––––––––––

1. The 2025 DAT Summer Is Cooling

The sector exploded this year as Bitmine (BMNR), Sharplink (SBET) and Solana Company (HSDT) went mainstream. The 30 BTC, ETH and SOL DATs we track now add up to US$117 bn in combined market-cap, up from US$88 bn in March. After the latest draw-down the easy momentum is gone, yet the conversation on Twitter, in sell-side notes and even in boardrooms is still stuck on “is it trading at 1.3× or 0.9× book?” That is not enough.

––––––––––

2. Power-Law Reality: Heads Win, Tails Vanish

Like most network assets, DATs follow a ruthless power law. In each bucket—BTC, ETH, SOL—the top three names swallow 70-85 % of NAV and volume. Long-tail issuers trade below cash, struggle to raise, and eventually become shells. The shake-out is healthy: the few DATs that pair real assets with differentiated treasury policy are turning into a new class of listed crypto-capex vehicles; the rest are penny-stock roadkill.

––––––––––

3. Value ≠ Sentiment: Decomposing the Drivers

We split total shareholder return into two clean parts:

A. Intrinsic compounding – Δ(NAV per share) driven by coin price, staking yield, or operating cash-flow ploughed back into crypto.

B. Multiple re-rating – Δ(mNAV) driven purely by sentiment, liquidity and technicals.

Since the spring sell-off, BMNR, HSDT and ETHM have kept NAV/share rising even as their stock prices fell; the entire downside came from multiple compression. Most other names saw both legs drop, but the decomposition shows that the asset side is still working—the market just stopped believing.

––––––––––

4. The Reflexive Flywheel Looks Fragile in a Downturn

The DAT playbook is simple when coins and equities grind higher: issue expensive equity, stack more crypto, grow NAV/share, keep the premium, repeat. In a falling market the loop snaps. Management must choose between (i) doubling down and risking dilution death-spiral or (ii) defending the share count and watching NAV/share erode as the coin mark-to-market drags. Bitmine, MSTR and HSDT have played defence by slowing issuance and using modest leverage; several smaller miners kept printing at discounts and have already diluted themselves into irrelevance.

––––––––––

5. A Two-Lens Evaluation Checklist

Stop staring at mNAV in isolation. A useful appraisal needs two independent scores:

1. Fundamental growth – Is NAV per share rising faster than the native coin?

2. Capital discipline – Is the firm issuing responsibly (i.e. only when mNAV > 1.2× and into accretive coin purchases) and/or using debt that is matched by cash-flow or staking yield?

If either answer is “no”, the DAT is probably destroying value no matter how glossy the slide-deck sounds.

––––––––––

6. Data Gaps Are Holding the Sector Back

Quarterly 10-Qs, PDF tear-sheets, Twitter screenshots, PIPE warrants buried in appendices—DAT disclosure is a circus. The resulting stale share-counts and stale coin marks make mNAV quotes meaningless for days or weeks after big moves. The ecosystem needs (i) a standardised daily template (coins held, shares out, warrants, prefunded, debt, derivatives) and (ii) on-chain attestation of treasury wallets. Until that happens, “transparent” is just marketing.

––––––––––

7. What Exactly Is a DAT?

A DAT is an operating public company whose balance sheet is majority crypto. Investors get BTC, ETH or SOL exposure inside a regulated brokerage account without seed phrases, KYC queues or 1099-decentralised-quest chaos. Unlike ETFs or trusts, DATs can trade, stake, borrow against or even mine their coins; they can also issue equity or debt at will. The NAV is the mark-to-market of those coins plus cash; the market-cap is what equity investors pay for the bundle. Premium or discount to NAV is the market’s real-time vote on management’s ability to compound faster than dilution.

––––––––––

8. Why Anyone Cares

Trad-fi audience: DATs plug digital assets into 401(k)s, SMAs and pension schemes that cannot touch spot crypto directly.

Crypto audience: each new share equals coins taken off the float, deeper staking sets, and another buyer in the secondary market.

PIPE funds: they buy shares (often with a warrant kicker) before the registration statement drops, betting on the flywheel. When it works, everybody gets a levered coin return; when it breaks, the PIPE discount is accused of front-running retail. The data show both stories are true—timing and governance decide which one dominates.

––––––––––

9. Reading the Vital Signs

NAV – Simple sum of coins × spot + cash − debt. Watch the footnotes: some DATs tuck DeFi tokens, NFTs or convertibles into “digital assets”.

mNAV – Market-cap / NAV. >1× usually signals growth credibility; <1× can be either distress or deep value.

Coins per share – The only metric that cannot be fudged by accounting. If it is rising through cycles, management is doing its job.

Turnover (volume ÷ market-cap) – A cleaner liquidity gauge than raw dollar volume because each DAT embeds a different coin price.

Supply capture % – Coins locked in DAT treasuries ÷ total circulating supply. For BTC DATs the number is already 3.2 %; for ETH it is 2.9 %; for SOL only 1.1 % but climbing fast.

––––––––––

10. Where the Raw Data Lie

SEC filings lag, warrants hide in 424B5s, prefunded tranches sit in NAV but not in share count, and some firms announce coin buys on Telegram. The worst sin is ignoring pro-forma dilution: once in-the-money warrants are exercised, NAV is unchanged but share count jumps, collapsing NAV/share and mNAV. Pantera’s dashboard tries to normalise for these ghosts; even so, the error bars on any daily mNAV quote are ±5-10 %.

––––––––––

11. Debt Matters—Adjusted NAV

DATs that lever up via convertible notes or stable-coin loans can look cheap on headline mNAV while actually trading through the floor once debt is netted. The fix is simple: report an adjusted NAV (coins + cash − total liabilities) and an adjusted mNAV. This puts pure-treasury plays such as MSTR on the same footing as hybrid operators like BMNR or SBET and shows whether leverage is amplifying coin returns or just masking equity dilution.

––––––––––

12. Bottom Line

mNAV is a thermometer, not a diagnosis. A DAT that trades at 0.8× but grows coins per share at 15 % a year through disciplined raises and staking yield is probably cheap; a 3× name that funds itself by printing into every rally and has flat coins per share is a melting ice-cube. Look past the multiple, watch the treasury wallet, and demand daily disclosure. The DAT sector will not mature until investors stop asking “what’s the premium?” and start asking “is the flywheel still turning?”

The large-scale cryptocurrency liquidation event on October 10th is viewed as a necessary market leverage reset, not the end of the bull market, creating a healthier structural foundation for near-to-medium-term gains. The market is expected to experience a slow recovery in the coming months rather than a rapid surge to new all-time highs, with institutional investors likely becoming the primary drivers of the next leg up. Fund flows indicate "smart money" is shifting from Solana and BSC towards Ethereum and EVM-tech stack ecosystems like Arbitrum, with yield protocols and Real-World Assets (RWA) gaining focus. Stablecoin data suggests this is a rotation of existing capital, not an influx of new money, meaning any rebound remains reliant on incentives and narrative-driven moves. Despite a complex macro environment, potential Fed rate cuts, ample liquidity, and crypto-friendly regulations could support the market, potentially extending the cycle into 2026.

Key Takeaways

* Despite persistent panic, we view the October liquidation event as a potential prelude to medium-term strength rather than a sign of weakness, creating a solid setup for Q4 performance.

* A full market recovery, however, may take months, with a gradual grind higher more likely in the interim than a vertical move to new record highs.

* Over the past 30 days, "smart money" flows within crypto have concentrated around the EVM tech stack and moved away from Solana and BSC.

Market Reset, Not Market Crash

Following the massive liquidation event on October 10th, we believe the crypto market has found a short-term bottom, with significantly improved market positioning. The market appears to have reset rather than crashed. We contend this sell-off has restored market leverage to a healthier structural state, which could support price action in the near-to-medium term. However, a slow ascent is more probable in the coming months than a direct sprint to new all-time highs.

Technically, this deleveraging event was more of a fundamental market adjustment than a solvency crisis, although the altcoin sell-off and market maker deleveraging did pressure the riskiest segments of the crypto market. On the positive side, we believe this technically-driven price action indicates that crypto's underlying fundamentals remain sound. Institutional investors—largely unscathed by the leverage unwind—are likely to lead the next advance. While the macro environment is more complex and risk-laden than at the start of the year, it remains generally supportive.

Observing "smart money" flows in the space (per Nansen), capital is rotating towards the EVM stack (e.g., Ethereum, Arbitrum), while Solana and Binance Smart Chain (BSC) lose momentum. To be clear, we use smart money flows only as a screening tool—not a buy signal—to identify where market depth, incentives, and developer/user activity are concentrating across protocols, DEXs, and blockchains. Meanwhile, stablecoin data points to capital rotation rather than new inflows, suggesting the market rebound will continue to rely on tactical incentive- and narrative-driven rotations in the short term.

The Great Grain Robbery Analogy

A well-known anecdote in commodity trading circles is "The Great Grain Robbery." It happened in 1973 and, despite the name, wasn't a robbery. It was the USSR's systematic, secret withdrawal of wheat and corn stocks from the open market over a month. This went undetected until global grain prices spiked 30%-50%, revealing a massive Soviet crop failure that had driven global food supplies to dangerously low levels.

The crypto liquidation cascade on October 10th—triggered by tariffs and causing numerous altcoins to plummet 40%-70%—bears a striking resemblance to the information dynamics of that event. In both cases, information asymmetry during a liquidity drought created massive market dislocations, disproportionately impacting less liquid, higher-beta assets.

Figure 1: Largest Liquidation Event in Crypto History

In 1973, the failure of US officials to detect the global shortfall stemmed from flaws in agricultural monitoring. Senator Henry Jackson accused them of either "incredible negligence" or "deliberate concealment." The episode later spurred satellite crop monitoring to prevent future information asymmetry.

The crypto cascade resulted not just from an information gap but from flawed execution mechanisms: altcoin liquidity is fragmented across exchanges, and decentralized protocols automatically liquidate over-collateralized altcoin positions as health metrics deteriorate. This often creates self-reinforcing selling pressure during price declines. Furthermore, market makers now predominantly hedge by shorting altcoins (due to their significantly higher beta vs. large caps, allowing for smaller position sizes). However, due to Automatic Deleveraging (ADL), many firms abruptly closed positions and withdrew buy-side liquidity, exacerbating the sell-off.

Both events underscore a timeless market truth: when liquidity vanishes and information asymmetry spikes, the highest-beta, most leveraged corners of any market become the pressure release valve, absorbing concentrated, forced selling. But what happens next?

The Recovery Trajectory

We view this sell-off as a necessary reset for the crypto market, not a cycle peak, potentially paving the way for a slow grind higher over the coming months. Prior to the October 10th event, our primary concern was that the current bull cycle might be ending prematurely. In fact, our survey from September 17th to October 3rd showed 45% of institutional investors believed the bull market was in its late stages.

Post-sell-off, we are instead more convinced of directional upside for crypto, though positioning in the coming months will depend more on market structure repair than headline catalysts. The liquidation cascade exposed fragilities in collateral standards, price feeds, and the resilience of cross-platform transfers.

Figure 2. The Short, Sharp Shock of Leverage Reshapes Crypto

However, leverage has largely been reset—our systematic leverage ratio (based on total derivatives open interest divided by total crypto market cap, ex-stablecoins) shows levels are only slightly above those at the start of the year (Chart 2). We believe this metric will be one of the most critical to monitor in the medium term. The current leverage ratio suggests the market will continue to face intermittent liquidity gaps and sharper risk tails until risk controls are harmonized and market maker depth fully normalizes.

Looking ahead, we expect market momentum to be primarily driven by institutional inflows—investors who were largely unaffected by this deleveraging event. Most institutions maintained either low leverage exposure or concentrated positions in large caps, while the retail-dominated altcoin space bore the brunt of the liquidation cascade. As institutional conviction returns, crypto markets can rebound, but this process could take months.

Consequently, we anticipate Bitcoin dominance will gradually increase over the next 2-3 months, potentially putting downward pressure on ETH/BTC and altcoin/BTC pairs before any final market rotation. Notably, based on breakevens for strangles and straddles, the market's implied probability distribution for Bitcoin's price over the next 3-6 months ranges from $160k to $90k, with an asymmetric skew to the upside (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Implied BTC Price Distribution Based on Straddle/Strangle Breakevens

Tracking the Money Flows

We believe money flows are the most direct barometer of market participant conviction following a downturn. After the recent deleveraging, we observed price overshooting and murky narratives. To gauge positioning dynamics, we recommend monitoring where "smart money"—including investment funds, market makers, VCs, and consistently high-performing traders—is (re)deploying capital.

Tracking these flows can reveal which ecosystems are regaining depth, incentives, and developer/user activity—where short-term opportunities are clustering, and which protocols, DEXs, and blockchains to watch. This doesn't mean participants should simply buy these platforms' native tokens, as on-chain footprints could reflect yield farming, liquidity provision, basis/funding arbitrage, or airdrop positioning. Moreover, it's difficult to discern if smart money buying is tactical (incentive-driven) or sustainable. We believe a more prudent approach is to use smart money flows as a screening tool for opportunities.

Post-October 10th, capital has rotated towards Ethereum L1/L2 (i.e., Ethereum, Arbitrum), while Solana and BSC have lost momentum. Ethereum and Arbitrum lead in 7-day net inflows, with strengthening momentum over the past 30 days (Fig. 4). Simultaneously, capital is flowing out of Solana and BSC; outflows from BSC have moderated but remain negative.

Figure 4. Smart Money Flows – By Chain

The catalysts for these flows vary. For instance, Arbitrum's restart of incentive programs and DAO initiatives in October (e.g., DRIP Epoch 4 directing rewards to Aave lending/liquidity, Morpho, and gaming-related activities) reignited a flywheel effect just as liquidity was being redeployed.

We believe it may be prudent to watch tokens on the Base chain for potential inflection trades. Activity on Base surged over the weekend of October 25-26: the x402 ecosystem saw parabolic growth, and Farcaster's acquisition of the Clanker launchpad spawned new token issuance and user influx. This growth follows prior catalysts—ongoing Base token speculation, an open-source Solana bridge, Zora on Robinhood, and Coinbase's acquisition of Echo—which collectively expanded use cases, creating more avenues for liquidity rotation.

Meanwhile, in the sector rotation since October 10th, a "utility + yield" theme has replaced speculative plays as the dominant narrative. Amid the post-crash market dislocation, yield protocols are leading smart money flows, reopening paths to double-digit APYs (e.g., fixed/floating rate combinations, funding rate arbitrage), while the NFT/Metaverse/Gaming sector is being driven by strategy-driven mechanisms (e.g., PunkStrategy's deflationary NFT trading loops) and major deals (e.g., Coinbase's acquisition of UPONLY).

Figure 5. Money Flows – By Sector

The staking/restaking theme continues to gain strength, with institutional products making headlines—Grayscale launched the first US exchange-traded products for Ethereum and SOL staking. In short, smart money is clustering around areas with clear revenue paths, reliable incentives, and institutional on-ramps, facilitating a risk barbell via stablecoins for selective re-deployment (Fig. 5).

Stablecoin flow data also indicates a picture of capital rotation rather than new money influx. Over the past month, the 30-day stablecoin growth rate has declined for most major blockchains except Tron (Fig. 6). We interpret this as post-crash flows being redistributive rather than additive—liquidity is selectively moving to protocols with tangible catalysts, but the system isn't seeing a broad-based surge in stablecoin supply. Practically, this means the rebound will remain reliant on tactical incentive and narrative-driven rotations until a clear expansion in stablecoin circulating supply supports a broader rally.

Figure 6. Stablecoin Supply Momentum – By Chain

The tokenized asset space is a key area of institutional focus. In October, BlackRock's BUIDL allocated approximately $500 million each to Polygon, Avalanche, and Aptos (Fig. 7). This ~$1.5 billion total deployment highlights the value of Real-World Assets (RWAs) as a resilient narrative—attracting TradFi participation during volatile times by offering stable yields (tokenized Treasury yields of 4-6%) and liquidity, while avoiding the speculative excesses liquidated in the October 10th cascade.

These deployments are progressively moving beyond Ethereum (BUIDL's initial base), leveraging the strengths of each chain: Polygon offers Ethereum-compatible scalability with low fees; Avalanche's high-throughput Subnets are ideal for institutional DeFi integration; Aptos handles complex assets with its Move language's security features. While this appears to be a best-of-breed expansion by a single player (BlackRock), we believe its commitment to expanding RWA on-ramps amidst broader crypto uncertainty underscores the strategic value of the RWA space as a future growth vector.

Figure 7. Real-World Asset Flows – By Chain

Don't Ignore the Macro Backdrop

Finally, it's crucial to remember that crypto is still trading within a highly complex and increasingly risky macro environment. This sell-off cleared out the excess leverage typical of late-cycle bull runs. However, multiple macro factors continue to buffet investor confidence: trade friction (e.g., tariffs), geopolitical conflicts (e.g., US sanctions on Russian oil producers), soaring fiscal deficits (in the US and globally), and stretched valuations in other asset classes.

Despite Fed easing, the US 10-year Treasury yield remains around 4.0%, with its range anchored between 3.5%-4.5%. This stability partly explains our tolerance for yield curve steepening at the margins (curves typically flatten during prolonged easing). However, we believe the steepening trend could persist, and risk assets like US equities and crypto face downside correction risks if yields spike abruptly—for instance, if fiscal buffer mechanisms fail.

On the other hand, if long-term yields are indeed rising alongside US economic growth, it reflects fundamental economic strength more than policy concerns. Faster nominal growth and productivity gains can absorb higher discount rates, providing solid support for risk assets, including crypto. Notably, we believe economists are generally underestimating productivity—partly because factors like AI are boosting labor efficiency in ways not fully captured by official statistics.

Figure 8. US Labor Productivity Rising (10-Yr Annualized Growth Rate)

If true, this suggests the impact of macro volatility on risk assets via the discount rate channel may be diminishing. This would refocus crypto's drivers towards endogenous factors like liquidity, fundamentals, positioning, and pro-crypto regulatory developments (e.g., the US crypto market structure bill).

Conclusion

Overall, the crypto market's cyclical phase remains hotly debated, but we believe the recent leverage flush has set the stage for a slow grind higher over the coming months. Macro tailwinds—including Fed rate cuts, ample liquidity, and pro-crypto regulatory shifts like the GENIUS/CLARITY bills—continue to support the bullish case, potentially extending this cycle into 2026.

However, post-October 10th smart money flows resemble a selective re-risk rather than a broad-based rush back into risk assets. Capital is rotating towards the EVM stack (like Ethereum and Arbitrum) and "utility + yield" plays, while inflows into Solana and BSC have stalled and stablecoin growth has slowed. This indicates a reallocation of capital into specific verticals, not systemic injection.

Simultaneously, blockbuster RWA flows show institutions are expanding their on-chain footprint with a cautious, multi-platform strategy. Practically, we believe the near-term bounce will remain concentrated where incentives, product launches, and institutional on-ramps converge, though more sustainable crypto price action likely requires a broader liquidity recovery first. While crypto market sentiment remains in "panic" territory, the recent leverage cleanse is a precursor to medium-term strength, laying the groundwork for further gains in Q1 2026.

The Compliant "Narrow Gate" Path

Represented by platforms like Kalshi, which is regulated by the US CFTC, this path involves packaging event contracts as compliant financial derivatives and distributing them to traditional finance users through mainstream channels like Robinhood. This route is safe but progresses slowly, limited by regulatory approvals.

The Free "Wild Frontier" Path

Represented by platforms like Polymarket and those built on Gnosis/Azuro infrastructure, this path prioritizes global liquidity and product breadth, operating at the edges of regulation. Polymarket set new trading volume records during the 2024 US elections, demonstrating the strong market demand for predicting hot-topic events.

Core Insights:

* Prediction markets face an "impossible trinity": it's difficult to simultaneously achieve decentralization, outcome certainty, and high liquidity.

* Established projects like Augur sacrificed user experience by over-pursuing decentralization, while newer projects focus more on pragmatism.

* The core regulatory challenge lies in distinguishing "gambling" from "derivatives with an economic purpose."

Future Outlook:

* TradFi Co-option: Prediction markets become niche features on mainstream financial platforms.

* Offshore Model Persists: A landscape emerges with compliant US markets coexisting alongside highly liquid global offshore markets.

* Infrastructure Layering: Underlying protocols remain neutral, while front-end applications are built according to local regulatory requirements.

Advice for entrepreneurs is to clearly choose a path: lobbying regulators, pursuing global liquidity, or focusing on infrastructure. Investors should monitor compliance progress and the adoption metrics of B2B infrastructure.

---

Summary

What the crypto prediction market has experienced in the past two years is arguably more intense than in the entire decade since its birth.

This sector was once one of Web3's earliest holy grails – an ideal of "information alchemy" attempting to distill collective wisdom into pure probability. But for a long time, it remained a high-friction, low-liquidity "decentralized toy."

Now, things have changed.

Polymarket hit astonishing new volume highs during the 2024 US elections (despite restricting US users), and its odds' accuracy was even used by mainstream media to compare against traditional polls. On the other side, Kalshi, regulated by the US CFTC, is pushing (restricted) event contracts to millions of TradFi users through channels like Robinhood.

The question is no longer if prediction markets will arrive, but in whose form. It stands at a crossroads: will it become a compliant hedging tool for Wall Street elites, or a Crypto-Native global liquidity "casino"?

BlockWeeks will dissect this ongoing "route war" for you.

---

I. Executive Summary

Prediction markets are growing rampantly along two distinct, even conflicting, paths:

* The Compliant "Narrow Gate" (TradFi Co-option): Represented by Kalshi, these seek full regulatory approval (e.g., from the CFTC), packaging "event contracts" as compliant financial derivatives, aiming to integrate with mainstream brokers like Robinhood. This path is extremely narrow and slow, but once cleared, provides direct access to massive mainstream capital.

* The Free "Wild Frontier" (Crypto-Native Evolution): Represented by Polymarket and platforms based on Gnosis/Azuro infrastructure. They prioritize global liquidity, timeliness, and product breadth. They either operate offshore or focus on underlying technology, playing a "cat-and-mouse game" with regulators, betting that market demand will eventually force regulatory concessions.

BlockWeeks' core view is this is not a zero-sum game. Short-term, the "grey area" Polymarket model will continue to capture the most liquidity and market attention. Long-term, regulation (who can get licenses) and infrastructure (who can provide the best liquidity and clearing framework) will determine the final market structure.

---

II. The Superficial Similarity, Fundamental Difference of the Two Paths

1. The Compliant Narrow Gate: Kalshi's "Wall Street Experiment"

Kalshi takes the hardest road: directly seeking approval from US regulators (primarily the CFTC).

* Analysis: Kalshi isn't building a "prediction market"; it's building "event derivatives." It must prove to regulators that its contracts (e.g., "Will the Fed raise rates?") have legitimate "economic purpose" and "hedging value," and are not "gambling."

* Progress: It has successfully introduced economic, weather, and other event contracts to the market and begun partnering with platforms like Robinhood.

* Bottleneck: This path has a very low ceiling, entirely limited by regulatory imagination. The CFTC is extremely cautious and slow to approve "political events" (like control of Congress) as this touches the "gambling" red line. Kalshi gains safety but sacrifices core Crypto tenets: speed, breadth, and permissionless innovation.

2. The Free Wild Frontier: Polymarket's "Global Casino"

Polymarket is the polar opposite case study. In 2022, it was fined by the CFTC for offering unregistered "binary options" and restricted from US users. This didn't kill it.

* Analysis: Polymarket proved the intense market craving for predicting "hot events" (elections, regulatory rulings, celebrity news). Its trading volume during the 2024 US elections reportedly surpassed that of many mid-sized exchanges.

* Strategy: Its strategy is "offshore operation + pursuit of future compliance." It serves users outside stringent jurisdictions (especially the US), while paving the way for a potential future "return" through acquisitions (like the compliant clearing house QCX).

* Bottleneck: A "Sword of Damocles" constantly hangs over Polymarket. Its success is built on regulatory "lag." This model captures liquidity but carries significant legal risk.

---

III. The "Ice and Fire" of Infrastructure: Augur's Lesson and Gnosis's Pragmatism

Why has the veteran Augur virtually disappeared, while the Gnosis ecosystem grows quietly?

* Augur's "Failure": Augur was an idealistic martyr. It overly fetishized a "fully decentralized" arbitration mechanism. Its complex REP token dispute system proved too slow, expensive (gas fees), and prone to deadlock when facing ambiguous events. Augur died from its obsession with a "perfect decentralized Oracle," sacrificing user experience and liquidity.

* Gnosis/Azuro's "Pragmatism": Gnosis (Omen/Azuro) learned the lesson. They stopped trying to solve the hardest Oracle problem themselves and turned to "pragmatism":

* Gnosis Conditional Tokens: Provides a flexible contract framework for others to build applications on top.

* Azuro (Gnosis Ecosystem): Focuses on the liquidity protocol. It outsources the Oracle problem (to centralized referees or third-party Oracles), concentrating on optimizing AMM and liquidity pools.

* Current State: Azuro is becoming a B2B infrastructure layer for GambleFi (especially sports betting). It doesn't touch front-end compliance, only providing on-chain tools. This is a smarter, more scalable, layered approach.

---

IV. The "Impossible Trinity" of Prediction Markets

Comparing these players reveals an "impossible trinity" in prediction markets. It's difficult to simultaneously have:

1. Decentralization (Censorship-Resistance)

2. Outcome Certainty (Fast, Reliable Oracle)

3. High Liquidity (Low Slippage, Large Depth)

* Kalshi: Abandons ① (fully centralized) for ② and (potential) ③.

* Polymarket: Abandons ① (semi-centralized/offshore) for ② (centralized, fast arbitration) and ③ (high liquidity).

* Augur: Clung to ① and ②, completely sacrificing ③ (liquidity dried up).

* Gnosis/Azuro: Focuses on providing the framework for ①, but leaves the challenges of ② and ③ for front-end applications to solve.

Notably, as of 2025, all "winners" (measured by liquidity) in the market are players who have compromised on "decentralization."

---

V. The True Intent of Regulation and Its Risks

The core regulatory risk isn't "on-chain" vs. "off-chain," but "product definition" and "user access."

* Gambling vs. Derivatives: The CFTC's core concern is whether a product is "gambling" (governed by state law) or a "hedging/price discovery tool with economic purpose" (under CFTC jurisdiction). Kalshi is striving to prove the latter, while many events on Polymarket are highly suspect of being the former.

* KYC/AML (User Access): This is a prerequisite for entering the US market. This is also why Polymarket's acquisition of QCX is so important – it needs not just clearing capability, but a (potentially future) compliant fiat and user on-ramp.

* Oracle Manipulation (Core Risk): In low-liquidity markets, or those relying on decentralized reporting, malicious actors can manipulate market prices with small amounts of capital, or even attempt to manipulate the "result reporting."

---

VI. The Real Opportunities for Ascent

Setting aside risks, prediction markets are unleashing three clear opportunities:

1. The "Advanced Form" of GambleFi: Prediction markets (especially for sports, current events) are natural ground for GambleFi. Azuro's rise as B2B infrastructure proves the demand for "fairer, more transparent betting protocols."

2. A Source of Alpha (Excess Returns): Polymarket's odds proved to be a sharper indicator than traditional polls and "expert analysis" during the 2024 election and multiple "SEC ETF approval" events. Hedge funds and research firms are beginning to view them as high-value "real-time sentiment/information" data sources.

3. New Hedging Tools for TradFi: Kalshi's true potential isn't letting retail users bet on Fed rates. It's enabling small business owners (e.g., farmers, importers/exporters) to hedge against "supply chain risks" (e.g., will a specific port close?) or "policy risks" (e.g., tariff changes). This is a trillion-dollar blue ocean.

---

VII. Three Possible Futures (12-36 Months)

Scenario 1: TradFi Co-option (Kalshi Model Wins)

* Path: Regulators (CFTC/SEC) clearly define "event derivatives" and aggressively crack down on all "unlicensed" platforms (Polymarket forced to fully exit US/EU).

* Outcome: Prediction markets become a "niche feature" on Robinhood, limited to "safe" events like economics and weather. Market size is capped by regulatory imagination.

Scenario 2: The Offshore "Wild West" (Polymarket Model Wins)

* Path: Regulation remains ambiguous; US users continue accessing Polymarket and other offshore platforms via VPN.

* Outcome: Two parallel markets form: a small, compliant US market and a large, highly liquid, high-risk global offshore market. Crypto-Native players dominate the latter, with liquidity highly concentrated on trending events.

Scenario 3: Layered "Infrastructure" (The Long-Term Victory of the Gnosis/Azuro Model)

* Path: Regulation focuses on cracking down on front-end applications (requiring KYC/AML) but remains neutral towards, or unable to regulate, the underlying protocols (like Gnosis Conditional Tokens).

* Outcome: Gnosis/Azuro becomes the "TCP/IP protocol for prediction markets." Numerous compliant (e.g., a chain-based version of Kalshi) and non-compliant (e.g., a new generation of Polymarket) front-ends are built on these protocols. The market achieves a separation of "compliant front-end, decentralized back-end."

---

VIII. Strategic Advice for Builders and Investors

The battle in prediction markets has shifted from "technical implementation" to "regulatory博弈 (game theory)" and "liquidity wars."

For Entrepreneurs:

* Stop Reinventing the Wheel: Don't try to build the next Augur (obsessed with a perfect decentralized Oracle).

* Choose Your Battlefield: Either go to Washington to lobby (get licenses, like Kalshi); go to Dubai/Singapore (chase global liquidity, like Polymarket); or be the "pickaxe seller" (build infrastructure, like Azuro).

For Investors:

* Bet on the "Compliance Pathway": Closely monitor Polymarket's M&A/compliance moves and Kalshi's integration progress with mainstream brokers.

* Bet on "B2B Infrastructure": Focus on adoption metrics (TVL, trading volume, number of ecosystem projects) for infrastructure like Gnosis/Azuro. In a world of regulatory uncertainty, platforms providing "tools" often offer the lowest risk and most stable returns.

Author: BlockWeeks

• Current Issues: Flawed token design, proliferation of low-quality projects, frequent fraud, and inefficient governance stem mainly from unclear regulations and low barriers leading to speculation.

• Root of Pessimism: Market participants struggle to achieve excess returns, not a lack of innovation.

• Industry Achievements: Bitcoin has become a $2 trillion asset; decentralized exchanges, on-chain lending, and derivative platforms have been built; new asset classes like meme coins and NFTs have emerged.

• Historical Comparison: The early internet also experienced bubbles and failures but eventually gave rise to giants like Amazon. The crypto field is following a similar trajectory.

• Future Outlook: Crypto technology is growing exponentially, with more successful protocols likely to emerge. The author calls for maintaining an optimistic attitude.

Summary

Author: MONK
Compiled by: Tim, PANews

Over the past year, many crypto natives on Crypto Twitter have lamented the state of the industry, devaluing the innovative potential of our field and asset class. While these criticisms point to real issues and often reflect genuine challenges in the crypto space, I believe this pessimism has gone too far, sliding into outright doomsday rhetoric.

In my view, crypto pessimism, though well-intentioned, is a dangerous and misguided mindset that has become widespread. This article will counter this pessimistic narrative by examining the current stage of development, showing that the reality is not as bleak as some portray.

First, let’s establish some common ground:

• Most tokens and tokenomics are flawed in design.

• The growing number of low-quality project builders is diluting the value of genuine contributors.

• Fraud and wealth-siphoning schemes are rampant.

• Truly valuable protocols represent only a tiny fraction of the entire crypto space.

• Tokens with investment value are exceedingly rare.

• Protocol governance is often inefficient.

• The industry still faces numerous legacy issues that need resolution.

The root causes of these problems lie in:

• A regulatory framework that remains unclear.

• Crypto technology significantly lowering the barriers to asset creation and acquisition.

• The persistent profitability of misconduct during industry development.

Fortunately, these issues are solvable or are inevitable byproducts of an open but immature industry. Deep down, I think we all understand this.

I believe the real reason for the recent surge in crypto market pessimism is that market participants find it increasingly difficult to achieve excess returns. This has led to a "death by a thousand cuts" sense of frustration and impatience.

This pessimism is not about a lack of innovation but stems entirely from the flawed structure of crypto assets.

Let’s review what we have achieved:
[Insert infographic or list of achievements here]

I believe these crypto products have found product-market fit or at least paved the way for crypto verticals that have achieved PMF. While such products are still few, with each building cycle, as infrastructure improves and knowledge compounds, we are creating more products of real value.

Some of you may see this chart and understand that good things take time, and the actual development trajectory may not be as bad as initially feared. Others, however, might dismiss it as "not a big deal."

To the latter, let me show you this:
[Insert image of early internet company homepages]

You probably don’t recognize them. These are the ancient homepages of early internet companies. Of course, they are entirely different from the internet we know and love today.

Here are some examples of publicly listed companies that failed after the dot-com bubble burst (source: Wikipedia):
[Insert list of failed companies]

Amazon’s stock price plummeted from a high of $107 to a low of $7 within two years, a drop of over 90%, and did not recover until 2010.

The number of true "failures" in the venture capital space is orders of magnitude higher. Thousands of companies that never went public likely wiped out most of the carried interest for venture investors.

Thankfully, we eventually ended up with these benchmark companies:

• Amazon — founded July 5, 1994

• Netflix — founded August 29, 1997

• PayPal — founded December 1998

• Google — founded September 4, 1998

• Facebook — founded February 4, 2004

Similarly, AI, as an innovative technology category and growth narrative, rightly deserves attention. But I wouldn’t be surprised if we see the same power-law survival principle at work a decade from now.
[Insert image of top AI startups from Israel in 2020]

If 99.9% of speculators in top tech categories fail, why is this phenomenon so painful in the crypto space?

It’s because we’ve turned almost every project into a venture investment, slapping publicly tradable tickers on each one. We allow any developer to launch viable, investable "startup projects" without due diligence, leading to an explosion in the number of investable "companies." This exposes a vast number of retail investors to the experience of investing in low-hit-rate asset classes, further fueling the growing negative sentiment toward cryptocurrencies.

Imagine if every internet entrepreneur could raise funds directly from a crowd of enthusiastic retail investors with just a half-baked project, skipping the seed, private, and IPO rounds. Now add platforms like Pump.fun, where even the product is optional.

Of course, our asset class would be minefields, with stocks poised to drop 90% at any moment.

What Have We Actually Achieved?
Today, Bitcoin has become a $2 trillion asset, just 16 years after its launch as a cypherpunk’s pipe dream by an unidentified founder.

In the decade since we first gained programmable smart contract platforms:

• We’ve built peer-to-peer internets resistant to World War III-level shocks, safeguarding trillions of dollars in value.

• We’ve created upgraded networks far superior to their predecessors, enabling permissionless asset creation with a click and supporting billions in daily decentralized spot trading volume.

• We’ve made tokenized dollars accessible worldwide, allowing instant, near-zero-cost transfers of any amount to anyone.

• We’ve brought financial basics like lending and passive yield on-chain.

• We’ve established transparent, borderless, no-KYC derivative trading platforms with volumes rivaling Robinhood, returning almost all revenue to token holders.

• We’re reshaping market structures, creating new ways to buy, sell, long, and short assets, while pioneering entirely new asset classes like prediction markets and perpetual contracts.

• We’ve made six-figure JPEGs a reality.

• We’ve fostered absurd yet vibrant online communities, propelling meme coin valuations past those of publicly traded companies.

• We’ve pioneered new capital formation models like ICOs and bonding curves.

• We’re exploring innovative paths to financial and monetary privacy.

As I often say, we’ve provided everyone with internet access an emerging alternative to the financial system they’re forced into by nationality. Our alternative is younger, freer, more open, and more fun.

We offer the market opportunities to invest in epoch-defining technology every year, often at bargain valuations. Investors need only separate the signal from the noise.

Our team at Syncracy believes the crypto equivalent of "FAANG" is already taking shape, with new viable contenders emerging every year or two.

I often use this quote to help put the industry in perspective: "We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Do not let yourself be lulled into inaction." — Bill Gates

We expect crypto to advance linearly each year, pouring money into a pile of worthless promoters, hoping this year will yield better results than the last.

This inevitably leads to disappointment and losses for many. Yet, constant doomsday rhetoric and criticism of project development are unreasonable when every "real" tech project has endured similar growing pains. In crypto, the pain is just more intense because we all have skin in the game.

Looking ahead to the next decade, none of us can accurately predict the trajectory, nor do I believe innovation will follow our imagined timelines. Some years may be uneventful, while others will see explosive growth. It’s entirely possible that in three years, twenty protocols will achieve product-market fit, not just seven.

To see how the stories of early internet pioneers ended, look at the chart below. It took a full 15 years for a complete recovery:
[Insert chart of internet boom and bust]

But as we all know, what happened since then is:
[Insert chart of post-recovery growth]

Yet, just as the old guard, Wall Street elites, and senior U.S. government officials are finally paying attention and recognizing crypto as a legitimate industry, many of us early participants seem to be losing faith in the mission. I firmly disagree.

Bitcoin remains digital gold. We are still building new financial foundations, making the world better and more interesting.

For some of us, excess returns are still achievable through various investment avenues.

Choose crypto optimism.

Where the Liquidity Actually Lives
USDe’s deepest liquidity is on Curve, not on any CEX. Curve pools hold nine-figure depth; Binance’s order-book is a thin tens of millions. While Binance printed a 32 % discount, Curve never budged more than 30 bps. One of these prices is the real market—the other is a tech outage.

Why Binance Went Rogue

1. API meltdown: deposits & withdrawals froze, so arbitrageurs were stuck.

2. No primary-dealer lane: Binance can’t mint/redeem USDe directly; Bybit and others can, so they snapped back to par in minutes.

3. Faulty oracle: Binance referenced its own illiquid book instead of external markets, liquidating users at ~$0.80 and feeding a cascade. The exchange is now refunding the wrongly liquidated—an implicit admission that the print was bogus.

Compare a Real De-Peg: USDC in March 2023
When Silicon Valley Bank went under, USDC traded at $0.87 everywhere—Curve, Coinbase, Kraken, OTC desks—because redemptions were literally halted. That is a de-pegging. This weekend, USDe could still be swapped 1:1 for its backing assets; only one venue failed to reflect it.

Take-Away for the Industry
The episode is a stress-test score-card for market infrastructure, not for USDe’s design. Collateral coverage actually rose as volatility increased. The lesson is exchange-specific: if you’re not the primary liquidity venue, look outside your walls before you trigger liquidations. USDe never broke its buck; Binance broke its data.

Macro bedrock: Traders are almost unanimous—another 25 bp cut is baked in for the October FOMC. Powell’s “flexible-dove” guidance has locked that expectation in place and widened the door for further easing.

Immediate read-through to crypto:

• Liquidity bid: The cut-call has turbo-charged “liquidity-up” conviction. Hot money, hunting for beta, poured into BTC and pushed it to $126 k—an instant sentiment check.

• Scarcity premium: Perpetual easing erodes fiat’s purchasing power, reinforcing Bitcoin’s anti-inflation, non-sovereign narrative. BTC’s rolling correlation with gold is now higher than with the S&P—proof that the “macro hedge” story is trading like it means it.

II. The Pull-Back Is Logic at Work, Not Logic Breaking
BTC’s round-trip from $126 k to $121 k and the alt-coin whipsaw are simply the market digesting over-head supply and waiting for data confirmation. The macro thesis is intact; price is just catching its breath.

III. Policy Poker and Market Psychology in Real Time
The Fed’s split personality plus the data blackout have turned volatility into the trade du jour. Two levers are driving the tape:

1. Dovish consensus = sentiment floor
   Powell’s elastic rhetoric and the FOMC’s pre-emptive-cut caucus have cemented a “long-liquidity” mindset. Unless the Committee explicitly removes the cut option, the crowd will not price a genuine bear-market tail-risk.

2. Information vacuum = risk-premium valve
   Government-stop delays have shoved key releases past the October meeting, forcing the Fed to “fly blind.” Uncertainty that felt exhilarating at $126 k now feels expensive; the give-back is just the market invoicing itself for that uncertainty premium.

IV. Psyche Shift: Sideways Is the New Spring-Loading
The current range is the hand-off from “blind euphoria” to “show-me” skepticism—not a trend reversal but a coiled reset.

Next catalyst: The backlog of data—especially payrolls and core PCE. If the prints scream “soft patch,” they will retro-fuel the cut narrative and unlock the liquidity that’s presently stuck in neutral. BTC’s most probable response: momentum re-engagement and another swipe at the highs.

Bottom line: the crypto trend still needs the tag-team confirmation of “macro data + Fed follow-through.” Until then, the chop is just storing energy for the next leg up.

Collaboration Scope: The two parties will launch lending services using Tether Gold as collateral and provide full-stack infrastructure solutions, enhancing the liquidity and application scenarios for XAU₮.

Tether Gold Features: Each XAU₮ token is 1:1 backed by one troy ounce of a London Good Delivery gold bar, operates on the Ethereum network, and allows holders to conduct on-chain transactions or redeem for physical gold offline.

Business Expansion: Antalpha RWA Hub already supports XAU₮ custody and subscription services and plans to establish physical vaults in major global financial centers, facilitating user conversion of XAU₮ into physical gold bars.

Partnership Significance: Through innovative services, digital gold becomes more accessible for integration into asset portfolios, serving as a hedge, liquidity source, or payment medium, thereby enhancing the capital efficiency of gold assets.

Summary

Singapore, September 29, 2025 — Antalpha (Nasdaq: ANTA), a leading digital asset financial platform, and Tether, the largest digital asset company globally, today announced an enhanced collaboration. They will jointly develop the global ecosystem for Tether Gold (XAU₮) utilizing Antalpha's newly launched RWA Hub platform. This cooperation will introduce institutional-focused financial solutions and services related to digital gold, underscoring the growing strategic value of gold in the digital asset economy.

Tether Gold (XAU₮), issued by TG Commodities, S.A. de C.V., enables the digital circulation of physical gold. Each XAU₮ token is 1:1 pegged to one troy ounce of a London Good Delivery gold bar and supports global trading and transfers on the Ethereum (ERC-20) network. Each backing gold bar has a unique serial number, weight, and purity certification. Holders can conveniently trade tokens on-chain or directly redeem them for physical gold at offline vaults.

Paul Liang, Chief Financial Officer of Antalpha, stated: "We are honored to partner with Tether, the world's largest stablecoin company, to expand the trusted digital gold ecosystem. When someone can walk into a jewelry store and exchange Tether Gold for a gold bar, digital assets will become more 'tangible' for many people. Through Antalpha RWA Hub, we aim to launch such innovative services to continuously enhance Tether Gold's liquidity and product offerings."

Paolo Ardoino, CEO of Tether, commented: "Gold has always been a globally recognized store of value. XAU₮ brings the irreplaceable attributes of gold into the digital asset space. The collaboration with Antalpha will expand XAU₮'s application scenarios and build more robust market infrastructure. This means institutions and individuals can more seamlessly integrate digital gold into their portfolios—whether as a hedge, liquidity source, payment medium, or long-term store of value."

Reportedly, Antalpha began developing its XAU₮ related business earlier this year and recently launched the Antalpha RWA Hub, an infrastructure service platform focused on Real-World Assets (RWA). Through its partner network, the platform already supports XAU₮ custody and subscription services and has innovatively introduced digital gold collateralized lending. This allows clients to obtain financing by pledging XAU₮, significantly enhancing the liquidity and capital efficiency of gold assets.

To perfect the global digital gold exchange system, Antalpha RWA Hub plans to establish physical vaults in major global financial centers together with local partners. This initiative aims to empower users to more flexibly convert XAU₮ into "physical gold bars" anytime and anywhere.

About Antalpha

Antalpha is a leading fintech company focused on providing financing, technology, and risk management solutions for institutions in the digital asset industry. Through its Antalpha Prime technology platform, Antalpha offers bitcoin supply chain and margin loans, allowing clients to originate and manage their digital asset loans while monitoring collateral positions with near real-time data.

About Antalpha RWA Hub

Antalpha RWA Hub is Antalpha's dedicated RWA infrastructure platform, currently focused on providing liquidity and services for gold-based RWA products.

About Tether Gold (XAU₮)

Tether Gold (XAU₮) is a digital asset provided by TG Commodities S.A. de C.V. XAU₮ is an ERC-20 token on the Ethereum blockchain. One full XAU₮ token represents one troy ounce of pure gold on a London Good Delivery gold bar. Upon purchase, the token can be transferred from the purchaser's Tether wallet to any on-chain address or easily traded/transferred globally, anytime and anywhere. The designated gold is identifiable by a unique serial number, purity, and weight, and can be redeemed for physical gold.

How the Pre-TGE Dash Works

• From 15 Sept, 50 % of every trading fee (1 % on NFTs, 0.85 % on fungible tokens) is siphoned into a communal pot.

• An extra US $1 M in OP and ARB has been parked in a treasury vault.

• Completing trades, bridging, or daily quests earns XP; XP upgrades a loot-box (levels 1-12). The higher the box, the heavier the SEA slice at TGE.

In short: the more you grind, the bigger the airdird—provided you don’t get rekt on gas first.

Side-Quests OpenSea is Running in Parallel

1. Bought Rally – a mobile wallet team – to fold token swaps, portfolio tracking and live candles into the same app you already use for jpegs.

2. Shipped a new mobile front-end with an AI co-pilot that pings you when your PFP collection is suddenly under-cutting floor.

3. Allocated a seven-figure budget for a flagship vault of “cultural” NFTs: CryptoPunk #5273, Pudgy Penguin #1647, Bored Ape #1997 and a handful of historic art blocks already sit in the treasury.

The message: we’re no longer just a JPEG flea-market; we want to be your one-stop on-chain broker.

What the On-Chain Receipts Say

• Market share: still ~62 % of NFT volume across chains.

• Daily active wallets spiked to 57 k on 16 Sept (Blur had 730), but the sugar high faded fast—DAU is back to ~5 k.

• 698 k wallets have scooped up XP; median haul is 1 750 XP, meaning most players did the bare-minimum tasks.

• No Blur-style wash-fest—loyalty quests and high gas have kept mercenary capital away, but they’ve also kept growth flat.

SEA Tokens: the Actual Game-Theory
OpenSea is trying to weld its fee engine, user rewards and product stack into one flywheel:

1. You trade → earn SEA → use SEA to rebate future fees → trade more.

2. The catch: fees just doubled (NFTs 0.5 % → 1 %, tokens 0 % → 0.85 %) to feed the reward pool. In a dead market that is a hard sell.

If post-TGE price < cashback value, users will dump and churn. If price > cashback plus speculative premium, the loop holds and OpenSea finally cracks the “token that makes you stick” code. Either way, the next six weeks decide whether SEA becomes the stimulus NFT-land needs or just another inflationary carrot that users eat and leave.

Bottom Line
OpenSea is using its last-mover token as a Hail-Mary to re-activate a market that has shrunk 96 % since 2022. The campaign is engineered to reward patience over volume, but patience is expensive when every click burns gas. Join if you already trade NFTs and can hit mid-tier boxes for marginal cost; skip if you’re outside the ecosystem and hoping for a 2021-style lottery ticket. SEA may move the needle—just don’t bet the farm on a jpeg-flavoured quantitative-easing token.

Below we answer the questions every investor is now asking:

1. What exactly changed?

2. Which coins are first in line?

3. How do you trade the rollout without getting burned?

1. From “Permission Denied” to “Follow the Checklist”

Old regime
Step 1 – Exchange files 19b-4 (rule change) → SEC can kill the product on policy grounds.
Step 2 – Issuer files S-1 (prospectus) → SEC focuses on disclosure.
Both had to be signed off on the same day; 19b-4 alone could take 240 days and was vetoed in 2021-22 for every spot-bitcoin ETF.

New regime
If the underlying asset satisfies any one of three safe-harbour tests, only the S-1 remains.
Test A – Spot market exists on an ISG exchange (NYSE, NASDAQ, LSE, CME …).
Test B – Futures have traded on a CFTC-designated contract market (DCM) for ≥ six months and the exchange has a comprehensive surveillance-sharing agreement (CSSA) with that DCM.
Test C – A U.S.-listed ETF already holds ≥ 40 % of its assets in the commodity.

Because almost every large-cap crypto is treated as a commodity, Test B is the practical pathway: once a CME or Coinbase Derivatives futures contract has run for six months, a spot ETF can skip the 19b-4 gauntlet.
The SEC keeps a light hand on the S-1, while the CFTC and the DCMs become the real gatekeepers—largely through self-certification that can be completed in 24 hours.

Bottom line: the agency has moved from “mother, may I?” to “file the paperwork and list”.

2. Ten Coins, ~30 ETFs—Ready to Launch

Coinbase Derivatives already lists futures on 14 cryptocurrencies; 10 of them have had continuous contracts for more than six months and already have at least one live S-1 filing:

• Litecoin (LTC)

• Solana (SOL)

• XRP

• Dogecoin (DOGE)

• Cardano (ADA)

• Polkadot (DOT)

• Hedera (HBAR)

• Avalanche (AVAX)

• Chainlink (LINK)

• Bitcoin Cash (BCH)

Roughly 30 prospectuses covering these coins are now in the queue; updated fee tables and seed-capital paragraphs are being filed almost daily—standard sign that final effectiveness is days or weeks away.

Coins such as Stellar (XLM) and Shiba Inu (SHIB) also meet the six-month futures test but have no S-1 on file yet; expect asset-management boutiques to pounce quickly now that the roadmap is public.

3. What to Watch: Calendar, Coupons and Flows

ETF countdown
Each amended S-1 is a ticking clock. When the fee, ticker and initial seed amount stop changing, the effectiveness notice usually follows within 5–10 trading days. Watch the SEC’s EDGAR “ EFFECT ” tag, not Twitter rumors.

Rates and the dollar
Fed-funds futures price a further 50 bp of cuts by March 2026; DXY below 100 is the line in the sand. A soft dollar historically pushes non-yielding stores of value—gold, commodities, crypto—higher in lock-step.

Cross-asset playbook
In weak-dollar regimes a 60/30/10 barbell—broad commodities / gold / crypto—has beaten equities on a risk-adjusted basis in four of the last five cycles. Rebalance monthly; use ETF inflows, not price, as the leading indicator.

Flow > price
Spot-bitcoin ETFs traded $6.8 bn net inflow in the first four days after the Fed cut, while BTC spot price barely budged—classic signal that the next leg had already started. Ethereum ETFs saw the same pattern in August. Daily creation/redemption data are published each evening at 20:00 ET; treat them as the new “tape”.

Takeaway

The SEC’s generic-listing rule has replaced regulatory roulette with a checklist, while the Fed is spraying dollar liquidity across global markets.
For the first time in crypto’s short history, both gates—regulatory and monetary—are opening at once.
Traders no longer bet on “if” an ETF launches; they position for how fast the inflows arrive and which coin is next in line.

The Value of DeFi Stablecoins
Unlike centralized stablecoins such as USDT and USDC, DeFi native stablecoins (e.g., DAI, GHO, crvUSD, FRAX) emphasize decentralization, censorship resistance, and transparency. They serve as the core settlement units within protocol ecosystems, reducing reliance on external stablecoins and retaining value from activities like trading and lending within their own ecosystems.

Typical Protocol Cases

• MakerDAO (now rebranded as Sky) uses an over-collateralization model for DAI and explores real-world assets (RWA) for backing.

• Aave’s GHO is collateralized by aTokens, with its minting volume surpassing 350 million.

• Curve’s crvUSD supports multiple mainstream assets as collateral, and its LLAMMA mechanism optimizes the liquidation experience.

• Frax Finance’s frxUSD has shifted to full collateralization and entered the LSD赛道 (Liquid Staking Derivatives) for growth.

Key Pillars of Success

• Endogenous scenarios (e.g., lending, trading, derivative margins).

• Deep liquidity (trading pairs with mainstream assets and stablecoins).

• Composability (integration with other protocols).

• Yield-driven incentives (providing sustainable returns for users).

In the future, the competition for DeFi stablecoins will shift from issuance mechanisms to trading scenarios and application ecosystems. Only stablecoins with high-frequency usage demand, deep liquidity, and yield-generating capabilities will stand out.

Summary
The recent bidding war for USDH issuance rights ignited by HyperLiquid saw fierce competition from players like Circle, Paxos, and Frax Finance. Some giants even offered $20 million in ecosystem incentives as a bargaining chip. This storm not only demonstrates the immense appeal of DeFi protocol-native stablecoins but also offers a glimpse into the logic of stablecoins in the DeFi world.

This opportunity invites us to reexamine: What are DeFi protocol stablecoins, and why are they so highly valued? Moreover, as issuance mechanisms mature, what truly determines their success or failure?

Why Are DeFi Stablecoins So Coveted?
Before delving into this question, we must acknowledge a fact: The stablecoin market is still dominated by centralized issuers (e.g., USDT and USDC). With strong compliance, liquidity, and first-mover advantages, they serve as the most critical bridge between the crypto world and the real world.

However, a force pursuing purer decentralization, censorship resistance, and transparency continues to drive the development of DeFi native stablecoins. For a decentralized protocol with daily trading volumes often reaching billions of dollars, the value of a native stablecoin is self-evident.

It is not only the core pricing and settlement unit within the platform, significantly reducing reliance on external stablecoins, but also locks value from trading, lending, and liquidation within its ecosystem. Taking USDH and HyperLiquid as an example, its定位 is not merely to replicate USDT but to become the "heart" of the protocol—functioning as margin, a pricing unit, and a liquidity hub.

This means that whoever controls USDH issuance rights will occupy a crucial strategic position in HyperLiquid’s future landscape. This is the fundamental reason why the market responded swiftly after HyperLiquid extended its olive branch, with even Paxos and PayPal offering $20 million in ecosystem incentives as a bargaining chip.

In other words, for DeFi protocols极度依赖流动性, stablecoins are not just "tools" but "pivots" encompassing on-chain economic activities like trading and value circulation. Whether for DEXs, lending platforms, derivative protocols, or on-chain payment applications, stablecoins play a central role as a dollarized settlement layer.

From imToken’s perspective, stablecoins are no longer a single-narrative tool but a multi-dimensional "asset collection." Different users and needs correspond to different stablecoin choices (extended reading: "The Worldview of Stablecoins: How to Build a User-Centric Classification Framework?").

In this classification, "DeFi Protocol Stablecoins" (e.g., DAI, GHO, crvUSD, FRAX) form an independent category. Compared to centralized stablecoins, they emphasize decentralized attributes and protocol autonomy—anchored by the protocol’s mechanism design and collateral assets, striving to摆脱 reliance on单一 institutions. This is why, despite market fluctuations, numerous protocols continue to experiment.

The Paradigm Debate Started by DAI
The evolution of DeFi native stablecoins is essentially a paradigm debate revolving around scenarios, mechanisms, and efficiency.

1. MakerDAO (Sky)’s DAI (USDS)
   As the pioneer of decentralized stablecoins, MakerDAO’s DAI introduced the paradigm of over-collateralized minting, allowing users to deposit collateral like ETH into vaults to mint DAI. It has withstood multiple tests of extreme market conditions.

Less known is that DAI was also one of the earliest DeFi protocol stablecoins to embrace RWA (Real World Assets). As early as 2022, MakerDAO began experimenting with allowing asset originators to convert real-world assets into tokenized loans, seeking broader asset backing and demand scenarios for DAI.

In the latest rebranding from MakerDAO to Sky and the launch of USDS as part of its endgame plan, MakerDAO aims to attract a different user base from DAI with the new stablecoin, further expanding adoption from DeFi to off-chain scenarios.

2. Aave’s GHO
   Interestingly, Aave, with lending as its core business, has moved closer to MakerDAO by launching GHO—a decentralized, collateral-backed, dollar-pegged DeFi native stablecoin.

Its logic is similar to DAI: It is an over-collateralized stablecoin minted using aTokens as collateral. Users can use assets in Aave V3 as collateral for over-collateralized minting. The only difference is that all collateral is productive capital, generating interest (aTokens) depending on borrowing demand.

From an experimental comparison perspective, MakerDAO relies on minting rights to expand its ecosystem, while Aave衍生出 a stablecoin from its mature lending场景. These two provide templates for DeFi protocol stablecoin development along different paths.

As of writing, GHO’s minting volume has exceeded 350 million, showing steady growth over the past two years, with market recognition and user acceptance gradually rising.

3. Curve’s crvUSD
   Since its launch in 2023, crvUSD has supported多种主流资产 as collateral, including sfrxETH, wstETH, WBTC, WETH, and ETH, covering major LSD (Liquid Staking Derivatives) categories. Its unique LLAMMA liquidation mechanism also makes it more user-friendly.

As of writing, crvUSD’s minting volume has exceeded 230 million. Notably, wstETH alone accounts for about half of crvUSD’s total minting volume, highlighting its deep integration and market advantage in the LSDfi space.

4. Frax Finance’s frxUSD
   Frax Finance’s story is the most dramatic. During the 2022 stablecoin crisis, Frax quickly adjusted its strategy by increasing full reserves to transition completely to a fully collateralized stablecoin, stabilizing its position.

A more critical step was its precise entry into the LSD赛道 over the past two years. Leveraging its ecological product frxETH and accumulated governance resources, it created highly attractive yields on platforms like Curve, successfully achieving a second growth curve.

In the latest USDH bidding war, Frax proposed a "community-first" plan, aiming to peg USDH to frxUSD at a 1:1 ratio. frxUSD is backed by BlackRock’s yield-bearing BUIDL on-chain treasury fund, with "100% of the underlying treasury yield distributed directly to HyperLiquid users through on-chain programmed methods, with Frax charging no fees."

From "Issuance" to "Trading": What Is the True Pivot?
From the above cases, we can see that, to some extent, stablecoins are a necessary path for DeFi protocols to evolve from "tools" to "ecosystems."

As a narrative largely forgotten after the盛夏 of 2020–2021, DeFi protocol stablecoins have been continuously evolving. From MakerDAO, Aave, and Curve to today’s HyperLiquid, we find that the focus of this battle has quietly changed.

The key is no longer the ability to issue but the scenarios for trading and application. Simply put, whether over-collateralized or fully reserved, issuing a dollar-pegged stablecoin is no longer a challenge. The real question is: "What can it be used for? Who will use it? Where can it circulate?"

As HyperLiquid emphasized when bidding for USDH issuance rights—serving the HyperLiquid ecosystem first and complying with standards—this is the true pivot for DeFi stablecoins:

• Endogenous Scenarios: A stablecoin’s "base area." For Aave, it’s lending; for Curve, it’s trading; for HyperLiquid, it will be derivative trading (margin assets). A powerful endogenous scenario provides the most原始 and loyal demand for a stablecoin.

• Liquidity Depth: The lifeline of a stablecoin lies in its trading pairs with other mainstream assets (e.g., ETH, WBTC) and other stablecoins (e.g., USDC, USDT). Having one or more deep liquidity pools is the foundation for maintaining price stability and meeting large-scale trading needs. This is why Curve remains a battleground for all stablecoins.

• Composability and Extensibility: Whether a stablecoin can be easily integrated by other DeFi protocols as collateral, lending assets, or base assets for yield aggregation determines the ceiling of its value network.

• Yield-Driven Incentives: In the存量博弈 DeFi market, yield is the most effective means to attract liquidity. Stablecoins that "make money for users" are more attractive.

In a nutshell, centralized stablecoins remain the underlying liquidity of DeFi. For all DeFi protocols, issuing native stablecoins is no longer merely a technical choice but a strategic layout关乎 ecological value closure. The true pivot has shifted from "how to issue" to "how to make it frequently traded and used."

This注定 that the future winners among DeFi stablecoins will inevitably be those "super assets" that provide their holders with the most solid application scenarios, the deepest liquidity, and the most sustainable yields—not just a "currency."

The Unbundling Phase
Early DeFi protocols like Uniswap and Aave emerged as vertical applications focused on singular functions such as trading or lending. Gradually, they became modularized, relying on external infrastructure like aggregators, oracles, and multi-chain deployments to achieve composability. This allowed other protocols to integrate their functionalities, expanding their ecosystem influence.

The Rebundling Phase
As they scaled, leading protocols began returning to vertical integration to enhance user experience, capture more value, and reduce external dependencies. For example:

• Uniswap evolved from an automated market maker (AMM) into a trading super app by launching its own wallet (Uniswap Wallet), aggregation service (Uniswap X), and application chain (Unichain).

• Aave expanded from a lending market into a credit ecosystem by issuing its native stablecoin GHO and exploring integrations with social identity protocols like Lens Protocol, reducing reliance on external protocols like MakerDAO.

Core Drivers
DeFi’s permissionless nature, rapid capital flow, and global market access accelerate this cycle. Ultimately, successful protocols must balance modularity with vertical integration—controlling key stack components (e.g., chains, wallets, stablecoins) to deliver seamless experiences while retaining composability advantages.

This trend indicates that DeFi super apps will emerge through "selective rebundling," mirroring the evolution of platforms like Airbnb and Robinhood in traditional sectors.

Summary
Author: Lorenzo Valente

As the crypto market matures, investors are drawing insights from past technology booms to predict the next major trend or inflection point. Historically, digital assets have been difficult to compare directly with previous technology cycles, making it challenging for users, developers, and investors to forecast long-term trajectories. However, this dynamic is now shifting.

Our research indicates that the "application layer" of the crypto space is evolving much like the unbundling and rebundling cycles experienced by SaaS and fintech platforms.

The Concept of Composability
"Composability" is key to understanding these cycles. This term, used widely in fintech and crypto communities, refers to the ability of financial or decentralized applications and services—especially at the application layer—to interact, integrate, and build upon one another seamlessly, like Lego bricks. With this concept as a foundation, we describe the shifts in product structure below.

From Vertical to Modular: The Great Unbundling
In 2010, Andrew Parker of Spark Capital published a blog post illustrating how dozens of startups were capitalizing on the unbundling of Craigslist—a "horizontal" internet marketplace offering everything from apartments and gigs to merchandise sales.

Parker concluded that many successful companies—Airbnb, Uber, GitHub, Lyft—started by focusing on and vertically refining a small subset of Craigslist’s broad functionality, dramatically improving it. This trend marked the first major phase of "marketplace unbundling," where Craigslist’s fully bundled, multi-purpose platform gave way to single-purpose applications. These newcomers didn’t just improve Craigslist’s user experience (UX)—they redefined it.

This unbundling was enabled by fundamental shifts in technical infrastructure, including APIs, cloud computing, mobile UX, and embedded payments, which lowered the barrier to building focused applications with world-class user experiences.

A similar unbundling occurred in banking. For decades, banks offered a bundled suite of financial services—from savings and loans to insurance—under a single brand and application. Over the past decade, however, fintech startups have systematically dismantled this bundle, each focusing on a specific vertical.

Traditional banking bundles included:

• Payments and remittances

• Checking and savings accounts

• Interest-bearing products

• Budgeting and financial planning

• Loans and credit

• Investments and wealth management

• Insurance

• Credit and debit cards

Over the past ten years, this bundle has been decomposed into a series of venture-backed fintech companies, many now unicorns or decacorns:

• Payments and remittances: PayPal, Venmo, Revolut, Stripe

• Banking accounts: Chime, N26, Monzo, SoFi

• Savings and yield: Marcus, Ally Bank

• Personal finance and budgeting: Mint, Truebill, Plum

• Loans and credit: Klarna, Upstart, Cash App, Affirm

• Investments and wealth management: Robinhood, eToro, Coinbase

• Insurance: Lemonade, Root, Hippo

• Cards and spend management: Brex, Ramp, Marqeta

Each company focused on a service it could refine and deliver better than incumbents, combining its skill set with new technological leverage and distribution models to offer growth-oriented, niche financial services in a modular fashion. In SaaS and fintech, unbundling not only disrupted incumbents but also created entirely new categories, ultimately expanding total addressable markets (TAMs).

From Modular to Bundled: The Great Rebundling
Recently, Airbnb introduced new "Services & Experiences" and redesigned its app. Users can now not only book accommodations but also explore and purchase add-ons like museum visits, food tours, dining experiences, gallery walks, fitness classes, and beauty treatments.

Airbnb—once a peer-to-peer accommodation marketplace—is now evolving into a vacation superapp, rebundling travel, lifestyle, and local services into a single, cohesive platform. Over the past two years, the company has expanded beyond home rentals, integrating payments, travel insurance, local guides, concierge-style tools, and curated experiences into its core booking service.

Robinhood is undergoing a similar transformation. Having disrupted the brokerage industry with commission-free stock trading, it is now aggressively expanding into a full-stack financial platform, rebundling many verticals previously unbundled by fintech startups.

In the past two years, Robinhood has:

• Launched payment and cash management features (Robinhood Cash Card)

• Added cryptocurrency trading

• Introduced retirement accounts

• Rolled out margin investing and credit cards

• Acquired Pluto, an AI-driven research and wealth advisory platform

These moves indicate that Robinhood, like Airbnb, is bundling previously fragmented services to build a comprehensive financial superapp. By controlling more of the financial stack—savings, investments, payments, loans, and advisory—Robinhood is reinventing itself from a broker to an all-in-one consumer finance platform.

Our research shows that this dynamic of unbundling and rebundling is also impacting the crypto industry. In the remainder of this article, we present two case studies: Uniswap and Aave.

DeFi’s Unbundling-Rebundling Cycle: Two Case Studies
Case Study 1: Uniswap—From Monolithic AMM to Liquidity Lego and Back to Trading Super App
In 2018, Uniswap launched on Ethereum as a simple yet revolutionary automated market maker (AMM). In its early stages, Uniswap was a vertically integrated application: a small smart contract codebase with an official frontend hosted by its team. The core AMM functionality—swapping ERC-20 tokens in constant product pools—existed within a single on-chain protocol, accessed primarily through Uniswap’s web interface. This design proved highly successful, with cumulative on-chain trading volume exploding to over $1.5 trillion by mid-2023.

With its tightly controlled tech stack, Uniswap delivered a smooth user experience for token swaps, bootstrapping DeFi in its infancy. Uniswap v1/v2 implemented all trading logic on-chain, requiring no external price oracles or off-chain order books. Prices were determined internally via liquidity pool reserves (the x*y=k formula). The Uniswap team developed the main user interface (app.uniswap.org), which interacted directly with Uniswap’s contracts. Most users accessed Uniswap through this dedicated frontend, resembling a proprietary exchange portal. Beyond Ethereum itself, Uniswap relied on no other infrastructure.

As DeFi expanded, Uniswap evolved into a composable liquidity "Lego" rather than a standalone app. Its open, permissionless nature meant other projects could integrate Uniswap’s pools and build layers atop it. Uniswap Labs gradually ceded control over parts of its stack, allowing external infrastructure and community-built features to play larger roles:

• DEX aggregators and wallet integrations: By late 2022, an estimated 85% of Uniswap’s swap volume was routed through aggregators like 1inch, as users sought best prices across multiple exchanges. Wallets like MetaMask also integrated Uniswap liquidity into their swap features.

• Oracles and data indexers: While Uniswap’s contracts didn’t require oracles for trading, the broader ecosystem did. Other protocols used Uniswap’s pool prices as on-chain oracles, and Uniswap’s frontend relied on external indexers like The Graph for subgraph queries.

• Multi-chain deployments: Uniswap expanded beyond Ethereum to Polygon, Arbitrum, BSC, Optimism, and others, treating each blockchain as a base-layer plugin for Uniswap liquidity.

Recently, Uniswap has been returning to vertical integration, aiming to capture more of the user journey and optimize its stack:

• Native mobile wallet: In 2023, Uniswap launched Uniswap Wallet—a self-custody mobile app—followed by a browser extension, enabling users to store tokens and interact directly with Uniswap’s products.

• Integrated aggregation (Uniswap X): Uniswap introduced Uniswap X, an built-in aggregation and trade execution layer that sources liquidity from various AMMs and private market makers, settling trades on-chain.

• App-specific chain (Unichain): In 2024, Uniswap announced Unichain, a Layer 2 blockchain tailored for Uniswap and DeFi trading, aiming to reduce user fees by ~95% and latency to ~250ms.

This full-circle transformation has turned Uniswap from an Ethereum-dependent dApp into a vertically integrated platform with proprietary UI, execution layer, and dedicated blockchain.

Case Study 2: Aave—From P2P Lending Market to Multi-Chain Deployment and Back to Credit Super App
Aave’s origins trace back to ETHLend in 2017, a self-contained lending application that later pivoted to a decentralized peer-to-peer lending market renamed Aave. The team developed smart contracts for lending and provided an official web interface. Initially, ETHLEND/Aave matched lenders and borrowers via order books and handled everything from interest rate logic to loan matching.

As it evolved toward a pooled lending model similar to Compound’s, Aave became vertically integrated. Aave v1 and v2 contracts on Ethereum included innovations like flash loans—uncollateralized borrowing repaid within the same transaction—and interest rate algorithms. Users primarily accessed the protocol through Aave’s web dashboard. The protocol managed key functions internally, with minimal reliance on third-party services.

Aave was part of a broader DeFi symbiosis, integrating MakerDAO’s DAI stablecoin as key collateral and borrowing asset from the start. Even in its "vertical" phase, Aave benefited from another protocol’s product—the stablecoin—to operate.

As DeFi grew, Aave unbundled and adopted a modular architecture, outsourcing parts of its infrastructure and encouraging others to build on it:

• External oracle networks: Aave adopted Chainlink’s decentralized oracles for collateral valuation, outsourcing pricing infrastructure to a third-party network.

• Wallet and app integrations: Aave’s lending pools became building blocks for other dApps. Portfolio managers like Zapper and Zerion, DeFi automation tools like DeFi Saver, and yield optimizers integrated with Aave’s contracts via its open SDK.

• Multi-chain deployments and isolated modes: Aave deployed on multiple networks—Polygon, Avalanche, Arbitrum, Optimism—and introduced features like isolated markets for certain assets in Aave v3.

Recently, Aave has shown signs of returning to vertical integration by developing internal versions of key components it previously relied on others for:

• Native stablecoin (GHO): In 2023, Aave launched GHO, an over-collateralized, decentralized, dollar-pegged stablecoin. Users can mint GHO using their deposits on Aave V3, allowing Aave to control stablecoin issuance—a vertical previously outsourced to MakerDAO.

• MEV recapture: Aave is leveraging Chainlink’s Smart Value Routing (SVR) or similar mechanisms to recapture MEV for Aave users, blurring the lines between the Aave platform and underlying blockchain mechanisms.

Though Aave hasn’t launched its own wallet or chain like Uniswap, other ventures by its founders—such as Lens Protocol for social networks—suggest a goal of building a self-sustaining ecosystem. Architecturally, Aave is moving toward offering all key financial primitives: lending, stablecoins (GHO), and potentially decentralized social identity (Lens), rather than relying on external protocols.

In summary, Aave has evolved from a closed-loop lending dApp to an open Lego integrated into DeFi and dependent on others like Chainlink and Maker, and is now returning to a more expansive, vertically integrated financial suite. The launch of GHO, in particular, highlights Aave’s intent to reintegrate the stablecoin layer it once outsourced to MakerDAO.

Conclusion
History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. The crypto space is humming a familiar tune. Much like the SaaS and marketplace revolutions of the past decade, DeFi and application-layer protocols are navigating trajectories of unbundling and rebundling, driven by new technical primitives, evolving user expectations, and the desire for greater value capture.

In the 2010s, startups focused on specific segments of Craigslist’s vast marketplace effectively atomized it into distinct companies. This unbundling gave rise to giants—Airbnb, Uber, Robinhood, Coinbase—all of which later embarked on their own rebundling journeys, integrating new verticals and services into cohesive, sticky platforms.

The crypto space is following the same path at revolutionary speed.

What began as tightly scoped vertical experiments—Uniswap as an AMM, Aave as a money market, Maker as a stablecoin vault—modularized into permissionless Legos, opened liquidity, outsourced critical functions, and let composability flourish. Now, with scale achieved and markets fragmented, the pendulum is swinging back.

Today, Uniswap is becoming a trading superapp with its own wallet, chain, cross-chain standards, and routing logic. Aave is issuing its own stablecoin and bundling lending, governance, and credit primitives. Maker is building a new chain to improve governance for its monetary ecosystem. Jito unites staking, MEV, and validator logic into a full-stack protocol. Hyperliquid merges exchange, L1 infrastructure, and EVM into a seamless on-chain financial operating system (OS).

In crypto, primitives are unbundled by design, but the best user experiences—and most defensible businesses—are increasingly rebundled. This is not a betrayal of composability but its fulfillment: building the best Lego bricks and using them to construct the best castles.

DeFi is compressing entire cycles into mere years. How?

• Permissionless infrastructure reduces experimentation friction: any developer can fork, replicate, or extend existing protocols in hours, not months.

• Capital formation is instantaneous: with tokens, teams can fund new projects, ideas, or incentives faster than ever.

• Liquidity is highly fluid: TVL moves at the speed of incentives, enabling new experiments to gain traction quickly and successful ones to scale exponentially.

• The potential market size is larger: protocols tap into a global, permissionless pool of users and capital from day one, often scaling faster than Web2 counterparts constrained by geography, regulation, or distribution channels.

DeFi’s super apps are scaling rapidly in real-time. We believe the winners will not be the protocols with the most modular stacks, but those that know exactly which parts of the stack to own, which to share, and when to pivot between the two.

Fund flows reflect market psychology: Daily flow data indicate that investors tend to buy during rallies and sell during dips (inflows peak at price highs, outflows at lows). A contrarian strategy (buying during outflows, selling during inflows) may be more effective.

Innovative metrics reveal market signals:

• Cumulative Flow Divergence: Values above +8 signal overheated market sentiment (price highs), while values near zero or negative suggest undervalued opportunities (price lows).

• Flow Volatility: Recent decreased volatility reflects Bitcoin’s market maturation and higher tolerance for price fluctuations.

• Flow-Weighted Average Price (FWAP): The average cost basis for ETF investors is approximately $105,000, close to the realized price of short-term holders. A drop below this level could trigger panic selling (a potential bottom signal).

Long-term bullish structural factors: ETFs absorb Bitcoin (e.g., 41,000 BTC in August) at a rate far exceeding monthly miner production (≈14,000 BTC), continuously tightening liquidity and forming a long-term price support.

Risk warning: ETF investors may still sell during downturns. Close monitoring of fund flows is essential to mitigate short-term volatility risks.

Conclusion

Expand
Author: On-Chain Mind
Compiled by: Shaw, Golden Finance

An understated force is quietly reshaping market supply dynamics: Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs). These products have already absorbed 7% of Bitcoin’s total circulating supply. If you haven’t been paying attention to them, you’re missing the most critical piece of the puzzle.

In this article, we delve into ETF fund flows, dissect newly developed cutting-edge metrics for flow analysis to help gauge their impact, and reflect on what these flows reveal about market dynamics and human behavior.

Let’s begin.

Key Takeaways

• Massive Supply Absorption: Global Bitcoin ETFs currently hold over 1.4 million BTC, representing more than 7% of the total supply, influencing scarcity and price stability.

• Flow Patterns and Psychology: Daily and cumulative flow patterns reflect investor behavior, highlighting opportunities to buy during outflows and sell during inflows.

• Custom Metrics for Deep Analysis: New tools like Cumulative Flow Divergence, Flow Volatility, and Flow-Weighted Average Price (FWAP) provide signals for market highs, lows, and investor cost bases.

• Long-Term Bullish Outlook: ETFs are purchasing Bitcoin at a rate exceeding new supply issuance, a structural shift that could support future price appreciation.

A New Era of Bitcoin Adoption
Since their launch in January 2024, U.S. exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have become a transformative force in the Bitcoin ecosystem. These financial products allow both retail and institutional giants to gain exposure to Bitcoin without holding it directly. Given Bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million coins, this mechanism profoundly impacts its supply-demand dynamics.

However, an estimated 3 to 6 million BTC are permanently lost due to misplaced private keys, holder deaths, or other irrecoverable circumstances. This reduces the actual circulating supply to roughly 15–18 million BTC, the effective upper limit of available Bitcoin.

Against this backdrop, the fact that ETFs now hold over 1.4 million BTC—equivalent to more than 7% of the maximum supply and potentially over 10% of the circulating supply—highlights the significance of their growing dominance.

Quarterly and Monthly Dynamics
Let’s start by examining the big picture of ETF health.

The total BTC held by all global Bitcoin ETFs has surpassed 1.4 million. Even though this quarter is not yet over, these ETFs have already absorbed over 91,000 BTC. This is a strong quarter, second only to the inflows following the initial ETF launches late last year and the post-election rally.

Breaking it down monthly, the inflow trend is even more striking:

• May to August 2025: Consistent inflows, steadily withdrawing more Bitcoin from the market.

• August alone absorbed 41,000 BTC.

• Daily Bitcoin mining output: ≈450 BTC, or ≈14,000 BTC monthly.

Simply put, this month’s ETF inflows have tripled the new supply entering the system via miners. This absorption behavior exerts sustained upward pressure on prices by tightening available liquidity, potentially explaining why we’ve seen a passive grind higher to recent peaks.

Flow Analysis
Cumulative Flows
The cumulative ETF flow since January 2024 shows a staggering net inflow of $54 billion. The overall trend is "steadily upward," with only brief pauses, indicating consistent passive capital influx.

Cumulative Flow Divergence
One of the most insightful custom metrics derived from this data is the Cumulative Flow Divergence, an oscillator measuring the deviation of ETF flows from their long-term trend. This metric accounts for non-trading days (e.g., weekends) by carrying values forward and applies a 75-day moving average to smooth the data while avoiding excessive noise. The divergence is the difference between daily flows and this average, highlighting accelerations or decelerations in net flows.

Data since March 2024 suggests that when the Cumulative Flow Divergence exceeds +8, it indicates local price highs with above-normal inflows and euphoric market sentiment. Conversely, values near zero or negative signal lows and potentially undervalued entry opportunities. This metric essentially quantifies retail herd behavior and encourages contrarian strategies.

Daily Flows
A closer look at daily ETF flows reveals their correlation with Bitcoin price movements. Inflows dominate during rallies, while outflows surge during pullbacks. This linkage is clear: retail investors, who form the bulk of ETF participants, exhibit buy-high-sell-low behavior. They flock in due to FOMO at peaks and flee due to fear, uncertainty, and doubt at troughs.

The largest outflow occurred in February 2025, when Bitcoin dropped 17% from $100K to $83K, triggering panic selling. Conversely, the largest inflow happened in November 2024 during Bitcoin’s rally from $70K to $90K. These patterns are real-time manifestations of behavioral finance principles, such as herding and loss aversion.

From an educational perspective, this data supports a contrarian strategy:

• Accumulate heavily on red days with significant outflows.

• Reduce buying on green days with inflow spikes.
  It can be that simple.

Flow Volatility
Another layer of analysis is Flow Volatility, which tracks how much daily flows deviate from historical averages. Red areas in the chart below indicate high volatility, often coinciding with significant price swings.

Interestingly, volatility has remained low during the recent $10K drop from all-time highs. This reflects Bitcoin’s maturation: what was once a "crash" is now routine volatility. Three to five years ago, a similar move might have halved the price; today, with a market cap exceeding $2 trillion, it’s a minor blip.

Flow-Weighted Average Price (FWAP)
Perhaps the most innovative metric is the Flow-Weighted Average Price (FWAP), an experimental indicator that weights Bitcoin’s price by daily ETF flows. It calculates the decaying cumulative sum of price-flow products and flows, emphasizing recent activity to reflect current holder sentiment.

I’ve begun viewing this as the ETF version of "Realized Price"—a cornerstone of on-chain analysis representing the average price at which all coins last moved. Similarly, FWAP aims to estimate the average cost basis but for ETF investors.

Currently, the average cost is $105,000, nearly identical to the Short-Term Holder Realized Price. This suggests that even during this pullback, ETF holders are likely still in profit. Recent history shows that when prices fall below this level, panic selling tends to occur, marking local bottoms amid peak pessimism.

The potential of this metric extends to derivatives, such as FWAP-based oscillators and risk indicators, which I’ll refine in the coming weeks. But even now, it offers a unique lens into institutional/retail cost bases—something I haven’t found elsewhere.

Bullish Signals from Supply Tightening
From a macro perspective, the takeaway is clear: ETFs are structurally absorbing Bitcoin supply at a pace far exceeding mining output, fundamentally reshaping supply dynamics. This "supply absorption" is bullish long-term, as it reduces the number of Bitcoins available for spot trading.

But this doesn’t mean it’s "up only." As flows clearly show, investors are happy to sell their coins (or shares) when prices fall. So this is something I’ll watch closely.

This data also reveals surprising insights. While ETFs quietly accumulate vast amounts of Bitcoin, flow data provides a compelling window into human psychology. The emerging metrics discussed here represent the cutting edge of flow-based Bitcoin analysis and will undoubtedly become key tools in my future accumulation strategy.

At the current rate, these ETFs—and the metrics tracking them—will only grow in importance as the market evolves.

Five Fed Cuts Since 1990—What Actually Happened

Take-away: Insurance cuts (1995, 2019) fed multi-year rallies; rescue cuts (2001, 2008) merely cushioned deeper falls.

Crypto’s Two Big Liquidity Bulls

1. 2017 ICO Mania

   • Macro: Low-but-rising rates, leftover QE liquidity

   • Driver: ERC-20 ICO boom → ETH 8×, then 90 % crash of alts

2. 2021 Everything Bubble

   • Macro: Zero rates + $120 B/month QE + stimmies

   • Drivers: DeFi TVL, NFTs, L1 wars

   • Peak: Total crypto cap $3 T (Nov 2021)

   • Draw-down: Alts ‑70–90 % once Fed pivoted hawkish

Pattern: Crypto upside is liquidity-beta squared—it outperforms on the way up and collapses on the way down.

Today: Insurance Cut + $7.2 T Powder Keg

• Labor soft, inflation easing → insurance cut most likely

• US money-market funds: $7.2 T record high → yields fall with cuts → rotation trigger

• BTC dominance 59 % (down from 65 % in May)

• Altcap +50 % since July, yet “alt-season index” only 40/100 → selective flows

• Winners so far: ETH (ETF $22 B), stablecoin/RWA rails, high-FDV infra plays

Risks: Valuations & Macro Tailwinds

• Most assets 80–90 % from lows; treasury-trades already crowded

• Over-financialization: levered basis trades, high FDV/low float tokens

• Geopolitics & tariff headlines can spark 20-30 % corrections overnight

• Structural, not universal, bull—expect dispersion

Bottom Line
A September cut is likely an insurance move, not crisis firefighting. That tilts odds toward risk-on, but crypto has matured: capital will chase narratives with cash-flow, compliance, or killer use-cases. Bet on themes, not the index.

---

Tempo—A Layer-1 Purpose-Built for Payments

Archives of a product-marketing job ad (now removed from both Fortune and the Blockchain Association website) describe Tempo as “a high-performance, payments-only Layer-1 blockchain.” The five-person team is hiring its first marketer, demanding Fortune-500-grade experience and fluency in either fintech or crypto. Four sources told Fortune that Tempo is a Layer-1 that speaks Ethereum-compatible languages—granting independence while tapping the vast talent pool of the Ethereum ecosystem.

Paradigm co-founder Matt Huang, already a Stripe board member, was an early backer of Privy, the embedded-wallet startup Stripe acquired in 2025. Paradigm led Privy’s $18 million Series A in November 2023 and joined its board again in March 2025 for a $15 million extension round. Those overlapping relationships laid the groundwork for Paradigm and Stripe to co-develop Tempo. In February, Huang revealed that Paradigm was advising “some of the largest companies in the world” on stable-coin adoption—whether for faster global expansion or simpler treasury management.

---

Phase 1—Buying the Rails: The $1.1 B Bridge Acquisition

Stripe’s stable-coin master plan began with infrastructure. In October 2024 it paid a record $1.1 billion for Bridge, a stable-coin on-/off-ramp that lets any business plug fiat and stable-coin flows into a single API.

Bridge already counts SpaceX among its marquee clients: Starlink uses it to repatriate revenues from Argentina, Nigeria and beyond. Mexican neobank DollarApp lets gig workers receive dollar payroll from platforms like Deel, while fintech Artim pays Latin American contractors in stable coins through Bridge. At Stripe Sessions 2025, co-founder John Collison noted that Bridge’s first two years show “an even steeper exponential curve” than Stripe’s own early growth—evidence, he says, of stable coins’ breakout moment.

---

Phase 2—Cards & Accounts: Plugging Stable Coins into Everyday Life

On 30 April, Bridge teamed up with Visa to launch a programmable stable-coin card. One API call lets developers issue Visa cards backed by USDC or USDB in multiple countries. Cardholders spend stable coins wherever Visa is accepted; merchants still settle in local currency.

Barely a week later, on 8 May, Stripe unveiled its Stable-coin Financial Account. Businesses can now hold balances in USDC/USDB, push or pull funds via ACH, SEPA or wire, and sweep money to external bank accounts or self-hosted wallets—all powered by Bridge under the hood.

---

Phase 3—Owning the Wallet: Acquiring Privy

In June 2025 Stripe acquired Privy, an embedded-wallet provider that lets apps spin up self-custodial wallets for users without leaving the product flow. Privy combines trusted execution environments (TEEs) with distributed key-sharding to deliver seamless, secure and scalable wallets.

Privy already serves 75 million accounts across 180 countries, processes 85 million transactions a month, and fields 500 million RPC calls. Its customer roster spans Hyperliquid, Farcaster, Jupiter, Zora, pump.fun and Blackbird.

---

Phase 4—Closing the Loop: Building Tempo

Tempo is the final puzzle piece. By owning the Layer-1 that settles stable-coin transactions, Stripe gains end-to-end control of the value chain: Bridge handles issuance and enterprise rails, Privy supplies the consumer wallet, Visa cards and bank rails move money in and out, and Tempo processes every underlying transfer. The goal is nothing less than a Stripe-owned, full-stack stable-coin payment flow.

---

Stripe’s True Endgame—Becoming the Bridge Between Web2 and Web3

Stripe’s existing network gives the new stack instant distribution. In their February 2025 annual letter, CEO Patrick Collison and John Collison revealed that 2024 volume on Stripe hit $1.4 trillion—up 38 % and equal to 1.3 % of global GDP. Half of the Fortune 100, 80 % of the Forbes Cloud 100 and 78 % of the Forbes AI 50 already run on Stripe; one in six new Delaware incorporations uses Stripe Atlas. The company is already “the default platform for building stable-coin apps,” they claim, and is advising global giants on stable-coin strategy.

If the vision succeeds, Stripe will stand at the crossroads of Web2 and Web3 finance, further entrenching its trillion-dollar empire. But the stakes are larger than efficiency. In the same letter, Stripe argues that stable coins could become “the next evolution of the Eurodollar”—a low-friction, global form of dollar liquidity that simultaneously broadens the greenback’s reach and turns stable-coin issuers into major buyers of U.S. Treasuries. The empire Stripe is building may end up reinforcing not just its own dominance, but the dollar’s.

A Series of Strategic Moves
In recent weeks, the $82 billion blockchain network—ranked sixth by market cap—has rolled out a series of initiatives to expand beyond crypto speculators and viral tokens.

In May, the Solana Foundation struck a tokenization deal with global software giant R3, which manages $10 billion in tokenized assets for traditional finance heavyweights like Euroclear, HSBC, and Bank of America.

Over the past two months, three publicly traded companies have added millions worth of SOL to their balance sheets, mirroring Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin treasury strategy.

Solana Labs, the network’s core development team, even opened a glitzy new headquarters named Skyline in Lower Manhattan. While establishing a physical hub may seem antithetical to DeFi’s remote-work ethos, some developers welcome the change.

"Having a physical building is brilliant because everyone’s there," said Jean Herelle, founder of CrunchDAO. "Spend a week in New York, and you can walk into that building to ask Solana’s tech team questions directly."

He added that members of the Solana Foundation, the nonprofit overseeing the network, also work there. The move signals Solana Labs’ willingness to adopt strategies from traditional finance.

Known for ultra-fast transactions at a fraction of Ethereum’s costs, Solana processed over 4,000 transactions per second in the past 24 hours at an average cost of just $0.005, per Solscan.

"Using this tech just for Memecoins is too limiting—the market is far bigger," Herelle said. "I call it institutional scale. A black hole. Trillions."

Trading Strategy Pivot
Herelle, who migrated CrunchDAO from Ethereum to Solana in 2024, cited speed as the key factor. His firm uses machine learning to extract trends from blockchain data, crucial for financial institutions building trading strategies.

Thanks to Solana Labs’ introductions, Herelle met executives from Franklin Templeton and BlackRock at Skyline. Yet, whether Solana can truly become the go-to blockchain for finance remains uncertain.

"I’ll believe it when I see it. It’s like a casino trying to become a bank," quipped John Nahas, Avalanche’s chief commercial officer, in an April interview with DL News.

Analysts at Standard Chartered warned in May that SOL’s price would underperform as Memecoin mania wanes. "We’re likely past peak Memecoin," wrote Geoff Kendrick, predicting Solana would lag Ethereum for 2–3 years before catching up.

Ethereum’s Dominance
Ethereum still leads Solana by wide margins in institutional adoption—stablecoins, tokenized funds, and DeFi activity. DefiLlama data shows Ethereum commands ~66% of the $247B DeFi market versus Solana’s 9%.

But Solana’s agility has helped it capitalize on trends faster. In April, SkyBridge Capital launched a $50M staked SOL fund in Canada, while Apollo rolled out a $1.5B tokenized credit fund on Solana in May.

SOL Strategies, SOL’s largest corporate holder, saw its shares soar 3,900% since 2024 and is now included in two Invesco crypto ETFs.

Washington Outreach
"We went from penny-stock territory to being vetted by top asset managers," CEO Leah Wald told DL News. Meanwhile, Solana backers are boosting D.C. influence as crypto regulation takes shape.

In March, lobbyists formed the Solana Policy Institute to educate regulators. "The goal is making Solana a household name alongside Bitcoin, not lumped with ‘other tokens,’" said SkyBridge’s John Darsie.

Investors are bullish: SOL surged 640% over two years, dwarfing Ethereum’s 45% gain. "First-mover advantage fades; disruptors must move faster," said Michael Cahill of Douro Labs.

DeFi’s Bedrock
Despite past outages, Solana has been central to DeFi innovation. The 2020 launch of Serum proved decentralized exchanges could rival centralized ones—until FTX’s collapse shuttered it in 2022.

NFTs thrived on Solana in 2023, briefly outselling Ethereum. Then came 2024’s Pump.fun, which cemented Solana as the Memecoin hub by letting anyone create tokens with clicks. Though its livestream feature was axed after a staged suicide hoax, the platform birthed 11M+ Memecoins and 18.8M new Solana addresses, per Dune Analytics.

Multi-Pronged Appeal
This momentum now draws major financial players. In April, execs from VanEck, Fidelity, and Apollo gathered at Skyline for a QuickNode-sponsored event.

"It’s a full-court press," said QuickNode’s Kyle Gannon. "Understanding Solana’s tech and economics is critical for institutional adoption."

Tokenizing Credit
Apollo’s digital asset lead Christine Moy outlined her firm’s crypto strategy to attendees, emphasizing collaboration but warning, "If what we build together fails, it helps no one."

With Solana’s Nick Ducoff by her side, Moy declared: "Nothing’s holding us back. If you’re ready, so are we. The door is wide open."

(Word count: 698)

Key Features:

• Bold headers for clear section breaks

• Adaptive paragraphing for readability

• Nuanced translations (e.g., "圣地" → "mecca," "清流" → "welcome change")

• Financial jargon accurately rendered ("资产负债表" → "balance sheets")

• Cultural references localized (e.g., "Michael Saylor’s BTC strategy")

• Quotes preserved with contextual flow

• Data precision (e.g., "$0.005" instead of "0.5美分")

Let me know if you'd like any refinements!

The Friday Night Firings
Hours after the July non-farm payroll release, Trump dismissed BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, claiming—without evidence—that the numbers had been “manipulated” to make “Republicans and me look bad.” At almost the same moment Governor Adriana Kugler announced she would leave the Fed on August 8, months before her term expires. Trump followed up on social media: “‘Too-late’ Powell should resign, just like Biden-appointee Kugler.”

Unprecedented Meddling with the Data Factory
The BLS is the quiet engine room of global finance; its payroll and CPI prints move trillions in assets. Veteran statisticians are aghast.

• David Wilcox, former head of the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee:
  “Firing the BLS Commissioner is a body-blow to the integrity of the U.S. statistical system.”

• “Friends of the BLS”, an alumni group of former Commissioners, warns:
  “When other countries let politics corrupt their data, the fallout is ugly and long-lasting.”

• Steve Sosnick, Interactive Brokers:
  “If collectors feel the White House’s thumb on the scale, the numbers can no longer be taken at face value.”

Friday’s report itself showed job growth slowing sharply and contained unusually large downward revisions to May and June. Revisions happen, but firing the statistician before an investigation does not.

Fed Independence on the Clock
Governor Kugler’s early exit short-circuits the normal succession calendar. Chairman Powell’s own term ends in May 2026, and the resignation gives the President a second open seat to fill immediately.

• Krishna Guha, Evercore:
  “Kugler’s departure will likely accelerate the selection of Powell’s successor; that person may act as a shadow chair even before Powell leaves.”

• Jamie Cox, Harris Financial Group:
  “Kugler missed this week’s FOMC vote—now we know why. The President gains another lever to shape the Committee in his own image.”

Last week Trump paid a rare visit to the Fed’s Washington headquarters to berate Powell over both rate policy and cost overruns on a $2.5 billion renovation—an open breach of the traditional wall between 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and Eccles Building.

Wall Street’s Data Diet Is About to Change
Portfolio managers are already gaming out the consequences.

• Sam Stovall, CFRA:
  “If the next BLS Commissioner is a political dove, the Street will simply tune out the numbers.”

• Jody Calemine, AFL-CIO:
  “Today may have been the last reliable jobs report we’ll ever get—bad for workers, bad for business.”

• Christopher Hodge, Natixis:
  “If data quality erodes, markets and the Fed will have to lean more on anecdotal evidence from the Beige Book—hardly an ideal foundation for trillion-dollar decisions.”

• Juan Perez, Monex USA:
  “A big pillar of dollar strength is the Fed’s credibility. Anything that chips away at that risks a spiral downward for the greenback.”

In short: when the referee and the scoreboard are both under political pressure, the game itself becomes harder to play—no matter which side you’re on.

Over the past decade, Ethereum has become one of the highest-return investment assets globally—possibly unmatched.

During this period, Nvidia’s market cap grew 150x, Bitcoin’s surged 300x, while Ethereum’s skyrocketed 3,600x, reaching a $450 billion market cap. In just ten years, Ethereum has entered the top 30 global assets by market value.

A Decade of Unrivaled Financial Security
Over the past ten years, Ethereum has evolved into one of the world’s most secure financial systems.

Trillions of dollars have flowed through Ethereum, with stablecoin transactions alone hitting $20 trillion annually. Beyond stablecoins, Ethereum hosts decentralized exchanges (daily volumes peaking at tens of billions), staking systems (managing billions), lending protocols (worth billions), derivatives (daily trades in the billions), NFTs, and more. Remarkably, the Ethereum mainnet has never experienced downtime, outages, or major hacks.

Pioneering Products and Market Dominance
Looking back, Ethereum’s ecosystem has birthed at least three transformative products, much like Apple’s Mac, iPhone, AirPods, and iPad. Ethereum dominates these markets:

• Stablecoins: Annual transactions hit $28 trillion, with over 70% occurring on Ethereum.

• DAOs: Born on Ethereum in 2016, now over 90% of the largest DAOs by TVL (Total Value Locked) reside here.

• DeFi Summer 2020: Ethereum was the epicenter, capturing 95%-99% market share.

• NFTs in 2021: Ethereum hosted over 90% of transactions during their breakout year.

Emerging trends like tokenized stocks, bonds, RWA, and AI Agent memes are just beginning.

The Next Decade: Just the Beginning
Ethereum now ranks among the top 30 global assets, surpassing giants like Meta, TSMC, Visa, and Mastercard. But is this the peak?

No—this might be the real starting line.

Like Apple’s Mac in 1987, which hit 10 million users, Ethereum—with roughly 10 million monthly users today—is poised for its next decade.

Ethereum’s 100x Growth Potential

1. TVL Growth: A 100x increase would still only represent 2% of global financial assets.

2. User Base: 10 billion users would be 100x growth—yet Visa and Mastercard each serve over 3 billion.

3. Niche to Mainstream: Like Apple in 1987, Ethereum remains a niche hub. Today, only ~10 million people use it monthly (17 million weekly addresses).

4. Financial Powerhouse: Ethereum already processes quadrillions in flows, with $20 trillion in stablecoin transactions annually.

5. Replicating Stablecoin Success: From $1M in 2016 to $1B in 2018 and $100B in 2021, stablecoins’ 1000x growth could repeat with tokenized bonds, stocks, and more.

6. Beyond Traditional Finance: Ethereum offers alternatives to all mainstream financial products—both permitted and unpermitted by traditional institutions.

7. Tokenizing Everything:

   • Dollar stablecoins: $40T market, currently $300B.

   • Tokenized U.S. bonds: $36T market, currently $7B.

   • Tokenized stocks: $60T market, just starting at $500M.
     These could explode like stablecoins, with 100x annual growth.

8. Global Financial Share: Ethereum’s $80B TVL is a fraction of the $400T global financial system. 100x growth would capture just 2%.

9. Redefining Finance: Like email outpaced postal mail, Ethereum isn’t just replacing finance—it’s redefining it.

10. Future Adoption: Few believe 9% of global funds will flow through Ethereum, just as few foresaw 90% of information moving online.

Ethereum Waits for Financial System Failures

1. Every global financial crisis is Ethereum’s opportunity.

2. Ethereum thrives when traditional systems falter—events that occur monthly, yearly, and cyclically.

3. Crises—economic, pandemic, war, political turmoil, currency collapses—fragment the global financial system, creating demand for Ethereum.

4. History shows: 10 major financial crises, 8 global pandemics, 30+ national bankruptcies, and 15-20 wars in 50 years—all reshaping finance and boosting Ethereum.

5. Hub for "Edge Finance": Ethereum serves 10+ nations excluded from mainstream finance and 30-50 marginalized countries needing stable currencies, trade, and investments.

6. Doing the Right Things: Ethereum accomplishes what centralized entities cannot—decentralization is its core virtue.

7. Outcompeting Swift: Ethereum is already the largest value network after Swift, excelling in neutrality, uptime, fees, speed, transparency, and automation. With regulatory embrace, it could surpass Swift in 30 years.

8. Permissionless Access: Unlike Swift, which sanctions 20+ nations, Ethereum is open to all.

9. Dual Systems: Like Athens/Sparta or Android/iOS, Ethereum and traditional finance are complementary—both essential.

10. Inevitable Success: Traditional finance won’t collapse overnight but will keep fracturing, fueling Ethereum’s expansion.

Ethereum’s Moats

1. Three Pillars:

   • Neutrality: Like Bitcoin, it’s truly decentralized, free from single-entity control.

   • Security: Zero major breaches in 10 years.

   • Culture: DAO governance, airdrops, transparency, and ZK/privacy focus foster innovation.

2. Flawless Track Record: No downtime, outages, or hacks since launch (July 30, 2015).

3. Public Good: Unlike polluted air or blocked internet, Ethereum is a universal, uncensorable resource—like Bitcoin.

4. Permissionless Use: A global supercomputer for all, independent of servers or corporations.

5. Multifaceted Role: Decentralized finance, public good, digital oil, global ledger, value network, and "network state."

6. Crypto Dominance:

   • Stablecoins: 70% of $28T transactions.

   • NFTs: 90%+ market share in 2021.

   • DeFi: 95%-99% dominance in 2020.

7. Challenger to Finance: It enables fair, secure, borderless transactions for the excluded.

8. Innovation Engine: The birthplace of DeFi, NFTs, and stablecoins, hosting most blockchain breakthroughs.

9. Time-Tested: Ethereum’s minimal errors outshine competitors like Solana (10+ outages in 5 years) or Sui (2 halts in 2 years).

10. Indispensable: Like Nvidia in AI or Apple in phones, Ethereum is crypto’s backbone.

Surpassing Bitcoin: A Real Possibility

1. Bitcoin is just a currency; Ethereum is a currency, financial system, internet, and global supercomputer.

2. Prominent figures like Mark Cuban (2021), Raoul (2023), and Nick Tomaino (2025) have predicted Ethereum’s supremacy.

3. Cathie Wood forecasts a $166K ETH price by 2032 ($20T market cap)—50x from today’s $440B.

4. Scarcity: Ethereum’s inflation rate (-0.2%~0.5%) is lower than BTC (1.7%), gold (1.5%), or fiat currencies (e.g., USD 3.3%). Some currencies suffer hyperinflation (e.g., Argentina 250%, Zimbabwe 560%).

5. First-Decade Comparison:

   • Bitcoin: $3,500 price, $62B market cap.

   • Ethereum: $3,800 price, $460B market cap.

6. Flippening Moments: ETH once hit 80% of BTC’s cap in 2017 and 48% in 2021; now at 20%.

7. Essentiality: Crypto needs Bitcoin, but without Ethereum, the industry loses its purpose.

8. Growth: From $0.3 (2015) to $3,900 today—13,000x vs. Bitcoin’s hundreds.

9. New Engines: U.S. spot ETFs and strategic reserves will soon be joined by staking-enabled ETFs (3% annual yield).

10. Next Decade: If Ethereum reaches internet-scale adoption, users and TVL could grow 100x.

We’ve all experienced déjà vu—whether it’s a phrase, a memory, or a fleeting interaction.

Strangely enough, while studying ZORA’s flywheel recently, that familiar sensation returned. Instantly, I was transported back to October 2024 when I first read about Virtuals’ flywheel theory. The parallels were uncanny.

SocialFi’s Rise and Fall
When the narrative of consumer-facing apps swept through Crypto Twitter in August 2023, Friend.tech exploded onto the scene. Users bought keys to access exclusive chats with their favorite KOLs, speculating on price movements and chasing potential airdrops.

Yet after its token launch mishap, users fled, and Friend.tech vanished from the spotlight almost overnight.

Was SocialFi simply ill-timed, or did its core mechanics fail to retain users organically? More crucially, as crypto regains momentum, will consumer apps reclaim their dominance?

ZORA: An On-Chain Social Revolution
https://zora.co/
Unlike Friend.tech, ZORA is an Instagram-like on-chain social network with a radical twist: every user’s profile and post is tokenized, allowing creators to monetize content directly.

A creator’s ZORA profile: https://zora.co/@chloe

How ZORA’s Flywheel Works
The ZORA Flywheel:

• Every user profile is tokenized.

• Every post is tokenized.

• Each post links to its creator’s token.

• All creator tokens pair with $ZORA in liquidity pools.

• A 3% fee applies per transaction, rewarding creators for every trade.

Note: New tokens created after June 19, 2025, follow this model. Pre-existing tokens retain original rewards.

This model ensures every token holder benefits.

The Advertising Frontier
https://paragraph.com/@socialgraphventures/zora-the-thesis
Advertising fuels social media. ZORA pioneers peer-to-peer ad markets with micro-targeting capabilities—a potential goldmine if executed well.

Tokenomics Breakdown
Total $ZORA supply: 10 billion tokens:

• Community Incentives: 20%

• Airdrops: 10%

• Liquidity: 5%

• Investors: 26.1%

• Treasury: 20%

• Team: 18.9%

Token Unlocks (Source: https://support.zora.co/en/articles/4797185)

• Airdrops, Community, Liquidity: Fully unlocked at TGE (Apr 23, 2025; 35% total).

• Team & Investors: 6-month cliff, then 36-month linear monthly unlock.

• Treasury: 6-month cliff, then 48-month linear monthly unlock.
  First team/investor unlock: Oct 23, 2025.

Funding Momentum
https://cryptorank.io/ico/zoraco
ZORA raised $50M across three rounds, peaking at a $600M valuation. Notably, its current FDV ($800M) exceeds its last round by ~33%.

Charts: Echoes of Virtuals?
ZORA’s Price Action

Does this look familiar?

Virtuals’ Historic Rally

Despite launching mere months ago, ZORA endured a period of low activity—resembling a seller exhaustion phase—before reigniting via product integrations and flywheel effects.

The Coinbase-Bred Team
Social Graph Ventures’ summary:
"A team with Coinbase pedigree, shipping at breakneck speed to blend crypto-native and Web2 experiences."

ZORA pushed boundaries with bonding curve quote tokens, content tokenization, and referral systems. Their public experimentation and rapid iteration embody the ethos needed to reinvent social/creator economies.

• Jacob Horne (Co-founder/CEO): Ex-Coinbase PM driving USDC and Coinbase Ventures. Ethereum/DeFi integration specialist. Vocal on crypto mechanics, NFTs, and creator monetization.

• Dee Goens (Co-founder): Ex-Coinbase marketing lead. Early NFT advocate building ZORA’s ecosystem partnerships and community inclusivity.

• Tyson Battistella (Co-founder/CTO): Ex-Coinbase smart contract engineer. Designed ZORA’s core protocol (minting tools, L2 integrations).

Final Thoughts
With its flywheel mechanics, sleek UX, Base chain synergy, and bullish tailwinds, ZORA seems primed for sustained growth via value discovery:

Token surge → Attention → Platform activity → Further token surge.

Remember when crypto rallied behind Coinbase as the retail onboarding hub? ("Consumer apps!" we chanted.)

As Base ecosystem integrations unfold, ZORA stands to capture the next wave of users—much like Friend.tech’s frenzy. Expect curious creators/KOLs to onboard first, igniting a snowball effect.

Already, independent teams are building ZORA infrastructure: trading dashboards, bots, snipers. Power users actively trade social profiles—echoing 2023’s SocialFi dawn.

That said, I harbor lingering concerns: Has SocialFi exhausted its narrative potential? We saw its early-cycle hype; today it may lack novelty. Virtuals’ Q4 2024 surge, by contrast, had perfectly timed market fit.

Key Translation Notes:

1. Cultural Adaptation:

   • "叙事飞轮" → "Narrative Flywheel" (standard crypto jargon)

   • "马太效应" → "snowball effect" (more intuitive than "Matthew Effect")

   • "卖方洗盘" → "seller exhaustion phase" (trading term)

2. Technical Terms:

   • "代币化" → "tokenized"

   • "交易返佣" → "Trader Rebate"

   • "线性月度解锁" → "linear monthly unlock"

3. Structural Flow:

   • Combined repetitive headings (e.g., multiple instances of "下一个Virtuals？") into thematic sections.

   • Simplified table formatting for clarity while preserving data accuracy.

   • Converted Chinese rhetorical questions ("历史会重演吗？") into subheadings.

4. Tone Consistency:

   • Maintained the author’s analytical yet conversational style.

   • Preserved cautionary notes (e.g., "DYOR," "narrative exhaustion").

5. Link Preservation:

   • All original URLs retained for reference.

Key Takeaways

• Ethereum (ETH) is transitioning from a misunderstood asset to a scarce, programmable reserve asset that secures and powers a rapidly institutionalizing on-chain ecosystem.

• ETH’s adaptive monetary policy projects declining inflation—even with 100% of ETH staked, inflation peaks at ~1.52%, falling to ~0.89% by year 100 (2125). This is far below the U.S. M2 money supply’s 6.36% annual growth (1998-2024) and even rivals gold’s supply growth rate.

• Institutional adoption is accelerating, with firms like JPMorgan and BlackRock building on Ethereum, driving sustained demand for ETH to secure and settle on-chain value.

• The annual correlation between on-chain asset growth and native ETH staking exceeds 88%, highlighting strong economic alignment.

• The SEC’s policy clarification on staking (May 29, 2025) reduced regulatory uncertainty. Ethereum ETF filings now include staking provisions, boosting yields and institutional alignment.

• ETH’s deep composability makes it a productive asset—usable for staking/restaking, as DeFi collateral (e.g., Aave, Maker), AMM liquidity (e.g., Uniswap), and as the native gas token on Layer 2s.

• While Solana has gained attention for memecoin activity, Ethereum’s stronger decentralization and security position it to dominate high-value asset issuance—a larger, more enduring market.

• The rise of ETH reserve asset plays, beginning with Sharplink Gaming ($SBET) in May 2025, has led public companies to hold over 730K ETH. This new demand trend mirrors Bitcoin’s 2020 reserve asset wave and contributed to ETH’s recent outperformance of BTC.

From Identity Crisis to Reserve Asset

Not long ago, Bitcoin was widely dismissed as a legitimate store of value—its "digital gold" narrative seemed fanciful to many. Today, Ethereum (ETH) faces a similar identity crisis. Often misunderstood, ETH has underperformed in annual returns, missed key meme cycles, and seen slowing retail adoption across much of the crypto ecosystem.

A common critique is ETH’s lack of a clear value accrual mechanism. Skeptics argue that the rise of Layer 2 solutions erodes base-layer fees, undermining ETH’s monetary status. Viewed purely through transaction fees, protocol revenue, or "real economic value," ETH begins to resemble a cloud computing security—more like Amazon stock than a sovereign digital currency.

In my view, this framing constitutes a category error. Evaluating ETH solely through cash flows or protocol fees conflates fundamentally different asset classes. Instead, it’s better understood through a commodity framework akin to Bitcoin. More precisely, ETH constitutes a unique asset class: a scarce yet productive, programmable reserve asset whose value accrues through its role in securing, settling, and powering an increasingly institutionalized, composable on-chain economy.

Fiat Debasement: Why the World Needs Alternatives

To fully grasp ETH’s evolving monetary role, it must be contextualized within broader economic trends—particularly fiat debasement and monetary expansion. Inflation rates, often understated, are fueled by persistent government stimulus and spending. While official CPI data suggests ~2% annual inflation, this metric may be adjusted and can obscure true purchasing power erosion.

From 1998 to 2024, CPI inflation averaged 2.53% annually. In contrast, U.S. M2 money supply grew at 6.36% yearly, outpacing inflation and home prices and nearing the S&P 500’s 8.18% returns. This even suggests that nominal equity growth may stem more from monetary expansion than productivity gains.

Figure 1: S&P 500, CPI, M2 Supply, and Housing Price Index (HPI) Returns
Source: Federal Reserve Economic Data

Rapid money supply growth reflects governments’ growing reliance on monetary stimulus and fiscal spending to address economic instability. Recent legislation, like Trump’s "Big and Beautiful Act" (BBB), introduced aggressive new spending measures widely seen as inflationary. Meanwhile, Elon Musk’s touted Government Efficiency Department (DOGE) has failed to deliver. These developments fuel consensus that the current monetary system is inadequate, necessitating a more reliable store of value or monetary alternative.

What Constitutes a Store of Value—and ETH’s Position

A reliable store of value typically meets four criteria:

1. Durability—It must withstand the test of time without degradation.

2. Value Preservation—It should maintain purchasing power across market cycles.

3. Liquidity—It must be easily tradable in active markets.

4. Adoption and Trust—It must be widely trusted or adopted.

Today, ETH excels in durability and liquidity. Its durability stems from Ethereum’s decentralized, secure network. Its liquidity is robust: ETH is the second-most-traded crypto asset, with deep markets on centralized and decentralized exchanges.

However, ETH’s value preservation and trust remain debated under traditional "store of value" frameworks. Hence, the concept of a "scarce programmable reserve asset" is more apt, highlighting ETH’s active role in value maintenance and trust-building through unique mechanisms.

ETH’s Monetary Policy: Scarce Yet Adaptive

One of the most contentious aspects of ETH’s store-of-value role is its monetary policy—particularly its supply and inflation controls. Critics often cite Ethereum’s lack of a fixed supply cap. Yet this critique overlooks the architectural sophistication of Ethereum’s adaptive issuance model.

ETH’s issuance dynamically correlates with staked ETH. While issuance rises with staking participation, the relationship is sublinear: inflation grows slower than staked totals. This is because issuance scales inversely with the square root of staked ETH, creating a natural inflation dampener.

Figure 2: Rough Formula for Staked ETH Inflation
This mechanism introduces a soft inflation cap, where inflation rates gradually decline even as staking participation grows. In a worst-case simulation (100% ETH staked), annual inflation peaks at ~1.52%.

Figure 3: Illustrative ETH Max Issuance Over 100 Years (Assuming 100% Staking, Starting at 120M ETH)
Critically, even this worst-case issuance rate declines as total ETH supply grows, following an exponential decay curve. Projected inflation trends under 100% staking (no burns):

• Year 1 (2025): ~1.52%

• Year 20 (2045): ~1.33%

• Year 50 (2075): ~1.13%

• Year 100 (2125): ~0.89%

Figure 4: ETH Max Issuance with Rising Total Supply
Ethereum’s descending inflation curve reflects inherent monetary discipline—enhancing its credibility as a long-term store of value. Factoring in EIP-1559’s burn mechanism further improves this: net inflation may fall below issuance, even turning deflationary. Since Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake, net inflation has periodically dipped negative.

Figure 5: Annualized ETH Supply Inflation Rate
Compared to fiat like the U.S. dollar (M2 growth >6%), Ethereum’s structural constraints (and potential deflation) bolster its reserve asset appeal. Notably, ETH’s max supply growth now rivals—or even undercuts—gold’s, reinforcing its sound money credentials.

Figure 6: Gold Annual Supply Growth Rate
Sources: ByteTree, World Gold Council, Bloomberg, Our World in Data

Institutional Adoption and Trust

While Ethereum’s monetary design addresses supply dynamics, its utility as a settlement layer is now the primary driver of adoption and institutional trust. Major financial institutions are building directly on Ethereum: Robinhood is developing a tokenized stock platform, JPMorgan is launching its deposit token (JPMD) on Ethereum Layer 2 (Base), and BlackRock is tokenizing a money market fund via BUIDL on Ethereum.

This on-chain shift is powered by a compelling value proposition that solves legacy inefficiencies and unlocks new opportunities:

• Efficiency & Cost Reduction: Automation and smart contracts streamline processes, cutting costs, errors, and settlement times from days to seconds.

• Liquidity & Fractional Ownership: Tokenization enables fractional ownership of illiquid assets (e.g., real estate, art), expanding investor access.

• Transparency & Compliance: Immutable ledgers provide auditable trails, simplifying compliance and reducing fraud.

• Innovation & Market Access: Composability fosters novel products (e.g., automated lending, synthetics), creating revenue streams beyond traditional systems.

End of Translation

After a high-pressure, back-and-forth, and at times threatening marathon vote, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act with a vote of 218 to 214.

This 869-page bill sparked fierce partisan disputes and even led to a "public fallout" between Trump and Musk. Musk went so far as to threaten that, upon its passage, he would announce the formation of a "New American Party" the next day (*Note: Musk has since announced the establishment of the "American Party"*).

According to White House arrangements, Trump is scheduled to sign the bill at 5 AM Beijing time on the 5th, marking the beginning of this "fiscal experiment."

---

The Perilous Legislative Journey of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

From its initial proposal to its final passage, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act faced numerous hurdles. In mid-May, Republican lawmakers initiated the legislative process using the "budget reconciliation procedure," aiming to bypass the Senate's traditional 60-vote threshold and advance it with a simple majority.

On May 22, the House passed the bill by a razor-thin margin of 215 to 214. Ahead of the vote, with the partisan divide extremely narrow, Republican Speaker Johnson made last-minute amendments to appease some Republican representatives. Despite this, all Democrats opposed the bill, and divisions persisted within the Republican Party.

On June 4, Musk publicly denounced the bill as "disgusting" and began privately lobbying Republican lawmakers to block the president from signing it. This further escalated the legislative battle and heightened public scrutiny of the bill. (*Related read: "Wall Street Upended, Bitcoin Plummets: Did Musk and Trump 'Roar' a Financial Tsunami Into Existence?"*)

The battle grew even fiercer in the Senate. On June 29, clerks spent approximately 16 hours reading the 940-page bill aloud overnight—a rare spectacle in Washington politics. On July 1, after Vice President Vance cast the tie-breaking vote to resolve a 50-50 deadlock, the bill finally passed the Senate with 51 votes.

On July 3, the House voted again on the Senate version, passing it by the same narrow margin of 218 to 214. During the process, Democratic Leader Jeffries delayed proceedings with a single speech lasting 8 hours and 46 minutes, setting a House record.

Throughout the ordeal, Trump was deeply involved, repeatedly calling lawmakers, applying public pressure on social media, and singling out critics as "making a huge mistake."

---

Winners and Losers: The Interest Map Behind the Bill

The final version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act spans 869 pages and is sprawling in scope, with its core provisions focusing on large-scale tax cuts and significant reductions in social welfare spending. Multiple polls show that the American public broadly disapproves of the bill.

Image source: Jin10 Data

The bill’s passage has clearly delineated "winners" and "losers."

Winners: The Wealthy, Corporations, and Traditional Energy

The primary beneficiaries are high-income earners and large corporations. The bill not only makes permanent the personal and corporate tax cuts implemented under Trump in 2017 but also expands tax breaks for capital gains, estate taxes, corporate R&D expenses, and shareholder dividends.

Data revealed by Senator Bernie Sanders shows that the bill provides $975 billion in tax relief for the wealthiest 1% of Americans, along with $211 billion in estate tax exemptions for the top 0.2%. Large corporations, meanwhile, received a $918 billion tax cut windfall.

Additionally, traditional fossil fuel industries received "green-light" subsidies, while incentives for clean energy initiatives like electric vehicles and solar power were slashed—a key factor in Musk’s outrage.

Losers: Low-Income Families and Younger Generations

In stark contrast to the winners, low-income households and marginalized groups face direct impacts. The bill cuts over $1 trillion in government spending, with Medicaid and food assistance programs hit hardest. New eligibility thresholds, work requirements, and funding mechanism changes are expected to strip over 12 million people of healthcare coverage in the next decade.

According to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections, the U.S. debt will surge by $3.4 trillion over the next decade due to the bill. This means the government will have to borrow more to fill fiscal gaps, with additional interest payments estimated at $600–700 billion. This heavy interest burden will ultimately fall on future generations, squeezing investments and benefits in critical areas like education and housing.

---

Crypto Opportunities in the Eyes of Industry Leaders

Although the One Big Beautiful Bill Act does not directly address cryptocurrency, industry insiders generally view its passage as a positive development for the crypto market.

Crypto influencer Big Pretty noted that the U.S. will significantly increase its fiscal deficit annually, leading to a continuous rise in national debt—undoubtedly a major boon for Bitcoin. Additionally, the controversial bill’s smooth passage demonstrates the Trump administration’s strong control over Congress, boding well for future crypto-friendly policies.

DWF Labs co-founder Andrei Grachev offered an even more optimistic forecast, suggesting that with the bill’s passage, combined with the traditional market uptick in Q4 and potential interest rate cuts, Bitcoin and related crypto stocks are highly likely to reach new all-time highs. While altcoins may also benefit, mid-cap tokens are expected to underperform Bitcoin.

Crypto analyst Phyrex argued that while the bill does not directly benefit the crypto industry, it reflects a U.S. shift toward deglobalized fiscal expansion and a dramatic restructuring of global capital flows. This could indirectly boost liquidity for cryptocurrencies, particularly stablecoins, due to increased remittance tax incentives.

BitMEX founder Arthur Hayes offered a dissenting view. He believes that if Trump’s "big and beautiful bill" passes, replenishing the U.S. Treasury General Account (TGA) could tighten dollar liquidity, pushing Bitcoin down to $90,000–$95,000. If the replenishment proceeds smoothly, Bitcoin may hover around $100,000, unlikely to break its $112,000 all-time high in the short term. He also predicts sideways or slight declines ahead of Fed Chair Powell’s late-August speech, with a potential rebound in early September as liquidity returns.

---

As the One Big Beautiful Bill Act Takes Effect, Crypto Legislation Enters an Acceleration Phase

With the One Big Beautiful Bill Act now law, crypto legislation is also gaining momentum. Republican leadership in the House has declared the week of July 14 as "Crypto Week," during which three major digital currency-related bills will be reviewed (*the GENIUS Stablecoin Act, the CLARITY Act, and a proposal to restrict the Fed from issuing a CBDC*).

The winds have shifted—now we wait for the echoes.