1) There's an obvious risk on Ethereum's DeFi ecosystem that most people are either ignoring or they're simply unaware. Take MakerDAO for example, their Maker token is supposed to increase in value through the buy back and burn generated through DAI's interest.
2) With a shrinking supply the investor logically expects positive returns. Does this remotely resemble an utility token? Many might argue that this is a legal grey area but to me it seems fairly obvious that from a regulatory point of view this is a security token.
3) An increasing regulatory pressure should be expected within the next few years so ask yourself what will happen to MakerDAO and other DeFi projects like Compound (that use Maker's model)? Will they just keep on pretending that their tokens are utilities? The backlash is nigh.
4) On the other side of the spectrum you can find StakerDAO which is currently being built on Tezos. Their model is far more responsible. Essentially they decided to treat their Staker token as a security (thus only accredited investors qualify for investment).
5) By doing so there are obvious short term limitations associated with StakerDAO but overall just like Jonas Lamis mentioned it's easier to go from being a security to an utility than the other way around.
6) This regulatory compliance concern is deeply rooted in the Tezos ecosystem (if you follow their Devs updates you're aware of it) and that's why I believe that if an institutionally tokenized future lies ahead of us Tezos is the leading platform to deploy it.
7) With that being said there's no denying that Ethereum's network value and ecosystem is still far superior, Ethereum is a really awesome but nonetheless flawed experiment. Which of the networks with triumph? One of them, maybe both, regardless I'm prepared for both scenarios.
