Oh, absolutely. I agree 100%. This strategy would by its nature have lower returns, as we’d only be able to deploy a fraction of the deposited collateral into working capital. When starting this strategy my main concern was how to allow end users to be certain their DAI would be secure in case of DAI losing its peg; returns were a secondary consideration.
One just needs to look at the fraction of DAI in the yCRV pool to see how much more in demand this token is. In a worst case scenario, DAI has reached $1.22 in the past. A simple CRV deposit would not be able to guarantee depositors could reclaim their principal in the case of another crunch. I’m not sure there’s a solution out there that could guarantee DAI liquidity with notably high returns. I can continue to search/think though.