Many people, upon hearing "payments + DeFi," first react: it's going to get complicated and we'll have to pull in TVL again. But if we look at it from the perspective of real capital flow, the payment chain actually needs DeFi for a very simple goal: to make money operate more efficiently. Payment scenarios naturally bring a large influx and outflow of stablecoins. If this capital can only "make a round and leave," it's difficult for the chain to form a deposit; however, once it can provide low-threshold, low-risk capital efficiency tools (such as stablecoin yields, lending turnover, short-term liquidity management), capital is more willing to stay, and users will use the same chain more frequently.
For ordinary users, the correct way to open DeFi on the payment chain is not "high leverage," but rather "more convenient capital management": for example, can the money I temporarily don't need be placed on the chain to earn a relatively stable yield? Can I quickly borrow funds using stablecoins as collateral when I need to turn over? For merchants and teams, capital management is more realistic: should the incoming stablecoins be immediately exchanged? Can we improve capital efficiency while waiting for settlement or payment cycles? These needs are not flashy but very frequent.
So when I look at the DeFi ecosystem of Plasma, I am not looking at "whose APR is more exaggerated," but rather whether it can form a healthy closed loop: payments bring real capital flow → DeFi provides turnover and yield tools → capital is willing to stay → usage frequency increases → payment experience continues to be optimized. When this flywheel starts to turn, it indicates that it is not a chain that only promotes itself, but a chain that can "make money work on it."