Let’s talk about some insights into the future evolution of perp dex: 1) The “numbers game” of inflating trading volume in exchange for airdrop expectations is unsustainable. If a large number of users wash trade in anticipation of an airdrop instead of actually using the product, if professional arbitrageurs deprive most of the incentive budget at low cost, and if the project side condones or even encourages these behaviors in order to make the data look good. If this continues, the entire points system will become an expectation game without any real value creation, and the bubble will eventually burst. 2) The low-fee war between platforms results in users “hiddenly paying the bill”. Internal competition among platforms will compress the "revenue model" to the extreme, but what is the balance point for value capture that maintains zero transaction fees? If the seemingly "zero transaction fees" actually result in losses in liquidation penalties, funding rates, and other areas that users cannot see or care about, this strategy will be unsustainable in the long run. Either sell PFOF to market makers like Robinhood, or become a broker that provides value-added services. These are all things that require long-term product iteration to achieve; 3) The perp dex boom led by CLOB is just an on-site carnival. Perp dex isn't a new phenomenon, but the current trillion-dollar boom is largely driven by the volume generated by crypto-native assets like BTC and ETH. As TrdfFi assets migrate on-chain, such as truly in-demand stocks, foreign exchange, and commodities, the CLOB full-chain order book model may no longer be effective. Instead, an oracle or RFQ model will be more efficient. The question is, should we plan ahead and embrace traditional incremental assets, or spend $100,000 to purchase the CLOB Dex code and engage in an incentive war? It will become clear who is truly creating value. 4) The high valuations supported by the black box execution layer cannot be effectively verified. While some perp dex platforms tout their differentiation, massive amounts of transaction data and hidden black-box technology cannot truly price in high valuations. If users don't even know how orders are processed, where liquidity comes from, or how prices are formed, and if the so-called "best execution" actually eats into users' MEV and profits from information asymmetry, this is not a true technological moat. Using ZK proof to prove the logic is correct, but real-time order tracking, order data indicators, and whether the technical means can withstand the test of the market are key; 5) Perp dex as a Service will dilute the overall value of the entire track. If everyone does CLOB, supports similar trading pairs, has maker/taker fees, and has a points system, and if the only difference is a better-looking UI, higher airdrop expectations, and more aggressive KOL shilling, the overall value of the entire Perp DEX track will be severely diluted in the long run. Should we continue to focus on the "one-click chain launch" strategy, or should we truly address user pain points and establish differentiation? The former will only plunge the entire sector into a death spiral, while the latter will likely produce truly valuable projects.Let’s talk about some insights into the future evolution of perp dex: 1) The “numbers game” of inflating trading volume in exchange for airdrop expectations is unsustainable. If a large number of users wash trade in anticipation of an airdrop instead of actually using the product, if professional arbitrageurs deprive most of the incentive budget at low cost, and if the project side condones or even encourages these behaviors in order to make the data look good. If this continues, the entire points system will become an expectation game without any real value creation, and the bubble will eventually burst. 2) The low-fee war between platforms results in users “hiddenly paying the bill”. Internal competition among platforms will compress the "revenue model" to the extreme, but what is the balance point for value capture that maintains zero transaction fees? If the seemingly "zero transaction fees" actually result in losses in liquidation penalties, funding rates, and other areas that users cannot see or care about, this strategy will be unsustainable in the long run. Either sell PFOF to market makers like Robinhood, or become a broker that provides value-added services. These are all things that require long-term product iteration to achieve; 3) The perp dex boom led by CLOB is just an on-site carnival. Perp dex isn't a new phenomenon, but the current trillion-dollar boom is largely driven by the volume generated by crypto-native assets like BTC and ETH. As TrdfFi assets migrate on-chain, such as truly in-demand stocks, foreign exchange, and commodities, the CLOB full-chain order book model may no longer be effective. Instead, an oracle or RFQ model will be more efficient. The question is, should we plan ahead and embrace traditional incremental assets, or spend $100,000 to purchase the CLOB Dex code and engage in an incentive war? It will become clear who is truly creating value. 4) The high valuations supported by the black box execution layer cannot be effectively verified. While some perp dex platforms tout their differentiation, massive amounts of transaction data and hidden black-box technology cannot truly price in high valuations. If users don't even know how orders are processed, where liquidity comes from, or how prices are formed, and if the so-called "best execution" actually eats into users' MEV and profits from information asymmetry, this is not a true technological moat. Using ZK proof to prove the logic is correct, but real-time order tracking, order data indicators, and whether the technical means can withstand the test of the market are key; 5) Perp dex as a Service will dilute the overall value of the entire track. If everyone does CLOB, supports similar trading pairs, has maker/taker fees, and has a points system, and if the only difference is a better-looking UI, higher airdrop expectations, and more aggressive KOL shilling, the overall value of the entire Perp DEX track will be severely diluted in the long run. Should we continue to focus on the "one-click chain launch" strategy, or should we truly address user pain points and establish differentiation? The former will only plunge the entire sector into a death spiral, while the latter will likely produce truly valuable projects.