Why IRIS

Borrowers ask why the fixed rates originated through IRIS come in tighter than the ones on fixed-rate AMMs or interest rate swap platforms. The answer is two design choices: solvers price each loan on its own, and they manage the funding behind it for the life of the loan.

​

Where pool-based fixed rates run out of road

Traditional fixed-rate DeFi designs run into four recurring problems. Liquidity fragmentation. Every new lending market, whether a new Morpho pair or a Compound vault, requires its own swap pool with independently bootstrapped liquidity. Borrowers wait for that local liquidity to mature. Consensus pricing for heterogeneous risk. AMMs force a single consensus price onto every participant. A 30-day loan and a 180-day loan carry meaningfully different risk profiles, yet both are priced through the same AMM-based construct. A single market consensus price can be too coarse to underwrite a fixed rate on, and that produces adverse outcomes for the seller of the fixed rate and the buyer alike. Static capital. A swap market locks a borrower into the consensus rate of a specific venue at a specific moment. The borrower pays that venue’s own risk premium for the entire loan duration, cut off from cheaper capital elsewhere in the ecosystem. Hedges rather than loans. Swap protocols deliver an interest rate hedge that the user has to manage alongside a separate variable borrow position. Borrowers want a loan: deposit collateral, receive funds, repay a known amount. These follow from each other. Fragmented pools enforce consensus pricing, consensus pricing mandates standardized products, and standardized products deliver complex hedges rather than simple loans.

​

Pricing each loan on its own

IRIS replaces the pool curve with solver judgment. A solver runs your specific request through its own risk models. It looks at the exact duration rather than a standardized bucket, at how the size affects its hedging and the venue’s utilization, at how volatile the underlying rate has been, and at how your loan sits against the rest of its book. Two loans that an AMM would price identically can come back at different rates, because they are different loans. Several solvers can quote the same request, so the borrower ends up with the pricing of whichever solver models the risk best rather than a premium set by a curve.

​

Managing the funding, not locking it

A static swap ties the counterparty to one venue’s rate at one moment. If you take a loan backed by an Aave swap and Compound turns cheaper three days later, the swap cannot follow. IRIS solvers can. When a solver quotes a fixed rate, it is not promising to sit in one pool. It is pricing its ability to fund your loan cheaply over the whole term, across every venue it is allowed to use. Moving between venues. If a solver starts your loan on Aave at 5% and Morpho later drops to 3%, it can repay the Aave debt and re-borrow the same amount on Morpho. Your fixed rate does not move. That spread is the solver’s, and that is the point. The chance to capture it is what the solver priced in when it quoted you. It can offer a lower fixed rate today because it expects to fund your loan more cheaply than any single venue’s average over the term. You are paid for that option up front, in the rate. Choosing when to lock in. Rather than buying an expensive long-dated hedge on day one, a solver can carry cheap short-term funding and change its approach as conditions move. Never being stuck with one venue’s quirks. Because a solver can follow the cheapest funding across the ecosystem, the fixed rate it can offer today is often below any single venue’s long-run average.

​

What this means for your rate

Two things reach you. Liquidity stays whole, because solvers route to any integrated venue instead of splitting into narrow per-asset swap pools. And solvers compete to win your request, so the efficiency they expect to capture shows up in the rate they quote. For the capital that makes a quoted rate credible, see What backs your fixed rate.