BTCFi is not dead, it just hasn't started yet—— I deeply resonate with @ kevinliub's article today: Since its launch, Babylon's price has plummeted significantly, and the popularity of the BTCFi track has plummeted. Many people are beginning to doubt whether this track has been validated as a failure. But if we dissect it carefully, we will find that the problem lies not in the narrative of "BTCFi" itself, but in the Babylon model choosing the wrong entry point. Babylon's proposal of "shared BTC security" as the underlying logic is actually in the right direction. But the problem lies on the demand side: who is willing to use it? Who will foot the bill? Big Chain will not use Babylon for secure sharing, as it would weaken its native token; Small chains may be interested, but their size is insufficient to support Babylon's valuation. To be more realistic, even if a small chain is established, it will ultimately have to return to its own token system to ensure security. This forms a demand loop—— No one really needs Babylon. The ETH ecosystem has long been trying the path of "secure sharing", like EigenLayer, which has an earlier and more complete mechanism, but so far it has not truly reached the demand side. This is not a problem with BTC, this is a problem with the entire 'secure sharing' logic. So the question is: BTCFi, is that all for now? I don't think so. @ kevinliub's analysis is very accurate. What BTCFi really needs to solve are two more fundamental problems: one ️⃣ How to achieve native security of BTC? two ️⃣ Where does BTC's native revenue come from and can it be sustainable? These two questions actually correspond to the critical path that ETH took when it followed the L2 route. The success of ETH Optimism/Rollup relies on their complete inheritance of the security of the ETH main chain, without any technical forks or value deviations. BTC needs its own "OP moment" and also requires a native solution that does not modify the main chain or disrupt consensus - currently, BitVM2 is the most likely direction to achieve this. In the economic model, if BTCFi is only motivated by platform tokens, it is not fundamentally different from any previous DeFi foam and will not last long. But if it is really possible to do things like ETH L2, where L2 gas fees are priced in BTC and then returned to BTC holders through a mechanism—— This is the true 'native BTC revenue', rather than a parasitic mode that relies on others' systems. If BitVM2 can truly achieve a seamless economic loop without changing the main chain, then BTCFi is not the end, but just the beginning. When everyone is disappointed, it may actually be the time when a new order is born.