A higher APY can look attractive until the cost of reaching it enters the calculation. Suppose a pool offers a noticeably better return than your current position. That difference only matters if the additional yield survives gas, routing costs, slippage, and the time your capital actually remains deployed. This is where cross-chain strategies become interesting. Traditional bridges can introduce another layer of exposure through bridge contracts and wrapped representations.They can also add waiting periods and additional transactions before the capital becomes usable. Resolver-based execution takes a different approach. Omniston uses a Request for Quote market where resolvers compete to fill cross-chain orders, while paired Hashed Timelock Contracts enforce the settlement conditions. The destination asset can arrive natively rather than as a wrapped version created by a bridge. That does not make every cross-chain move profitable. The numbers still have to work. And sometimes the best decision is not moving at all. For a TON native position, STON.fi already provides swaps, liquidity pools, and farming without requiring a cross-chain transaction. There is no reason to pay for complexity when the opportunity you want already exists on the chain where your capital sits. The smartest yield strategy is not finding the highest APY. It is finding the highest APY after every cost is included. #BTC Price Analysis# #Macro Insights# $TMX $SOL