On the day of brushing the income ranking list, I stared at WLFI for a while. It is sandwiched between AAVE and CAKE, and at first glance, they seem to be a group, both of which have real gold and silver income from the agreement. But if you really classify it as AAVE, it's easy to suffer losses. The most special thing about this project is that it breaks down the two things of "whether the protocol makes money" and "whether the token is worth it" into a cleaner version than almost any other project on the market. It's so clean that when you look at the same name, you can come to two completely opposite conclusions. Let's talk about the business line first. The USD1 stablecoin reached $4.85 billion in circulation on June 22nd, with a weekly increase of nearly 10 points. The key is that the stablecoins in the same range were basically shrinking that week, and Sky's USDS fell by more than three points, nearly three billion. The entire stablecoin market was flat that week, with only USD1 rising against the trend. By June 25th, it had steadily entered the top five fiat collateralized stablecoins. Calculating the time, it has been less than a year and a half since its launch in March last year, and this speed can be counted in the entire history of stablecoins. What supports it is not individual investors who buy it little by little, but institutions who carry it from behind. The most iconic one is the MGX in Abu Dhabi, which settled a $2 billion investment in Binance with USD1, making it the largest stablecoin settlement transaction in cryptocurrency history. This 2 billion yuan will add 2 billion yuan of liquidity to USD1 out of thin air, and it is estimated that this amount alone can bring a profit of 60 million to 80 million US dollars to the agreement in one year, provided that Binance does not redeem this money back. The reserves are managed by BlackRock, managed by BitGo, and off chain are short-term bonds and cash. In addition, recently Binance, Bybit, and Gate have all been promoting USD1 incentive activities. Bybit has offered 40 million WLFIs as rewards, and OCC's trust banking license is reportedly about to be approved. After approval, the issuance of USD1 will have a bank level license endorsement. This combination of punches is clearly aimed at institutions and compliance, not grassroots gameplay. So if you only look at the USD1 product, it can indeed be used, with real growth and clear revenue sources. I won't go around this with you. But that's where the problem lies. During the same period, the current price of WLFI token was only 0.058 US dollars, with a market value of 1.88 billion yuan, and it fell 2.1% that week. On one hand, stablecoins are clanking upwards, while on the other hand, tokens are quietly slipping downwards. These two have walked out of completely opposite curves, which is not a coincidence, but there is a reason behind it. Why? Open the white paper and you will understand. WLFI is a governance token that does not give you legal rights to protocol income. After the money came in, 75% went to DT Marks DEFI LLC, the entity controlled by the Trump family. The agreement does take the net income to buy back WLFI in the market and then burn it. This action compresses the flow, and the logic is the same as that of BNB and CAKE. But if you score clearly, repurchase and destruction and "holding cash dividends" are completely different things. The former is a market behavior that the agreement is willing to do, and it can be done today and not done tomorrow; The latter is the rights that you, as a holder, can claim, which are written into the token economy model. When you buy WLFI, what you get is voting rights, or the type of voting rights that are capped at 5% for a single wallet. What's even funnier is that there was a governance proposal in January this year, and just nine wallets held nearly 60% of the voting weight in your hands. To put it simply, the money earned from USD1 is separated from what you can receive as a WLFI holder, and there is no pipe connecting them. The root of the stagnant token is here. After discussing the token layer, there is another layer that other protocols do not have, which is politics and regulation. Before Trump officially took office, the Abu Dhabi Tanun family bought 49% of the shares for $500 million. This matter was not made public at the time, but was later exposed by The New York Times, and even though two of Tanuen's associates were included in the board of directors, it was not disclosed. Now the Congress is investigating whether this can be considered as crossing the red line of foreign remuneration in the Constitution. Just these two days, five Democratic senators jointly requested a hearing to specifically investigate this $500 million investment. In April, there was another incident where WLFI used their treasury tokens as collateral to borrow $75 million in stablecoins from Dolomite, which boosted the utilization rate of the pool to 93%. Ordinary depositors were unable to withdraw money during those days. The project team came out to argue that there was no liquidation risk, but the market was really panicked for a while. These are not my conclusions, they are things that can be found in black and white in public reports. I am putting them out for you to weigh the weight on your own, and I will not make a decision on how big a thunder this is. Finally, to return to the initial logic, it is' now is a good entry point '. Those who are optimistic about this list have similar reasons: clear bills are about to be implemented, and with regulatory certainty, these agreements with real cash flows should be collectively repriced. This statement holds true for most projects. It can be placed on WLFI, you have to take a bend. The ethical clause that is currently stuck in the clear bill is precisely aimed at "whether government officials should cut off their interests from the cryptocurrency industry", and the reason for this clause is precisely the Trump family's own big cryptocurrency business. The White House's attitude is that rules can be treated equally, but it does not accept a clause that specifies a specific position. The Democratic Party says that without this clause, it would not be enough to gather 60 votes. There are only about thirty working days left before the Senate's summer break, and there are still a bunch of other bills in front of them. The probability of this bill passing within the year on Polymarket has dropped from 74% a month ago to 48% now. The same good news, hitting AAVE is a pure tailwind, hitting WLFI is wrapped in a layer of political uncertainty, because this bill is slow to move and is itself tied to the political situation of the Trump family. This is a fluctuation that others don't have to bear, it has to bear alone. Triple layered view together: In terms of business, USD1 is one of the fastest-growing stablecoins in this field, and that's true; On the token side, WLFI does not capture protocol revenue, and the money earned cannot be transferred to the token, which is also true; Externally, it also exerts pressure on political and regulatory variables that others do not have, and this is equally true. These three things are not at odds with each other and are simultaneously established. Being optimistic about the growth of USD1 is one thing, but deciding whether to buy WLFI is another. This project requires you to separate and think about these two things more than most. As of the end of June, the supply of stablecoins and the progress of bills have become faster. I will update you later if there are any new developments.