Minter: what you pay on $M debt
Earner: what $M holders actually receive
Полная разбивка
| Метрика | Ценить |
|---|
Dilution table — same Owed $M, more Earning Supply
Holding Total Active Owed $M, Minter Rate and the governance Max Earner Rate fixed at your inputs above, here is what happens to the Earner Rate as Total Earning Supply changes — this is the "shared pie" effect from FAQ #4 below.
| Earning Supply | vs Owed $M | Effective Earner Rate |
|---|
Two rates, one shared pie
M0 ($M) is not a consumer stablecoin brand so much as wholesale issuance infrastructure: whitelisted Minters post collateral (currently short-duration Treasury exposure) and mint $M against it, verified on-chain by a separate set of Validators. The Minter Rate is simply the governance-set cost of that debt — it accrues continuously to what each Minter owes and is hard-capped at 400% APR in the protocol's MinterRateModel contract.
- Earner Rate is a completely different calculation, because the money going out to $M holders who opt in to earning has to come from the money coming in from Minters — and those two pools (Total Active Owed $M vs Total Earning Supply) move independently. M0's EarnerRateModel solves this with an "instantaneous cashflow" formula — Earner Rate ≈ (Owed $M × Minter Rate) / Earning Supply — then multiplies that by a 98% safety haircut before letting anyone actually earn it. If Owed $M ever exceeds Earning Supply, the model switches to a more conservative 30-day log-based calculation instead, because the simple version would imply paying earners faster than minters are actually generating the cash.
The practical upshot: your yield as a $M earner is not a fixed number set by a vault strategy — it is a dynamically shrinking share of what Minters are collectively paying, divided across everyone else who also opted in to earn at that moment.
Часто задаваемые вопросы
What is M0 (M^0) and how is $M different from USDC or DAI?
M0 is not a consumer-facing stablecoin brand, it is infrastructure. Per M0's own documentation, approved institutional Minters post collateral (currently short-duration US Treasury exposure) and mint a shared base dollar token called $M against it, verified on-chain by a separate set of Validators. $M itself is rarely held directly by end users; instead it gets wrapped into custom-branded stablecoin extensions that businesses issue with their own compliance rules and yield mechanics, all settling against the same shared $M liquidity underneath. That is structurally different from USDC (single issuer, Circle, no on-chain minter market) or DAI (overcollateralized crypto-backed, governed directly by Sky/MakerDAO) — M0 is a wholesale issuance layer other stablecoins are built on top of, with MXON as the first live Minter completing a $10M mint of $M per M0's own press release.
How is the Minter Rate different from the Earner Rate, and why do they need two separate formulas?
The Minter Rate is the cost a Minter pays on their outstanding $M debt: it accrues continuously to what they owe, is set by M0's TTG governance, and is hard-capped at 400% APR (40,000 basis points) in the protocol's MinterRateModel contract. The Earner Rate is the yield paid to $M holders who opt in to earning status. These cannot just be the same number, because Total Active Owed $M (what Minters owe) and Total Earning Supply (how much $M is opted into earning) are two independently-moving pools. If more holders opt in to earn than there is debt generating interest, paying everyone the full Minter Rate would pay out more than the protocol is actually collecting. The EarnerRateModel contract exists specifically to solve that mismatch.
What does "safe earner rate" mean, and why is there a 98% haircut?
Per the EarnerRateModel source code (m0-foundation/protocol, src/rateModels/EarnerRateModel.sol), when Total Active Owed $M is less than or equal to Total Earning Supply, the safe rate is calculated as (Total Active Owed $M × Minter Rate) / Total Earning Supply, an instantaneous cashflow formula that keeps total interest paid to earners mathematically at or below total interest collected from minters at every instant. The contract then multiplies that safe rate by a RATE_MULTIPLIER of 9,800 out of 10,000 (98%) before using it, via the getExtraSafeEarnerRate() function: a deliberate 2 percentage-point safety buffer on top of an already-conservative formula, so rounding error or timing lag between rate updates can never push the protocol into paying out more than it is taking in.
What happens to my earner yield if more $M holders opt into earning?
Your rate goes down, with no change in what Minters are paying. The formula's denominator is Total Earning Supply, so if Total Active Owed $M stays fixed and more holders switch on earning, the same minter-fee income gets divided across a bigger base, and every earner's rate drops proportionally. The dilution table above shows it directly: roughly doubling Earning Supply while holding everything else constant roughly halves the Earner Rate. That is the opposite of most DeFi yield products where your personal yield is independent of how many other people also deposited (a fixed-APY vault, for example) — here it is explicitly a shared, shrinking pie.
Why does the formula change when Total Active Owed $M exceeds Total Earning Supply?
Below that crossover, the simple instantaneous formula is reliable because the pie is at least as big as the Minter Rate alone would produce. Above it, with more debt than earning supply, the naive version of the same formula would imply a rate higher than the Minter Rate itself, which creates a timing risk: Minters' debt compounds continuously, but if the Earner Rate briefly overshoots before the next rate update, earners could be promised more than minters will have actually paid in by the time it is checked. Per the contract's own 30-day confidence-interval logic using logarithmic index math, the EarnerRateModel switches to a more conservative calculation in this regime specifically to stay safe over that longer window rather than just the current instant, which is why this calculator shows a different, more conservative number once Earning Supply is pushed below Owed $M.