Fees and retained revenue answer different questions
Gross reported fees can be distributed among liquidity suppliers, resource providers, the protocol or other participants according to the underlying product. They should not be presented automatically as token-holder earnings. The revenue-capture screen examines a separate provider metric for retained revenue; this ranking keeps the fee measure explicit so that the two questions remain distinguishable.
Normalize the comparison period
Consider hypothetical protocol A reporting $900,000 over 30 days and protocol B reporting $100,000 over one day. Those values do not form a fair same-period ranking. A’s arithmetic daily average is $30,000, but the actual path may be uneven. Use the same selected window for both applications and inspect whether each has a usable observation. The minimum field applies to the full chosen period, not an automatically annualized run rate.
Interpret the output within its coverage
The chain filter tests deployment membership and leaves protocol-wide fee values intact. Shares use the sum of valid returned reporting rows; parent-child grouping can make that sum differ from the separately reported aggregate. A fee spike can be worth investigating, but it does not establish sustainable demand, profitability or an attractive token price. Compare a selected protocol’s fee definition and history with its business model. Keep missing figures unavailable and preserve the source receipt when exporting results, especially when comparing data loaded at different times.