A decline and its recovery are asymmetric
In a hypothetical example, a protocol falls from $100 million to $60 million. That is a 40% decline. Returning from $60 million to $100 million would require an increase of about 66.7%. The difference comes from the changing denominator. Read negative percentages together with current balances rather than treating an equally sized positive percentage as an exact reversal of the contraction.
Know what the filters can hide
The minimum applies to current TVL. A project that previously exceeded the floor may disappear from the results after falling below it, so lowering the threshold can reveal a different downside picture. Missing change fields are not silently converted into zero. The prior balance is reconstructed from current TVL and the reported percentage only when the denominator is valid; a reported loss of 100% cannot be inverted into a unique prior balance.
Investigate a contraction without inventing a cause
A red number is not evidence of a hack, insolvency or mass withdrawals. Repricing, ordinary redemptions, an adapter revision or movement between products can all require further examination. Compare protocol history with official project disclosures before attributing the change. For a multichain application, the chain filter selects deployment membership while the displayed balance remains global. Save the receipt time and chosen period with an exported review list so future checks can distinguish a continuing contraction from a temporary snapshot.