The pricing logic of the Ethereum ecosystem is somewhat distorted.

Recently, a phenomenon has been frequently observed—the infrastructure layer that bears systemic risk and maintains network security is almost not given a reasonable valuation by the market; instead, various narrative hype, short-term concepts, and growth stories are taking turns to attract investment.

In plain terms, market enthusiasm is very concentrated, but the direction is problematic.

Projects like OBOL are caught in this cognitive vacuum. They focus on validation infrastructure, staking coordination, and other "invisible but critical" tasks that directly support the operation of Ethereum's security layer. However, in the trading market, these projects are usually marginalized and seem lukewarm.

Compare this: some projects that attract attention through stories and publicity can increase tenfold, while the infrastructure that truly works within Ethereum's core security system is met with indifference. This is not to say narratives are unimportant, but rather that the market's risk pricing perception is biased.

The underlying logic is simple—if the Ethereum network itself encounters problems, the entire ecosystem cannot operate. And those node infrastructures that maintain network operation are actually the most worth paying attention to. It's just that they are not as sexy and are hard to tell stories about, so they are overlooked.

This gap will eventually be filled.