One thing people underestimate about @arbitrum is how deep its liquidity runs compared to most other L2s, and how efficiently that liquidity is being used. You can argue narratives all day, but liquidity is a major factor that determines how competitive a chain is for traders, LPs, aggregators, and protocols that need reliable execution and low slippage at scale. — Arbitrum has one of the most balanced liquidity profiles among L2s. You don’t see liquidity that spikes only when incentives are live, or 70% of TVL concentrated in one protocol. For context, even Base has its top protocol accounting for ~43% of its TVL. Meanwhile, @aave accounts for just 36% of Arbitrum’s TVL. Also, liquidity flight on other chains has become a pattern. Incentives end, TVL collapses, and volume drops. A perfect example is Blast. Arbitrum’s sticky liquidity breaks that loop. Volume stays consistent even outside incentive cycles, and protocols don’t collapse the moment reward emissions pause. That’s the difference between a chain that hosts DeFi, and one that actually powers DeFi. On Arbitrum, • Liquidity depth translates into reliability • Reliability translates into execution • Execution translates into volume • Volume translates into fees • Fees translate directly into sustainability. That’s the flywheel @arbitrum is operating on. It doesn't need a catalyst. The catalyst is already embedded in its structure.