Lending Protocol Comparison
SkillDev toolsCompare DeFi lending and borrowing protocols by analyzing interest rates, collateral requirements, liquidation mechanics, and risk parameters to find optimal lending or borrowing venues.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Lending Protocol Comparison skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by nirholas/three.ws in data/skills/defi/lending-protocol-comparison/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
When to use this skill
Use when the user asks about:
- Where to lend or borrow a specific asset
- Comparing interest rates across lending protocols
- Understanding liquidation risks and collateral ratios
- Evaluating lending protocol safety
- Optimizing a lending/borrowing position
Comparison Framework
1. Protocol Inventory
For each protocol under comparison, gather:
- Protocol name, version, and chain deployment
- Total supplied and total borrowed for the target asset
- Utilization rate and rate model type (linear, kinked, or dynamic)
- Governance token and incentive status
2. Supply Rate Analysis
Compare supply-side economics:
- Base supply APY — the rate paid to lenders from borrower interest
- Incentive APY — any additional token rewards for supplying
- Net supply APY — combined effective return
- Rate stability — how much has the rate fluctuated over 7d/30d?
- Utilization sensitivity — at what utilization does the rate spike?
3. Borrow Rate Analysis
Compare borrow-side costs:
- Variable borrow APR — current and 30d average
- Stable borrow APR — if available, and conditions for rebalancing
- Rate model kink point — the utilization threshold where rates jump
- Effective borrowing cost after any incentive offsets
4. Collateral Parameters
For each protocol, document:
- Loan-to-Value (LTV) — maximum borrowing power per collateral unit
- Liquidation threshold — the LTV at which liquidation triggers
- Liquidation penalty — the bonus liquidators receive (user's loss)
- Collateral types accepted — which assets can be used as collateral
- Isolation mode — is the asset in isolation with debt ceilings?
- E-mode — are there efficiency modes for correlated assets?
5. Risk Assessment
| Factor | Evaluation |
|---|---|
| Protocol audit history | Number, recency, and firms |
| Bug bounty size | Indicates confidence in security |
| Oracle mechanism | Chainlink, TWAP, custom? Freshness? |
| Governance timelock | Delay before parameter changes take effect |
| Bad debt history | Any past insolvency events? |
| Supply caps | Are there deposit limits? |
| Borrow caps | Are there borrowing limits? |
6. Liquidation Scenario Modeling
For the user's intended position:
- Calculate the liquidation price given their collateral and debt
- Estimate the buffer (current price vs liquidation price as percentage)
- Model what happens if collateral drops 20%, 40%, 60%
- Recommend a safe health factor target (suggest 1.5+ for volatile assets, 1.2+ for stablecoins)
7. Output Format
Present a comparison table and recommendation:
| Metric | Protocol A | Protocol B | Protocol C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supply APY | X% | Y% | Z% |
| Borrow APR | X% | Y% | Z% |
| LTV | X% | Y% | Z% |
| Liquidation threshold | X% | Y% | Z% |
| Liquidation penalty | X% | Y% | Z% |
| Audit status | ... | ... | ... |
- Best for lending: Protocol recommendation with reasoning
- Best for borrowing: Protocol recommendation with reasoning
- Risk-adjusted pick: Considering security, rate stability, and terms
- Position recommendations: Suggested health factor and monitoring frequency
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 114
- Forks
- 29
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
lending-protocol-comparison- Source
- github.com/nirholas/three.ws