Curve Best Yields & Key Metrics | Week 36, 2026

Rates are estimated annualized returns for a modeled $100,000 deposit after pool dilution. They include base fees, unboosted CRV and active Merkl rewards where applicable. Rates are variable and not guaranteed.

What supports the leading rates: the leading USD pool yields are mostly incentive-driven, so they can fall when rewards change. sUSG/reUSD has the largest fee contribution, with 9.2 percentage points coming from trading fees. Several leading pools also have relatively low TVL, making their returns more sensitive to new deposits and changes in incentives: $0.23 million for OUSD/USG, $1.04 million for sUSG/reUSD and $3.22 million for reUSD/sDOLA, against $11.68 million for reUSD/scrvUSD.

crvUSD remained close to peg at $0.9997. Minting rose 9.8% and LlamaLend borrowing increased 4.8%, while PegKeeper reserves fell by $22.8 million to $42.2 million. DEX TVL, volume, swaps and fees also declined, but these measure activity rather than protocol solvency.

Fees here are DEX pool fees only; crvUSD minting fees and LlamaLend fees appear in their own sections.

Vote 1492 executed on 2 September, activating and funding yRisk’s one-year risk-assessment mandate for LlamaLend.

Led by contributors to Yearn and Resupply, yRisk will monitor collateral, oracles, liquidity and market parameters, providing alerts and recommendations as conditions change. The mandate is revocable by the DAO.

It is paid as two revocable one-year vesting streams to yrisk.eth — 125,000 frxUSD held as sfrxUSD, and 568,181 CRV — with the sfrxUSD yield returning to the Curve treasury.

Vote 1491 executed on 29 August, changing how the swap fee behaves on the yb-cbBTC and yb-tBTC pools: cheaper when the pool is balanced, considerably more expensive when it is not, and reaching that higher level sooner. Vote 1494, submitted on 31 August, is still open; it would replace that behaviour with a single flat fee of 1.30% across the YieldBasis wBTC, cbBTC and tBTC pools, and change how often each pool rebalances.

The swap fee is what a trader pays and what liquidity providers earn. In these pools it is not one number: it sits low while the pool is balanced and rises as the pool drifts, which pays providers more for the trades that unbalance them. After the August change a balanced trade costs less than before and an unbalancing one costs much more. The open vote would drop that mechanism entirely and charge one flat rate whatever the pool state, making the cost of a trade predictable and removing the extra reward for trades that restore balance.

Measured on chain for both pools: the balanced-pool fee went from 1.46% to 1.28%, the out-of-balance fee from 1.70% to 3.28%, and the fee now climbs toward that ceiling roughly twice as quickly. The open vote proposes a flat 1.30%.

Vote 1493 executed on 2 September, lengthening the price-averaging window on the scrvUSD/sDOLA and sDOLA/invUSD pools from about 14 minutes to one hour.

A Curve pool does not price its assets off the last trade alone; it uses a time-weighted average, so a single large trade cannot move the quoted price on its own. A longer window makes that average react more slowly — steadier pricing in a thin market, at the cost of lagging a genuine move for longer.

Measured on chain: ma_exp_time went from 866 seconds to 3,600 on both pools.

Vote 1488 executed on 31 August, adding a gauge for the frxUSD/sUSDai pool. Vote 1489 executed on 27 August, adding a veFunder gauge for Vyper.

The frxUSD/sUSDai gauge is the ordinary kind: it lets a pool compete for the weekly CRV emissions that veCRV holders vote on, so depositors there can now earn CRV. The veFunder gauge is not a pool at all — it is the DAO’s funding route, where veCRV holders can direct emissions toward Vyper development instead of toward liquidity.

The following tables provide additional market data for readers who want to go beyond this week’s highlights.

reUSD/scrvUSD took the largest weight gain of the week. OETH/WETH, which took the largest gain last week, gave up the most this week.

The week’s growth in crvUSD debt came mostly from BTC collateral: WBTC added $3.61 million and cbBTC $1.51 million, against $1.08 million for wstETH.

crvUSD/sfrxUSD appears on both sides because these are two separate markets with the same collateral: the LlamaLend v2 market (controller 0x3cD4…1bbe, $11.7 million borrowed) took on $998k more debt, while the older v1 market (controller 0x3DE3…BF50, $5.49 million borrowed) was paid down by $938k.

Know someone tracking DeFi yields? Forward them this issue. Subscribe on Curve News to receive next week’s report.

Risk information: pool risks, lending risks and crvUSD risks.