Ledn vs Unchained: which bitcoin loan liquidates first?
Ledn's page prices an LTV-triggered loan; Unchained's commercial-loan page defines a CTP violation and prints no sale level. Both read 20 September 2026.
Filed under
Assessments
7 articles
Is Strike's volatility-proof bitcoin loan liquidation-proof?
No. The price triggers are gone, but a missed payment still sells collateral after a 10-day grace. Both Strike ladders and Ledn's, tabulated and priced.
Arch Lending's tokenised-gold loans, assessed on what a 90% liquidation threshold assumes
A $250,000 minimum, up to 75% initial advance, margin call at 85% and liquidation at 90%. Every threshold is published in the launch release. What the release does not publish is the price source that decides when they are crossed.
Galaxy's Crypto Portfolio Line of Credit, assessed on a no-rehypothecation promise
A revolving line against BTC, ETH and staked SOL at 50% loan-to-value and an advertised 8.99% variable APR. The pitch rests on collateral the firm says it does not lend on — a claim the borrower cannot check, and the launch coverage never describes the margin call.
Coinbase's crypto-backed borrowing, assessed as a custodial door onto an on-chain loan
The app is a familiar exchange account. The loan underneath it is a smart-contract position that a price feed can close without asking. Assessed on the gap between those two facts.
Custodial crypto lending, assessed as a counterparty question
Hand assets to a firm, receive an advertised yield. Assessed on the only question that has ever mattered in this model: who is paying that yield, and what happens if they cannot.
Over-collateralised on-chain lending, assessed from liquidation risk inward
The model that outlasted the last cycle, assessed the way this desk assesses everything: what can go wrong first, and how much of it the published parameters actually tell you.
