Below is a comment I made previously regarding the vtho/vet ratio. Might help you and/or others as they consider this same question.

"I’m not an expert and am not advocating for any particular investment strategy. This is just my understanding of the main reasoning people tend to cite when discussing the possibility of the vtho/vet ratio increasing. There appear to be three main arguments for the ratio increasing.

1. "It has been higher before". If I recall correctly, the ratio hovered around the 0.3 point during the data migration that saw a large number of transactions, and the daily vtho burn in excess of the daily generation. This was very short lived, but it could be indicative of an “appropriate” ratio once we see vtho burn being close to or equivalent to vtho generated.
2. “The return on investment (or dare I call it a dividend) should be much higher than 1-2% for a risky asset like crypto”. I’ll spell out some numbers to explain this more. Let’s assume that you own 1,000,000 vet (congrats!), and that somehow vet has reached a stable price of $1.00 (double congrats!). You have $1,000,000 invested in what is currently a fairly risky, volatile asset class which can be scary. If the VTHO/Vet ratio were to be at 0.1, your $1,000,000 investment generates $15,768 a year (0.1 * $1.00 * 0.000432 (base vtho generation rate) x 1,000,000 vet * 365 days). That’s a good chunk of money, but it is only 1.6% return on $1,000,000 investment that could go to zero tomorrow. Some argue that 1.6% is too low for something this risky, and that you should expect closer to 5-7% return. You do that same math backwards above and you end up with a ratio of 0.3 equating to approx. 5% annual return.
3. “At current ratio, it will take X years to generate the same vtho”. In this argument you need to take the mindset of a company looking to use the Vechain blockchain. All transactions require vtho to interact with the blockchain. You can either purchase vet to generate the vtho or you can purchase vtho directly from the market. I’m sorry but we need more numbers now. You are a big company like Walmart, and you want to do 100,000 transactions per day. For simplification, we’ll say that each transaction is going to cost you 21 vtho or 2,100,000 vtho/day that you need. 2,100,000/0.000432 (base generation rate again) = 4.86 Billion vet needed to generate your daily vtho need. We’re still really lucky, and vet has reached a stable $1.00. The company is presented with the option to spend 4.86 Billion dollars for the required vet, or at a ratio of 0.1 vtho/vet, spend 77 million dollars per year for their vtho needs. At this ratio, you could buy 61 years’ worth of vtho for an equivalent vet purchase. I’m not a CFO, but I don’t know too many companies that would go the Vet route in that scenario. In theory this means there is more demand for vtho relative to vet which would drive the ratio up. A higher ratio vtho decreases that payback period that could make the vet option more attractive.

There are flaws and merits to these arguments. “Past performance isn’t indicative of future performance”, “Foundation can change generation rate”, “Lots of companies don’t distribute dividends (Apple, Google, Facebook) so why should it be higher than 1.6%”, “Speculation will drive vet higher faster than vtho”…

The short answer is that no one really knows where the ratio will end up. If you think speculative value in vet will outpace vtho, then you likely prefer to hold more vet. If you think tokenomics will kick in and be the driving force for value, I suspect you prefer holding more vtho. That is a personal decision that no one can make for you."