The ultimate lending API suite.
Why Lending Aggregation Matters
DeFi lending has grown to billions in TVL across dozens of protocols. But this fragmentation creates real problems for users and developers.
The Current State: Fragmented Lending
Today's DeFi lending ecosystem looks like this:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ USER / APPLICATION │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│ │ │ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼
┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐
│ Aave V2 │ │ Aave V3 │ │Compound │ │ Morpho │ │ Silo │
│ │ │ │ │ V3 │ │ Blue │ │ V2 │
├─────────┤ ├─────────┤ ├─────────┤ ├─────────┤ ├─────────┤
│Different│ │Different│ │Different│ │Different│ │Different│
│ API │ │ API │ │ API │ │ API │ │ API │
│Different│ │Different│ │Different│ │Different│ │Different│
│ Rates │ │ Rates │ │ Rates │ │ Rates │ │ Rates │
│Different│ │Different│ │Different│ │Different│ │Different│
│ Risks │ │ Risks │ │ Risks │ │ Risks │ │ Risks │
└─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘
Problem: Which one has the best rate? What are the risks?
How do I integrate all of them?
The Confusion Problem
Consider a user wanting to supply USDC for yield. They face:
| Protocol | Supply APY | Risk Factors |
|---|---|---|
| Aave V3 | 5.2% | Battle-tested, insurance fund |
| Compound V3 | 4.8% | Single-collateral model, proven security |
| Morpho Blue | 6.1% | Higher rates, market-specific risk |
| Silo V2 | 5.5% | Isolated markets, newer protocol |
Questions the user must answer:
- Which APY is actually best after accounting for gas costs?
- How do the risk parameters compare?
- What's my liquidation threshold on each?
- How liquid is each market if I need to exit quickly?
- Do I need to monitor multiple positions?
For developers, it's even worse:
- 5 different APIs to integrate
- 5 different data formats
- 5 different transaction formats
- 5 different risk models to understand
- Constant maintenance as protocols upgrade
The 1delta Solution: Unified Aggregation
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ USER / APPLICATION │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1DELTA API │
│ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ UNIFIED DATA LAYER │ │
│ │ • Normalized & comparable rates & rewards across all protocols │ │
│ │ • Standardized risk metrics (ltv, utilization, ...) │ │
│ │ • Real-time best rate discovery │ │
│ │ • Aggregated position view & dsicovery │ │
│ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ UNIFIED TRANSACTION LAYER │ │
│ │ • Protocol-agnostic operations │ │
│ │ • Atomic multi-step transactions (e.g. position migrations) │ │
│ │ • Optimal routing │ │
│ │ • Built-in slippage protection │ │
│ │ • Advanced features across all lnders (looping, debt swap, ...)│ │
│ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
┌──────────────┬──────────┴──────────┬──────────────┐
▼ ▼ ▼ ▼
┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐
│ Aave │ │Compound │ │ Morpho │ │ Silo │
└─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘
Real-World Scenario: Finding the Best USDC Yield
Without 1delta (Manual Approach)
Step 1: Check Aave V3
- Navigate to app.aave.com → Connect wallet → Find USDC market
- Note: 5.2% APY, 82.5% LTV | Gas to deposit: ~$15
Step 2: Check Compound V3
- Navigate to compound.finance → Connect wallet → Find USDC market
- Note: 4.8% APY, 90% LTV | Gas to deposit: ~$12
Step 3: Check Morpho Blue
- Navigate to morpho.org → Connect wallet → Find USDC markets (multiple!)
- Compare rates across markets
- Note: 5.5-6.5% APY depending on market | Gas to deposit: ~$18
Step 4: Make decision
- Compare rates → Evaluate risks manually → Execute transaction
The Manual Process
| Time | 30+ minutes |
| Mental overhead | High |
| Missed opportunity | Better rate launched on Silo while you were checking |
With 1delta API
// Single API call to find best rate
const bestRate = await onedelta.getBestSupplyRate({
asset: "USDC",
chainId: 1,
minLiquidity: "1000000" // $1M minimum liquidity
});
// Response
{
protocol: "morpho-blue",
marketId: "0x...",
supplyAPY: 0.061,
liquidity: "45000000",
riskScore: "medium",
collateralFactor: 0.80,
recommendation: "Best rate with acceptable risk"
}
// Execute deposit with single transaction
const tx = await onedelta.buildDeposit({
protocol: bestRate.protocol,
marketId: bestRate.marketId,
asset: "USDC",
amount: "10000"
});
Result
| Time | 30 seconds |
| Mental overhead | Minimal |
| Always optimal | Yes |
Quantified Benefits
For Users
| Metric | Manual | With 1delta | Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time to find best rate | 30+ min | Instant | 99%+ |
| Transactions for looping | 5-10 | 1 | 80-90% |
| Missed yield opportunities | Common | None | 100% |
| Risk of partial execution | Yes | No | Eliminated |
For Developers
| Aspect | Direct Integration | 1delta API | Benefit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protocols to integrate | 5+ | 1 | 80% less code |
| APIs to maintain | 5+ | 1 | 80% less maintenance |
| Data formats | 5+ different | 1 unified | Simplified logic |
| Transaction builders | 5+ | 1 | Faster development |
| Time to market | Months | Days | 10x faster |
Risk Aggregation: Comparing Apples to Apples
One of the biggest challenges in DeFi lending is comparing risk across protocols. Each protocol uses different terminology and metrics.
The Problem: Inconsistent Risk Metrics
| Protocol | Collateral Term | Liquidation Term | Penalty Term |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aave | LTV | Liquidation Threshold | Liquidation Bonus |
| Compound | Collateral Factor | Liquidate Borrow | Close Factor |
| Morpho | LLTV | LLTV | Liquidation Incentive |
Same concepts, different names, different calculations.
The Solution: Normalized Risk Metrics
1delta normalizes all risk parameters into a consistent format:
// Query any protocol with consistent response format
const markets = await onedelta.getLendingMarkets({
asset: "WETH",
chainId: 1
});
// All protocols return the same structure
[
{
protocol: "aave-v3",
asset: "WETH",
// Normalized metrics (same format for all protocols)
maxLTV: 0.825, // Maximum loan-to-value
liquidationThreshold: 0.85, // When liquidation can occur
liquidationPenalty: 0.05, // Cost of liquidation
// Calculated metrics
safetyBuffer: 0.025, // liquidationThreshold - maxLTV
riskScore: "low" // Normalized risk assessment
},
{
protocol: "compound-v3",
asset: "WETH",
maxLTV: 0.90,
liquidationThreshold: 0.90,
liquidationPenalty: 0.05,
safetyBuffer: 0.00,
riskScore: "medium"
}
]
Protocol Migration Made Easy
Scenario: User has a 3x leveraged wstETH position on Aave V3 but Compound V3 just launched better rates.
Manual Migration (Without 1delta)
- Obtain funds to repay debt (where from?)
- Repay debt on Aave
- Withdraw collateral from Aave
- Deposit collateral to Compound
- Borrow from Compound
- Return borrowed funds
Manual Migration Cost
| Transactions | 6+ |
| Risk | Price movement between steps could cause issues |
| Time | 30+ minutes |
| Complexity | High (need temporary capital) |
1delta Migration (Single Transaction)
With our stack, such an operation can be executed in a single transaction without any currency conversions.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Flash Loan (debt amount) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Repay Aave V3 debt │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Withdraw from Aave V3 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Deposit to Compound V3 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Borrow from Compound V3 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Repay Flash Loan │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
1delta Migration Result
| Transactions | 1 (atomic) |
| Risk | None (atomic execution, no swaps needed) |
| Time | Single block |
| Complexity | Handled by 1delta |
Summary: The Aggregation Advantage
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ WITHOUT AGGREGATION │
│ │
│ [User] ──► [Protocol A] ──► [Protocol B] ──► [Protocol C] │
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ Different Different Different │
│ │ APIs Formats Risks │
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ └──────────────┴───────────────┴───────────────┘ │
│ │ │
│ CONFUSION + INEFFICIENCY │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ WITH 1DELTA AGGREGATION │
│ │
│ [User] │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ ┌──────────────┐ │
│ │ 1delta │ │
│ │ Aggregator │ │
│ └──────────────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ┌───────────────┼───────────────┐ │
│ ▼ ▼ ▼ │
│ [Protocol A] [Protocol B] [Protocol C] │
│ │
│ CLARITY + EFFICIENCY │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Key Benefits:
- Single integration point - One API for all protocols
- Normalized data - Consistent formats and risk metrics
- Optimal rates - Always find the best opportunity
- Atomic execution - No partial execution risk
- Gas efficiency - Complex operations in single transactions
- Future-proof - New protocols added without code changes
Get Started
Ready to simplify your DeFi lending integration?
- Data API - Query lending rates, pools, and yields
- Transaction API - Build lending transactions
- Lending Concepts - Understand the lending data model
- Looping Guide - Build leveraged positions
- Smart Contract API - Contract interfaces and examples