Hi everyone,
I’m Achim from 1delta.io. We’ve spent two years building yield and lending aggregation APIs on EVM chains - unified rates, positions, and execution across Aave, Compound, Morpho, and others. Originally backed by Aave and Compound grants. Used by dApps, AI protocols, funds, and builders who don’t want to integrate ten lending protocols one-by-one.
The Q1 2026 Stacks numbers pulled us in close enough to ask whether there’s a real product gap here. This post is us trying to figure out whether the gap we think we see is one the ecosystem actually feels - or whether we’re projecting EVM patterns onto a chain with different dynamics. Honest pushback is more useful than polite encouragement.
What we observe
At least five protocols offer something that looks like “yield on your assets”: Zest, Granite, StackingDAO, LISA, Hermetica. Bitflow sits underneath as the DEX layer. Each does something specific well, and the design philosophies vary meaningfully - Granite’s no-rehypothecation isolation is genuinely different from Zest’s Aave-lineage pools, and stSTXbtc’s BTC-streamed rewards don’t exist on any EVM chain.
From outside, what looks fragmented is the discovery and management layer on top, not the protocols themselves. A user with sBTC reads the Foundation’s yield guide, then opens four browser tabs. A user with positions on Zest and Granite checks two apps for total exposure. A wallet team integrating yield does five separate integrations.
On EVM, that gap gets filled by aggregators - Yearn, DeFiLlama Yields, Morpho Vaults, routing APIs like ours. On Stacks, that layer doesn’t really exist yet.
Our working hypothesis: a unified read API (rates, positions, health factors across all five protocols) plus a simple write API (deposit, withdraw, basic BTC-collateralized borrow) would be useful.
What we are not sure about
1. Is fragmentation actually felt by users, or are we overweighting it? TVL is whale-concentrated. Maybe current users are sophisticated enough that five tabs isn’t pain. Or maybe the next wave will hit it hard.
2. Wallet teams - would this change your roadmap? Today users leave your wallet to use Zest/Granite. Would a unified API change how you think about in-wallet earn UX, or is the per-protocol model working fine?
3. Protocol teams - competitive or complementary? Would an aggregation layer reach users you don’t reach today, or does it commoditize you in a way that hurts? We’ve seen both reactions on EVM.
4. What Stacks-unique primitives need first-class API treatment? stSTXbtc reward streaming, Dual Stacking BTC APYs, soft liquidations, sBTC peg dynamics - these don’t map onto EVM yield abstractions. Surface them distinctly, or abstract into generic “APY + risk”?
What this post is, and isn’t
Not an announcement. No engineering allocated, no launch date. If the community thinks this is a solution looking for a problem, we’d rather hear it now than after a quarter of Clarity work.
If signal is strong, we’ll come back with a concrete scoping post. If it’s weak, that’s a real outcome too - we’ll publish what we learned for whoever comes next.
Reply here, DM me, or reach me at [email protected].
- Achim, 1delta