Something about automated liquidity vaults that I think deserves to be said plainly, because the way they are described keeps obscuring it. A vault that widens or narrows its range based on a forecast is taking a position. Specifically it is short volatility. While price stays inside the band you collect fees; when it moves fast you get run over and end up holding the side you did not want. That is not a flaw in the strategy, that is the strategy. So a quoted annualised fee yield with no accompanying number for realised loss against simply holding is describing one leg of a two-leg trade. The forecast quality matters, but a better forecast only changes how often you get run over, not whether the exposure exists. I would rather see fees minus divergence over a full quarter than another APR headline.