ENA up 56% in the past month.
In the same period, the “treasury wrapper” behind it has surged even more aggressively—according to some calculations, from mid-August to the end of September, the shares of a certain stablecoin treasury vehicle rose by about 431%. ENA itself was up about 203%, outpacing by 2.12x.
In other words, the gains leading the way reflect the expectation that “this company will keep buying ENA,” not protocol revenue.
A transaction just came out on-chain: a new address withdrew 18.84 million ENA—about $4.91 million—from an institutional custody channel. The unit price was around $0.2607.
A new address doesn’t necessarily mean a new buyer. Funds moving custody could point in either direction.
On the other hand, according to public discussion, on September 28 the SEC updated its Q&A on token repurchases—though this update still awaits confirmation of the official interpretation. The update suggests that only when a product is already available and there is no central party, an issuer’s announcement of a repurchase is less likely to constitute an investment contract promise.
Ethena has been discussed publicly as part of the group that “is trying to do buybacks,” but whether it’s a mechanism-level feature or a team-driven decision is still unclear.
My take: this round of pricing is buying expectations layered on top of each other—not cash flow.
Question for you: if the final determination is that the buyback is a team-decision type, then in this 56%, how much is the regulatory discount that would need to be returned?
In the same period, the “treasury wrapper” behind it has surged even more aggressively—according to some calculations, from mid-August to the end of September, the shares of a certain stablecoin treasury vehicle rose by about 431%. ENA itself was up about 203%, outpacing by 2.12x.
In other words, the gains leading the way reflect the expectation that “this company will keep buying ENA,” not protocol revenue.
A transaction just came out on-chain: a new address withdrew 18.84 million ENA—about $4.91 million—from an institutional custody channel. The unit price was around $0.2607.
A new address doesn’t necessarily mean a new buyer. Funds moving custody could point in either direction.
On the other hand, according to public discussion, on September 28 the SEC updated its Q&A on token repurchases—though this update still awaits confirmation of the official interpretation. The update suggests that only when a product is already available and there is no central party, an issuer’s announcement of a repurchase is less likely to constitute an investment contract promise.
Ethena has been discussed publicly as part of the group that “is trying to do buybacks,” but whether it’s a mechanism-level feature or a team-driven decision is still unclear.
My take: this round of pricing is buying expectations layered on top of each other—not cash flow.
Question for you: if the final determination is that the buyback is a team-decision type, then in this 56%, how much is the regulatory discount that would need to be returned?