Over the past few days, I’ve looked into several contracts related to re-pledging/sharing security, and the more I look, the more I feel: yield stacking is possible, but risks are also stacking up. Don’t just see “an extra layer of interest” as free gains. Many projects claim to outsource security, but honestly, they’re just extending the trust chain—authorization, penalties, upgradability—if any one of these points is poorly implemented, it’s not just a loss if something goes wrong.

Especially with structures like “Stake A for B, then B for C,” it’s easy to fall into a psychological illusion: thinking you’re still protected by the security cushion of the underlying assets, but in reality, there are several layers of permissions that can be passively manipulated. When I see strange administrators, pause switches, or arbitrary parameter changes, I usually treat them as red flags.

The inflation + studio + token price spiral in blockchain games is also similar: it looks like an economic model snowballing, but in fact, the more fragile points pile up, and the first to collapse are always the thinnest layers. Anyway, I’d rather earn less now than be the last safety provider to take the hit in a “stacking game.”