underlying exposure is AMM liquidity provision with impermanent loss, which we reject as a class. It also stacks its own contracts on top of Curve's, so a client takes both attack surfaces to earn a boost on one. Second, and the detail that would decide it even if the first did not: CRV to cvxCRV is a ONE-WAY conversion. There is no redemption path back. To exit you must sell cvxCRV on the open market at whatever discount prevails, which by construction is worst precisely when everyone wants out. An instrument a client cannot redeem, only sell, is not a position we can responsibly put them into — it is a permanent decision disguised as a yield strategy.

What would reopen the file

  • n/a — rejected

Facts on file

Verdict
Rejected
Exposure
liquidity provision
Chains examined
Ethereum
Memo version
v1
Reviewed
Next review

← All published refusals