# Create a crvUSD credit line to Yield Basis

**URL:** <http://gov.curve.finance/t/create-a-crvusd-credit-line-to-yield-basis/10774>\
**Category:** Proposals\
**Created:** [August 18, 2025, 5:48pm UTC](http://gov.curve.finance/t/create-a-crvusd-credit-line-to-yield-basis/10774 "2025-08-18T17:48:53Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 28

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Anoncalc1](http://gov.curve.finance/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Anoncalc1](http://gov.curve.finance/u/Anoncalc1)\
**Post date:** [September 22, 2025, 5:56pm UTC](http://gov.curve.finance/t/create-a-crvusd-credit-line-to-yield-basis/10774/28 "2025-09-22T17:56:41Z")

</div>

Got it, but let me push back a bit.

If the math doesn’t really justify V∗∝(Vc)LV^\* \propto (V\_c)^LV∗∝(Vc​)L, then IL isn’t truly “eliminated,” it’s transformed. In a low-volume or low-fee environment, the rebalancing costs can exceed fee income, which means the position will draw down relative to just HODL’ing.

So my question is: in those adverse conditions, where exactly does the model protect LPs from losses? Because unless the fee stream _always_ covers the rebalance drag, it feels like IL risk is still there, just hidden under different assumptions.

Appreciate the dialogue.

---

_[View the full topic](http://gov.curve.finance/t/create-a-crvusd-credit-line-to-yield-basis/10774)._