TurboLoop against a bank deposit

A term deposit is the closest familiar product: you give money for a fixed period at a rate agreed in advance. That similarity is exactly why the differences deserve stating plainly.

The short version

  • A bank deposit is usually covered by a deposit guarantee scheme up to a limit set by the country; a DeFi plan has no insurance of any kind.
  • Banks are supervised and have a complaints route that ends with a regulator; a renounced contract has no one to appeal to.
  • Early withdrawal from a term deposit is normally possible at the cost of the interest; a Loop Plan has no early exit at any price.
  • A bank pays more for longer money because it is funding loans; TurboLoop also pays more per day for longer terms, which is the reverse of a funding logic.
  • Both are counterparty risk. What differs is who the counterparty is and what stands behind them.
A term deposit compared with a TurboLoop plan
Question The alternative TurboLoop
What stands behind it A licensed, supervised institution, usually with a state guarantee scheme up to a limit. A contract with renounced ownership. No licence, no guarantee, no supervisor.
Breaking the term early Normally possible, at the cost of some or all of the interest. Impossible. There is no function in the contract that releases the principal early.
If something goes wrong A complaints procedure, an ombudsman in many countries, and courts. Nothing. Nobody can change the contract, which also means nobody can fix it.
Where the rate comes from The bank lends your money at a higher rate and keeps the spread. Stated revenue streams the protocol says it operates, with no published arithmetic.
Rate by duration Longer terms usually pay more in total, as compensation for the commitment. Longer terms pay more per day too: about 0.43% on 7 days against about 0.9% on 60.

The protections are the whole difference

A deposit guarantee means a failed bank does not become your problem up to the covered amount. Supervision means someone checks the books before failure, and a complaints route means a dispute has somewhere to go. None of those exist here, and no amount of on-chain verification substitutes for them.

What a public contract gives instead is a different kind of certainty: the rules cannot be changed behind your back, and every payment is visible. That is worth something. It is not worth the same thing.

The curve that runs the wrong way

A bank pays more for a longer term because longer money is more useful for lending, and the premium is small. Here the longer plan pays more per day as well as in total, which is not how a funding cost normally behaves.

A rate structure that rewards locking money away for longer, more intensely, is worth noticing. It is the shape you would design if the goal were to keep deposits in place.

A deposit suits you better if

  • Losing the money would change your circumstances.
  • You want a guarantee scheme and somewhere to complain.
  • You may need the money back and can accept losing the interest to get it.

A Loop Plan suits you better if

  • You are deliberately allocating money you can lose entirely.
  • You want the rules to be public and unchangeable rather than guaranteed.
  • The term matches money you genuinely will not need.
Comparing the two percentages directly is the mistake to avoid. They are not the same unit of risk, and the higher number is paid for the absence of everything in the left column.

Where the TurboLoop column comes from