13 posts tagged with "Investment Research"

Search "Mutuum Finance" on Google and you will find page after page of sponsored press releases proclaiming a revolutionary DeFi lending protocol, $20 million in presale funding, and projections of 2,400% returns. Search "Mutuum Finance scam" and you will find trust scores as low as 14 out of 100, user complaints about vanishing balances, and an anonymous team behind a product that does not yet exist.

Both of these realities are true simultaneously. And that tension makes Mutuum Finance one of the most instructive case studies in how to evaluate — and potentially avoid — crypto presale projects in 2026.

Mutuum Finance (MUTM) is marketing itself as the next major DeFi lending protocol. The presale has attracted over 18,900 investors and nearly $20 million in funding across seven phases. The token price has risen from $0.01 in Phase 1 to $0.04 in Phase 7, with a confirmed launch price of $0.06. The project claims dual lending models, a Halborn security audit, and a CertiK token scan score of 90 out of 100.

But beneath the press releases lies a pattern that experienced crypto investors have seen before — and one that demands scrutiny.

What Mutuum Finance Claims to Be​

At its core, Mutuum Finance describes a decentralized, non-custodial liquidity protocol for lending, borrowing, and earning interest through overcollateralized crypto loans. The design, on paper, is not unusual. It mirrors established protocols like Aave and Compound with some structural additions.

Peer-to-Contract (P2C) Lending: Users deposit assets into shared liquidity pools to earn yield and receive mtTokens — interest-bearing tokens that appreciate as borrowers repay loans. Borrowers provide overcollateralized collateral and can choose between variable and stable interest rates. This model is functionally identical to how Aave V3 operates.

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Lending: A second market supports direct lending and borrowing of more volatile assets (the project names PEPE and SHIB as examples) within fixed loan-to-value parameters. By isolating speculative tokens in a dedicated environment, the protocol claims to maintain security for its core pools.

Overcollateralized Stablecoin: Mutuum describes plans for a USD-pegged stablecoin minted from the protocol treasury using mint-and-burn mechanics — similar in concept to Aave's GHO stablecoin.

Buy-and-Redistribute Mechanism: Platform fees are used to purchase MUTM on the open market, which is then redistributed to users who stake mtTokens in a safety module.

The total token supply is 4 billion MUTM, with 45.5% (1.82 billion tokens) allocated to the presale. The project is based in Dubai and plans to deploy on Ethereum with Layer 2 support and Chainlink oracle integration.

None of these features are technically novel. Every element exists in production across Aave, Compound, Morpho, or SparkLend. The question is not whether the design is theoretically sound — it is whether the team can execute it.

The Red Flags​

1. Anonymous Team​

The Mutuum Finance team is anonymous. No founders, developers, or advisors are publicly identified. In a space where rug pulls and exit scams remain common, team anonymity is the single most significant risk factor for presale investors.

Anonymous teams are not inherently fraudulent — Bitcoin's Satoshi Nakamoto is the most famous example. But Satoshi never asked anyone for $20 million before shipping a working product. When a project raises substantial capital from retail investors without public accountability for the people controlling those funds, the risk profile changes fundamentally.

2. No Working Product​

As of January 2026, Mutuum Finance has deployed a basic smart contract to the Sepolia testnet. No frontend interface is publicly available. No transactions have been observed on the testnet. No users have tested the protocol in any meaningful capacity.

The project has raised nearly $20 million for a product that exists only as a whitepaper description and a set of audited smart contracts. The V1 protocol is described as approaching testnet readiness, with mainnet activation expected sometime in 2026 — but no firm date has been announced.

For comparison: Aave launched its mainnet in January 2020 after extensive testnet deployment and public beta testing. Compound V1 shipped in 2018 before raising significant capital. In the established DeFi lending space, products ship before presales, not the reverse.

3. $240 Million Launch Valuation​

At the confirmed launch price of $0.06 per token with 4 billion total supply, Mutuum Finance's fully diluted valuation (FDV) at listing is $240 million. For context:

• Aave has $43 billion in TVL and processes trillions in cumulative deposits
• Compound holds $3.15 billion in TVL after seven years of operation
• Morpho became the largest lending market on Base with $1 billion borrowed

Mutuum has zero TVL, zero users, and zero production transactions. A $240 million FDV for an unproven protocol with no working product is atypical even by crypto standards, where inflated presale valuations frequently precede sharp post-listing declines.

4. Aggressive Paid Marketing​

Googling "Mutuum Finance MUTM" returns an overwhelming volume of sponsored content and press releases — primarily distributed through GlobeNewswire and syndicated across financial news outlets. The language is consistently promotional, with phrases like "300% growth confirmed" and "most promising altcoin under $1."

Organic community discussion is sparse. Independent reviews are overwhelmingly negative or cautionary. The ratio of paid marketing to genuine user engagement is inverted compared to legitimate DeFi protocols, which typically build communities organically before launching marketing campaigns.

5. Conflicting Trust Scores​

Third-party trust assessment tools show conflicting signals:

• Scam Detector rates mutuum.finance at 14.2 out of 100 ("Controversial. High-Risk. Unsafe") but rates mutuum.com at 86.1 ("Authentic. Trustworthy. Secure")
• Gridinsoft rates mutuum.finance at 39 out of 100 with "multiple red flags"
• Scamadviser shows a very low trust score with user reviews averaging 1.3 stars

The discrepancy between domains adds confusion. Users have reported investing small amounts only to find their balances showing zero the following day, with no response from the team.

What the Audits Actually Mean​

Mutuum Finance highlights two security credentials: a Halborn Security audit and a CertiK token scan score of 90 out of 100. These are real companies performing legitimate work. But understanding what they cover — and what they do not — is critical.

Halborn's audit reviewed smart contract components including liquidation operations, collateral valuation, borrowing logic, and interest rate calculations. This confirms that the code, as written, functions as intended. It does not verify that the team is honest, that the business model is viable, or that funds are safe from insider mismanagement.

CertiK's token scan evaluates the token contract for common vulnerabilities — honeypot mechanisms, hidden minting functions, and similar technical risks. A score of 90 out of 100 means the token contract itself is technically clean. It says nothing about the project's legitimacy, the team's intentions, or the probability of post-launch support.

Both audits are necessary but not sufficient conditions for trust. Many projects that eventually failed or turned out to be fraudulent held valid security audits. An audit tells you the code works; it does not tell you the people behind it are trustworthy.

The $50,000 bug bounty program is a positive signal, but modest by industry standards — Aave's bug bounty has paid out millions.

The DeFi Lending Market in 2026​

To evaluate whether Mutuum Finance addresses a genuine market need, it helps to understand the competitive landscape.

DeFi lending has matured significantly. Total outstanding loans across major protocols rose 37.2% year-over-year in 2025. Aave dominates with 56.5% of total DeFi debt, having surpassed $71 trillion in cumulative deposits. Compound remains a foundational protocol with $3.15 billion in TVL. Morpho has emerged as a credible competitor, particularly on Base where it overtook Aave as the largest lending market.

SparkLend reached $7.9 billion in TVL by combining conservative collateral requirements with innovative yield strategies. Even among newer entrants, the successful ones launched working products before seeking significant capital.

The market for overcollateralized lending is real and growing. The question is whether there is room for a new entrant that brings no technical innovation, no established user base, and no production track record — especially one seeking a $240 million valuation.

The honest answer is: probably not, unless the team delivers something genuinely differentiated. The P2P lending model for volatile assets is the most interesting aspect of the design, but it has not been built yet, let alone tested.

What Investors Should Consider​

For anyone who has already participated in the Mutuum Finance presale — or is considering it — here is the framework for making informed decisions:

The bull case: The smart contracts are audited. The dual lending model is conceptually sound. If the team delivers a working product that attracts users and TVL, early presale participants bought at a significant discount to launch price. The overcollateralized stablecoin adds a revenue diversification angle. Multi-chain deployment could expand the addressable market.

The bear case: Anonymous team, no working product, $240 million launch FDV, overwhelming paid marketing relative to organic adoption, conflicting trust scores, and user complaints. The project structure — where 45.5% of tokens go to presale investors at escalating prices with vesting periods — creates mechanical sell pressure at launch. Historical data shows 88% of airdropped and presale tokens lose value within three months.

The realistic assessment: Legitimate DeFi lending protocols build products, attract users, and then raise capital. Mutuum Finance has inverted this sequence. That does not automatically make it a scam — some legitimate projects run presales before launch. But it dramatically increases the risk profile, and the weight of circumstantial evidence (anonymity, no product, aggressive marketing, low trust scores) tilts the analysis toward extreme caution.

The safest approach to any presale is simple: never invest more than you can afford to lose entirely, and apply the same skepticism you would bring to any unproven investment opportunity that promises extraordinary returns.

DeFi lending is a $50+ billion market with room for innovation. But the innovations that matter — undercollateralized lending, real-world asset integration, cross-chain liquidity — are being built by teams with public identities, working products, and organic communities. Mutuum Finance has none of these. Whether it will develop them remains an open question — one that only time and delivered code can answer.

This article is for educational purposes and does not constitute investment advice. Always conduct independent research before participating in any crypto presale or investment opportunity.

The median altcoin fell 79 % in 2025. The October 10 liquidation cascade wiped out more than $20 billion in notional positions — eclipsing the Terra/Luna and FTX unwinds. And yet, 151 public companies ended the year holding $95 billion in digital assets, up from fewer than ten in January 2021.

Pantera Capital, the crypto industry's oldest institutional fund with $4.8 billion under management and a 265-company portfolio, has published its most detailed annual outlook yet. Written by managing partner Cosmo Jiang, partner Paul Veradittakit, and research analyst Jay Yu, the letter distills nine predictions and twelve theses into a single message: 2026 is the year crypto stops being a casino and starts being infrastructure. That thesis deserves scrutiny.

The State of Play: A Bear Market Hiding Inside a Bull Narrative​

Before looking forward, Pantera's backward glance is unusually candid for a fund letter. Bitcoin fell roughly 6 % in 2025, Ethereum dropped 11 %, Solana slid 34 %, and the broader token universe (excluding BTC, ETH, and stablecoins) declined 44 % from its late-2024 peak. The Fear & Greed Index touched FTX-collapse-era lows. Perpetual futures funding rates collapsed, signaling a leverage washout.

The culprit, Pantera argues, was not fundamentals but structure. Digital asset treasuries (DATs) exhausted their incremental buying power. Tax-loss selling, portfolio rebalancing, and CTA (commodity trading advisor) flows compounded the downturn. The result was a year-long bear market for everything except Bitcoin and stablecoins — a divergence that sets the stage for every prediction that follows.

The key statistic: 67 % of professional investment managers still have zero digital asset exposure, according to a Bank of America survey. Only 4.4 million Bitcoin addresses hold more than $10,000 in value, versus 900 million traditional investment accounts globally. The gap between institutional interest and institutional allocation is where Pantera sees the 2026 opportunity.

Prediction 1: "Brutal Pruning" of Corporate Bitcoin Treasuries​

The most provocative call is consolidation among digital asset treasury companies. By December 2025, 164 entities (including governments) held $148 billion in digital assets. Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) alone holds 709,715 Bitcoin purchased for approximately $53.9 billion. BitMine, the largest corporate Ethereum holder, accumulated 4.2 million ETH valued at $12.9 billion.

Pantera's thesis: only one or two dominant players will survive per asset class. "Everyone else gets acquired or left behind." The math supports this. Smaller DATs face a structural disadvantage — they can't issue convertible notes at the same scale, they don't get the same premium-to-NAV, and they lack the brand recognition that drives retail flows.

This has direct implications for the 142 public companies operating corporate Bitcoin treasuries. Many face the same Grayscale GBTC-style discount risk we've analyzed previously — when premiums evaporate, these companies become worth less than their underlying holdings, triggering a death spiral of selling pressure.

Prediction 2: Real-World Assets Double (At Minimum)​

RWA TVL reached $16.6 billion by mid-December 2025 — approximately 14 % of total DeFi TVL. Pantera expects treasuries and private credit to at least double in 2026, with tokenized stocks growing faster thanks to an anticipated SEC "Innovation Exemption" for tokenized securities in DeFi.

The "surprise" call: one unexpected asset class — carbon credits, mineral rights, or energy — will surge. This aligns with the broader institutional consensus. Galaxy Digital predicts the SEC will provide exemptions to expand tokenized securities in DeFi (though those exemptions will be tested in court). Messari's thesis identifies RWA as a "systemic integration" pillar alongside AI and DePIN.

Pantera also singles out tokenized gold as a key RWA category, forecasting that blockchain-based gold tokens backed by physical bullion will become a cornerstone of DeFi collateral strategies — essentially positioning tokenized gold as a macro hedge embedded natively in on-chain lending markets.

Prediction 3: AI Becomes Crypto's Primary Interface​

This prediction has two layers. First, Pantera argues that AI will become the primary way users interact with crypto — conversational assistants that execute trades, provide portfolio analysis, and enhance security. Platforms like Surf.ai are cited as early examples.

Second, and more ambitiously, research analyst Jay Yu predicts that AI agents will mass-adopt x402, a blockchain-based payment protocol, with some services deriving over 50 % of revenue from AI-initiated micropayments. Yu specifically predicts Solana will surpass Base in x402 transaction volume.

The institutional implication: AI-mediated trading cycles will become mainstream. Not fully autonomous — Pantera acknowledges LLM-based autonomous trading is still experimental — but AI assistance will "gradually permeate user workflows of most consumer-facing crypto applications." The next crypto unicorn, they argue, may be an on-chain security firm using AI to achieve "100x safety improvements" over current smart-contract auditing.

This prediction has real numbers behind it. Current AI already achieves 95 % accuracy in Bitcoin transaction labeling for fraud detection. The gap between 95 % and 99.9 % — where institutions need it to be — is where the value creation happens.

Prediction 4: Bank Consortium Stablecoin and the $500B Market​

Stablecoins hit a $310 billion market cap in 2025, doubling since 2023 in a 25-month expansion. Pantera's boldest stablecoin call: ten major banks are exploring a consortium stablecoin pegged to G7 currencies, with ten European banks separately investigating a euro-pegged stablecoin. They predict at least one major bank consortium will release its stablecoin in 2026.

This aligns with broader industry momentum. Galaxy Digital predicts that top-three global card networks will route more than 10 % of cross-border settlement volume through public-chain stablecoins in 2026. Pantera forecasts the stablecoin market reaching $500 billion or more by year-end.

The tension: stablecoin growth benefits off-chain equity businesses more than token protocols. Pantera is refreshingly honest about this. Circle captured a $9 billion IPO valuation, Coinbase earns $908 million annually from USDC revenue sharing, and Stripe acquired Bridge for $1.1 billion — all equity value, not token value. For token holders, the stablecoin boom is infrastructure that enriches everyone except them.

Prediction 5: The Biggest Crypto IPO Year Ever​

The U.S. saw 335 IPOs in 2025 (a 55 % increase from 2024), including nine blockchain listings. Pantera portfolio companies Circle, Figure, Gemini, and Amber Group went public with a combined market cap of approximately $33 billion as of January 2026. Ledger is reportedly eyeing a $4 billion IPO with Goldman Sachs, Jefferies, and Barclays advising.

Pantera predicts 2026 will exceed 2025's IPO activity. The catalyst: 76 % of companies surveyed plan tokenized asset additions, with some targeting 5 %+ portfolio allocation to digital assets. As more crypto companies have auditable financials and regulatory compliance, the IPO pipeline deepens.

Prediction 6: A $1B+ Prediction Market Acquisition​

With $28 billion traded in prediction markets during 2025's first ten months (hitting an all-time high of $2.3 billion the week of October 20), Pantera predicts a buyout exceeding $1 billion — one that will not involve Polymarket or Kalshi. The targets: smaller platforms with institutional infrastructure that larger financial players want to acquire rather than build.

Yu separately predicts prediction markets will bifurcate into "financial" platforms (integrated with DeFi, supporting leverage and staking) and "cultural" platforms (localized, long-tail interest betting). This bifurcation creates acquisition targets at both ends.

How Pantera's Predictions Compare to the Consensus​

Pantera's outlook doesn't exist in isolation. Here's how it aligns with — and diverges from — other major institutional forecasts:

Five of six major firms agree that AI-crypto convergence will scale in 2026. The sharpest divergence is on Bitcoin price: Galaxy predicts $250,000, Bitwise expects new all-time highs in H1, while Pantera avoids a specific target — focusing instead on structural adoption metrics rather than price.

For accuracy context: historical prediction scorecards show Messari at 55 % accuracy, Bitwise at 50 %, Galaxy at 26 %, and VanEck at 10 %. Pantera's track record is harder to assess because their predictions tend to be structural rather than price-based — which is arguably more useful for portfolio construction.

The Uncomfortable Truth Pantera Acknowledges​

The most valuable section of Pantera's letter isn't the predictions — it's the honest assessment of what went wrong in 2025. They identify three structural problems that don't have obvious 2026 solutions:

Value accrual failure. Governance tokens broadly failed to capture protocol revenue. Pantera cites Aave, Tensor, and Axelar as cases where token holders didn't benefit proportionally from platform growth. Yu predicts "equity-exchangeable tokens" may emerge as a fix, but the regulatory framework for token-equity convergence remains unclear.

Slowing on-chain activity. Layer-one revenues, dApp fees, and active addresses all decelerated in late 2025. The infrastructure buildout has dramatically reduced transaction costs — great for users, challenging for L1/L2 token valuations that depend on fee revenue.

Stablecoin value leakage. The $310 billion stablecoin market enriches issuers (Circle, Tether) and distributors (Coinbase, Stripe) — equity businesses, not token-governed protocols. This creates a paradox: the fastest-growing crypto use case may not benefit crypto token holders.

These aren't problems Pantera claims to solve. But acknowledging them puts the bullish predictions in useful context: even the industry's most optimistic institutional investor recognizes that 2026's growth may flow to equity rather than tokens.

What This Means for Builders and Investors​

Pantera's 2026 framework suggests three actionable themes:

Follow the equity, not just the tokens. If the biggest crypto value creation happens through IPOs, bank stablecoins, and AI security companies, portfolio construction should reflect that. The era of pure token speculation is giving way to a hybrid equity-token landscape.

The consolidation trade is real. "Brutal pruning" of DATs, prediction market acquisitions, and institutional-grade infrastructure suggest that 2026 rewards scale and compliance over innovation and experimentation. For builders, this means the bar for launching new protocols has risen dramatically.

AI is the distribution channel, not just the product. Pantera's emphasis on AI as the "interface layer" for crypto implies that the next wave of crypto adoption won't come from better protocols — it will come from AI assistants that make existing protocols accessible to the 67 % of investment managers who currently have zero crypto exposure.

The crypto industry has been promising "the year of infrastructure" for half a decade. Pantera's $4.8 billion bet is that 2026 is finally the year it delivers. Whether that's conviction or marketing, the data they cite — 151 public companies holding $95 billion, $310 billion in stablecoins, $28 billion in prediction markets — makes the case that the infrastructure is already here. The question is whether it generates returns for token holders or only for the equity investors Pantera's own fund structure serves.

This article is for educational purposes and does not constitute investment advice. Always conduct independent research before making investment decisions.

The tokenized real-world asset market just crossed $33 billion. But if you look beneath the headline number, a striking imbalance emerges: private credit commands 58% of all tokenized RWA flows, treasuries take 34%, and equities—the asset class most people would expect to lead—barely registers at 2%.

This isn't a random distribution. It's the market telling us exactly which assets are ready for tokenization and which face structural barriers that no amount of blockchain innovation can immediately solve.

In the first quarter of 2025 alone, 1.8 million crypto projects died. That's not a typo—it's nearly half of all project failures ever recorded, compressed into just three months. The carnage included well-funded startups backed by tier-one VCs, heavily marketed tokens that debuted on major exchanges, and political memecoins that briefly touched $10 billion valuations before collapsing 90%.

The crypto graveyard of 2025 isn't just a cautionary tale. It's a masterclass in what separates projects that survive from those that become case studies in failure. Here's what went wrong, who fell hardest, and the patterns every builder and investor should recognize.

The Numbers: A Year of Unprecedented Failure​

The statistics are staggering. According to CoinGecko data, 52.7% of all cryptocurrencies ever launched have now failed—meaning they stopped trading entirely or dropped to zero liquidity. Of the nearly 7 million tokens listed on GeckoTerminal since 2021, 3.7 million are now dead coins.

But the velocity of death in 2025 broke all records:

The math is brutal: with 73,000 tokens launching daily and less than 2% surviving past their first week, the crypto space became a factory for failure.

The Memecoin Massacre: 98% Failure Rate​

No category collapsed harder than memecoins. A Solidus Labs report found that 98.6% of tokens launched on Pump.fun—the dominant memecoin launchpad on Solana—were rug pulls or pump-and-dump schemes.

Of the 7+ million tokens issued through Pump.fun since January 2024, only 97,000 maintained even $1,000 in liquidity. In August 2025 alone, 604,162 tokens launched but just 4,510 "graduated" to real trading—a 0.75% success rate.

The poster children for memecoin failure were the political tokens:

TRUMP Token: Launched to celebrate the incoming administration, TRUMP rocketed from under $10 to $70 within 48 hours of inauguration, briefly hitting a fully diluted value above $10 billion. Within weeks, it collapsed 87% from peak. Reports emerged that insiders profited over $100 million by buying before public launch.

MELANIA Token: Following the same playbook, MELANIA launched to fanfare and promptly crashed 97% from its high.

Pi Network: The "mine crypto on your phone" project spent years building hype among millions of users. When the token finally launched and price discovery met unlock schedules, Pi spiked to nearly $2.98 in February before collapsing over 90% to around $0.20 by year-end.

The memecoin market as a whole went from a $150.6 billion peak in December 2024 to $47.2 billion by November 2025—a 69% collapse.

Case Study: Movement Labs—How Opaque Token Deals Kill Credibility​

Movement Labs offered something more substantial than meme tokens: a Move-VM-powered Ethereum scaling solution with slick marketing and prominent exchange listings. Yet by mid-2025, it had become "a case study in how opaque token deals destroy credibility faster than any technical failure."

What happened: Reports surfaced that Movement handed roughly 66 million MOVE tokens—approximately 5% of total supply, worth $38 million at the time—to a market maker linked to Web3Port through an intermediary. Most of those tokens hit the market immediately.

The fallout:

• Coinbase delisted MOVE as the scandal unfolded
• The foundation suspended and terminated co-founder Rushi Manche
• MOVE crashed 97% from its December 2024 all-time high
• An external governance review was commissioned

The lesson: Even technically sound projects can implode when token economics and insider dealings undermine trust. The market punishes opacity ruthlessly.

Case Study: Mantra (OM)—The $6 Billion Evaporation​

Mantra positioned itself as the premium play in the RWA (Real-World Asset) tokenization narrative. A January 2025 partnership with UAE's DAMAC Group to tokenize $1 billion in real estate assets seemed to validate the vision.

On April 13, 2025, OM crashed from approximately $6.30 to under $0.50 in a single day—a 90%+ collapse that erased over $6 billion in market cap within hours.

The red flags that preceded the crash:

• OM's fully diluted valuation reached $10 billion while total value locked (TVL) was just $4 million
• Token supply was abruptly doubled from 1 billion to 2 billion
• In the week before the crash, at least 17 wallets deposited 43.6 million OM ($227 million) to exchanges
• Two of these addresses were linked to Laser Digital according to Arkham data

The official story vs. reality: Co-founder John Patrick Mullin blamed "reckless forced closures initiated by centralized exchanges." Critics pointed to the concentration—multiple sources alleged the team controlled 90% of token supply.

OKX founder Star Xu called it "a big scandal to the whole crypto industry," promising to release investigation reports.

Whether technically a "rug pull" or not, Mantra became a textbook example of how disconnected valuations and concentrated token ownership create catastrophic risk.

The GameFi and NFT Apocalypse​

Two narratives that defined the 2021-2022 bull market became graveyards in 2025:

GameFi: Down 75.1% year-to-date, making it the second-worst performing crypto narrative (behind only DePIN at -76.7%). Projects that shut down included COMBO, Nyan Heroes, and Ember Sword. The GameFi market collapsed from $237.5 billion to $90.3 billion.

NFTs: The market fell from $92 billion to $25 billion. Platforms like Royal, RECUR, and X2Y2 closed operations entirely.

AI Tokens: Lost roughly 75% of combined value year-over-year, wiping out an estimated $53 billion from the market—despite AI being the hottest narrative in tech.

The pattern: narrative-driven valuations that far outpaced actual usage or revenue.

The Warning Signs: How to Spot a Dying Project​

Across the wreckage of 2025, consistent warning signs emerged:

1. Valuation-TVL Disconnect​

Mantra's $10 billion FDV vs. $4 million TVL was an extreme example of a common problem. When a project's market cap dwarfs actual usage metrics by 1000x or more, that gap eventually closes—usually violently.

2. Token Unlock Concentration​

Movement's market maker deal and Mantra's concentrated holdings demonstrate how token distribution can make or break a project. Check:

• Vesting schedules and unlock timing
• Wallet concentration (top 10 holders %)
• Recent large deposits to exchanges before major announcements

3. Development Activity Stagnation​

Use GitHub and other repositories to check commit frequency. If the last meaningful code commit was six months ago, the project may already be dying.

4. Transaction Volume vs. Hype​

Blockchain explorers reveal the truth. Low daily transactions or minimal wallet activity despite high social media presence suggests artificial demand.

5. Team Transparency Issues​

Pseudonymous teams aren't inherently bad—Bitcoin had Satoshi—but combine anonymity with large insider allocations and you have a recipe for disaster.

Lessons for Builders​

The survivors of 2025 share common traits:

1. Revenue Over Narrative Projects that generated actual fees, usage, and economic activity—not just token speculation—weathered the storm. Hyperliquid capturing 53% of on-chain trading revenue demonstrates that real business models matter.

2. Transparent Token Economics Clear vesting schedules, on-chain verifiable allocations, and honest communication about insider sales build the trust that sustains communities through downturns.

3. Regulatory Pragmatism Projects that ignored legal frameworks found themselves delisted, sued, or shut down. The FCA's placement of Pump.fun on its Warning List and the class-action lawsuits that followed show regulators are paying attention.

4. Focus on User Experience As the a16z State of Crypto report noted, 2025 marked the transition from infrastructure-building to application-building. Revolutionary tech that's inaccessible won't gain adoption.

The Systemic Risk: Security Failures Beyond Individual Projects​

Individual project failures were painful. The systemic security crisis was catastrophic.

Total crypto losses from hacks and exploits crossed $3.5 billion in 2025, making it one of the most damaging years in crypto history. The February ByBit hack alone—at $1.5 billion—represented the largest DeFi breach ever recorded.

The $150 billion in forced liquidations throughout the year, including a single 24-hour period that erased $20 billion in leveraged positions, demonstrated how interconnected the ecosystem has become.

What's Next: The 2026 Outlook​

The carnage of 2025 cleared out the speculative excess, but the underlying infrastructure kept building. Stablecoin volumes continued growing, institutional adoption accelerated, and the survivors emerged stronger.

For builders entering 2026:

• Focus on real utility over token price
• Prioritize transparency in all token dealings
• Build for users who need your product, not speculators hoping for returns
• Treat regulatory compliance as a feature, not an obstacle

The crypto graveyard of 2025 holds valuable lessons for those willing to learn. The 1.8 million projects that died in Q1 alone represent billions in lost capital and countless broken promises. But buried among the failures are the patterns that distinguish lasting projects from elaborate exits.

The best time to build is when speculative money has left. The projects starting now, with the lessons of 2025 fresh in mind, may well define the next cycle.

BlockEden.xyz provides enterprise-grade blockchain infrastructure designed for the long term. We believe in building sustainable technology that serves real users, not speculation cycles. Explore our API services to build on foundations designed to last.

Overview​

Digital asset treasuries (DATs) are publicly listed corporations whose primary business model is to accumulate and manage crypto‑tokens such as ETH or SOL. They raise capital through stock offerings or convertible bonds and use the proceeds to purchase tokens, stake them to earn yield, and grow tokens per share via savvy financial engineering. DATs blend features of corporate treasuries, investment trusts and DeFi protocols; they let mainstream investors gain exposure to crypto without holding the coins directly and operate like “on‑chain banks.” The following sections synthesise the visions of four influential leaders—Tom Lee (Fundstrat/BitMine), Joseph Lubin (Consensys/SharpLink), Sam Tabar (Bit Digital) and Cosmo Jiang (Pantera Capital)—who are shaping this emerging sector.

Tom Lee – Fundstrat Co‑founder & BitMine Chairman​

Long‑term thesis: Ethereum as the neutral chain for the AI–crypto super‑cycle​

• In 2025 Tom Lee pivoted the former Bitcoin miner BitMine into an Ethereum treasury company. He argues that AI and crypto are the two major investment narratives of the decade and both require neutral public blockchains, with Ethereum offering high reliability and a decentralised settlement layer. Lee describes ETH’s current price as a “discount to the future”—he believes that the combination of institutional finance and artificial intelligence will eventually need Ethereum’s neutral public blockchain to operate at scale, making ETH “one of the biggest macro trades of the next decade”.
• Lee believes tokenised real‑world assets, stablecoins and on‑chain AI will drive unprecedented demand for Ethereum. In a Daily Hodl interview he said ETH treasuries added over 234 k ETH in one week, pushing BitMine’s holdings above 2 million ETH. He explained that Wall Street and AI moving on‑chain will transform the financial system and most of this will happen on Ethereum, hence BitMine aims to acquire 5 % of ETH’s total supply, dubbed the “alchemy of 5 %”. He also expects ETH to remain the preferred chain because of pro‑crypto legislation (e.g., CLARITY & GENIUS Acts) and described Ethereum as the “neutral chain” favoured by both Wall Street and the White House.

DAT mechanics: building shareholder value​

• In Pantera’s 2025 blockchain letter, Lee explained how DATs can create value beyond token price appreciation. By issuing stock or convertible bonds to raise capital, staking their ETH, using DeFi to earn yield and acquiring other treasuries, they can increase tokens per share and maintain a NAV premium. He views stablecoins as the “ChatGPT story of crypto” and believes on‑chain cash flows from stablecoin transactions will support ETH treasuries.
• Lee emphasises that DATs have multiple levers that make them more attractive than ETFs: staking yields, velocity (rapid issuance of shares to acquire tokens) and liquidity (ability to raise capital quickly). In a Bankless discussion he noted that BitMine moved 12 × faster than MicroStrategy in accumulating crypto and described BitMine’s liquidity advantage as critical for capturing a NAV premium.
• He also stresses risk management. Market participants must differentiate between credible leaders and those issuing aggressive debt; investors should focus on execution, clear strategy and risk controls. Lee warns that mNAV premiums compress as more companies adopt the model and that DATs need to deliver performance beyond simply holding tokens.

Vision for the future​

Lee predicts a long super‑cycle in which Ethereum underpins tokenised AI economies and digital asset treasuries become mainstream. He foresees ETH reaching US $10–12 k in the near term and much higher over a 10–15 year time horizon. He also notes that major institutions like Cathie Wood and Bill Miller are already investing in DATs and expects more Wall Street firms to view ETH treasuries as a core holding.

Joseph Lubin – Consensys Founder & SharpLink Chairman​

ETH treasuries as storytelling and yield machines​

• Lubin argues that Ethereum treasury companies are more powerful than Bitcoin treasuries because ETH is productive. By staking tokens and using DeFi, treasuries can generate yield and grow ETH per share, making them “more powerful than Bitcoin treasuries”. SharpLink converts capital into ETH daily and stakes it immediately, creating compounding growth.
• He sees DATs as a way to tell the Ethereum story to Wall Street. On CNBC he explained that Wall Street pays attention to making money; by offering a profitable equity vehicle, DATs can communicate ETH’s value better than simple messaging about smart contracts. While Bitcoin’s narrative is easy to grasp (digital gold), Ethereum spent years building infrastructure—treasury strategies highlight its productivity and yield.
• Lubin stresses that ETH is high‑powered, uncensorable money. In an August 2025 interview he said SharpLink’s goal is to build the largest trusted ETH treasury and keep accumulating ETH, with one million ETH merely a near‑term signpost. He calls Ethereum the base layer for global finance, citing that it settled over US $25 trillion in transactions in 2024 and hosts most real‑world assets and stablecoins.

Competitive landscape and regulation​

• Lubin welcomes new entrants into the ETH treasury race because they amplify Ethereum’s credibility; however, he believes SharpLink holds an advantage due to its ETH‑native team, staking know‑how and institutional credibility. He predicts ETFs will eventually be allowed to stake, but until then treasury companies like SharpLink can fully stake ETH and earn yield.
• In a CryptoSlate interview he noted that the supply–demand imbalance for ETH and daily purchases by treasuries will accelerate adoption. He emphasised that decentralisation is the direction of travel and expects both ETH and BTC to continue rising as the world becomes more decentralised.

SharpLink’s execution​

• SharpLink quietly shifted its focus from sports betting technology to Ethereum in early 2025. According to shareholder filings, it converted significant portions of its liquid reserves into ETH—176 270 ETH for $462.9 million in July 2025 and another 77 210 ETH for $295 million a day later. An August 2025 direct offering raised $400 million and a $200 million at‑the‑market facility, pushing SharpLink’s reserves beyond 598 800 ETH.
• Lubin says SharpLink accumulates tens of millions of dollars in ETH daily and stakes it via DeFi to generate yield. Standard Chartered analysts have noted that ETH treasuries like SharpLink remain undervalued relative to their holdings.

Sam Tabar – CEO of Bit Digital​

Rationale for pivoting to Ethereum​

• After profitably running a Bitcoin mining and AI infrastructure business, Sam Tabar led Bit Digital’s complete pivot into an Ethereum treasury and staking company. He sees Ethereum’s programmable smart‑contract platform, growing adoption and staking yields as capable of rewriting the financial system. Tabar asserts that if BTC and ETH had launched simultaneously, Bitcoin might not exist because Ethereum enables trustless value exchange and complex financial primitives.
• Bit Digital sold 280 BTC and raised around $172 million to purchase over 100 k ETH. Tabar has emphasised that Ethereum is no longer a side asset but the centerpiece of Bit Digital’s balance sheet and that the firm intends to continue acquiring ETH to become the leading corporate holder. The company announced a direct offering of 22 million shares priced at $3.06 to raise $67.3 million for further ETH purchases.

Financing strategy and risk management​

• Tabar is a strong proponent of using unsecured convertible debt rather than secured loans. He warns that secured debt could “destroy” ETH treasury companies in a bear market because creditors might seize the tokens when prices fall. By issuing unsecured convertible notes, Bit Digital retains flexibility and avoids encumbering its assets.
• In a Bankless interview he compared the ETH treasury race to Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin playbook but noted that Bit Digital is a real business with cash flows from AI infrastructure and mining; it aims to leverage those profits to grow its ETH holdings. He described competition among ETH treasuries as friendly but emphasised that mindshare is limited—companies must aggressively accumulate ETH to attract investors, yet more treasuries ultimately benefit Ethereum by raising its price and awareness.

Vision for the future​

Tabar envisions a world where Ethereum replaces much of the existing financial infrastructure. He believes regulatory clarity (e.g., the GENIUS Act) has unlocked the path for companies like Bit Digital to build compliant ETH treasuries and sees the staking yield and programmability of ETH as core drivers of future value. He also highlights that DATs open the door for public‑market investors who cannot buy crypto directly, democratizing access to the Ethereum ecosystem.

Cosmo Jiang – General Partner at Pantera Capital​

Investment thesis: DATs as on‑chain banks​

• Cosmo Jiang views DATs as sophisticated financial institutions that operate more like banks than passive token holders. In an Index Podcast summary he explained that DATs are evaluated like banks: if they generate a return above their cost of capital, they trade above book value. According to Jiang, investors should focus on NAV‑per‑share growth—analogous to free cash‑flow per share—rather than token price, because execution and capital allocation drive returns.
• Jiang argues that DATs can generate yield by staking and lending, increasing asset value per share and producing more tokens than simply holding spot. One determinant of success is the long‑term strength of the underlying token; this is why Pantera’s Solana Company (HSDT) uses Solana as its treasury reserve. He contends that Solana offers fast settlement, ultra‑low fees and a monolithic design that is faster, cheaper and more accessible—echoing Jeff Bezos’s “holy trinity” of consumer wants.
• Jiang also notes that DATs effectively lock up supply because they operate like closed‑end funds; once tokens are acquired, they rarely sell, reducing liquid supply and potentially supporting prices. He sees DATs as a bridge that brings tens of billions of dollars from traditional investors who prefer equities over direct crypto exposure.

Building the pre‑eminent Solana treasury​

• Pantera has been a pioneer in DATs, anchoring early launches such as DeFi Development Corp (DFDV) and Cantor Equity Partners (CEP) and investing in BitMine. Jiang writes that they have reviewed over fifty DAT pitches and that their early success has positioned Pantera as a first call for new projects.
• In September 2025 Pantera announced Solana Company (HSDT) with more than $500 million in funding, designed to maximize SOL per share and provide public‑market exposure to Solana. Jiang’s DAT thesis states that owning a DAT could offer higher return potential than holding tokens directly or via an ETF because DATs grow NAV per share through yield generation. The fund aims to scale institutional access to Solana and leverage Pantera’s track record to build the pre‑eminent Solana treasury.
• He emphasises that the timing is critical: digital asset equities have enjoyed a tailwind as investors search for crypto exposure beyond ETFs. However, he warns that excitement will invite competition; some DATs will succeed while others fail. Pantera’s strategy is to back high‑quality teams, filter for incentive‑aligned management and support consolidation (M&A or buybacks) in downside scenarios.

Conclusion​

Collectively, these leaders see digital asset treasuries as a bridge between traditional finance and the emerging token economy. Tom Lee envisions ETH treasuries as vehicles to capture the AI–crypto super‑cycle and aims to accumulate 5 % of Ethereum’s supply; he stresses velocity, yield and liquidity as key drivers of NAV premiums. Joseph Lubin views ETH treasuries as yield‑generating machines that tell the Ethereum story to Wall Street while pushing DeFi and staking into mainstream finance. Sam Tabar is betting that Ethereum’s programmability and staking yields will rewrite financial infrastructure and warns against secured debt, promoting aggressive yet prudent accumulation through unsecured financing. Cosmo Jiang frames DATs as on‑chain banks whose success depends on capital allocation and NAV‑per‑share growth; he is building the pre‑eminent Solana treasury to showcase how DATs can unlock new growth cycles. All four anticipate that DATs will continue to proliferate and that public‑market investors will increasingly choose them as vehicles for exposure to crypto’s next chapter.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust, ticker IBIT, has become one of the most popular ways for investors to gain exposure to Bitcoin directly from a standard brokerage account. But what is it, how does it work, and what are the trade-offs?

In short, IBIT is an exchange-traded product (ETP) that holds actual Bitcoin and trades like a stock on the NASDAQ exchange. Investors use it for its convenience, deep liquidity, and access within a regulated market. As of early September 2025, the fund holds approximately $82.6 billion in assets, charges a 0.25% expense ratio, and uses Coinbase Custody Trust as its custodian. This guide breaks down exactly what you need to know.

What You Actually Own with IBIT​

When you buy a share of IBIT, you are buying a share of a commodity trust that holds Bitcoin. This structure is more like a gold trust than a traditional mutual fund or ETF governed by the 1940 Act.

The fund’s value is benchmarked against the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate – New York Variant (BRRNY), a once-a-day reference price used to calculate its Net Asset Value (NAV).

The actual Bitcoin is stored with Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC, with operational trading handled through Coinbase Prime. The vast majority of the Bitcoin sits in segregated cold storage, referred to as the “Vault Balance.” A smaller portion is kept in a “Trading Balance” to manage the creation and redemption of shares and to pay the fund’s fees.

The Headline Numbers That Matter​

• Expense Ratio: The sponsor fee for IBIT is 0.25%. Any introductory fee waivers have since expired, so this is the current annual cost.
• Size & Liquidity: With net assets of $82.6 billion as of September 2, 2025, IBIT is a giant in the space. It sees tens of millions of shares traded daily, and its 30-day median bid/ask spread is a tight 0.02%, which helps minimize slippage for traders.
• Where It Trades: You can find the fund on the NASDAQ exchange under the ticker symbol IBIT.

How IBIT Keeps Up with Bitcoin’s Price​

The fund’s share price stays close to the value of its underlying Bitcoin through a creation and redemption mechanism involving Authorized Participants (APs), which are large financial institutions.

Unlike many gold ETPs that allow for “in-kind” transfers (where APs can swap a block of shares for actual gold), IBIT was launched with a “cash” creation/redemption model. This means APs deliver cash to the trust, which then buys Bitcoin, or they receive cash after the trust sells Bitcoin.

In practice, this process has been very effective. Thanks to the heavy trading volume and active APs, the premium or discount to the fund’s NAV has generally been minimal. However, these can widen during periods of high volatility or if the creation/redemption process is constrained, so it’s always wise to check the fund’s premium/discount stats before trading.

What IBIT Costs You (Beyond the Headline Fee)​

Beyond the 0.25% expense ratio, there are other costs to consider.

First, the sponsor fee is paid by the trust selling small amounts of its Bitcoin holdings. This means that over time, each share of IBIT will represent a slightly smaller amount of Bitcoin. If Bitcoin’s price rises, this effect can be masked; if not, your share’s value will gradually drift downward compared to holding raw BTC.

Second, you’ll encounter real-world trading costs, including the bid/ask spread, any brokerage commissions, and the potential for trading at a premium or discount to NAV. Using limit orders is a good way to maintain control over your execution price.

Finally, trading shares of IBIT involves securities, not the direct holding of cryptocurrency. This simplifies tax reporting with standard brokerage forms but comes with different tax nuances than holding coins directly. It’s important to read the prospectus and consult a tax professional if needed.

IBIT vs. Holding Bitcoin Yourself​

Choosing between IBIT and self-custody comes down to your goals.

• Convenience & Compliance: IBIT offers easy access through a brokerage account, with no need to manage private keys, sign up for crypto exchanges, or handle unfamiliar wallet software. You get standard tax statements and a familiar trading interface.
• Counterparty Trade-offs: With IBIT, you don't control the coins on-chain. You are relying on the trust and its service providers, including the custodian (Coinbase) and prime broker. It’s crucial to understand these operational and custody risks by reviewing the fund’s filings.
• Utility: If you want to use Bitcoin for on-chain activities like payments, Lightning Network transactions, or multi-signature security setups, self-custody is the only option. If your goal is simply price exposure in a retirement or taxable brokerage account, IBIT is purpose-built for that.

IBIT vs. Bitcoin Futures ETFs​

It’s also important to distinguish spot ETFs from futures-based ones. A futures ETF holds CME futures contracts, not actual Bitcoin. IBIT, as a spot ETF, holds the underlying BTC directly.

This structural difference matters. Futures funds can experience price drift from their underlying asset due to contract roll costs and the futures term structure. Spot funds, on the other hand, tend to track the spot price of Bitcoin more tightly, minus fees. For straightforward Bitcoin exposure in a brokerage account, a spot product like IBIT is generally the simpler instrument.

How to Buy—And What to Check First​

You can buy IBIT in any standard taxable or retirement brokerage account under the ticker IBIT. For best execution, liquidity is typically highest near the U.S. stock market's open and close. Always check the bid/ask spread and use limit orders to control your price.

Given Bitcoin’s volatility, many investors treat it as a satellite position in their portfolio—an allocation small enough that they can tolerate a significant drawdown. Always read the risk section of the prospectus before investing.

Advanced Note: Options Exist​

For more sophisticated investors, listed options on IBIT are available. Trading began on venues like the Nasdaq ISE in late 2024, enabling hedging or income-generating strategies. Check with your broker about eligibility and the associated risks.

Risks Worth Reading Twice​

• Market Risk: Bitcoin’s price is notoriously volatile and can swing sharply in either direction.
• Operational Risk: A security breach, key-management failure, or other problem at the custodian or prime broker could negatively impact the trust. The prospectus details the risks associated with both the "Trading Balance" and the "Vault Balance."
• Premium/Discount Risk: If the arbitrage mechanism becomes impaired for any reason, IBIT shares can deviate significantly from their NAV.
• Regulatory Risk: The rules governing cryptocurrencies and related financial products are still evolving.

A Quick Checklist Before You Click “Buy”​

Before investing, ask yourself these questions:

• Do I understand that the sponsor fee is paid by selling Bitcoin, which slowly reduces the amount of BTC per share?
• Have I checked today’s bid/ask spread, recent trading volumes, and any premium or discount to NAV?
• Is my investment time horizon long enough to withstand crypto’s inherent volatility?
• Have I made a conscious choice between spot exposure via IBIT and self-custody based on my specific goals?
• Have I read the latest fund fact sheet or prospectus? It remains the single best source for how the trust truly operates.

This post is for educational purposes only and is not financial or tax advice. Always read official fund documents and consider professional guidance for your situation.

BlockEden.xyz is excited to announce the launch of our CryptoNews API, empowering developers with real-time access to comprehensive cryptocurrency news and market sentiment data. This new addition to our API marketplace reflects our commitment to providing developers with the tools they need to build sophisticated, data-driven applications in the Web3 space.

Why CryptoNews API?​

In today's fast-paced crypto market, having access to real-time news and sentiment analysis isn't just a nice-to-have—it's essential. Whether you're building a trading platform, market analytics dashboard, or consumer crypto app, integrating reliable news data can significantly enhance your user experience and provide valuable market context.

Key Features​

• Real-time News Updates: Access a continuous stream of crypto news from trusted sources
• Sentiment Analysis: Get pre-processed sentiment scores for each news article
• Topic Classification: Filter news by specific topics like "mining," "pricemovement," etc.
• Asset Tracking: Track news by specific cryptocurrency tickers (BTC, ETH, etc.)
• Rich Metadata: Each article includes source information, publication date, images, and more
• GraphQL Interface: Flexible querying with our intuitive GraphQL API

Getting Started​

Getting started with CryptoNews API is straightforward. Here's a simple example using GraphQL:

query CryptoNews($after: String, $first: Int) {
  cryptoNews(after: $after, first: $first) {
    pageInfo {
      hasNextPage
      endCursor
      hasPreviousPage
      startCursor
    }
    edges {
      node {
        title
        text
        sentiment
        tickers
        topics
        sourceName
        newsUrl
      }
    }
  }
}

Visit https://blockeden.xyz/api-marketplace/crypto-news to get your API key and start building.

Use Cases​

• Trading Applications: Integrate real-time news feeds to help traders make informed decisions
• Market Analysis Tools: Build comprehensive market intelligence platforms
• Portfolio Trackers: Enhance portfolio tracking with relevant news for held assets
• Content Aggregators: Create crypto news aggregation services
• Sentiment Analysis: Develop market sentiment indicators based on news data

Simple Integration, Powerful Results​

Our CryptoNews API is designed to be developer-friendly while delivering enterprise-grade reliability. With flexible pagination, rich filtering options, and comprehensive documentation, you can start pulling crypto news data into your application in minutes.

const response = await fetch('https://api.blockeden.xyz/crypto-news/<access_key>', {
  method: 'POST',
  headers: {
    'Content-Type': 'application/json',
  },
  body: JSON.stringify({
    query: `
      query CryptoNews {
        cryptoNews(first: 10) {
          edges {
            node {
              title
              sentiment
              tickers
            }
          }
        }
      }
    `
  }),
});

Pricing and Access​

We offer flexible pricing tiers to accommodate projects of all sizes:

• Free Tier: Perfect for testing and development
• Growth: For scaling applications
• Enterprise: Custom solutions for high-volume needs

Get Started Today​

Ready to enhance your application with real-time crypto news? Visit https://blockeden.xyz/api-marketplace/crypto-news to get started, or join our Discord community for support and discussions.

Stay connected with BlockEden.xyz:

• Twitter: https://twitter.com/BlockEdenHQ
• Discord: https://discord.gg/eWZvE4RSBw

Build the future of crypto with BlockEden.xyz! 🚀

In the rapidly evolving world of blockchain, venture capital plays a crucial role. Yet, beneath the surface of sophisticated analysis lies a straightforward goal: selling tokens. Unfortunately, many VCs, especially newcomers, fail to turn a profit due to a lack of deep industry knowledge. Their primary function often boils down to promoting and supporting their investments through various channels.

The Performance of Liquid Funds​

Currently, liquid funds are underperforming compared to Bitcoin (BTC). Historically, they were profitable, but so were individual investors. Liquid fund investors typically already have BTC exposure, forcing these funds to invest in non-BTC assets, which frequently struggle to outperform BTC. If a fund can't beat BTC, it doesn't add value.

Advanced Blockchain Literacy​

Influencers (KOLs)​

Never take influencer content at face value. Their statements often generate noise and serve as tools to gauge project funding and their network. When someone promotes a project, it’s usually because they have financial stakes. Disregard profit and loss screenshots and retrospective analyses. Genuine wealth is often understated, and the most seemingly affluent may not be as wealthy as they appear.

Centralized Exchanges​

Inherently distrust centralized exchanges. Avoid using them for contract trading. They can serve as cross-chain bridges or platforms for buying spot currencies, but always be ready to withdraw funds at the slightest hint of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt). Using a centralized exchange can be a good career start, providing passive information intake, but success depends on your ability to leverage this information.

Evaluating Blockchain Projects​

Treat statements from project teams with skepticism. Announcements of partnerships often signify minimal progress. Focus on the tangible actions of the project team and evaluate how their work accelerates the value chain. If the outcomes positively influence public perception of token value, the project is worth considering. Be wary of projects with past ethical breaches—they are likely to repeat such behavior.

Marketing in Blockchain​

Most project teams lack effective marketing strategies. It's challenging to quantify marketing success, and metrics often involve inflated figures. Basic marketing budgets are best converted into influencer rounds. Other marketing expenses are less effective than direct market actions like price boosts.

Individual Investment Approach​

For VC-backed tokens, avoid promoting them publicly but feel free to share sincere insights. For community-driven tokens, engage in community building and advocacy. Trust on-chain data and genuine buy orders. Encourage any form of investor rights protection unless you have conflicting interests. Publicly documenting your learning journey and successes can build trust and credibility.

Key Takeaways​

Navigating the blockchain industry requires skepticism, strategic thinking, and a reliance on verifiable data. Trust actions over words, and always prioritize projects and funds that demonstrate real, measurable progress.

As the CEO of a startup in the web3 domain, I'm often intrigued by emerging tech trends. The rapid ascent of bot platforms, particularly in the context of blockchain and decentralized finance, has caught my attention.

The New Wave: Telegram Bots in Web3​

With the growth of Unibot, robot concepts are becoming a new area of competition. The landscape now features hundreds of bot-centric and micro-innovative projects. Telegram, a must-have social application in the crypto circle, boasts a staggering 800 million monthly active users. These numbers become even more fascinating when you consider how Telegram Bots are simplifying crypto interactions. Within the platform, bots can handle a variety of tasks, from decentralized finance (DeFi) and miner extractable value (MEV) protection to data analytics, whale tracking, and even community gaming governance. The appeal lies in their accessibility, convenience, and wide-ranging applications.

However, rapid growth often brings skepticism and worries. Concerns about the security vulnerabilities of Telegram Bots and the maturity of the technology have begun to surface.

Unibot: The Phenomenon​

Launched in June, Unibot took just two months to achieve a phenomenal status, spawning hundreds of imitative projects. It hit a peak market cap of over $200 million, although it later faced stiff competition from "Banana Gun", leading to a considerable market share decline. Despite this drop, its current market value stands around $60 million, keeping Unibot as the leading figure in the bot arena.

Unibot Features:

• New project tracking
• Copy-trading capabilities
• Limit orders
• Token tracking and precision sniping within Telegram
• Speedier than conventional decentralized exchanges, outpacing platforms like Uniswap.

Revenue Model:

1. Service Fee: Unibot charges a 1% service fee. 40% of this is allocated to $UNIBOT Token holders, with the remaining going toward team operations.
2. **$UNIBOT Token Tax**: The token imposes a 5$UNIBOT holders.

In its prime, daily revenue reached beyond 300 ETH. Despite challenging market conditions, Unibot has performed impressively, garnering approximately 15,000 users and generating around 8,200 ETH (approx. $13 million) in total revenue within three months.

Banana Gun: The Challenger​

Banana Gun, a recent entrant, has managed to challenge Unibot's dominance. With features similar to Unibot, it has garnered a user base comparable in size, but with slightly more active members. Notably, it's proving to be more effective in its "sniping" capabilities. Banana Gun's recent pre-sale raised 800 ETH, and they faced some liquidity withdrawal issues due to contract tax complications.

The Broader Bot Ecosystem​

Other bots in the market focus on various niche aspects, such as:

• Analyzing contract details for potential red flags, like liquidity pool locks, contract access renunciations, and "rug pull" possibilities.
• Tracking the actions of high-performing wallet addresses.
• Monitoring newly launched project tokens for potential early investment opportunities.

Why Are Bots Gaining Traction?​

1. Their integration with Telegram, one of the most widely-used applications in the industry, provides a natural congregation of traffic.
2. The essence of buying and selling remains a fundamental need in finance. The functionalities of these bots revolve around trading, and ultimately, profitability is their selling point.

In conclusion, the world of web3 bots is evolving rapidly. As decentralized technologies mature, bots will undoubtedly play a significant role in the way we interact with and leverage the capabilities of the blockchain. As a stakeholder in this space, I'm excited to be a part of this journey and look forward to the innovations that lie ahead.

• Twitter: https://twitter.com/BlockEdenHQ
• Discord: https://discord.gg/eWZvE4RSBw
• Source Link: https://blockeden.xyz/blog/2023/09/16/web3-bots-rise-unibot-vs-banana-gun/