It is an existence proof that the security is good enough to get the job done and keep losses to an acceptable level. If it was truly "woeful" enough to actually matter then an alternative with better security would have displaced it by now.
This is overly simplistic and assumes an open market witn no barrier to entry for competitors, which is not the case.
Itβs like saying the people of North Korea believe their government is good enough to get the job done, otherwise KJU would have been displaced by now.
How is that any indication of its security?