The sustainability of bitlayer relies on three links: costs—supply—distribution. The cost side includes transaction fees, bridge and settlement fees, (if using validity proofs) verification and service fees; the supply side covers sequencers, provers, relays, and monitoring; the distribution side must balance incentives for nodes and public goods. If there is a native token, bitlayer will use it for Gas, staking/slashing, and governance; if priced in BTC, stronger cost routing and redistribution logic are necessary. To determine whether it is 'self-consistent', the key is whether the usage value metrics can cover the supply costs.
Compare bitlayer with others in the same category: relative to Stacks' 'consensus expansion', bitlayer emphasizes the programmable execution layer combined with DeFi more; for EVM-on-BTC solutions like Rootstock/BEVM, bitlayer needs to provide clearer curves on bridge trust assumptions, DA costs, and finality confirmations; in the face of ZK solutions, bitlayer needs to explain whether the proof/verification costs and frequency are suitable for high-frequency applications; compared to the 'mixed settlement/mixed DA' route, can bitlayer's cost-delay curve provide certainty for institutions? This benchmarking should be quantified with unified metrics rather than slogans.
From an investment and governance perspective, bitlayer's 'level of usage' is more important. It is recommended to create a dashboard: L2 daily active users and effective interactions, net inflows to the bridge and 7-day rolling averages, average redemption times and failure rates, commitment/proof frequency and stability, native proportion and income quality of top protocols' TVL, and decentralization progress of sequencers along with incident disclosures. As long as these metrics are steadily improving, the economic cycle of bitlayer will be healthier; if it mainly relies on subsidies to drive volume or frequent congestion during redemptions, positions should be reduced to a conservative level.
The operational strategy for Binance Square can also be quantified: new funds entering bitlayer use a 'three-batch + fixed withdrawal line' approach, with each batch triggered by metrics; in case of 'bridge congestion, oracle anomalies, or sequencer outages for extended periods', automatically reduce positions to baseline; new deployments and market making on the bitlayer side should mitigate single point impacts through 'multi-pool diversification + limit price deepening'. Long-term allocation should only expand under the premise of 'usage value > cost, governance transparency, and traceable incidents'. Hand over popularity to social media and decision-making to data; bitlayer's long-term value will be easier for you to grasp.