The new @dl_research × @yield report makes a deep dive into Gen 1 yield optimizers the first big attempt to solve DeFi’s yield maze. Let’s look at how platforms like Yearn Finance, Beefy, and BadgerDAO reshaped yield farming, and what held them back 🧵

When yield farming became too complex, Gen 1 optimizers promised simplicity Deposit once, and strategies handle the rest. Platforms like Yearn automated the search for returns across DeFi and quickly hit product–market fit. TVL rose from $1.8B to $12B in 2021.

How Yearn’s V3 architecture works: - Built on the ERC-4626 tokenized vault standard for seamless DeFi integration - Users deposit into multi-strategy vaults that allocate capital across venues like Curve or Aave - Profits are automatically re-invested to compound returns - Users receive vault tokens representing their share of the underlying strategies This modular setup makes vaults more flexible, and easier to build on, though each remains chain-bound.

But Gen 1's still carried risks. Several early platforms suffered major exploits and design flaws, exposing weak vault architectures and composability risks. Losses from flash-loan and access-control exploits drained confidence in the model. What was meant to simplify yield instead introduced new vulnerabilities.

Yearn’s design introduced clear advantages in safety, modularity, and standardization, but it still faces key structural limits like chain isolation and narrow strategy scope. The table below highlights where Yearn excels and where those constraints remain.

Gen 1 laid the foundation, but it didn’t fully solve the DeFi yield maze. Read the full report for the full story: