Lately, I've been looking at projects involving re-pledge/sharing security, and the more I look, the more I feel that people are not stacking yields, but stacking imagination... To put it plainly, the underlying security budget is limited, and if you split the same collateral "clone" to secure multiple chains, the returns can indeed pile up, but the tail risks are also amplified, just not often looked at closely.

Moreover, on the macro side, there's talk about expectations of interest rate cuts, the US dollar index moving together with risk assets rising and falling—when sentiment heats up, many people will assume "liquidity comes, everything is safe." I prefer to think of re-pledging as selling insurance: the premium (yield) looks attractive, but the real key is who decides the claims conditions (slash/punishment triggers) and whether there's a chain reaction.

Next time, I might first clarify "how much could be lost in the worst case, and whether it could drag other positions down" before engaging; when you evaluate such projects, is your first focus on who holds the penalty rights and exit pathways?