#预测市场 Recently, I looked at the compensation data of the Uniswap Foundation and felt quite reflective. Out of $4.8 million in employee expenses, $3.87 million is allocated to executive salaries, while @E5@ with $2.14 million delivers over six times the funding—this comparison truly prompts us to think about what efficiency really means.

But what I want to emphasize is not criticism, but a reminder of an important lesson: **When we hold governance tokens of a certain ecosystem, we should pay as much attention to its operational transparency as we do to our investment portfolio**. The recent scrutiny of Uniswap essentially reflects the trial-and-error costs of DAO governance—executive compensation accounts for 22% of the foundation’s expenses, far exceeding industry standards, which directly impacts community confidence and token value.

In contrast, Maple Finance’s expansion strategy appears more prudent—focusing on genuine sustainable returns rather than incentive-driven growth. Its asset management scale has surged from $500 million to over $5 billion, with annualized revenue exceeding $25 million, and it also returns value to holders through buyback mechanisms. This approach, emphasizing actual output, is more worth paying attention to in the long run.

The new project Rocket Finance in the prediction market is also quite interesting—highlighting "trading movement rather than results," with designs that feature no liquidation and unlimited returns. It makes me think: **True security isn’t about eliminating risk, but designing more reasonable risk mechanisms**.

My advice is: for projects you’re unsure about, first look at their governance cost efficiency and genuine return commitments. Don’t be fooled by high expectations. In the long term, projects that can manage operational rhythm well and maintain high transparency are the assets worth holding for the long haul.