Recently, someone asked me again about yield aggregators and whether that APY looks attractive enough to go for... I usually don't look at the numbers first; I check which contracts the money is being sent into: whether it's simply reinvesting for you, or layered with one on top of another, possibly involving lending, derivatives, and other counterparty risks. To put it plainly, APY isn't something that falls from the sky; most likely, you're bearing some risk for others, just packaged more smoothly.

And contract risk isn't just something "hackers" encounter; small funds can't withstand a single freeze or withdrawal blockage. Recently, the main chain is undergoing upgrades/maintenance, and everyone in the group is speculating whether the ecosystem will migrate. I'm actually more concerned about the steps in cross-chain/cross-pool aggregation—whether any of the protocols relied upon might have issues before or after the upgrade, like pauses, parameter changes, or liquidation logic modifications, which could be problematic.

My current approach is to put the "can be withdrawn at any time" layer on top, and the "locked for a long time/complex path" layer underneath, even if the APY is lower... Anyway, which pools do you think are most likely to have issues first during the upgrade period?