## 4 Conclusions and Prospects  
This review systematically summarizes the research progress of MOF-based EMA flame-retardant dual-functional composites, with the EMA and flame-retardant performance of all discussed materials collected in Table 1. To provide a more intuitive comparison of the performance of different materials across various parameters, Figure 13 presents a comprehensive comparison of these materials in terms of EMA levels, flame retardancy, and other key properties. Additionally, the following main conclusions can be drawn:  
(1) Through the rational design of the structure and composition of MOFs, synergistic enhancement of both EMA and flame-retardant properties can be achieved. The selection of metal centers plays a key role in the material's performance. Typical magnetic metals (such as Fe, Co, and Ni) can provide a certain degree of magnetic loss capability while also exhibiting excellent dielectric loss characteristics, demonstrating outstanding impedance matching performance. Polymetallic MOFs further enhance performance through the synergistic effect of multiple components. (2) The EMA performance of MOF-based composites is mainly influenced by the following factors: the pore structure of MOFs provides abundant interfacial polarization sites and multiple reflection channels; the introduction of metal centers and conductive components enhances the material's magnetic loss and dielectric loss capabilities; rational structural design contributes to the optimization of impedance matching. Reported MOF-based composites have achieved RL values ranging from \(-40\) dB to \(-75\) dB and EAB values from 3 GHz to 7 GHz. (3) The flame-retardant mechanism of MOF-based composites mainly includes the following: the catalytic promotion of charring by the metal centers to form a dense protective layer; the porous structure facilitating the adsorption and catalytic decomposition of toxic gases; and the introduction of functional groups such as P and N further enhancing the flame-retardant effect. Some materials have achieved V-0 flame-retardant performance and a LOI of over 30%. Figure 13: Radar chart of EMA–flame retardancy levels of all MOF-based dual-functional composites. Figure 14 visually illustrates the challenges and development directions that research on MOF-based dual-functional composites still faces. In-depth studies on the structure-performance relationships of materials are needed to establish synergistic enhancement mechanisms for EMA and flame-retardant properties, providing theoretical guidance for the rational design of materials. New synthesis strategies and processing techniques should be developed to improve the scalability of material preparation and enhance their  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & **Structure** & **Loading** & **RL\({}_{\text{min}}\)/d** & **EAB/d** & **Main Flame-Retardant and** & **Advantages/** & **Ref. ** \\  & & **(wt.\%)** & **(dB/mm)** & **(GHz/mm)** & **Thermal Insulation Results** & **Disadvantages** & **Ref. ** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Fe-MOF+GO} & Heterostructure & & & & & Alcohol lamp burning 20 s & Lightweight, easy to \\  & composed of 2D \(\upmu\)GO & 25 & \(-\)43.6/2.0 & 5.0/2.0 & without deformation; HRC, pHRR & prepare/high-proportion & [77] \\  & and 3D Fe-MOF & & & & & 42.3\% and 17.7\%, respectively. & requirements & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Fe\({}_{2}\)P\({}_{\text{A}_{012}}\)/P-C} & Complexnetwork & & & & & High-temperature fire & \\  & structure composed of & octahedralFE\({}_{2}\)P\({}_{\text{A}_{012}}\) and & 30 & \(-\)67.6/2.0 & 5.76/2.1 & Alcohol lamp burning 180 s & \\  & & & & & without deformation. & preparation process and & \\  & layered carbon & & & & & requirements & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Fe/C/CF} & 3D porous structure & & & & & & Lightweight, easy to \\  & composed of Fe/C & & & & & & prepare/long-term stability & \\  & nanocolues and carbon & & & & stealth.