Great work from @JackMandin and Blockworks. Fund industry grade reporting is exactly what this sector needs, and netting recursive deposits alone puts this above most dashboards. 🤝 One question though. Are we missing something, or is the Arbitrum sleeve of HYPE++ not in the coverage? The seven questions framework is built around a specific animal: capital allocators running money on lending infrastructure they do not operate. Fair enough, that is most of the $7B. But it defines the sector down to rate routing and excludes tokenized derivatives strategies entirely, the corner that most resembles actual asset management. Our corner. Our HYPE++ vault on Arbitrum: $11.7M TVL, 32.61% APR, 48% cumulative on that sleeve, epoch based ERC-4626 with defined funding and settlement windows, Anchorage custody, ISDA documented OTC legs. The consolidated D2 book is ~$28M across @arbitrum , @base , @HyperliquidX and now @Optimism, over $2B notional traded, 2.6 Sharpe, one negative epoch out of 31 since December 2023. Tweet 6 asks the question that matters: who actually beats the passive lending benchmark. In this coverage the winners beat it in bps. We beat it in multiples, with options, dispersion and vol arbitrage rather than lending optimization. So either the classification line excludes tokenized derivatives strategies by construction, in which case the total vault AUM number undercounts the most fund-like segment of the sector. Or we simply have not been mapped yet. Happy to walk the team through the structure, the audits and 31 epochs of settlement data. You said it yourselves: this is an asset management industry. Agreed. We have been running one onchain for two and a half years. Fade D2 at your own risk.