We’re still comparing chains like it’s 2020 and so much has changed. The industry desperately needs a total rethink on how we actually assess what we class as success. If we’re still comparing how successful a blockchain is by TVL and other vanity metrics that don’t necessarily mean anything but make us feel better about ourselves and give us some sort of false truth, then we’ve gone backwards as an industry, not forwards. TVL is easily gamed. Half the VCs just pivoted to TVL deals because they were incapable of picking winners and got extremely favourable terms from desperate ecosystems and projects. There haven’t been that many places to deploy it at scale. That’s why some of the least active ecosystems still have ungodly amounts of TVL. Chain revenue doesn’t tell the full story either. It’s basically a tax on users submitting transactions to the network. You can have high economic activity with low fees, or high fees with low economic activity. It’s not a good way to assess how well a chain is actually doing. TVL means nothing if it’s not being put to good use. And having loads of apps that aren’t profitable or on a clear path to revenue? That’s just as useless. The only thing that really matters is whether a chain’s infrastructure opens up the design space for what can be built on top of it. If something is ultra high throughput and near enough real time, that increases the types of applications that can exist. Does that open the door to them being inherently more profitable or more competitive with their off chain, real world, web2 counterparts? That’s the question we should actually be asking. Both Monad and MegaETH are still too early to judge. I think both have really good infrastructure that should enable these types of businesses to succeed, but we’ll see. A default line on a chart is not how you measure that. chainGDP coming soon.