Quoting from past talks with big brains:

Loki has some different aspects:

1) Blocktimes are 2m vs 5s for @THORChain_org, so better UX for the latter.

2) Can't lock up all their coin in nodes (needed for Service Node collateral), so they have a more complex bond:staked curve. https://twitter.com/alexgausman/status/1295583852824420352

3) Loki don't want to put state in chain, so they will use "quoters" which is a secondary service that sits between user and state machine. could impact UX.

4) They can't inflate their block reward into pools, because they currently use it for service node revenue.

5) Today we have 100's of centralised exchanges. Tomorrow we will have 1 dominant liquidity network, with other networks filling niche use cases.

Since $RUNE has much more purchasing power, cleaner/clearer economics, I don't see LOKI beating it.

6) @THORChain_org will probably connect to a handful of main chains, and Loki may focus on PoW coins. Don’t see much overlap in pools between both projects.

7) Do you feel Balancer competes with Uniswap competes with Curve? Or do they all fill their own niches well?

8) The bet is that in ~5 years the only centralised exchanges will be the ones with fiat gateways, or using pools as their backend.