Back to all articles
Risk Management

Algorithmic vs. Collateralized Stablecoins: A Post-Mortem Analysis

Examining the failures of Terra, Iron Finance, and Basis Cash. Why algorithmic approaches fail and what collateralized designs get right.

18 min read
January 17, 2025
The graveyard of failed stablecoins is littered with algorithmic experiments. Terra/Luna ($40B collapse), Iron Finance ($2B), Basis Cash, Empty Set Dollar—the list extends further than most would care to remember. Each failure followed a predictable pattern: algorithmic mechanisms that worked in benign conditions but created death spirals under stress. This post-mortem analysis examines why algorithmic approaches consistently fail and why collateralized designs, despite their capital inefficiency, remain the only proven path to stablecoin stability.

The Algorithmic Stablecoin Thesis

Algorithmic stablecoins emerged from a compelling premise: maintain a price peg through supply manipulation rather than collateral. When price rises above peg, mint more tokens to increase supply and push price down. When price falls below peg, contract supply to push price up. No collateral needed—just elegant game theory and arbitrage incentives.

The Fatal Flaw

Algorithmic stabilization relies on market confidence to function. When that confidence breaks—even temporarily—the mechanisms designed to restore the peg instead accelerate its collapse. The algorithm cannot distinguish between a temporary depeg and a fundamental loss of confidence, responding identically to both.

Anatomy of the Terra Collapse

Terra's UST maintained its peg through a mint/burn mechanism with LUNA. When UST dropped below $1, arbitrageurs could redeem 1 UST for $1 worth of LUNA (newly minted), creating buy pressure on UST. The mechanism worked for years—until it didn't.

$40B
Market Cap Before Collapse
3 days
Time to Complete Collapse
99.99%
Value Destroyed

On May 7, 2022, large UST redemptions triggered the mint mechanism, flooding the market with LUNA. As LUNA's price dropped, each UST redemption required minting more LUNA, further crashing its price. The reflexive doom loop was unstoppable: more UST selling → more LUNA minting → lower LUNA price → more UST selling. Within 72 hours, $40 billion evaporated.

Why Collateralization Works

Collateralized stablecoins like USDC, USDT, and GRAIN work because redemptions are backed by real assets. When a holder redeems GRAIN, they receive USDC from the reserve—not newly minted tokens from an algorithm. The reserve exists independently of market sentiment; it doesn't depend on arbitrageurs, game theory, or confidence to maintain value.

  • Algorithmic: Depends on confidence → reflexive collapse risk
  • Collateralized: Backed by assets → redemption always possible
  • Algorithmic: Supply manipulation → hyperinflation risk
  • Collateralized: Fixed/managed supply → price stability
  • Algorithmic: Works until it doesn't → catastrophic failure mode
  • Collateralized: Graceful degradation → orderly wind-down possible
"There is no free lunch in stablecoin design. If you're not putting up collateral, you're putting up confidence—and confidence is the first casualty of a crisis."
Post-Terra Industry Analysis

Ready to Transform Your Treasury?

Join forward-thinking enterprises using GRAIN for instant, zero-friction payments with protected reserves.

Grain & Vault | Protected Treasury. Zero Friction Payments.