Seeing that everyone is talking about Pendle's YT/PT dual wielding, I will also briefly talk about it. Conclusion: Pendle is indeed a powerful tool to increase TVL, YT/PT is a means used by the project party to incentivise the growth of TVL, and dual wielding is the incentive of the arbitrage project party, but it has little impact on the final result. In the past, traditional staking was tge income such as lock-up, but after the emergence of Pendle, the income was split into PT (stable) and YT (betting tge). Big money buys PT and drives down APY; The APY decreases, and gamblers buy YT to pull up the returns; The rise in APY attracted more people to buy PT, and the TVL rolled up like this. The essence is to turn the "divergence" into a tradable market, creating TVL from scratch. Because YT can boost TVL, project teams usually give YT more incentives. This brings us to the arbitrage space: 20 points for a single token hold, 40 points for a dual hold of PT+YT (Pendle takes 5%), but the risk is almost the same. In a rational market, a large amount of local currency will naturally flow to Pendle dual-holding, resulting in incentives being "levelled". In fact, this is not what the project team hopes the most, because the original intention is to encourage gambling on YT, pull apy, attract big money to buy pt, and make TVL bigger. But this arbitrage has a limited impact, and the worst result is that everyone is dual-holding and the points are rebalanced. PT mortgage + revolving loan is different from dual holding, this is a real capital inflow (such as buying local currency with USDT and then doing circulation), which does bring new TVL, and the project party should support it instead. Summary: PT/YT dual wielding is arbitrage, but it doesn't hurt Pendle's growth logic. As long as the market is divided on APY, Pendle's TVL magic continues.