Rhino.fi has deployed its first on-chain credit market built on Wildcat and priced in USDT and settled on Plasma. The purpose of the on-chain credit market is to overcome a specific infrastructure limitation and to ensure there is a pool of stablecoins already pre-positioned on the desired chain ready to settle transactions rather than sourcing it reactively per transaction.
The market starts with a $2 million max capacity and 10 percent lender returns. It is denominated in USDT, which is followed by the settlement on Plasma and developed on Wildcat’s credit infrastructure.
The liquidity issue that is being addressed
Rhino.fi has processed more than $15 billion in cumulative transaction volume on 30+ chains for 100+ business clients, such as Wirex, Karta, Kettlepay, GRVT, and Extended. They currently have processed more than $700 million in monthly clearing volume, which is representing 5 times YoY with settlements of over $10 million each.
At that velocity it’s not possible to supply liquidity on demand. The funds must already reside on-chain, where settlement takes place at the time a customer transacts. To this point, this operating liquidity has been solely on-chain, supported by Rhino.fi’s balance sheet and therefore limiting the settlement activity to their internal capacity. The Wildcat market enters with the external, on-chain credit as a second funding source to make sure of the same operating liquidity.
How cross-chain settlement is managed by Rhino.fi
Rhino.fi’s credit product is designed with a delta-neutral settlement model. USDT borrowed on Plasma is not taken as a directional view and is balanced out with identical stablecoin holdings elsewhere within Rhino.fi’s multi-chain infrastructure. This balancing between the borrowed asset and reserves is facilitated using LayerZero and Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP) and the assets are moved across chains as demand arises on specific chains.
Capital that was borrowed goes towards settlement throughput, while a reserve offsets positions neutrally. The lender’s USDT is used for live settlement, so putting an offset in the balance elsewhere absorbs that risk.
The trigger for the rebalancing comes in via LayerZero, with CCTP actually transferring the USDT, eliminating wrapped-asset risk. The wildcat reserve ratio and withdrawal cycle dictate how the rebalance is split between the part of the balance that remains on the liquid side and what portion is put out to use.
How the Rhino.fi’s settlement stack fits Plasma and Wildcat
Plasma, a blockchain that is exclusively developed for the fastest and cheapest stablecoin transfers. It integrates well with conventional EVM tools and was already powering PlasmaOne, rhino.fi’s neobank product; thus, this integration is not a new collaboration.
Wildcat handles the lending functionality. Wildcat is the system that handles the lending portion of things. The lenders are dictated by the borrowers, who decide all the terms: what rate is charged, how long the funds should be locked for, what percentage of funds are kept as cash reserves, and who the eligible lenders are.
This all without relying on someone else’s report, as that can be verified on-chain. Major trading institutions like Wintermute, Amber Group, Keyrock, and Selini have all utilized Wildcat, and these terms have already been validated through large amounts of real money.
The risk here is not what it seems like
Lenders are risk-based off of a true settlement flow, not a blind balance sheet. Wildcat can provide full visibility into reserves, payback, and terms directly on-chain at every moment in time. With a delta-neutral position, risk is primarily based on the solvency of Rhino and their rebalancing capabilities across-chain, not exposure to USDT price.
The Plasma market is the first deployment. Additional chains are planned next, comprising the Ethereum mainnet, equipped with a system for tracking client demand and the track record this market builds. Every single new chain implements an additional rebalancing leg on LayerZero and CCTP. The meaning here is simple: complexity increases with each market regardless, though the core logic remains as it is.
