Personal opinion about blast $ETH $LDO
Blast, a Layer 2 platform that does not even have a testnet, only launched the deposit function, and its total value locked (TVL) exceeded US$100 million in one day. This is indeed a good start, as the growth in numbers gives an intuitive sense of excitement. While it is not ruled out that Blast may be successful in the future, there are risks, and I am personally involved. This is not to pour cold water on it, but something needs to be clearly understood.
Among them, approximately US$91 million is stETH stored in Lido. This means that the funds are actually held in Lido, so it’s difficult to say that this is entirely Blast’s own TVL, it just helps users deposit funds. Blast itself doesn’t create any incremental assets, it just acts like a salesperson helping other banks attract deposits. At the same time, Lido itself faces the problems of centralization and low returns, and it is not native Staking. Investing 90% of Layer 2 assets in a non-native DeFi protocol is inherently risky, especially considering stETH’s history of decoupling.
After switching to POS, Ethereum staking has become a stable interest-generating tool in the currency circle. Users usually pledge idle funds that they do not commonly use. It’s important to note that Blast is a blockchain, not a DeFi protocol. There is no problem with DeFi protocols locking assets, but the blockchain needs to be used by people to allow assets to flow on various Dapps.
If Blast’s initial approach to establishing TVL was to make money by earning interest on deposits, the tone set might be a challenge. When the real mainnet is online, how much of such a large-scale TVL can be converted into active funds, so that funds can truly flow on the chain, will be a question worth paying attention to.
Blast, a Layer 2 platform that does not even have a testnet, only launched the deposit function, and its total value locked (TVL) exceeded US$100 million in one day. This is indeed a good start, as the growth in numbers gives an intuitive sense of excitement. While it is not ruled out that Blast may be successful in the future, there are risks, and I am personally involved. This is not to pour cold water on it, but something needs to be clearly understood.
Among them, approximately US$91 million is stETH stored in Lido. This means that the funds are actually held in Lido, so it’s difficult to say that this is entirely Blast’s own TVL, it just helps users deposit funds. Blast itself doesn’t create any incremental assets, it just acts like a salesperson helping other banks attract deposits. At the same time, Lido itself faces the problems of centralization and low returns, and it is not native Staking. Investing 90% of Layer 2 assets in a non-native DeFi protocol is inherently risky, especially considering stETH’s history of decoupling.
After switching to POS, Ethereum staking has become a stable interest-generating tool in the currency circle. Users usually pledge idle funds that they do not commonly use. It’s important to note that Blast is a blockchain, not a DeFi protocol. There is no problem with DeFi protocols locking assets, but the blockchain needs to be used by people to allow assets to flow on various Dapps.
If Blast’s initial approach to establishing TVL was to make money by earning interest on deposits, the tone set might be a challenge. When the real mainnet is online, how much of such a large-scale TVL can be converted into active funds, so that funds can truly flow on the chain, will be a question worth paying attention to.