I respect the idea behind drift, but I don’t fully agree with the points being made here. Outlining an MM perspective on the comments made by @cindyleowtt 1. Access to Solana’s atomic global state is at odds with deep ACTIVE liquidity. - Atomic global state is expensive for market makers to update quotes, forcing wider and therefore worse active liquidity. - Priority lanes are crowded. To stand out from the crowd, a market maker will have to pay greater than epsilon to update quotes. 2. Being built on Solana L1 does not mean anything. The front end is the wallet. The wallet routes to protocols. Spot DEXs are commodity businesses. And the biggest Solana front end just chose Hyperliquid as the protocol to route flow to. Because it has the deepest liquidity. And it’s not even close. 3. Asset issuance is not the slam dunk metric you think it is. Net asset velocity on Solana is super high because of the memecoin mania. High quality community assets (SPOT) will ultimately have more liquidity on a CLOB. Even with Hyperliquid, in 9/10 situations, the most spot liquidity is on Binance. Hyperliquid carved out its niche by being fast to list new perps, but got griefed and have therefore taken a different approach. 4. In the universe of users, the L1 with the most liquidity will see the highest user flows because the front ends that are in touch with users have much better scope for ARPU by doing just that. Users won’t go to “ They will go to a front end. The front end will send them to where it makes most sense for them. 5. Re building out the microstructure for L1 DEFI, I fully agree. You guys have done an incredible job pushing capital efficiency. I view L1 DeFi as a great bootstrapping business. But ultimately you need to own your block space to optimise for tight active liquidity.