Liquity

LQTY is Liquity’s secondary token, used in the protocol’s fee and staking design. It is different from LUSD, the stablecoin borrowed against collateral, and from ETH, which backs the original borrowing positions. Liquity has separate V1 and V2 documentation, so a current explanation should identify which version’s features it describes rather than treating every mechanism as identical.

Under Liquity V1, staking LQTY entitles a participant to a proportional share of eligible borrowing and redemption fee revenue, paid in LUSD and ETH. Liquity V2 adds voting and incentive-allocation features described in its newer documentation. Rewards depend on protocol activity and the relevant rules; staking does not promise a fixed return or remove the risks of token price changes and smart contracts.

Liquity V1 documentation says LQTY is not used for governance in that version. Liquity V2 documentation describes voting power and the ability to direct certain incentives through initiatives. Because these statements refer to different protocol versions, a short answer without version context can be misleading. Check the official V2 staking and voting guide for the current mechanics before assuming a particular governance right applies.

LUSD is Liquity V1’s dollar-pegged stablecoin, created when users borrow against ETH collateral. It is not the same asset as LQTY: LUSD is the loan asset, while LQTY is associated with staking and protocol incentives. A dollar peg is a design goal, not a guarantee that every exchange price will remain exactly one dollar under all market conditions.

Liquity V1’s official token distribution FAQ lists a maximum supply of 100,000,000 LQTY and describes a programmed community issuance curve. That figure should be read alongside the official token contracts and any version-specific updates. Maximum supply, circulating supply and tokens currently staked measure different things, so they should not be used interchangeably when comparing market statistics.

Yes. The V1 fee share depends on eligible borrowing and redemption activity, so revenue can change as users borrow, repay or redeem LUSD. V2 incentives have their own voting and initiative rules. Neither mechanism should be treated as a fixed-rate savings product, and the market value of any reward can move independently of the number of tokens or units received.

Relevant risks include volatile token prices, changing protocol activity, smart-contract vulnerabilities, interface or wallet mistakes and differences between V1 and V2 mechanics. Borrowers face additional collateral and liquidation risks, while stakers depend on the contracts and fee sources involved. Official audits can reduce uncertainty but cannot prove that future losses are impossible, and historical performance does not guarantee future outcomes.

The all-time high recorded for LQTY on FMchart is $146.94. Historical extremes depend on the exchanges, quote currencies and time span included in a price series, so other data providers may report a different figure. Use the Price Statistics panel for the value and check the chart’s available history before comparing the record with a current market price.

Use FMchart’s composite chart to inspect LQTY across the available historical timeframes. Liquity’s original design links staking to eligible borrowing and redemption fees, but that mechanism does not determine market price by itself. The chart’s start date and exchange coverage affect the period being compared, and past price movement cannot establish what will happen next.

Start with Liquity’s official V1 documentation for token distribution and staking, then read the V2 staking-and-voting guide if you need newer incentive features. Compare the documentation with contract addresses and audit resources before interacting with a wallet. Third-party market pages can help with price discovery, but protocol rules should be checked against official materials because version-specific details can materially change the explanation.