zlacker

The part you're missing is that StableGains was simply parking their investors' money on Anchor, collecting the 20% APY, shaving off a quarter of it, and passing the remaining 15% to their investors.

Skipping the middleman is necessarily better because it is inherently lower risk for an absolute guarantee of 33% more upside.*

Investing in something else with even 16% promised returns, let alone 1500%, is not necessarily better because it is almost certainly higher risk.

* When Anchor (Luna/UST) crashed both StableGains and direct users of Anchor suffered the same percentage losses. But direct investors in Anchor had balances which were necessarily 33% ahead of StableGains investors due to not having StableGains shave off their interest earnings.

>>MacsHe+(OP)
The reason StableGains initially looked compelling to me was for smaller transactions. Being able to deposit & withdraw smaller amounts of money w/o having to pay gas fees looked good. If you need to pull out $100 to cover your half of dinner w/ a friend, StableGains would make that easy. Trying to pull it out of Anchor Protocol would be more work, and you'd have to pay the gas fees.