Repository navigation
[fix] Depositor yield history clamps negative yield to zero, hiding real losses #1856
Description
File/location: backend/src/services/yieldHistoryService.ts:262
Description:
buildDepositorYieldHistory computes netYield = Math.max(0, currentValue - depositedValue), so any bucket where a depositor's current position is worth less than their cost basis (e.g. after emergency-withdrawal share loss or a pool value decline) is reported as netYield: 0 instead of the actual negative value, misrepresenting the depositor's real performance on the yield-history chart/API response.
Acceptance Criteria:
- netYield reflects the true signed difference (currentValue - depositedValue), including negative values, in the returned YieldHistoryPoint[]
- A test constructs a scenario where currentValue < depositedValue (e.g. a large withdrawal after a value drop) and asserts the returned netYield is negative, not 0
Notes:
yieldHistoryService.test.ts:109 already comments 'may be slightly negative due to share price' while asserting only >= -1, which passes trivially against the current always->=0 behavior and does not actually catch this.
Filed via automated codebase sweep (backend / fix).
Activity
davidchike587-cmyk commentedon Sep 28, 2026
@davidchike587-cmyk has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 9th wave.
ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @davidchike587-cmyk to this issue.
Jubilee-001 commentedon Sep 29, 2026
@Jubilee-001 has applied to work on this issue as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 9th wave.
ℹ️ Repo Maintainers: To accept this application, review their application or assign @Jubilee-001 to this issue.
drips-wave commentedon Sep 29, 2026
Congratulations, @Jubilee-001! 🎉 Your application was accepted by the repo's maintainers, and the issue is due on September 30, 2026.
🧑💻 @Jubilee-001: Please resolve the issue such that the repo's maintainers have enough time to review your contribution before the due date. You'll earn Points for completing the issue on-time, which will make you eligible for a share of the Stellar Wave Program's reward pool.
Warning
When opening a PR, please link it to this issue to ensure it gets tracked accurately. Points are awarded when this issue is marked as completed by the maintainer.
🤠 Repo maintainers: Please keep an eye on the contributor's progress and review their work before the due date. You can manage this issue, including adjusting its complexity and points, here.
🌊 Happy Wave 🌊
drips-wave commentedon Oct 13, 2026
This issue has been marked as completed by a Drips Wave moderator for @Jubilee-001 as part of the Stellar Wave Program's 9th Wave 🥳
Moderator's reason: [Auto-assessed] PR #1969 is merged (mergedAt timestamp 2026-10-10T10:06:49Z), cleanly removing the Math.max(0) clamp on netYield and adding unit tests covering negative yield scenarios as requested by issue #1856. There are no maintainer objections across any channel.
😎 @Jubilee-001: You earned 150 Points for completing this issue! Once the Wave's rewards are finalized, you'll be eligible for a percentage of the Wave's reward pool based on the percentage of total points you've earned. Learn more here.
🧑💻 Repo maintainers: How'd the contributor do? Leave a review to share your experience working with them.
ℹ️ Note: This issue was marked complete via moderation. Points were issued even though the GitHub issue remains open.