English
92831
Markets are looking for "certainty," but the most resilient systems often seek to "gain from chaos."While most institutional investors are still evaluating cryptoassets using traditional risk models, they may be misreading Ethereum’s true value proposition. Ethereum is not a stable system pursuing "zero risk", but an anti-fragile machine that evolves in extreme events through convex design. This is not marketing rhetoric, but a structural feature worthy of quantitative verification. 1. What is convexity? Why is it important?There is a core concept in Taleb's tail risk theory: Convexity. The characteristic of convex assets is that when tail risk occurs, potential returns grow much faster than earnings decline. This kind of convex financial asset will produce positive mean results in the long run. In traditional financial markets, most strategies show a linear relationship - borrow twice as much money, bear twice as much risk, and get twice as much potential return. But convex assets are different: they may perform mediocrely or even lose money under normal circumstances, but they can produce super-linear returns in extreme events. The system design of Ethereum naturally has this characteristic. It does not survive by avoiding risks, but evolves through a "limited loss, unlimited gain" structure. Every crisis is not an end, but a moment when the system tests its boundaries and triggers adaptive upgrades. This is in stark contrast to the traditional financial system, which often faces bankruptcy liquidation in extreme events, while Ethereum chose to "stay at the table and continue playing." How two and three "tail risks" shape Ethereum1. DAO incident: the first "99 small losses""In 2016, DAO was attacked and $60M was stolen. The community is faced with a choice: accept the loss or hard fork and roll back the transaction. In the end, Ethereum chose a hard fork and split into ETH and ETC. This is regarded by some as a stain of "not being decentralized enough", but from an anti-fragile perspective, this is the first stress test of the system. Core logic: Ethereum does not pursue the perfectionism of "getting it right the first time", but accepts the strategy of "limiting losses and staying at the poker table". You must have a very strong belief to withstand 99 losses and that one success. The loss in the DAO incident is not a failure, but the "system evolution cost" paid. It forced Ethereum to improve its governance mechanism, security audit process, and how community consensus is formed. This is a "small loss" that pays for greater system resilience in the future. Data support: After the DAO fork, the activity of Ethereum developers increased instead of falling. The ICO boom in 2017 proved the market’s recovery of confidence in it. 2. Bear market and regulatory shock: the process of paying the "premium"In the 2018 bear market, the price of ETH fell from $1,400 to $80, a drop of 94%. In 2022, we will once again experience the Terra crash and FTX thunderstorm, and TVL will shrink significantly. On the face of it, this is a disaster. But from an antifragile perspective, this is the system "paying premiums." Usually making small losses 99% of the time is like paying insurance premiums just to bet on the 1% extreme market trend. What every bear market does:
Key data: During the bear market in 2022, the number of Ethereum developers will increase instead of falling. The Electric Capital report shows that the number of full-time developers continues to grow during the bear market. This is no accident. The system is using the price of "falling TVL" in exchange for the improvement of "protocol maturity". This is a typical convex transaction - short-term paper losses, long-term structural gains. 3. Gas crisis → Layer 2 outbreak: convexity benefits realizedIn DeFi Summer 2021, Ethereum gas fees soared to hundreds of dollars, and the user experience collapsed. This is extreme stress on the system. But it was this pressure that triggered the explosive development of Layer 2 technology. Rollup solutions such as Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base have matured rapidly, and the zkEVM technology roadmap has also accelerated. This is a classic example of convexity gain: when the pressure reaches a threshold, the system response is not linear, but superlinear. When tail risk occurs for convex assets, returns grow much faster than earnings decline. The modular architecture of Ethereum is exactly like this - gas crisis (pressure) → Rollup ecological explosion (super linear response). Data support:
This is not "fixing bugs", but "maximizing the profit-loss ratio" triggered by the system under pressure. Ethereum does not directly improve the main network TPS (linear solution), but achieves greater scalability through a modular architecture (convex solution). 3. Why does the market underestimate this feature?Most investors use traditional financial models to evaluate Ethereum: calculating TVL, comparing TPS, and analyzing fee income. These metrics are important, but they fail to capture the antifragility of the system. Core misunderstanding: equating "volatility" with "risk". Volatility is not a risk, mediocrity is. For a protocol that is in a period of technological change, stability is the biggest risk - it means losing adaptability. Another overlooked dimension: Ethereum’s “failure tolerance.” The traditional financial system pursues "never making mistakes", but this pursuit often leads to system rigidity. Ethereum allows DAO events, high gas fees, and short-term TVL drops - but every "small loss" is exchanged for a jump in system capabilities. This is a key cognitive difference: Ethereum is not avoiding risk, but managing exposure to risk. It trades "limited losses" for "infinite room for evolution". 4. Risks and Contrarian ViewsRational investment requires facing up to reverse cases. Potential risks:
Contrary view: Some investors believe that Ethereum's "slowness" is precisely its disadvantage. In an era of accelerating technology iterations, an overly conservative upgrade pace may cause it to lose its first-mover advantage. These doubts are reasonable. But from a long-term perspective, the value of a convex system lies in "living longer" rather than "running faster". A person has 5-6 opportunities to start a business in his life. What is the probability that all 5-6 companies will fail? Ethereum's strategy is to increase the probability of final success through multiple "small trials and errors". This is not the fastest path, but it may be the most probabilistic path. 5. Conclusion: Adapting to the era of endogenous tail risksWe are in an era of endogenous tail risks. Technological revolution, geopolitical conflicts, and economic structural transformation—these factors add up and make "black swans" the norm. In such an environment, pursuing "zero volatility" assets may be the most dangerous option, as they tend to go to zero all at once in extreme events. Ethereum's value proposition is not "stability" but "adaptive chaos." It does not try to eliminate volatility but to benefit from it. Every crisis is a stress test, and every "small loss" is a premium paid for the next jump. This is an anti-consensus point of view, but it deserves a re-examination by institutional investors: In an era of uncertainty, the most resilient systems are not those that "never make mistakes," but those that "evolve after making mistakes." Ethereum is not trying to be a perfect machine, but an economic machine that benefits from chaos. This may be its most underestimated moat. |
|
|
|
|
|
