These past two days, I’ve been seeing one too many LST/re-staking posts about “a multi-layer extra yield.” My first reaction isn’t “sounds good”—it’s: where does the money actually come from? Basically, the initial portion comes from staking itself and that part is still fairly clear. But the added-on part, many times, comes from protocol subsidies, expected points, or repackaging the risks and selling them again… It looks like a stacking-yield game, but in reality it’s a stacking-tail-risk game.

After I’ve suffered losses from impermanent loss, I’ve become more cautious: re-staking the same collateral with repeated commitments is most dangerous not from everyday volatility, but from the moment you run into penalties/contract vulnerabilities/liquidity getting drained instantly—when that happens, the drawdown might not even give you a chance to “wait it out” and recover gradually.

Recently, L2s are still arguing about TPS, fees, and subsidies. Listening to it, I can’t help feeling déjà vu: subsidies can make the numbers look beautiful, but it’s the withdrawal of subsidies that truly determines the ecosystem. Anyway, I only have one principle now: only touch it if I can exit, if I can understand it, and if—at worst—I can withstand it. Survive first, then talk about yield.