The crypto industry loves a good narrative, and few narratives sound more appealing than financial inclusion. Supporters argue that Ethena and Etherfi represent a new generation of financial applications capable of delivering savings, yield, and payments to users who have long been underserved by traditional banking. On the surface, the idea is compelling. If someone in Latin America, Southeast Asia, or Africa can access dollar-denominated savings and yield from a smartphone, why wouldn’t that be considered progress?
The inclusion story surrounding Ethena and Etherfi appears overstated. These protocols are innovative, but innovation alone does not automatically translate into meaningful financial inclusion. What they are building looks less like a replacement for banking and more like a parallel financial system designed primarily for crypto-native participants.
The Inclusion Narrative Sounds Better Than the Reality
Advocates of Ethena and Etherfi describe them as a second wave of financial digitization, replacing bank balance sheets with smart contracts and directing more value to users. The economic model is certainly attractive. According to onchain data, Etherfi has historically passed 76% of generated fees back to users, while Ethena keeps only a small portion of its gross yield, with significant amounts directed toward reserves and users instead.
That comparison creates a sharp contrast with banks and even fintech firms such as Revolut or Nubank, which retain a larger share of the profits generated from customer deposits and activity.
However, there is a major flaw in calling this financial inclusion. The average unbanked individual is not searching for exposure to funding-rate dynamics, staking rewards, liquid restaking, or synthetic dollars. Most people need reliable savings, payment services, and protection from financial shocks. Ethena and Etherfi offer yield, but they do not offer the safeguards that traditional banking systems provide.
Yield Still Depends on Speculation
The strongest evidence against the inclusion narrative comes from the revenue engines powering Ethena and Etherfi.
Ethena’s yield largely comes from staking rewards and perpetual futures funding rates. The protocol openly depends on demand from leveraged traders to support returns. Experts note that yields have fluctuated significantly and that user demand follows those yield cycles.
Meanwhile, Ethena and Etherfi operate without deposit insurance and remain exposed to smart contract risks, counterparties, and market conditions. Onchain analysts highlight that banking protections, capital requirements, and central-bank support do not exist within these systems.
That matters because genuine financial inclusion is built on stability first and yield second. If returns disappear when speculative activity cools, then the system is serving traders before savers.
The reality is that Ethena and Etherfi attract yield farmers, token investors, and crypto enthusiasts far more effectively than they attract unbanked populations.
Final Thoughts
Despite the skepticism surrounding the sector, dismissing Ethena and Etherfi would be a mistake. These protocols have introduced a more transparent method of distributing financial rewards and have demonstrated that digital financial products can operate without many legacy intermediaries.
Yet the industry’s favorite talking point remains premature. Ethena and Etherfi are not democratizing finance in the way their supporters claim. Today, they function primarily as sophisticated yield machines tied to crypto market activity.
That said, risks can be engineered down over time. Better transparency, stronger infrastructure, improved risk controls, and greater regulatory clarity could gradually make these platforms more practical for mainstream users. If that evolution continues, Ethena and Etherfi may eventually become powerful examples of onchain finance reaching everyday consumers. For now, though, they look less like banks for the unbanked and more like highly efficient products built for degens seeking yield.
Be the first to comment