➥ I’ve been digging into 3 native BTC bridge approaches Each is shaping #BTCFi differently, but @BitcoinBridge_ stands out with a very pragmatic angle ☒ @BitcoinBridge_ • Powered by TEEs + threshold cryptography, 0.1% fee, BTC ∩ ETH bridge • Just-in-time liquidity, without $50M idle TVL, wasted capital • Super efficient capital use • UX-driven w low fees, smoother flow • TSS eliminates single point of failure → If they prove security transparency, this could be the bridge that balances UX with robust cryptography ☒ @PortaltoBitcoin • Atomic swaps + notary L3 anchored to Bitcoin • Integrates with Babylon Genesis → BTC staking secures validators • Backed by big names Coinbase Ventures, OKX • Almost trust-minimal, but architecture is complex → UX might feel slower ☒ @optimexfi • Native DeFi on Bitcoin (swap, lending, margin) • RFQ swap model without AMM & MEV • Recent integration with Across for EVM leg of BTC ∩ EVM flows • More of a Bitcoin DeFi layer than a pure bridge I can see ppl gonna love these native Bitcoin bridge → If I want lowest trust assumptions → Portal → If I want full DeFi suite on Bitcoin → Optimex But if I want simple, cheap, fast BTC ∩ ETH bridging → @BitcoinBridge_ feels the sharpest bet cuz they nail transparency around TEEs + TSS In #BTCFi adoption, every design makes trade-offs • Security model → hardware vs. cryptography vs. hybrid • Capital efficiency → idle liquidity vs. JIT • User experience → fees, speed, complexity @BitcoinBridge_ is betting on pragmatism + UX and I think that’s exactly what #BTCFi may need to cross the adoption chasm

Just-in-time BTC liquidity + TSS-backed bridging is a smart combo. @BitcoinBridge_ might quietly become the default ETH ∩ BTC rail if they keep this clean.

Really solid breakdown! Love how you framed the trade-offs: trust assumptions, capital efficiency, and UX.