I used to understand BTCFi, but I was a bit too focused on yields.

Later, I realized that what’s truly scarce for BTC might not be a higher APY, but its operational radius in the on-chain world.

Assets like ETH and SOL naturally flow within their own ecosystems, engaging in lending, trading, staking, and market-making. But BTC is different; it holds the highest value yet often gets stuck in the single scenario of "holding." It’s not that people don’t want to use it, but the process is too convoluted: wrapping assets, cross-chain paths, protocol integration, risk assessment—every step can turn off a portion of users.

So, when I look at @Bedrock 's uniBTC, I'm not just considering how many chains it covers, but whether it truly expands BTC's operational radius.

If one BTC can more seamlessly enter different ecosystems, protocols, and yield scenarios while maintaining a relatively uniform asset representation, then BTC won't just be a bystander in on-chain finance. It will start to have greater liquidity.

$BR is also worth monitoring here. Because as BTC's operational radius expands, the system will need clearer incentives, governance, and resource coordination.

BTC doesn’t lack consensus; it lacks more intuitive usage paths.

@Bedrock $BR #Bedrock