Over the past few years, I’ve seen too many projects with TVL skyrocketing overnight; once the incentives stop, the funds run faster than anyone, leaving behind a bunch of "I participated" screenshots. So now, when I look at a protocol, I don’t just focus on how high its peaks are, but rather how many folks are still around after the tide recedes.
Using this yardstick, @Bedrock stands out, with its numbers being more convincing than those loudmouths. Its flagship, uniBTC, consistently holds over 4000 BTC, peaking at 4956 in June 2025; more importantly, this March, amidst a general market downturn, it recorded around a 10.8% rebound.
This "rebound" is way more important than the peak. It indicates one thing: the money wasn’t just temporarily lured in by high APYs; it’s sticking around after being used. This kind of retention is the true moat of a BTCfi protocol.
Many are focusing on the new stuff in Bedrock 2.0—AI, vaults, routing—but I think what’s most underrated is the simple fact that it hasn’t "collapsed" through various cycles. Protocols that survive the bear market have already filtered out 90% of the competition.
The value of $BR , in the end, relies on this underlying trust for survival. No one is going to stake permissions and long-term capital on a pool that could evaporate at any moment.
My lingering question is: can the rebound continue? That depends on the real retention after the rollout of the 2.0 products; just a month’s data isn’t enough, and I’ll keep an eye on that.
But one thing I’m increasingly convinced of is that this kind of resilience across cycles, #Bedrock , doesn't shine in a bull market but is worth its weight in gold during a bear market. When you’re picking a BTCfi, are you looking at peaks or retention?
Using this yardstick, @Bedrock stands out, with its numbers being more convincing than those loudmouths. Its flagship, uniBTC, consistently holds over 4000 BTC, peaking at 4956 in June 2025; more importantly, this March, amidst a general market downturn, it recorded around a 10.8% rebound.
This "rebound" is way more important than the peak. It indicates one thing: the money wasn’t just temporarily lured in by high APYs; it’s sticking around after being used. This kind of retention is the true moat of a BTCfi protocol.
Many are focusing on the new stuff in Bedrock 2.0—AI, vaults, routing—but I think what’s most underrated is the simple fact that it hasn’t "collapsed" through various cycles. Protocols that survive the bear market have already filtered out 90% of the competition.
The value of $BR , in the end, relies on this underlying trust for survival. No one is going to stake permissions and long-term capital on a pool that could evaporate at any moment.
My lingering question is: can the rebound continue? That depends on the real retention after the rollout of the 2.0 products; just a month’s data isn’t enough, and I’ll keep an eye on that.
But one thing I’m increasingly convinced of is that this kind of resilience across cycles, #Bedrock , doesn't shine in a bull market but is worth its weight in gold during a bear market. When you’re picking a BTCfi, are you looking at peaks or retention?