Casestudier
Celsius: the lesson on yield without a source
Celsius offered returns banks could not match and grew to billions in customer funds before freezing withdrawals in 2022.
The offer
Customers deposited crypto for far higher interest than savings accounts, marketed as returning what banks kept.
Less visible: the yield came from lending to traders, risky protocol positions and the platform's own token.
Why it failed
As markets fell, borrowers could not repay and collateral lost value while customers rushed to withdraw.
Funds were lent out rather than segregated, so withdrawals were halted.
- Customer funds lent, not held
- Maturity mismatch
- Own token as part of the backing
The legal core
Terms stated deposited assets could become platform property, making customers creditors rather than owners.
That distinction is the most important sentence in any yield contract.
How to spot it
Ask who pays the yield, what risk sits opposite it and whether your coins are segregated.
Compare returns with the risk-free rate; structurally higher means structurally riskier.
Ofte stilte spørsmål
What went wrong at Celsius?
Customer funds were lent into risky positions with a maturity mismatch; a downturn made withdrawals impossible.
Is crypto interest always dangerous?
Not inherently, but the yield needs an identifiable source and your coins must legally remain yours.
How do I check segregation?
Read who holds ownership, whether lending occurs and whether a segregating custodian is used.
Les videre
FTX: reputation is not proof of reserves
The structure behind FTX's collapse, Alameda's role and the controls the industry adopted afterwards.
Mt. Gox: how 'not your keys' became a saying
How the largest bitcoin exchange of 2014 collapsed, what went wrong in custody and which lessons still apply.
Ponzis in crypto form
How to spot a ponzi by its yield source, why returns look fine until they stop, and which cases prove the pattern.