It’s a good question.
LSTs, for me, are an interesting marketing pitch.
They have reduced volatility due to the fact they are anchored to the value of the underlying staked token (in this case SOL).
But they are more volatile than SOL, and normally (depending on the token of course) worth more than SOL.
That and, most, LSTs naturally increase in value in relation to the same number of SOL (e.g., 1 INF is worth more than 1 SOL). It’s a slow increase, quite good for someone from the tradfi world of bonds but terrible compared to the swings that people in crypto (especially the memecoin casino of Solana) are used to. But, again, the underlying asset is also volatile so maybe that isn’t as stark a choice.
SOL is a popular asset to hold. Very popular. So by extension LSTs SHOULD be as popular as SOL when you factor in a discount for smart contract risk but a boost from the rewards.
The issue Solana faces is whilst the staking rate is high, the amounts held in LSTs is quite low.
Rather than bringing new people to staking, via LSTs, we might want to consider how to bring more SOL stakers to LSTs instead of native staking. I think the validator LSTs initiative is huge in this regard and we’ve only just scratched the surface of what that can do
Shameless plug for this: ValiDex: A wiki of validator LSTs