I kept staring at one number in the TermMax token breakdown: 20% circulating at TGE. The other 80% is still sitting somewhere, unlocking on a schedule most holders haven't actually read.
Easy take: fixed supply, no inflation, stake TMX for sTMX and earn rewards tied to protocol usage. Sounds clean. Sounds like alignment skin in the game, as the TermMax team puts it themselves.
But sit with where that other 80% actually goes and on what timeline. "Fixed supply" answers how much will ever exist. It says nothing about how much hits the market next month, next quarter, or next year, and who's holding the keys to that schedule.
That's the conflation people make: fixed supply gets read as "no dilution risk," when really it just means no dilution risk from new issuance. The dilution risk from existing-but-locked tokens unlocking is still fully live, and it's arguably the bigger variable for anyone staking now at today's circulating float.
It's the same gap between a bond's face value and its actual float. A bond's total issuance is fixed and disclosed upfront too, but what moves price is how much of that issuance is actually trading versus held to maturity by a few large holders. Fixed supply, variable float two different numbers that get flattened into one headline stat.
TermMax's protocol sits around $31M TVL currently, with sTMX rewards designed to scale with usage meaning staking yield is a function of a still-small revenue base, not the token's total 1B supply.
I want to like the "no inflation" framing, it's a fair point against protocols that print endlessly. My first instinct was to treat fixed supply as the whole risk picture. It's not it's half of it, and the unlock schedule is the half most people skip past.
Watching how the remaining 80% actually unlocks over time, and whether staking demand keeps pace with it or just gets absorbed by it.
@TermMax #termMAX #TermMax
Easy take: fixed supply, no inflation, stake TMX for sTMX and earn rewards tied to protocol usage. Sounds clean. Sounds like alignment skin in the game, as the TermMax team puts it themselves.
But sit with where that other 80% actually goes and on what timeline. "Fixed supply" answers how much will ever exist. It says nothing about how much hits the market next month, next quarter, or next year, and who's holding the keys to that schedule.
That's the conflation people make: fixed supply gets read as "no dilution risk," when really it just means no dilution risk from new issuance. The dilution risk from existing-but-locked tokens unlocking is still fully live, and it's arguably the bigger variable for anyone staking now at today's circulating float.
It's the same gap between a bond's face value and its actual float. A bond's total issuance is fixed and disclosed upfront too, but what moves price is how much of that issuance is actually trading versus held to maturity by a few large holders. Fixed supply, variable float two different numbers that get flattened into one headline stat.
TermMax's protocol sits around $31M TVL currently, with sTMX rewards designed to scale with usage meaning staking yield is a function of a still-small revenue base, not the token's total 1B supply.
I want to like the "no inflation" framing, it's a fair point against protocols that print endlessly. My first instinct was to treat fixed supply as the whole risk picture. It's not it's half of it, and the unlock schedule is the half most people skip past.
Watching how the remaining 80% actually unlocks over time, and whether staking demand keeps pace with it or just gets absorbed by it.
@TermMax #termMAX #TermMax