Recently, looking at various address labels and clustering maps, it’s a bit like examining "character settings"—they can be referenced, but don’t take them too seriously. Honestly, the same batch of funds split into a dozen addresses, cross several bridges, then go through an aggregator, and the profile immediately becomes distorted; not to mention hot wallets at exchanges, custody, market making—labelging them can easily cause misjudgments. The RWA narrative is the same; people compare U.S. Treasury yields with on-chain yield products, and I find it a bit hollow: much of what’s on-chain is often the result of process risks, not a "higher version of government bonds." What I fear most isn’t slowness, but chaos: slow can still be reviewed, but chaos means permissions, bridges, governance votes all tangled up, and in the end, it’s unclear who takes the blame. Anyway, when I look at capital flows now, I prefer to draw fewer conclusions and focus more on the pathways and permission settings.