# Lending Terms Considerations

When making decisions about the loan terms, lenders and borrowers will look at this from two different perspectives. We'll try to outline the risk and rewards are for each participant in simple terms. They are not financial advice, nor will they cover everything and all possibilities. It merely serves as a guide for decision-making, but in the end, users should DYOR and manage their risks when dealing with any DeFi products and services.

## Lender

#### <mark style="color:green;">(+) Lending Returns</mark>

The flexible lending mechanisms of Feeder's P2P lending enable a diverse set of collateral assets. Some of these assets will be yielding receipt tokens such as synthetic vaulted assets or staked assets. The tolerance of the borrower for higher rates of borrowing will exist, thus offering lenders far greater returns, especially when compared to typical lending pool alternatives.

#### <mark style="color:green;">(+) Liquidation Returns</mark>

While lending pools offer liquidators the benefit of liquidation both from collecting collaterals and liquidation fees, Feeder's P2P lending allows the lender to collect on the collateral asset themselves if they choose to. In a favorable scenario, the borrower has left behind collaterals that exceed the loan value, and the lender makes a profit.&#x20;

#### <mark style="color:green;">(+) Optionality</mark>

Not only does the diverse set of collaterals create an opportunity for greater returns as lenders move up the risk curve of collateral assets, but it also offers tremendous optionality. A savvy lender could create a portfolio of diversified loans across a spectrum of risk curves, From lending with the safest collaterals of top tier projects or enhancing lending portfolio returns with a small or medium allocation to high-risk small-cap projects.

#### <mark style="color:red;">(-) Price Risk</mark>

The lender needs to be fully aware of the price risk of the collaterals when considering accepting bids or bidding on loans. A more volatile token has a higher risk of its value falling below the level at which it would cover the value of the capital lent to the borrower. Collaterals value dropping below the loan value would likely lead to borrowers not returning funds and purposely entering liquidation.

Therefore, the *higher* the token's (or the market's) volatility, the *lower* the Loan-to-Value and the *higher* the APR.

**Volatility UP --> LTV DOWN = MORE Collaterals**

**Volatility UP --> APR UP = More Interests**&#x20;

#### <mark style="color:red;">(-) Liquidity Risk</mark>

On the other hand, duration also plays a role in managing risk, mainly because the loan can't be terminated unless the borrower returns funds. &#x20;

Therefore, the *higher* the token's (or the market's) volatility, the *shorter the* loan duration and the *higher* the APR.

**Volatility UP --> Duration DOWN = SHORTER Term**

**Volatility UP --> APR UP = MORE Interests**&#x20;

#### <mark style="color:red;">(-) Yielding RT Risk</mark>

While the scenario is rare, it is not impossible in DeFi for protocols to be exploited. Lenders need to be aware and understand the risk of borrowers collateralizing yielding receipt tokens where the underlying token is being yield-optimized or staked inside a separate smart contract. The borrower will unlikely return funds if those assets are exploited and cease to have value.

Therefore, the *higher* the exploit risk, the *lower* the LTV and the *higher* the APR.

**Exploit Risk UP --> LTV DOWN = More Collaterals**

**Exploit Risk UP --> APR UP = MORE Interest**

## Borrower

#### <mark style="color:green;">(+) Liquidity</mark>

Feeder's P2P lending is highly complementary to borrowers. While lenders do not have liquidity, the borrowers do. Funds can be returned, but also not necessarily. While defaults and liquidations will be recorded on-chain and could result in a particular wallet finding it harder to borrow funds in the future, it is still part of the intended mechanism.

#### <mark style="color:green;">(+) Effective Insurance</mark>

As yielding assets can be used as collateral, loans taken out using these assets constitute effective insurance on the asset. Take a rare scenario where a vaulted asset was exploited. A borrower taking a 50% LTV loan would keep the borrowed asset and take a 50% hit rather than being completely wiped out, transferring the risk to the lender in the process.&#x20;

#### <mark style="color:red;">(-) Borrowing Costs</mark>

Depending on the collateral, the lender is likely to demand interests, LTV, and duration commensurate to the risk of those assets. The asset has embedded exploit risk, especially when the underlying asset is being yield-optimized in a vault or staked in a staking pool. At top-tier projects, the risk is low, but at non-top-tier projects, that risk may be higher and require higher borrowing costs.


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://docs.feeder.finance/products-and-services/peer-to-peer-lending/lending-terms-considerations.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.