bench audit: messaging finality callout + perp-oi gains multi-chain disclaimer

benchmarks/cross-chain-messaging-latency.yml

@@ -55,9 +55,11 @@ methodology:
   - "No canary transactions: every value on this page is a real user message. No wallet is funded, no gas is paid. Total observation cost is API polling."
   - "Circle CCTP not included: Circle's Iris API does not expose a list-recent endpoint, so passive polling is not feasible without maintaining nonce state via chain-scan on all ~10 CCTP source chains plus Solana. A CCTP bench is on the roadmap."
 
+disclaimer: "These four protocols make different security tradeoffs that directly affect their delivery time. LayerZero and Hyperlane sign messages before source-chain finality, so they deliver in seconds. Chainlink CCIP and Axelar wait for source-chain finality before signing (12-20 min on Ethereum-source lanes). A lower p50 here does not mean a protocol is technically superior — it may mean it accepts more re-org risk. Use the per-corridor bench for each protocol to compare like-for-like lanes."
+
 findings:
-  - "{{best_name}} currently leads end-to-end cross-chain delivery at {{best_p50}} (p50 aggregate across all corridors, 24h) across the four measured protocols."
-  - "Pre-finality signers (LayerZero, Hyperlane) deliver in the seconds-to-tens-of-seconds range. Chainlink CCIP and Axelar both add source-chain finality wait on Ethereum-source lanes (CCIP waits for Casper FFG epoch, Axelar waits for ~96 confirmations), so their aggregate p50 sits higher when Ethereum-source volume dominates their footprint. That is a security tradeoff visible directly in the data."
+  - "The numbers on this page reflect a security tradeoff, not just engineering speed. LayerZero and Hyperlane sign pre-finality and deliver in seconds. Chainlink CCIP and Axelar wait for source-chain finality (12-20 min on Ethereum-source lanes) before signing. A lower p50 here can mean faster delivery or less re-org protection — read both together."
+  - "{{best_name}} currently leads end-to-end cross-chain delivery at {{best_p50}} (p50 aggregate across all corridors, 24h). Pre-finality signers structurally dominate this aggregate on high-Ethereum-volume days."
   - "Per-corridor variance is large. The aggregate here is a headline; the individual bench for each protocol shows the per-source-chain breakdown that answers what you would feel in production."
 
 faq:

benchmarks/perp-open-interest.yml

@@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ findings:
   - "{{name:aevo}} sits at {{p50:aevo}} of open interest. Optimism L2 orderbook perps, options-focused history."
   - "{{name:gains}} sits at {{p50:gains}} of open interest. Synthetic perps across Arbitrum, Base, Polygon and ApeChain."
 
+disclaimer: "gains.trade aggregates open interest across four chains (Arbitrum, Base, Polygon, ApeChain) into a single number, while most other venues operate on one chain. This inflates gains.trade's total relative to single-chain venues and makes a direct OI comparison unfair. The per-venue tags call this out; for a single-chain view of gains.trade, use the per-chain breakdown once available."
+
 source: https://github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/perp-cohort-stats
 
 prometheus:
@@ -245,7 +247,7 @@ providers:
 
   - slug: gains
     name: gains.trade
-    tag: Synthetic perps across Arbitrum, Base, Polygon, ApeChain
+    tag: Synthetic perps across Arbitrum + Base + Polygon + ApeChain (4-chain aggregate — not directly comparable to single-chain venues)
     formula: "Open interest from the gains.trade trading-variables endpoint per chain backend: per-collateral pairOis long+short, normalized by precision x collateralPriceUsd, summed across 4 chains; headline is the 24h time average."
     queries:
       p50: avg_over_time(perp_venue_oi_usd{venue="gains"}[24h])