Jeff Walton

Maybe Ethereum.

Ethereum, maybe Solana, but like lower probability.

And if you're talking about

an asset going from $1.6 trillion to $20 trillion or $30 trillion, you need to access different pools of capital, large institutional scale, like different pools of capital that are not going to buy the underlying, but they're going to buy a wrapped product.

With Bitcoin, you're underwriting the protocol.

And so Bitcoin, $1.6 trillion asset.

With Ethereum, you would be underwriting, what is it, a $500 billion asset.

So it's a significantly smaller asset.

It's like one third the size.

And you're underwriting, right, the Ethereum Foundation and their ability to change the protocol and proof of stake and the credit profile.

Any credit written against Ethereum would likely need to have a premium over and above the credit that's issued on Bitcoin.

Not to say it's not doable.

It's just it would have to be better.

It would have to be a better product than the credit written against Bitcoin.

Because you're saying that there is more trust required?

I'm saying that the company that's issuing the product has to underwrite that future.

Right.

That risk profile is different than the risk profile of Bitcoin.

Yeah, yeah.

And with credit...