a couple of thoughts: > @aave having a real-time protection shield of $285m is seriously impressive. shows the protocol's commitment to mitigating bad debt & other risks. respect to @GearboxProtocol too. > but there are hundreds of solid defi protocols (lending, stablecoins etc) across chains that don’t have this kind of active risk cover for their users. > the biggest challenge imo is that bootstrapping meaningful coverage is hard. the cost of capital is just too high. > my thesis is that the growth of defi protocols, especially the larger ones like @MorphoLabs or @eulerfinance , will be ultimately capped by how much risk protection they can offer to their users. > this is because more institutional capital is coming onchain. this demand isn’t retail-led anymore. and institutions demand tradfi-like capital protection. > and so a robust risk coverage product isn’t optional. it’s a MUST-HAVE to attract TVL, compete and grow. > at @0xcatalysis, we’re building a unified access layer to $20b+ in aggregate economic security. my gray hair experience says that this fits perfectly with the risk protection needs of mature defi protocols & institutional folks. > we’re launching a new product called “catalysis coverage” with this exact use-case in mind. would love to jam with relevant teams & test it out. my DMs are open. > the goal is to provide an extremely simplified integration UX for top-tier defi protocols to bootstrap robust, secure covers upto $500m with ease.