I just received the internal testing invitation code for Backpack and tried it out. What I want to say is that if we only focus on the US stock market, there are many mature securities firms on the market; If we only focus on encryption, there are also many exchanges to choose from. But the biggest difference with Backpack is that it doesn't give you a choice between traditional finance and encryption, but rather attempts to put both into the same account system. Compared to traditional securities firms, Backpack retains real stocks, dividends, voting rights, and compliance architecture under the US securities system, while also having a native crypto operating experience, unified margin, and longer trading windows. Compared to many so-called stock tokenization platforms, it corresponds to real equity and a complete securities settlement system, rather than just a simple mapping product that tracks stock prices. I think its true competitiveness lies not in the transaction fees or interface, but in the direction of 'on chain stocks'. In the past, stocks and DeFi were basically two completely independent world stocks in securities firms, with encrypted assets on the chain and a clear boundary in between. And what Backpack wants to do is to enable the same asset to enjoy the benefits of traditional securities markets while also entering the on chain ecosystem to participate in lending, collateralization, and liquidity scenarios. For those who often pay attention to both the US stock market and the cryptocurrency market, this model is indeed quite interesting. Previously, funds, accounts, and assets were scattered across different platforms, but now there is a feeling of being connected. If this model can eventually work, it may not solve the problem of trading experience, but the long-standing "asset island" problem between traditional finance and encrypted finance. This is also the biggest difference I currently see between it and most securities firms and exchanges.