Crypto Enthusiast • Web3 Guy • Defi • AI • RWA • Gamefi • Multichain Analysis • Marketing Strategist • NFA • Threador 🧵🦅

space
Joined November 2010
Tokenized equities need more than an onchain ticker. They need assets people can actually use. @Swisscheese_fn is building on Polygon, combining tokenized stocks with swaps, staking and borrowing. Its security measures include smart contract audits, cold storage, encrypted data and 2FA. Reliable pricing, liquidity and compliance will determine how far this model can go. With $SWCH listed on MEXC and Gate.io, SwissCheese is building its presence in the wider crypto market. The goal is to make stocks functional assets within DeFi, not just put them onchain.
37
2
53
8,001
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗰𝗸𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴.𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻. I spent some time researching the latest development from @pendle_fi, and what caught my attention wasn't just the leverage. It was how three pieces of financial infrastructure are now working together on Base. On October 22, Pendle introduced PendleLoop, allowing eligible users to build leveraged positions in tokenized US equities through @aave V4. The supported assets include: • AAPLc — Apple • NVDAc — Nvidia • GOOGLc — Alphabet • TSLAc — Tesla • AMZNc — Amazon • MSFTc — Microsoft • METAc — Meta Here's what I found. ➊ 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁, 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸? @aave already introduced lending markets for these equities in September. @pendle_fi didn't create a new lending market. It built an interface that combines the transactions required to increase exposure. Instead of manually buying tokens, supplying collateral, borrowing and repeating the process, users can manage the position through PendleLoop. The mechanism works like this: → Purchase a tokenized stock. → Supply the tokens as collateral on $Aave V4. → Borrow $USDC against that collateral. → Use the borrowed $USDC to purchase additional stock tokens. → Repeat within the permitted collateral limits. The result is a larger equity position than the capital initially committed. At launch, available leverage ranged from approximately 2.6x to 4.2x, depending on the asset. But leverage isn't free. Borrowing rates are variable, and a decline in collateral value can trigger liquidation. ➋ 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗰𝗸𝘀? This is another detail worth understanding. @coinbase Tokenized Stocks aren't simply synthetic assets following equity prices. Each token represents a certificate issued by Coinbase Onchain SPV Ltd, with underlying shares held through Alpaca Securities (an SEC-registered broker-dealer). The issuer holds those shares under a trust arrangement for token holders. Corporate actions are also accounted for. For example: Dividends are reinvested into additional underlying shares (after applicable fees and taxes),rather than distributed directly to token holders. This means the tokens provide economic exposure to the underlying equities, although their legal rights and redemption arrangements differ from holding ordinary shares through a brokerage account. ➌ 𝗡𝗼𝘄, 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁? Aave V4's Equities Hub on @base supports the seven stocks as collateral for USDC borrowing. At launch, the market had approximately: • $29M in aggregate equity collateral caps. • $32M USDC supply cap. • $21M USDC borrow cap. • Collateral factors ranging from 65% to 79%. These are market limits, not actual deposits or borrowing volume. And the collateral factors matter because they determine how much borrowing capacity each asset receives. A token with a lower collateral factor generally requires more collateral for the same loan. This also explains why PendleLoop cannot offer identical leverage across every stock. ➃ 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗹𝗲𝗟𝗼𝗼𝗽 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁? Pendle is currently waiving its service fees on eligible non-PT looping positions until December 31, 2026. However, that doesn't eliminate the cost of leverage. Users still face: • Variable USDC borrowing interest • Transaction costs and slippage • Liquidation risk when collateral values decline Pendle has also announced borrowing incentives distributed through @Merkl_xyz. Those incentives can reduce effective financing costs for qualifying positions, but they shouldn't be treated as permanent income. ➎ 𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗜 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 The lending market operates 24/7, but the underlying US stock market doesn't. Aave uses Chainlink's tokenized equity price feeds, which publish prices 24/5. During weekends and US market holidays, the feeds retain their last published prices. That creates a pricing gap: • A stock could experience a major development outside regular market hours • while its onchain collateral valuation remains unchanged until the feed updates. For leveraged positions, a sharp repricing when the feed resumes can become a liquidation problem. So 24/7 access doesn't mean continuous price discovery or protection from market gaps. ✦ Conclusion What I find significant is how the responsibilities are divided: → @coinbase handles the tokenized equity structure. → @aave provides the collateral and borrowing infrastructure. → @pendle_fi makes the transactions accessible through one interface. Each component existed before this integration, but combining them reduces the work required to use tokenized equities in DeFi. And I think that distinction matters. Issuing more tokenized stocks doesn't necessarily create more demand for them. The stronger test is whether holders are willing to supply those assets as collateral, borrow against them, and maintain positions after promotional incentives expire. That's what I'll be monitoring: ▸ collateral deposits ▸ actual borrowing demand ▸ utilization ▸ how these markets behave during periods of equity volatility Because the ability to tokenize a stock has already been demonstrated. Whether that stock can support a liquid, sustainable lending market is the more important question.
51
11
57
1,541
Stablecoin deposits are growing across DeFi, but the capital isn’t flowing evenly between assets or lending markets. The latest 30-day data shows sUSDS leading individual pool inflows, while USDC is attracting deposits across several @Aave, @sparkfinance and @Compound_xyz markets. The largest inflows: → sUSDS / Sky Ethereum: +$383.1M (+8.6%) → USDC / Aave Arbitrum: +$38.0M (+20.9%) → RLUSD / Spark Ethereum: +$20.0M (+200%) → USDC / Aave Base: +$17.3M (+9.7%) → USDC / Aave V4 Ethereum: +$11.5M (+35.7%) → USDC / Spark Ethereum: +$9.0M (+22.3%) → USDT / Aave V4 Ethereum: +$7.6M (+38%) What’s particularly revealing is the distribution of USDC inflows. Across the seven USDC pools shown in the latest inflow table, deposits increased by approximately $92M in aggregate TVL. Arbitrum and Base accounted for $55.3M of that increase, while Ethereum’s newer Aave V4 Core market grew 35.7%. But deposit growth doesn’t necessarily translate into higher yields. @Aave’s USDC supply APY on Arbitrum fell from 2.93% to 2.37% despite attracting $38M in additional deposits. On Base, the opposite happened. USDC deposits grew $17.3M while supply APY increased from 3.96% to 4.17%, with utilisation reaching 90.3%. That suggests the relationship between available liquidity and borrowing activity differs considerably between markets. Meanwhile, sUSDS attracted $383.1M into @SkyEcosystem’s savings product, with its APY increasing from 3.60% to 3.80%. The distinction is important because savings deposits and lending deposits don’t represent identical forms of capital demand. These figures describe the largest inflowing pools, not net flows across every market. Outflows elsewhere can offset much of the growth. Stablecoin adoption is one thing. Attracting deposits into specific markets, maintaining utilisation and generating sustainable borrower demand is another. The distribution of capital across DeFi is becoming just as revealing as the total supply of stablecoins.
66
9
2
112
12,386
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
Everyday I log in here I see that so many people still have a skill issue. > being raped by memes on pumpdotfun ? pivot to NFTs join the best communities there are many out there. > still can’t win from NFTs ? Pivot to trading perps and prediction markets take your time to learn how to trade before trading there are prop firms for Gods sake to use and practice how to trade. > and if at the end of all these you still can’t make a little profit from crypto then build something of value that would provide services to teams in crypto. Add a little fee for those services and it must be worth the price (MUST) And if at the end of all these you are still unlucky and you still can’t win then Give up. don’t run yourself to absolute zero cause you want to win in crypto. I’m not a motivational speaker I’m just telling you the hard truth fren. pivot to learning a trade or something don’t waste your youthful years aping memes and trading perps to absolute zero. As always happy Sunday lads❤️
58
16
1
113
3,130
4.5% vs ~11% target APY across two RWA strategies on @grvt_io: Balanced Bundle • Target APY: ~4.5% • Primary exposure: BlackRock CLOA Opportunistic Bundle • Target APY: ~11% • Primary exposure: BlackOpal LiquidStone II The difference goes beyond yield. The Balanced Bundle focuses primarily on AAA rated CLOs, while the Opportunistic Bundle targets income from Brazilian credit card receivables with FX hedging. Both provide access to real-world credit, but with different risk profiles. What makes this move interesting is where GRVT is taking Earn. The upcoming upgrade aims to bring fixed-income strategies generating returns from interest, premiums and invoices onchain, with target yields of up to 11%. GRVT is also working toward letting users use their Earn balance as trading margin while it continues generating yield. @grvt_io isn’t just adding another way to earn yield. It’s trying to make capital productive without separating earning from trading. If executed well, that could make Earn a much bigger part of the GRVT experience.
61
8
126
13,540
Four lending markets, four very different amounts of capital actually borrowed: @0xfluid • TVL: $874M • Active loans: $666M • 76% loan intensity @maplefinance • TVL: $2.68B • Active loans: $1.92B • 72% Jupiter Lend • TVL: $1.76B • Active loans: $1.08B • 61% @Morpho • TVL: $11.27B • Active loans: $5.77B • 51% Morpho is by far the largest market here, with $11.27B in TVL and $5.77B in active loans, but its loan intensity is closer to 51%. Morpho still wins comfortably on absolute scale, but Fluid and Maple are currently converting a much larger share of deposited capital into outstanding credit. That creates a very different ranking depending on what you care about. By TVL, it goes: Morpho → Maple → Jupiter → Fluid By loan intensity, it flips to: Fluid → Maple → Jupiter → Morpho Same four protocols, completely different order once the focus moves from capital accumulated to capital actually borrowed.
64
10
93
8,500
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
Aave just recorded its strongest quarter ever, with total deposits surpassing $33B. 👀 The numbers tell an important story about where DeFi lending is heading. ➤ In Q3 2026: • Total deposits grew by $9.5B, up 40%. • Aave V4 deposits increased 6x to over $1.4B. • Active loans reached approximately $13B. • Aave DAO generated $84M in revenue year-to-date. But the development is what @aave is building beyond these numbers. Aave is expanding its lending infrastructure to support more than traditional crypto assets. Tokenized stocks from @coinbase are already live on V4, with deposits reaching $16.5M and active loans exceeding $5M. Native Bitcoin collateral and institutional custody-based lending are also in development. ➤ Why does this matter? Bitcoin holders could access borrowing without wrapping their $BTC into another asset, while tokenized stocks could allow users to borrow against assets like @Apple, @amazon, and @Google. This opens new ways to connect traditional financial assets with DeFi lending. Meanwhile, Aave App has attracted over $40M in deposits in just two months, showing demand for simpler ways to access on-chain financial services. Aave is also preparing Tokenomics 3.0, built around three components: buybacks, staking, and token burns. My opinion: DeFi lending is expanding beyond the crypto assets it started with. The next stage is about connecting more assets, more capital, and more users to on-chain credit markets. Aave is positioning itself for that expansion.
63
8
1
105
10,131
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
crypto keeps building faster ways to move money, but one weak point isn't going away ai is making phishing and social engineering more convincing, and even the best blockchain can't protect users who are tricked into signing a malicious transaction this is where wallets like binancecoin:native ecosystem projects and self custody tools need to compete on more than fees and speed clear transaction previews, smarter warnings and safer recovery can matter more than another feature launch the next big wave of adoption won't come from making crypto easier to use alone it'll come from making it harder to lose everything by mistake
79
23
2
75
3,773
.@trdEverything is putting $3,000 USDT up for grabs every week across three leaderboards. Perps volume, prediction markets volume, and profit. You can compete based on how you trade, whether that’s generating volume or focusing on profitability. Three leaderboards, one weekly prize pool.
💸 New Leaderboards and Bigger Rewards $3,000 USDT total prize pool every week for 3 leaderboards: • Perps Volume (our existing board) • Prediction Markets Volume • Profit (both perps and prediction markets) $1,000 USDT per board, split among the top 10 traders. The new leaderboards start this week, with final rankings every Thursday at 6 pm HKT.
28
2
76
5,922
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
there are dozens of crypto wallets, but not every wallet supports the same blockchains. here’s a simple breakdown of the major options ↓ 1/ broad multi-chain software wallets best for managing assets across multiple blockchains. → @BitgetWallet > 130+ chains → @TrustWallet > 100+ blockchains → @TokenPocket_TP > 100 to 1,000+ claimed networks → @GemWallet > 100+ blockchains → @MathWallet > 200+/223+ public chains → @GuardaWallet > 70+ blockchains → @CoinomiWallet > 50+ blockchains, 10,000+ tokens → @imTokenOfficial > Ethereum, Bitcoin, TRON, Cosmos, and more → @exodus > major blockchains + hundreds of tokens → @EdgeWallet > 130+ assets → @CoinbaseWallet > EVM chains, Solana, Bitcoin, and more → @Blockchain > Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and other supported networks → @BinanceWallet > 30–60+ chains 2/ specialized software wallets best for specific blockchains, ecosystems, or DeFi activities. → @Blockstream Green > Bitcoin, Lightning, and Liquid → @monero GUI > Monero only → @MyMonero > Monero only; check current service status → @MetaMask > EVM networks, plus supported Bitcoin, Solana, and TRON features → @myetherwallet (MEW) > Ethereum and ERC-20 tokens 3/ hardware wallets (cold storage) best for users who want dedicated devices to protect their private keys. → @Ledger > 50+ blockchains → @Trezor > major blockchains and thousands of supported assets → @Tangem > 80–100+ networks, 16,000+ tokens → @ELLIPAL Titan 2.0 > 40+ blockchains, 10,000+ tokens → @KeystoneWallet 3 Pro > multiple major blockchains → @BitBoxSwiss > Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum, and selected other assets → @SafePal S1 > 200+ claimed blockchains so, which should you use?
66
8
103
9,094
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
A company paying salaries onchain shouldn't have to expose every employee's paycheck. That's one of the practical problems @primus_labs and @allscaleio tested on BNB Chain. On September 1, both teams completed a technical validation of confidential stablecoin payroll, involving four fictional employees and four sample payments. The results were straightforward: • All four payments were recorded onchain. • Individual salary amounts remained encrypted. • Authorized users successfully recovered the correct salary figures. ✦ So how does this work? AllScale handles payroll preparation, settlement, and reconciliation, while Primus uses FHETransform to encrypt salary amounts before they’re submitted to the smart contract. Employees can then access their salary details by signing a wallet message, without paying gas to view them. However, this doesn’t make payroll completely anonymous. - Company wallets - Recipient addresses - Timestamps - Transaction records …remain visible. The protection applies to compensation amounts. That’s an important distinction. Businesses can retain public settlement records without exposing individual salaries. The validation involved only four sample payments, so larger-scale deployment and operational readiness still need further testing. Now, with @primus_labs Epoch 2 underway, there's also an opportunity for creators researching these technical developments. ✦ Here’s what participants should know: → 0.3% of the $PRIM supply is allocated to the campaign. → The top 450 creators across three language regions qualify for rewards. → Your four highest-scoring eligible posts determine your Mindshare score. → Each creator can submit up to 10 posts per epoch. There’s also a referral multiplier tied to Primus XP activity, which can contribute to your final score. For me, the useful part of this campaign is having more reasons to examine what Primus is actually building, from confidential payroll to verifiable offchain data. If you're planning to participate in Epoch 2, you can join through my referral link: s.kaito.ai/RsenLO4
71
8
121
4,784
spacebyte ⛓ retweeted
why should fixed-income opportunities be mostly associated with banks and large investors? i think this is one area where bringing traditional finance on-chain could make a real difference... and it's something @grvt_io is working towards with grvt earn for years, fixed-income strategies have been an important part of how institutions manage their capital but accessing similar opportunities hasn't always been simple for everyday users grvt wants to change that by bringing tokenized fixed-income strategies to its self-custodial platform here's what makes it interesting > access to strategies traditionally associated with institutional investors > eligible assets targeting up to 11% apy, not guaranteed > opportunities brought on-chain through tokenization > more control over assets through a self-custodial approach and there's a much bigger picture here the traditional fixed-income market is estimated at around $160T grvt isn't trying to move all of that on-chain, but making even a small part of these opportunities more accessible is an interesting direction personally, i think the real value isn't just the potential yield it's giving more people access to financial strategies that were traditionally harder to reach of course, institutional-style strategies still carry risks, and higher target yields don't mean guaranteed returns but if grvt can make these opportunities easier to access and understand, that's a meaningful step towards connecting traditional finance with crypto...
347
75
484
22,855
Moving assets between chains should feel this simple. With USDG deposits from Robinhood Chain and USDC from Arc now supported on @grvt_io, getting funds into the platform just got easier. Small improvements like this make a real difference to the user experience.
New updates 🧱
41
3
73
9,224
Starting to think ethereum:0xad29f2723fcdbcf665f210f25e06f97477e417cf might have another leg in it. Been seeing some decent price action around @grvt_io lately, with the structure gradually improving since August. Nothing too explosive yet, but there are a few things making the setup look better: → Higher lows holding up since August → Gradual recovery without a massive blow-off candle → Trading volume starting to return → $0.30 looking like the next level to challenge Wouldn’t be surprised to see momentum pick up if buyers keep pressing. $0.20 remains the downside scenario if the recovery fails, but I’m leaning toward an upside attempt first. Feels like the kind of chart that could attract traders pretty quickly once it starts moving. The volume follow-through will probably decide how far that move goes. PS: Giving away $100 worth of ethereum:0xad29f2723fcdbcf665f210f25e06f97477e417cf to one winner. RT + comment your price prediction to enter.
38
6
87
17,165
Grab a pickaxe. @DiggerBit WL is open ⛏
⛏️DIGGER BIT WHITELIST IS OPEN⛏️ We're kicking off our upcoming beta with $100K+ worth of ultra-rare in-game rewards Every eligible digger gets a chance to get one of 300 Treasury Boxes with: • Unique skins • 5M of $DIG • $20K Legendaries Join here: wl.digger.me/
36
3
46
6,283
Of the $433.5M @Collector_Crypt generated in revenue last quarter, only $25.4M came through as gross profit. Went through Pine Analytics’ Q3 report, and I think the customer data is just as revealing as the revenue itself. The numbers: → $433.5M in revenue, up 8% QoQ → $408.1M spent on card buybacks and redemptions → $25.4M in gross profit, up 12% → 5.9% gross margin So roughly 94% of revenue flows back out, leaving a relatively thin margin on a massive amount of activity. But the customer concentration is what caught my attention. 21,876 wallets purchased packs during Q3, nearly double the previous quarter. Yet just 548 wallets spending $100K+ accounted for 83% of sales. The top 100 alone contributed 54%. And the spending is moving toward more expensive products. Packs priced at $2,500+ generated $169.6M, accounting for 39% of sales, up from 21% in Q2. What’s more surprising is that only 18 of September’s top 100 buyers were also among June’s top 100. So a lot of the business depends on continuously attracting new high-spending collectors rather than the same whales consistently buying. @JupiterExchange also contributed 11% of Q3 sales after launching distribution in July, although retention among its first-time buyers was weaker than Collector Crypt’s own site. Meanwhile, monthly sales have cooled from June’s $212.2M peak to $134.5M in September. I actually like the underlying model here. Physical collectibles held in vaults, instant onchain ownership transfers, and the ability to redeem the actual cards. But looking at the numbers, I think the bigger question is how much recurring demand exists outside that rotating group of high-spending collectors. The $433M quarter shows how large the business can get. The customer concentration tells you a lot more about what’s driving it. h/t @PineAnalytics
155
11
190
12,470
More active addresses don’t necessarily mean more revenue for a blockchain. I compared seven-day chain revenue against active addresses across five networks. Here’s how much revenue each chain generated: → @base: $561.5K → @ethereum: $498.7K → @0xPolygon: $435.2K → @arbitrum: $128.6K → @Optimism: $19K Now, here’s the revenue generated per active address: → Base: $0.356 → Optimism: $0.300 → Polygon: $0.225 → Ethereum: $0.207 → Arbitrum: $0.178 Base leads both rankings, but Optimism surprised me. Despite generating the least total revenue, it ranks second in revenue per active address. It shows how differently networks monetize activity. Having more active addresses doesn’t automatically translate into more revenue. Of course, higher revenue per address isn’t necessarily better. Lower fees can also encourage more activity.
44
3
75
6,801
after @grvt_io’s first token buyback and burn, i went back to look at the numbers and what comes next for $GRVT. here’s the latest snapshot from DeFiLlama, Oct. 21: → $14.75B perp volume / 30D → $3.45B perp volume / 7D → $446.6M open interest → $36.1M TVL Grvt is processing serious trading volume, with $440B+ in cumulative perp volume. then came the October 20 announcement. Grvt bought and permanently burned 1.1M $GRVT using a portion of the app’s gross profit, removing close to 1% of circulating supply. i see this as a solid step because the buyback has moved beyond promises. the tokens were actually purchased on the open market and burned. but the bigger picture is what comes next. @grvt_io has four major releases planned before the end of November: → Grvt Earn: fixed-income strategies targeting up to 11% yield → Stable Funding Perps: zero trading fees, daily funding and a target of 1,000+ markets by December → Yield as Margin: earn yield on eligible balances while using them as trading collateral → Grvt 2.0: a redesigned investing app bringing these experiences together the direction makes sense to me. instead of competing on trading alone, Grvt is trying to make capital productive across earning and trading, without forcing users to move funds between separate accounts. that could create a stronger reason to stay on the platform and give $GRVT a more compelling story beyond speculation. still, there’s one number i won’t ignore. TVL peaked at $113.7M in March and sits around $36.1M today, roughly 68% below its peak. so despite the trading activity, Grvt still has work to do in attracting and retaining capital. the buyback is a good first step. now i want to see whether the upcoming products translate into sustained usage, stronger TVL and recurring buybacks supported by the business. with Grvt 2.0 approaching, the next few weeks could be important. the real test is whether Grvt can turn all this activity into a platform people want to keep their capital in.
44
3
79
12,004
ethereum L2s processed 14.5x as many transactions as mainnet over the past month, as of october 21. but how much of that activity translates into value for ethereum? according to @growthepie, L2s paid just $82K in settlement fees over the 30 days ending october 21. meanwhile, @base generated $2.77M in onchain profit and @RobinhoodCrypto chain $2.80M over the same period. this measures fees collected minus settlement costs, not full operating expenses. the gap raises a bigger question about the L2 business model. they can offer cheaper transactions and retain much of the revenue users generate, while ethereum provides settlement and data availability. as ethereum expands its own capacity, low fees alone may become a weaker reason to choose one L2 over another. distribution, liquidity and the applications built on top could matter far more. scaling transactions is one thing. building an economy that captures lasting value is another.
65
11
1
81
7,226