This article is worth a thorough study by all DeFi enthusiasts and practitioners! Coincidentally, I wrote a few days ago that Spark @ spakdotfi has launched a vault rating. You can continue to discuss this action in depth—— Let's go back to a long avoided pain point in DeFi: the best thing on the chain is quoting, and the worst thing is accountability. APY、TVL、 Utilization rate and borrowing demand are indicators that all agreements will desperately display, but when it comes to underlying risk disclosure, loss paths, and responsibility allocation, the vast majority of agreements are unwilling to talk about them. Because they only do curation and only need to invest in various assets to attract the liquidity in your hands, who cares whether the underlying of these assets is safe or not. So my assessment of Spark @ Sparkdotfi's introduction of Credora rating is: It's not making a better looking front-end tag, but competing for the risk interpretation power in DeFi. This action is a bit like an early company going to get a Moody's rating. Rating itself is certainly not a talisman, but whoever standardizes risk first and is willing to accept external scrutiny first will be more likely to obtain the most demanding and difficult to leverage high-quality capital. This matter cannot be accomplished with just a marketing article that says' Trust me, I am safe '. Once the risk rating is embedded into the deposit entrance, the competition logic between DeFi vaults will shift from comparing returns to the "Low Risk DeFi" stage repeatedly mentioned by V God @ VitalikButerin. If Vault really wants to become an asset manager on the chain, then rating is not just icing on the cake, but the most basic professional threshold: Only by introducing a rated vault can one qualify for faster deposit growth, higher capital retention, and more stable custodian reputation! Spark is currently a beneficiary, and in the future, the entire DeFi arena will face this issue.