This has been my observation as well (some previous discussions, specially see section “A step back of the strategy”).
I would however focus more on the more fundamental problem – which is that the EVM L2 competition is as intense as you can imagine. The planned deployment of Revive EVM on Polkadot Hub is slow. Even if we take the Revive roadmap all the way to the end, a few other chains already do compiled EVM, and much better than the EVM->PVM strategy. The current Polkadot Hub strategy has no advantage in the competition field, no matter now or in the future.
Regarding “Rust > Solidity”, I would say it’s more like “ink v5 > ink v6 > Solidity”. “ink v6”, which migrated to Revive, contains a lot of “junk stuff” that is not needed due to the EVM integration. Things which may make sense with EVM standalone, but are just ecosystem burden in the Rust ecosystem, and they will hunt us for eternity.
Your data, for the adoption of Rust smart contracts, is perhaps to a great extent due to Solana. Solana really showed us what a successful ecosystem, and a non-EVM deployment could have been, if we haven’t been making those serious strategic mistakes.