In Uncommonlab Weekly Alpha, we compile and share newly emerging crypto alpha insights each week.

• ZachXBT operates anonymously and analyzes blockchain data to track and expose hacks, rug pulls, scams, and insider trading — effectively acting as an on-chain investigator.

• Recently, one of the most profitable companies in the crypto industry became the center of major controversy after it was revealed that several employees had allegedly abused internal data over an extended period to conduct insider trading. The announcement that the findings would be disclosed three days later generated significant attention — enough to spark a prediction market on Polymarket.

• The platform in question was Axiom, a Solana-based trading platform. According to the exposé, an employee exploited vulnerabilities in an internal dashboard to access user information such as referral codes, wallet addresses, and UIDs. This data was allegedly used to establish trading positions before certain announcements became public.

• Evidence shared included an audio clip suggesting abnormal trading activity by BD employee Broox Bauer, screenshots of the internal dashboard, Google Sheets records, and on-chain transaction data showing suspicious timing patterns. Following the publication, Axiom announced that it had immediately revoked access to the internal tool in question and would investigate those involved to hold them accountable.

ZachXBT, widely known as an on-chain investigator, examined and publicly disclosed alleged insider trading at the Solana-based trading platform Axiom.

The core allegation is that an Axiom employee used an internal dashboard to access users’ referral codes, wallet addresses, and UIDs, and then executed abnormal trades by building positions before certain announcements were made public.

Shortly after ZachXBT published the exposé, Axiom responded by stating that it had immediately revoked access to the internal tool in question and launched an investigation into the individuals involved, pledging to pursue legal accountability where appropriate.

During the period when ZachXBT was signaling the upcoming insider revelation, betting volume on Polymarket surged to approximately $40 million, reflecting intense market interest. However, as multiple wallets profited from betting on Axiom-related outcomes, criticism emerged claiming that individuals who may have cooperated with the investigation effectively engaged in insider-like behavior themselves — creating an ironic and controversial situation.

Jane Street, which operates not only in traditional finance but also actively in the crypto market as an investor and trading firm, is now facing legal action.

Recently, Terraform Labs’ bankruptcy administrator, Todd Snyder, filed a lawsuit against Jane Street in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan Federal Court), alleging insider trading.

According to the complaint, shortly after Terraform Labs quietly withdrew 150 million UST from the Curve Finance 3pool, a wallet linked to Jane Street allegedly withdrew 85 million UST from the same pool and conducted large-scale sales, contributing to the weakening of UST’s dollar peg.

A central issue in the case is whether Jane Street obtained non-public information in advance from insiders at Terraform Labs and used it to unwind or adjust its positions before the broader market became aware of the situation.

According to the bankruptcy administrator of Terraform Labs, Jane Street allegedly received non-public information through insiders, sold UST ahead of the market, accelerated the collapse of Terra, and profited from the situation. Based on these claims, a lawsuit has been filed in federal court.

Jane Street has strongly denied the allegations, calling them baseless. The firm stated that the root cause of the collapse of Terra and Luna lies with Do Kwon and the management of Terraform Labs, not with Jane Street. The factual determination of these claims will ultimately be decided through ongoing legal proceedings.

Separately, some market participants speculate that Jane Street had been selling large amounts of BTC every day around 10 a.m., suppressing the price, and that Bitcoin began rising after the lawsuit because those sales stopped — leading to rumors that Jane Street may have shut down its crypto desk. While there is no confirmed evidence supporting this theory, it is true that Bitcoin’s price has increased since Jane Street was sued.

• DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) is a strategy in which companies hold BTC or ETH as treasury assets and seek to have their corporate valuation re-rated based on those holdings. ETHZilla began implementing its Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) strategy in July 2025.

• However, starting in December 2025, ETHZilla effectively abandoned its ETH-based DAT strategy and pivoted toward an RWA tokenization business model.

• One of the main reasons many companies are giving up on the DAT strategy is the sharp decline in the prices of Bitcoin or Ethereum — the very digital assets underpinning their treasury strategy. When prices fall significantly, the company’s market valuation relative to the value of its crypto holdings can drop below 1x, undermining the core premise of the strategy.

• Moreover, unlike MicroStrategy (MSTR) or BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), most DAT-focused companies lack sufficient capital reserves. To execute their digital asset treasury strategies, they often issue convertible bonds. Over time, as debt servicing becomes more difficult, they are forced to sell their digital assets to meet obligations — creating a negative feedback loop.

• In ETHZilla’s case, the situation deteriorated more rapidly after Founders Fund — the venture capital firm co-founded by Peter Thiel — sold its entire 7.5% stake in the company. The exit of such a prominent core investor significantly accelerated the company’s decline.

Companies that adopted a Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) strategy in 2025 are now rapidly abandoning it. The primary reason is the decline in the prices of most crypto assets, including Bitcoin.

At its core, the DAT model relies on a company announcing large-scale coin purchases, which drives up its stock price and creates an mNAV (multiple of Net Asset Value) premium. Based on this premium, companies raise capital by issuing new shares or convertible bonds.

However, as crypto prices continued to fall, the mNAV premium disappeared. Instead of benefiting from valuation expansion, companies began incurring losses. As a result, aside from large-scale DAT players such as MicroStrategy (MSTR) and BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), most firms can no longer sustain this strategy. Consequently, many are left with no choice but to abandon their DAT approach.

• Lobstar Wilde is an AI trading bot reportedly created by Nik Pash, who is believed to be an OpenAI developer.

• On February 22, 2026, a user named Treasure David posted on X claiming that his uncle had contracted tetanus from a lobster injury and needed 4 SOL for medical treatment. Due to a decimal miscalculation, the bot mistakenly transferred 5% of the total LOBSTAR token supply.

• At the time, the LOBSTAR tokens David received were worth approximately $250,000. Despite experiencing high swap slippage when converting the tokens, he proceeded to sell them.

• The incident ultimately boosted LOBSTAR’s token price and significantly increased its visibility. However, it also exposed vulnerabilities in the treasury management of autonomous AI agents, leading to a rise in similar “begging” attempts targeting such systems.

A person named Treasure David appealed to the AI trading agent Lobstar Wilde, claiming that his uncle had contracted tetanus from a lobster-related injury and needed 4 SOL to cover medical expenses. Due to a bot error, however, he received not 4 SOL, but LOBSTAR tokens worth approximately $250,000.

As the incident went viral, awareness of the LOBSTAR token increased and its price even saw upward momentum. In terms of proving that an AI agent can autonomously execute trading strategies and manage its own wallet without human intervention, the event demonstrated what many envision as the ideal form of an autonomous AI agent.

However, the case also exposed a critical vulnerability: an AI agent can make mistakes and accidentally transfer or lose significant funds. This highlights the need for safeguards to prevent similar incidents in the future.

• Punch was born at a zoo in Ichikawa City, Japan, and was abandoned by his mother shortly after birth.

• Caretakers gave Punch a stuffed orangutan doll, which he came to recognize as his mother. Photos and videos of Punch tightly hugging the stuffed toy quickly went viral on social media for the first time.

• Later, as Punch began socializing with other monkeys, he was occasionally bullied. Whenever that happened, he would return to the stuffed orangutan he viewed as his “mother,” a scene that deeply stirred people’s protective instincts and triggered a second wave of virality.

• In other words, the combination of a baby monkey’s cuteness, the loneliness of clinging to a stuffed orangutan as a substitute mother, and the emotional socialization process — including moments of being bullied — all worked together as powerful meme elements that propelled Punch to fame.

• In mid-February, Justin Sun donated $100,000 to Punch’s zoo, drawing attention from the crypto market as well. The Punch meme token’s market capitalization quickly surged to nearly $50 million at its peak and is currently trading around $33 million.

The Punch meme first gained widespread attention on social media after images and videos showed the baby monkey, abandoned by his biological mother, relying on a stuffed orangutan for comfort. The emotional story resonated deeply with audiences.

Momentum in the crypto space accelerated after Justin Sun donated $100,000 to the zoo for Punch, bringing the narrative into the broader crypto community.

As a meme built around an animal that had already generated strong public affection — a recurring theme that has historically performed well in meme markets — the Punch meme token briefly reached an FDV of $50 million, marking one of the stronger performances in the Solana meme sector in recent times.

However, given the overall weak sentiment in the broader crypto market and the inherently short-lived nature of meme trends, which often surge rapidly and fade just as quickly, it does not appear to be well-suited for long-term investment.

• Recently, Backpack Exchange announced its tokenomics ahead of its upcoming TGE (Token Generation Event).

• At launch, the initial circulating supply will be 25%. Of the total allocation, 24% will go to points holders, 1% to NFT holders, 37.5% will unlock upon achieving specific milestones prior to an IPO, and the remaining 37.5% — allocated to the team and investors — will be subject to a minimum one-year lock-up after the IPO.

• On February 23, 2026, CEO Armani Ferrante announced on X that users who stake their tokens for more than one year will be eligible to exchange them for up to 20% of the company’s equity at a fixed ratio.

• In other words, through an unusual reward structure that allows token holders to swap tokens for company shares, Backpack aims to incentivize long-term staking and effectively reduce circulating supply in order to support token price stability.

• Notably, the team and investors will not receive directly liquid token allocations. Instead, their upside is tied to company equity held in the corporate treasury, locked for at least one year post-IPO. The team can only realize gains if the company goes public or if a liquidity event involving equity occurs.

• Therefore, unlike typical crypto projects, Backpack is positioning itself for a long-term trajectory toward a U.S. IPO, with team compensation structured around corporate equity rather than immediate token unlocks.

Backpack Exchange recently announced that users who stake its token will be eligible to receive up to 20% of the company’s equity. This appears to be an attempt to address structural issues commonly criticized in traditional tokenomics models.

In most projects, token prices and company equity are completely separated. As a result, teams often have little incentive to support the token price. Moreover, after TGE, teams frequently sell their token allocations, putting downward pressure on the market. From a typical investor’s perspective, there is little reason to buy a token that even the team is continuously selling.

This negative cycle has repeated across the market, causing many altcoins to trend toward zero over time and draining overall market vitality.

Against this backdrop, the Backpack team has chosen a different approach. Instead of allocating immediately liquid tokens to team members at TGE, they structured incentives so that users who stake tokens can exchange them for up to 20% of company equity. This signals a longer-term orientation aligned with a potential IPO outcome.

The approach itself seems compelling. However, there are open questions about the actual upside. Backpack’s equity valuation is reportedly around $1 billion — only about twice the implied token valuation. In that context, it is unclear whether staking for one year would generate sufficiently attractive returns.

Additionally, for Korean investors, crypto taxation is set to begin next year. From a practical standpoint, it may be more efficient to benefit from reduced circulating supply and rising token prices in the short term rather than committing to long-term staking.

• Base has been operating using the OP Stack, but it is now planning to transition toward a more independent mainnet structure.

• This move appears aligned with recent comments from Vitalik Buterin, who emphasized that the future of Layer 2 solutions should not be solely about increasing raw speed, but about building L2s with differentiated and specialized value propositions.

• Following the announcement that Base would diverge from the Optimism ecosystem, the OP token fell more than 5.5% on the same day.

• If Base adopts a fully integrated stack under its own direction, it is expected to operate more independently under the management of Base and Coinbase, enabling faster development cycles and greater flexibility.

Base announced that it will move away from the OP Stack it has been using and transition to a unified, fully integrated stack.

While the Optimism OP Stack enabled Base to launch quickly by leveraging existing infrastructure, it also created structural complexity due to external dependencies. To address these limitations and evolve beyond being just another OP Stack chain, Base appears to be transitioning toward a more tightly integrated, Ethereum-aligned, and internally optimized Layer 2 infrastructure.

The shift will likely occur gradually over several months. Once Base becomes a fully independent chain, it is also expected that the long-speculated Base token launch could materialize.

For Optimism, Base had reportedly generated around 13 ETH per day in fees. With Base pursuing an independent path, Optimism stands to lose approximately 94% of those fees. Given this context, the decline in the OP token price appears to be a natural market reaction.

• Following a recent update to X’s policies, any promotional content that involves compensation — whether in the form of money, products, fees, or other incentives — must be clearly disclosed.

• Among the updates, certain categories are now explicitly prohibited from being promoted through paid partnerships. Notably, cryptocurrencies and prediction markets have been added to the restricted list.

• In particular, prediction market platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi are highly likely to be interpreted under the platform’s Gambling category according to policy guidelines.

• As a result, promotional posts involving financial compensation related to exchanges, token sales, airdrops, prediction market platforms, or similar crypto-related services may no longer be permitted. Violations of these rules could lead to enforcement actions or account penalties.

X recently updated its policies, adding cryptocurrencies and prediction markets to the list of categories prohibited from paid partnership promotions.

As a result, influencers can no longer officially promote crypto projects or prediction market platforms through paid partnerships. Violations may lead not only to post deletions but also to account suspensions.

Following the earlier crackdown on so-called “InfoFi” content, crypto-related promotional posts are now effectively restricted as well. Consequently, many crypto influencers on X are expected to disappear from the platform.

In particular, Nikita Bier, X’s Head of Product, has reportedly warned numerous crypto accounts directly that failure to properly disclose advertisements could result in account deletion. Some users who attempted to disguise paid promotions as organic content — even tagging Nikita’s account — have allegedly had their accounts forcibly removed, signaling that enforcement is now being actively carried out.

• Fuse Energy is an energy infrastructure project built on Solana and is preparing for its token launch.

• The project aims to address inefficiencies in the traditional power sector by building a blockchain-based system that integrates energy generation, trading, supply, installation, and infrastructure management.

• Since its founding in 2022, Fuse Energy has supplied energy to approximately 200,000 households and achieved an annual recurring revenue (ARR) of around $400 million. Based on this operational track record, the company successfully raised approximately $160 million in funding, demonstrating real-world infrastructure execution capabilities rather than a purely conceptual model.

• Fuse Energy has also obtained a no-action letter from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), allowing it to issue and sell the ENERGY token within the United States. This could set an important precedent for tokenized energy incentives under regulatory clarity.

• The ENERGY token is expected to be used for hardware discounts and energy bill payments, and will also function as a reward mechanism tied to actual energy consumption behavior.

The Solana-based energy infrastructure project Fuse Energy is preparing for its token launch.

The project operates on the basis of real-world infrastructure, including solar and wind power facilities, and holds regulatory approvals such as a UK energy supplier license. Participants are expected to receive ENERGY tokens as rewards tied to their involvement and energy usage.

To ensure regulatory compliance in the United States, Fuse Energy has also secured a no-action letter from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Since the reward structure is based on actual energy consumption behavior, it presents a more utility-driven model, which may make participation appealing.

However, the service is currently focused primarily on the UK market, and participation from Korea remains limited for now. Interested users may need to wait for future geographic expansion.

• The Aptos Foundation proposed changes to Aptos tokenomics on February 19, 2026.

• Under the previous model, Aptos operated with an uncapped, inflationary supply structure. Following the proposed update, the system would transition to a deflationary model with a fixed hard cap of 2.1 billion APT tokens.

• Staking rewards would be reduced significantly from 7% to 2.6%, cutting emissions by more than half. Gas fees would increase tenfold and be fully burned. In addition, the foundation plans to permanently lock up 210 million APT tokens — representing 18% of the circulating supply — further tightening long-term supply dynamics.

• Until now, Aptos’ tokenomics had faced criticism for excessive dilution, which many argued contributed to sustained price declines. For this reason, a shift toward a deflationary model has been viewed as a necessary step to better support long-term token value.

Aptos has proposed a tokenomics overhaul. While the network previously operated under an uncapped inflationary supply model, the new proposal aims to introduce a deflationary structure with a fixed cap of 2.1 billion tokens. Given that the Aptos Foundation is backing the change, it is widely expected to pass.

In its early days, Aptos was positioned as a direct competitor to Sui, often framed as part of a head-to-head rivalry. However, due to perceived execution challenges and continuous token price pressure driven by inflation, Aptos is generally viewed as having lost momentum in that competition.

As the token price continued to decline, user activity and ecosystem engagement reportedly weakened significantly. With the chain now facing relevance concerns, the foundation appears to have recognized the urgency of reforming its tokenomics.

Even after the announcement, Aptos’ price has continued to trend downward. Therefore, beyond adjusting supply mechanics, the project may need a broader long-term strategy to revitalize its ecosystem and restore market confidence.

Virtuals Protocol is an AI platform that enables users to create, tokenize, own, and monetize AI agents.

Previously, only AI agents officially verified by the Virtuals team were available on the platform. Recently, however, the protocol introduced ACP (Agent Commerce Protocol).

ACP functions as a marketplace where AI agents can collaborate with one another, forming an autonomous multi-agent system that enables structured cooperation between multiple agents.

Anyone can register their own agent on Virtuals, and once registered, a VIRTUAL-based token pool is automatically created for that agent, allowing it to be traded.

Unlike traditional centralized AI agent models, Virtuals operates on the Base chain and features a shared revenue model: 70% of agent token trading fees go to the creator (founder), while 30% goes to the protocol. This structure enables actual value creation and on-chain revenue distribution.

The core competition in AI is no longer about who has the best LLM, but about how effectively these models can be connected to real economic activity.

In response to this shift, Virtuals Protocol launched ACP (Agent Commerce Protocol) to accelerate the growth of the AI agent economy. ACP aims to standardize commerce between agents by introducing on-chain escrow, automated settlement, reputation systems, and an agent registry.

Anyone can create an agent through OpenClaw and onboard it to ACP. If real economic interactions occur between agents — leading to actual transactions — fees accumulate, and participants can generate revenue based on that activity.

However, the ecosystem is still in its early stages, and many agents currently lack differentiated or meaningful functionality. If higher-quality agents emerge and sustained collaboration frameworks develop, this could become a turning point — potentially driving appreciation not only in individual agent tokens but also in the broader VIRTUAL token price.

• Coinbase reported its Q4 2025 earnings, posting results below expectations. This marked the end of eight consecutive profitable quarters, as the company returned to a net loss. Its stock price fell to the lowest level since March 2024.

• Despite pursuing diversification through its “Everything Exchange” strategy — including strengthening derivatives via the acquisition of Deribit, and expanding into prediction markets and tokenized stock trading — Coinbase’s share price has continued to decline. This appears to be influenced not only by Bitcoin’s price weakness but also by uncertainty surrounding the proposed Clarity legislation.

• If the Clarity bill includes a provision prohibiting exchanges from paying interest or rewards to customers on stablecoin holdings, Coinbase’s short-term profitability could improve due to reduced payout obligations. However, in the long term, such restrictions could weaken customer acquisition and reduce competitiveness relative to other exchanges. It may also shrink revenue streams tied to DeFi and stablecoin-related products.

• CEO Brian Armstrong has voiced strong opposition to banning stablecoin rewards, suggesting that the banking industry is supporting such provisions to avoid competition. He has even stated that no legislation would be preferable to one that restricts stablecoin yield. While Armstrong strongly supports regulatory clarity overall, he firmly opposes limits on stablecoin-based rewards.

As the largest U.S.-based exchange and a publicly listed company, Coinbase generates revenue not only from trading fees but also through a unique revenue-sharing arrangement with Circle, allowing it to capture a significant portion of USDC-related income.

Thanks to this structure, Coinbase has maintained a market capitalization of over $40 billion and previously recorded eight consecutive profitable quarters. However, following its Q4 2025 earnings report, the company returned to a net loss, leading to a decline in its stock price.

While Bitcoin’s price performance is certainly a factor, near-term stock volatility appears to be heavily influenced by uncertainty surrounding the proposed Clarity bill. One key provision under discussion is a potential ban on exchanges paying interest or rewards on stablecoin holdings.

If stablecoin interest payments are definitively prohibited, Coinbase’s short-term profitability could improve due to reduced payout obligations. However, over the long term, such restrictions may weaken its competitive position relative to other exchanges and make customer acquisition more challenging.

Therefore, beyond whether the Clarity bill passes, it will be crucial to monitor how the stablecoin interest provision is ultimately resolved.

• TCG (Trading Card Games) feature unique characters and abilities assigned to each card. Rare cards command higher prices, and when combined with strong IP and dedicated communities, the ecosystem evolves into a complex investment market.

• Among them, the most popular TCG in recent times is Pokémon cards. In some emerging models, blockchain technology is being integrated into the process of randomly drawing cards from packs.

• Platforms like Courtyard have generated over $54 million in revenue and raised approximately $30 million in funding. Meanwhile, Collector Crypt focuses specifically on Pokémon TCG cards, tokenizing physical Pokémon cards into NFTs so they can be traded digitally.

• Unlike simple NFT projects, these models are directly linked to physical cards and can generate tangible revenue. In particular, tokenization helps address one of the traditional TCG market’s biggest limitations — the difficulty of quickly liquidating physical cards. By enabling faster liquidity through tokenized representations, this approach could evolve into a more sustainable business model.

The TCG (Trading Card Game) market is growing rapidly, driven by major IPs such as Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh!, and One Piece, along with their strong fan communities.

The appeal lies in the ability to own limited-edition and rare physical cards, satisfying collectors’ desires. At the same time, the randomness of card packs — and the possibility of pulling a highly valuable card — taps into gambling psychology, continuously attracting new users.

Despite strong demand, a major limitation of the traditional TCG market has been the difficulty of converting owned cards into immediate cash. By combining TCG with blockchain technology, this issue has been addressed through tokenization, allowing cards to be traded more efficiently in digital form.

Moreover, blockchain’s tamper-resistant properties enable the implementation of transparent, verifiable Gacha-style systems, where users can purchase and open packs from anywhere. As a result, not only crypto-native participants but also traditional TCG fans are joining the ecosystem, contributing to steady market expansion over time.

• This content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any specific asset. Cryptocurrency and digital asset investments involve significant risk, so please conduct your own research and make decisions carefully.

• All research comments reflect the views of Uncommonlab Research interns and do not constitute financial or legal advice, nor do they recommend the purchase or sale of any particular asset.

In Uncommonlab Weekly Alpha, we compile and share newly emerging crypto alpha insights each week.

• ZachXBT operates anonymously and analyzes blockchain data to track and expose hacks, rug pulls, scams, and insider trading — effectively acting as an on-chain investigator.

• Recently, one of the most profitable companies in the crypto industry became the center of major controversy after it was revealed that several employees had allegedly abused internal data over an extended period to conduct insider trading. The announcement that the findings would be disclosed three days later generated significant attention — enough to spark a prediction market on Polymarket.

• The platform in question was Axiom, a Solana-based trading platform. According to the exposé, an employee exploited vulnerabilities in an internal dashboard to access user information such as referral codes, wallet addresses, and UIDs. This data was allegedly used to establish trading positions before certain announcements became public.

• Evidence shared included an audio clip suggesting abnormal trading activity by BD employee Broox Bauer, screenshots of the internal dashboard, Google Sheets records, and on-chain transaction data showing suspicious timing patterns. Following the publication, Axiom announced that it had immediately revoked access to the internal tool in question and would investigate those involved to hold them accountable.

ZachXBT, widely known as an on-chain investigator, examined and publicly disclosed alleged insider trading at the Solana-based trading platform Axiom.

The core allegation is that an Axiom employee used an internal dashboard to access users’ referral codes, wallet addresses, and UIDs, and then executed abnormal trades by building positions before certain announcements were made public.

Shortly after ZachXBT published the exposé, Axiom responded by stating that it had immediately revoked access to the internal tool in question and launched an investigation into the individuals involved, pledging to pursue legal accountability where appropriate.

During the period when ZachXBT was signaling the upcoming insider revelation, betting volume on Polymarket surged to approximately $40 million, reflecting intense market interest. However, as multiple wallets profited from betting on Axiom-related outcomes, criticism emerged claiming that individuals who may have cooperated with the investigation effectively engaged in insider-like behavior themselves — creating an ironic and controversial situation.

Jane Street, which operates not only in traditional finance but also actively in the crypto market as an investor and trading firm, is now facing legal action.

Recently, Terraform Labs’ bankruptcy administrator, Todd Snyder, filed a lawsuit against Jane Street in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan Federal Court), alleging insider trading.

According to the complaint, shortly after Terraform Labs quietly withdrew 150 million UST from the Curve Finance 3pool, a wallet linked to Jane Street allegedly withdrew 85 million UST from the same pool and conducted large-scale sales, contributing to the weakening of UST’s dollar peg.

A central issue in the case is whether Jane Street obtained non-public information in advance from insiders at Terraform Labs and used it to unwind or adjust its positions before the broader market became aware of the situation.

According to the bankruptcy administrator of Terraform Labs, Jane Street allegedly received non-public information through insiders, sold UST ahead of the market, accelerated the collapse of Terra, and profited from the situation. Based on these claims, a lawsuit has been filed in federal court.

Jane Street has strongly denied the allegations, calling them baseless. The firm stated that the root cause of the collapse of Terra and Luna lies with Do Kwon and the management of Terraform Labs, not with Jane Street. The factual determination of these claims will ultimately be decided through ongoing legal proceedings.

Separately, some market participants speculate that Jane Street had been selling large amounts of BTC every day around 10 a.m., suppressing the price, and that Bitcoin began rising after the lawsuit because those sales stopped — leading to rumors that Jane Street may have shut down its crypto desk. While there is no confirmed evidence supporting this theory, it is true that Bitcoin’s price has increased since Jane Street was sued.

• DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) is a strategy in which companies hold BTC or ETH as treasury assets and seek to have their corporate valuation re-rated based on those holdings. ETHZilla began implementing its Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) strategy in July 2025.

• However, starting in December 2025, ETHZilla effectively abandoned its ETH-based DAT strategy and pivoted toward an RWA tokenization business model.

• One of the main reasons many companies are giving up on the DAT strategy is the sharp decline in the prices of Bitcoin or Ethereum — the very digital assets underpinning their treasury strategy. When prices fall significantly, the company’s market valuation relative to the value of its crypto holdings can drop below 1x, undermining the core premise of the strategy.

• Moreover, unlike MicroStrategy (MSTR) or BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), most DAT-focused companies lack sufficient capital reserves. To execute their digital asset treasury strategies, they often issue convertible bonds. Over time, as debt servicing becomes more difficult, they are forced to sell their digital assets to meet obligations — creating a negative feedback loop.

• In ETHZilla’s case, the situation deteriorated more rapidly after Founders Fund — the venture capital firm co-founded by Peter Thiel — sold its entire 7.5% stake in the company. The exit of such a prominent core investor significantly accelerated the company’s decline.

Companies that adopted a Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) strategy in 2025 are now rapidly abandoning it. The primary reason is the decline in the prices of most crypto assets, including Bitcoin.

At its core, the DAT model relies on a company announcing large-scale coin purchases, which drives up its stock price and creates an mNAV (multiple of Net Asset Value) premium. Based on this premium, companies raise capital by issuing new shares or convertible bonds.

However, as crypto prices continued to fall, the mNAV premium disappeared. Instead of benefiting from valuation expansion, companies began incurring losses. As a result, aside from large-scale DAT players such as MicroStrategy (MSTR) and BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), most firms can no longer sustain this strategy. Consequently, many are left with no choice but to abandon their DAT approach.

• Lobstar Wilde is an AI trading bot reportedly created by Nik Pash, who is believed to be an OpenAI developer.

• On February 22, 2026, a user named Treasure David posted on X claiming that his uncle had contracted tetanus from a lobster injury and needed 4 SOL for medical treatment. Due to a decimal miscalculation, the bot mistakenly transferred 5% of the total LOBSTAR token supply.

• At the time, the LOBSTAR tokens David received were worth approximately $250,000. Despite experiencing high swap slippage when converting the tokens, he proceeded to sell them.

• The incident ultimately boosted LOBSTAR’s token price and significantly increased its visibility. However, it also exposed vulnerabilities in the treasury management of autonomous AI agents, leading to a rise in similar “begging” attempts targeting such systems.

A person named Treasure David appealed to the AI trading agent Lobstar Wilde, claiming that his uncle had contracted tetanus from a lobster-related injury and needed 4 SOL to cover medical expenses. Due to a bot error, however, he received not 4 SOL, but LOBSTAR tokens worth approximately $250,000.

As the incident went viral, awareness of the LOBSTAR token increased and its price even saw upward momentum. In terms of proving that an AI agent can autonomously execute trading strategies and manage its own wallet without human intervention, the event demonstrated what many envision as the ideal form of an autonomous AI agent.

However, the case also exposed a critical vulnerability: an AI agent can make mistakes and accidentally transfer or lose significant funds. This highlights the need for safeguards to prevent similar incidents in the future.

• Punch was born at a zoo in Ichikawa City, Japan, and was abandoned by his mother shortly after birth.

• Caretakers gave Punch a stuffed orangutan doll, which he came to recognize as his mother. Photos and videos of Punch tightly hugging the stuffed toy quickly went viral on social media for the first time.

• Later, as Punch began socializing with other monkeys, he was occasionally bullied. Whenever that happened, he would return to the stuffed orangutan he viewed as his “mother,” a scene that deeply stirred people’s protective instincts and triggered a second wave of virality.

• In other words, the combination of a baby monkey’s cuteness, the loneliness of clinging to a stuffed orangutan as a substitute mother, and the emotional socialization process — including moments of being bullied — all worked together as powerful meme elements that propelled Punch to fame.

• In mid-February, Justin Sun donated $100,000 to Punch’s zoo, drawing attention from the crypto market as well. The Punch meme token’s market capitalization quickly surged to nearly $50 million at its peak and is currently trading around $33 million.

The Punch meme first gained widespread attention on social media after images and videos showed the baby monkey, abandoned by his biological mother, relying on a stuffed orangutan for comfort. The emotional story resonated deeply with audiences.

Momentum in the crypto space accelerated after Justin Sun donated $100,000 to the zoo for Punch, bringing the narrative into the broader crypto community.

As a meme built around an animal that had already generated strong public affection — a recurring theme that has historically performed well in meme markets — the Punch meme token briefly reached an FDV of $50 million, marking one of the stronger performances in the Solana meme sector in recent times.

However, given the overall weak sentiment in the broader crypto market and the inherently short-lived nature of meme trends, which often surge rapidly and fade just as quickly, it does not appear to be well-suited for long-term investment.

• Recently, Backpack Exchange announced its tokenomics ahead of its upcoming TGE (Token Generation Event).

• At launch, the initial circulating supply will be 25%. Of the total allocation, 24% will go to points holders, 1% to NFT holders, 37.5% will unlock upon achieving specific milestones prior to an IPO, and the remaining 37.5% — allocated to the team and investors — will be subject to a minimum one-year lock-up after the IPO.

• On February 23, 2026, CEO Armani Ferrante announced on X that users who stake their tokens for more than one year will be eligible to exchange them for up to 20% of the company’s equity at a fixed ratio.

• In other words, through an unusual reward structure that allows token holders to swap tokens for company shares, Backpack aims to incentivize long-term staking and effectively reduce circulating supply in order to support token price stability.

• Notably, the team and investors will not receive directly liquid token allocations. Instead, their upside is tied to company equity held in the corporate treasury, locked for at least one year post-IPO. The team can only realize gains if the company goes public or if a liquidity event involving equity occurs.

• Therefore, unlike typical crypto projects, Backpack is positioning itself for a long-term trajectory toward a U.S. IPO, with team compensation structured around corporate equity rather than immediate token unlocks.

Backpack Exchange recently announced that users who stake its token will be eligible to receive up to 20% of the company’s equity. This appears to be an attempt to address structural issues commonly criticized in traditional tokenomics models.

In most projects, token prices and company equity are completely separated. As a result, teams often have little incentive to support the token price. Moreover, after TGE, teams frequently sell their token allocations, putting downward pressure on the market. From a typical investor’s perspective, there is little reason to buy a token that even the team is continuously selling.

This negative cycle has repeated across the market, causing many altcoins to trend toward zero over time and draining overall market vitality.

Against this backdrop, the Backpack team has chosen a different approach. Instead of allocating immediately liquid tokens to team members at TGE, they structured incentives so that users who stake tokens can exchange them for up to 20% of company equity. This signals a longer-term orientation aligned with a potential IPO outcome.

The approach itself seems compelling. However, there are open questions about the actual upside. Backpack’s equity valuation is reportedly around $1 billion — only about twice the implied token valuation. In that context, it is unclear whether staking for one year would generate sufficiently attractive returns.

Additionally, for Korean investors, crypto taxation is set to begin next year. From a practical standpoint, it may be more efficient to benefit from reduced circulating supply and rising token prices in the short term rather than committing to long-term staking.

• Base has been operating using the OP Stack, but it is now planning to transition toward a more independent mainnet structure.

• This move appears aligned with recent comments from Vitalik Buterin, who emphasized that the future of Layer 2 solutions should not be solely about increasing raw speed, but about building L2s with differentiated and specialized value propositions.

• Following the announcement that Base would diverge from the Optimism ecosystem, the OP token fell more than 5.5% on the same day.

• If Base adopts a fully integrated stack under its own direction, it is expected to operate more independently under the management of Base and Coinbase, enabling faster development cycles and greater flexibility.

Base announced that it will move away from the OP Stack it has been using and transition to a unified, fully integrated stack.

While the Optimism OP Stack enabled Base to launch quickly by leveraging existing infrastructure, it also created structural complexity due to external dependencies. To address these limitations and evolve beyond being just another OP Stack chain, Base appears to be transitioning toward a more tightly integrated, Ethereum-aligned, and internally optimized Layer 2 infrastructure.

The shift will likely occur gradually over several months. Once Base becomes a fully independent chain, it is also expected that the long-speculated Base token launch could materialize.

For Optimism, Base had reportedly generated around 13 ETH per day in fees. With Base pursuing an independent path, Optimism stands to lose approximately 94% of those fees. Given this context, the decline in the OP token price appears to be a natural market reaction.

• Following a recent update to X’s policies, any promotional content that involves compensation — whether in the form of money, products, fees, or other incentives — must be clearly disclosed.

• Among the updates, certain categories are now explicitly prohibited from being promoted through paid partnerships. Notably, cryptocurrencies and prediction markets have been added to the restricted list.

• In particular, prediction market platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi are highly likely to be interpreted under the platform’s Gambling category according to policy guidelines.

• As a result, promotional posts involving financial compensation related to exchanges, token sales, airdrops, prediction market platforms, or similar crypto-related services may no longer be permitted. Violations of these rules could lead to enforcement actions or account penalties.

X recently updated its policies, adding cryptocurrencies and prediction markets to the list of categories prohibited from paid partnership promotions.

As a result, influencers can no longer officially promote crypto projects or prediction market platforms through paid partnerships. Violations may lead not only to post deletions but also to account suspensions.

Following the earlier crackdown on so-called “InfoFi” content, crypto-related promotional posts are now effectively restricted as well. Consequently, many crypto influencers on X are expected to disappear from the platform.

In particular, Nikita Bier, X’s Head of Product, has reportedly warned numerous crypto accounts directly that failure to properly disclose advertisements could result in account deletion. Some users who attempted to disguise paid promotions as organic content — even tagging Nikita’s account — have allegedly had their accounts forcibly removed, signaling that enforcement is now being actively carried out.

• Fuse Energy is an energy infrastructure project built on Solana and is preparing for its token launch.

• The project aims to address inefficiencies in the traditional power sector by building a blockchain-based system that integrates energy generation, trading, supply, installation, and infrastructure management.

• Since its founding in 2022, Fuse Energy has supplied energy to approximately 200,000 households and achieved an annual recurring revenue (ARR) of around $400 million. Based on this operational track record, the company successfully raised approximately $160 million in funding, demonstrating real-world infrastructure execution capabilities rather than a purely conceptual model.

• Fuse Energy has also obtained a no-action letter from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), allowing it to issue and sell the ENERGY token within the United States. This could set an important precedent for tokenized energy incentives under regulatory clarity.

• The ENERGY token is expected to be used for hardware discounts and energy bill payments, and will also function as a reward mechanism tied to actual energy consumption behavior.

The Solana-based energy infrastructure project Fuse Energy is preparing for its token launch.

The project operates on the basis of real-world infrastructure, including solar and wind power facilities, and holds regulatory approvals such as a UK energy supplier license. Participants are expected to receive ENERGY tokens as rewards tied to their involvement and energy usage.

To ensure regulatory compliance in the United States, Fuse Energy has also secured a no-action letter from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Since the reward structure is based on actual energy consumption behavior, it presents a more utility-driven model, which may make participation appealing.

However, the service is currently focused primarily on the UK market, and participation from Korea remains limited for now. Interested users may need to wait for future geographic expansion.

• The Aptos Foundation proposed changes to Aptos tokenomics on February 19, 2026.

• Under the previous model, Aptos operated with an uncapped, inflationary supply structure. Following the proposed update, the system would transition to a deflationary model with a fixed hard cap of 2.1 billion APT tokens.

• Staking rewards would be reduced significantly from 7% to 2.6%, cutting emissions by more than half. Gas fees would increase tenfold and be fully burned. In addition, the foundation plans to permanently lock up 210 million APT tokens — representing 18% of the circulating supply — further tightening long-term supply dynamics.

• Until now, Aptos’ tokenomics had faced criticism for excessive dilution, which many argued contributed to sustained price declines. For this reason, a shift toward a deflationary model has been viewed as a necessary step to better support long-term token value.

Aptos has proposed a tokenomics overhaul. While the network previously operated under an uncapped inflationary supply model, the new proposal aims to introduce a deflationary structure with a fixed cap of 2.1 billion tokens. Given that the Aptos Foundation is backing the change, it is widely expected to pass.

In its early days, Aptos was positioned as a direct competitor to Sui, often framed as part of a head-to-head rivalry. However, due to perceived execution challenges and continuous token price pressure driven by inflation, Aptos is generally viewed as having lost momentum in that competition.

As the token price continued to decline, user activity and ecosystem engagement reportedly weakened significantly. With the chain now facing relevance concerns, the foundation appears to have recognized the urgency of reforming its tokenomics.

Even after the announcement, Aptos’ price has continued to trend downward. Therefore, beyond adjusting supply mechanics, the project may need a broader long-term strategy to revitalize its ecosystem and restore market confidence.

Virtuals Protocol is an AI platform that enables users to create, tokenize, own, and monetize AI agents.

Previously, only AI agents officially verified by the Virtuals team were available on the platform. Recently, however, the protocol introduced ACP (Agent Commerce Protocol).

ACP functions as a marketplace where AI agents can collaborate with one another, forming an autonomous multi-agent system that enables structured cooperation between multiple agents.

Anyone can register their own agent on Virtuals, and once registered, a VIRTUAL-based token pool is automatically created for that agent, allowing it to be traded.

Unlike traditional centralized AI agent models, Virtuals operates on the Base chain and features a shared revenue model: 70% of agent token trading fees go to the creator (founder), while 30% goes to the protocol. This structure enables actual value creation and on-chain revenue distribution.

The core competition in AI is no longer about who has the best LLM, but about how effectively these models can be connected to real economic activity.

In response to this shift, Virtuals Protocol launched ACP (Agent Commerce Protocol) to accelerate the growth of the AI agent economy. ACP aims to standardize commerce between agents by introducing on-chain escrow, automated settlement, reputation systems, and an agent registry.

Anyone can create an agent through OpenClaw and onboard it to ACP. If real economic interactions occur between agents — leading to actual transactions — fees accumulate, and participants can generate revenue based on that activity.

However, the ecosystem is still in its early stages, and many agents currently lack differentiated or meaningful functionality. If higher-quality agents emerge and sustained collaboration frameworks develop, this could become a turning point — potentially driving appreciation not only in individual agent tokens but also in the broader VIRTUAL token price.

• Coinbase reported its Q4 2025 earnings, posting results below expectations. This marked the end of eight consecutive profitable quarters, as the company returned to a net loss. Its stock price fell to the lowest level since March 2024.

• Despite pursuing diversification through its “Everything Exchange” strategy — including strengthening derivatives via the acquisition of Deribit, and expanding into prediction markets and tokenized stock trading — Coinbase’s share price has continued to decline. This appears to be influenced not only by Bitcoin’s price weakness but also by uncertainty surrounding the proposed Clarity legislation.

• If the Clarity bill includes a provision prohibiting exchanges from paying interest or rewards to customers on stablecoin holdings, Coinbase’s short-term profitability could improve due to reduced payout obligations. However, in the long term, such restrictions could weaken customer acquisition and reduce competitiveness relative to other exchanges. It may also shrink revenue streams tied to DeFi and stablecoin-related products.

• CEO Brian Armstrong has voiced strong opposition to banning stablecoin rewards, suggesting that the banking industry is supporting such provisions to avoid competition. He has even stated that no legislation would be preferable to one that restricts stablecoin yield. While Armstrong strongly supports regulatory clarity overall, he firmly opposes limits on stablecoin-based rewards.

As the largest U.S.-based exchange and a publicly listed company, Coinbase generates revenue not only from trading fees but also through a unique revenue-sharing arrangement with Circle, allowing it to capture a significant portion of USDC-related income.

Thanks to this structure, Coinbase has maintained a market capitalization of over $40 billion and previously recorded eight consecutive profitable quarters. However, following its Q4 2025 earnings report, the company returned to a net loss, leading to a decline in its stock price.

While Bitcoin’s price performance is certainly a factor, near-term stock volatility appears to be heavily influenced by uncertainty surrounding the proposed Clarity bill. One key provision under discussion is a potential ban on exchanges paying interest or rewards on stablecoin holdings.

If stablecoin interest payments are definitively prohibited, Coinbase’s short-term profitability could improve due to reduced payout obligations. However, over the long term, such restrictions may weaken its competitive position relative to other exchanges and make customer acquisition more challenging.

Therefore, beyond whether the Clarity bill passes, it will be crucial to monitor how the stablecoin interest provision is ultimately resolved.

• TCG (Trading Card Games) feature unique characters and abilities assigned to each card. Rare cards command higher prices, and when combined with strong IP and dedicated communities, the ecosystem evolves into a complex investment market.

• Among them, the most popular TCG in recent times is Pokémon cards. In some emerging models, blockchain technology is being integrated into the process of randomly drawing cards from packs.

• Platforms like Courtyard have generated over $54 million in revenue and raised approximately $30 million in funding. Meanwhile, Collector Crypt focuses specifically on Pokémon TCG cards, tokenizing physical Pokémon cards into NFTs so they can be traded digitally.

• Unlike simple NFT projects, these models are directly linked to physical cards and can generate tangible revenue. In particular, tokenization helps address one of the traditional TCG market’s biggest limitations — the difficulty of quickly liquidating physical cards. By enabling faster liquidity through tokenized representations, this approach could evolve into a more sustainable business model.

The TCG (Trading Card Game) market is growing rapidly, driven by major IPs such as Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh!, and One Piece, along with their strong fan communities.

The appeal lies in the ability to own limited-edition and rare physical cards, satisfying collectors’ desires. At the same time, the randomness of card packs — and the possibility of pulling a highly valuable card — taps into gambling psychology, continuously attracting new users.

Despite strong demand, a major limitation of the traditional TCG market has been the difficulty of converting owned cards into immediate cash. By combining TCG with blockchain technology, this issue has been addressed through tokenization, allowing cards to be traded more efficiently in digital form.

Moreover, blockchain’s tamper-resistant properties enable the implementation of transparent, verifiable Gacha-style systems, where users can purchase and open packs from anywhere. As a result, not only crypto-native participants but also traditional TCG fans are joining the ecosystem, contributing to steady market expansion over time.

• This content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any specific asset. Cryptocurrency and digital asset investments involve significant risk, so please conduct your own research and make decisions carefully.

• All research comments reflect the views of Uncommonlab Research interns and do not constitute financial or legal advice, nor do they recommend the purchase or sale of any particular asset.