Wendy 1
122 Posts
Wendy 1
🇻🇳 Verified Binance Square & CoinmarketCap | Research | Insight | Onchain | DM for Collab & Promo @wendyr9
0 Following
0 Followers
0 Liked
Posts
$ASTER ASTER Burns Another 3.08 Million Tokens Under Its Upgraded Tokenomics
ASTER has released the latest update on its buyback and burn program.
Between June 29 and July 13, the protocol allocated 99% of its daily platform fees to buy back 3,083,815.69 ASTER for stakers.
At the same time, the team permanently burned an additional 3,083,815.69 ASTER from its own allocation, matching the amount purchased through platform revenue.
The latest figures bring the totals to:
🔥 6.02 million ASTER burned since the upgraded tokenomics launched on June 17, 2026.
🔥 183.8 million ASTER burned across all burn programs since inception.
Current estimated staking rewards are also attractive, with:
• 5.35% APY for a 26-week lock.
• 28.85% APY for the maximum 208-week lock.
By combining protocol fee buybacks, team-funded burns, and staking incentives, ASTER is building a tokenomics model designed to reward long-term participants while gradually reducing circulating supply.
ASTER has released the latest update on its buyback and burn program.
Between June 29 and July 13, the protocol allocated 99% of its daily platform fees to buy back 3,083,815.69 ASTER for stakers.
At the same time, the team permanently burned an additional 3,083,815.69 ASTER from its own allocation, matching the amount purchased through platform revenue.
The latest figures bring the totals to:
🔥 6.02 million ASTER burned since the upgraded tokenomics launched on June 17, 2026.
🔥 183.8 million ASTER burned across all burn programs since inception.
Current estimated staking rewards are also attractive, with:
• 5.35% APY for a 26-week lock.
• 28.85% APY for the maximum 208-week lock.
By combining protocol fee buybacks, team-funded burns, and staking incentives, ASTER is building a tokenomics model designed to reward long-term participants while gradually reducing circulating supply.
$UNI Uniswap Moves Toward Buybacks and Token Burns
Uniswap could soon introduce one of the biggest changes to its tokenomics.
According to Uniswap founder Hayden Adams, protocol fees have now been activated, while governance proposals are underway to enable fee collection across Robinhood Chain (v2/v3), Uniswap v4, and bridge deployments on XLayer, Avalanche, MegaETH, and Sonium.
The next major step is expected to be $UNI buybacks and token burns.
If governance approves the proposals, this would mark the first continuous burn mechanism in Uniswap’s history.
The timing is notable because Uniswap remains one of the highest revenue-generating protocols in crypto, producing more than $5.2 million in daily fees, behind only a handful of major stablecoin issuers.
For many investors, the key question is no longer whether Uniswap can generate revenue, but whether that revenue will begin creating direct value for the UNI token through long-term supply reduction.
Uniswap could soon introduce one of the biggest changes to its tokenomics.
According to Uniswap founder Hayden Adams, protocol fees have now been activated, while governance proposals are underway to enable fee collection across Robinhood Chain (v2/v3), Uniswap v4, and bridge deployments on XLayer, Avalanche, MegaETH, and Sonium.
The next major step is expected to be $UNI buybacks and token burns.
If governance approves the proposals, this would mark the first continuous burn mechanism in Uniswap’s history.
The timing is notable because Uniswap remains one of the highest revenue-generating protocols in crypto, producing more than $5.2 million in daily fees, behind only a handful of major stablecoin issuers.
For many investors, the key question is no longer whether Uniswap can generate revenue, but whether that revenue will begin creating direct value for the UNI token through long-term supply reduction.
NOXA Burns 40% of Supply After Generating Millions in Robinhood Chain Fees
NOXA is drawing attention after a series of notable developments.
Over the past 7 days, the protocol has generated approximately $7.66 million in fees on Robinhood Chain, making it one of the most active applications on the network.
At the same time, the project’s original $NOXA token, which launched on DBKChain in 2025, has suddenly become active again.
The biggest development came roughly 10 hours ago, when the team permanently burned 400,000 NOXA, representing 40% of the token’s total supply.
While NOXA has not announced any new token plans, the combination of:
• Strong protocol revenue on Robinhood Chain.
• A large token burn.
• Renewed activity around the original token.
…has led many community members to speculate that a Robinhood Chain deployment or ecosystem expansion could be next.
For now, this remains speculation until the team confirms its plans. However, it’s a project worth monitoring as Robinhood Chain continues to attract new protocols and liquidity.
NOXA is drawing attention after a series of notable developments.
Over the past 7 days, the protocol has generated approximately $7.66 million in fees on Robinhood Chain, making it one of the most active applications on the network.
At the same time, the project’s original $NOXA token, which launched on DBKChain in 2025, has suddenly become active again.
The biggest development came roughly 10 hours ago, when the team permanently burned 400,000 NOXA, representing 40% of the token’s total supply.
While NOXA has not announced any new token plans, the combination of:
• Strong protocol revenue on Robinhood Chain.
• A large token burn.
• Renewed activity around the original token.
…has led many community members to speculate that a Robinhood Chain deployment or ecosystem expansion could be next.
For now, this remains speculation until the team confirms its plans. However, it’s a project worth monitoring as Robinhood Chain continues to attract new protocols and liquidity.
Hacked X Accounts Were Used to Promote a Fake Token, Generating Around $125K
A hacker reportedly compromised the @SpaceXAI and @Starlink X accounts to promote a newly created token called $SCATMAN.
According to the shared on-chain data:
• The attacker minted 10 trillion $SCATMAN tokens.
• Sold the entire position for approximately 59 ETH, worth around $108,000.
• A second wallet controlled by the attacker sold another 59.28 million SCATMAN for 14.7 ETH, worth roughly $27,000.
Total estimated proceeds were approximately $125,000.
The token briefly attracted significant trading activity after being promoted through compromised social media accounts before rapidly collapsing.
Incidents like this continue to highlight a common attack pattern in crypto:
1. Compromise a trusted or high-profile social media account.
2. Promote a newly created token.
3. Create FOMO within minutes.
4. Sell into the buying pressure before disappearing.
Wendy’s reminder:
Before buying any newly launched token, always verify announcements through multiple official channels. A verified account alone should never be considered proof that a token is legitimate.
Source: On-chain transaction data shared by the community.
A hacker reportedly compromised the @SpaceXAI and @Starlink X accounts to promote a newly created token called $SCATMAN.
According to the shared on-chain data:
• The attacker minted 10 trillion $SCATMAN tokens.
• Sold the entire position for approximately 59 ETH, worth around $108,000.
• A second wallet controlled by the attacker sold another 59.28 million SCATMAN for 14.7 ETH, worth roughly $27,000.
Total estimated proceeds were approximately $125,000.
The token briefly attracted significant trading activity after being promoted through compromised social media accounts before rapidly collapsing.
Incidents like this continue to highlight a common attack pattern in crypto:
1. Compromise a trusted or high-profile social media account.
2. Promote a newly created token.
3. Create FOMO within minutes.
4. Sell into the buying pressure before disappearing.
Wendy’s reminder:
Before buying any newly launched token, always verify announcements through multiple official channels. A verified account alone should never be considered proof that a token is legitimate.
Source: On-chain transaction data shared by the community.
U.S. Public Companies Now Hold 92.7% of Corporate Bitcoin Worldwide
Corporate Bitcoin ownership continues to become increasingly concentrated in the United States.
According to data from River and BitcoinTreasuries.net:
🇺🇸 U.S. public companies now hold approximately 1.24 million BTC, representing 92.7% of all Bitcoin held by public companies globally.
Over the past 12 months alone, U.S. companies added around 510,000 BTC to their balance sheets.
For comparison, that’s more than three times the amount of new Bitcoin mined during the same period.
Much of this growth has been driven by companies such as Strategy, while an increasing number of U.S.-listed firms have also adopted Bitcoin as part of their treasury strategy.
This trend highlights how institutional demand is becoming an increasingly important source of Bitcoin accumulation.
Whether this pace continues remains to be seen, but corporate adoption is clearly becoming more concentrated in the U.S. market.
Source: River, BitcoinTreasuries.net.
Corporate Bitcoin ownership continues to become increasingly concentrated in the United States.
According to data from River and BitcoinTreasuries.net:
🇺🇸 U.S. public companies now hold approximately 1.24 million BTC, representing 92.7% of all Bitcoin held by public companies globally.
Over the past 12 months alone, U.S. companies added around 510,000 BTC to their balance sheets.
For comparison, that’s more than three times the amount of new Bitcoin mined during the same period.
Much of this growth has been driven by companies such as Strategy, while an increasing number of U.S.-listed firms have also adopted Bitcoin as part of their treasury strategy.
This trend highlights how institutional demand is becoming an increasingly important source of Bitcoin accumulation.
Whether this pace continues remains to be seen, but corporate adoption is clearly becoming more concentrated in the U.S. market.
Source: River, BitcoinTreasuries.net.
Binance Now Holds 57% of All Exchange Stablecoin Reserves
According to Binance Research, stablecoin reserves across major crypto exchanges have grown to approximately $93 billion.
The standout figure is Binance.
The exchange currently holds around $53 billion in stablecoins, representing 57% of all exchange stablecoin reserves. That’s roughly $42 billion more than the second-largest exchange.
Since the beginning of 2025:
📈 Total exchange stablecoin reserves have increased 61%, adding around $35 billion.
📈 Binance’s share has also expanded from 54% to 57%.
Why does this matter?
Stablecoins are often viewed as a proxy for available trading liquidity. Higher reserves can indicate greater capital waiting to enter the market, stronger market activity, and deeper liquidity for traders.
While stablecoin balances alone don’t predict market direction, they provide useful insight into where capital is being held.
In this case, Binance continues to be the dominant venue for stablecoin liquidity.
Source: Binance Research.
According to Binance Research, stablecoin reserves across major crypto exchanges have grown to approximately $93 billion.
The standout figure is Binance.
The exchange currently holds around $53 billion in stablecoins, representing 57% of all exchange stablecoin reserves. That’s roughly $42 billion more than the second-largest exchange.
Since the beginning of 2025:
📈 Total exchange stablecoin reserves have increased 61%, adding around $35 billion.
📈 Binance’s share has also expanded from 54% to 57%.
Why does this matter?
Stablecoins are often viewed as a proxy for available trading liquidity. Higher reserves can indicate greater capital waiting to enter the market, stronger market activity, and deeper liquidity for traders.
While stablecoin balances alone don’t predict market direction, they provide useful insight into where capital is being held.
In this case, Binance continues to be the dominant venue for stablecoin liquidity.
Source: Binance Research.
Which Altcoin Is Leading DeFi? It Depends on the Metric.
Looking at only price rarely tells the full story.
Different DeFi projects dominate different categories.
Current leaders include:
📊 MCap / TVL: XPL (0.33x)
💰 Staking / Yield APY: AVAX (902k%)
💵 Fees / Revenue: CC ($57M)
📉 Price-to-Fees Ratio: WLFI (13x)
👥 Daily Active Users: AERO (3,192)
🔄 DEX Volume: HYPE ($8B)
📈 30-Day TVL Growth: STBL (+293%)
🏦 Total Value Locked: LDO ($16B)
The interesting part is that no single protocol leads every category.
Some projects generate the most revenue.
Others attract the most liquidity.
Some grow the fastest, while others already dominate in scale.
That’s why evaluating DeFi through multiple metrics often provides a clearer picture than looking at token price alone.
If you had to own just one DeFi project today, which would it be?
Looking at only price rarely tells the full story.
Different DeFi projects dominate different categories.
Current leaders include:
📊 MCap / TVL: XPL (0.33x)
💰 Staking / Yield APY: AVAX (902k%)
💵 Fees / Revenue: CC ($57M)
📉 Price-to-Fees Ratio: WLFI (13x)
👥 Daily Active Users: AERO (3,192)
🔄 DEX Volume: HYPE ($8B)
📈 30-Day TVL Growth: STBL (+293%)
🏦 Total Value Locked: LDO ($16B)
The interesting part is that no single protocol leads every category.
Some projects generate the most revenue.
Others attract the most liquidity.
Some grow the fastest, while others already dominate in scale.
That’s why evaluating DeFi through multiple metrics often provides a clearer picture than looking at token price alone.
If you had to own just one DeFi project today, which would it be?
Solana OG Loses 181,000 SOL ($14.2M) in Major Wallet Theft
A long-time Solana holder reportedly lost approximately 181,000 SOL, worth around $14.2 million, after their wallet was compromised.
According to on-chain investigator @zachxbt, the attacker quickly moved the stolen funds through several steps:
• Stole 181,000 SOL from the victim’s wallet
• Sold the entire SOL balance
• Bridged the proceeds from Solana to Ethereum
• Swapped the funds into approximately 7,918 ETH
The movement of funds can be tracked on-chain, highlighting both the transparency of public blockchains and the speed at which stolen assets can be laundered across multiple networks.
Incidents like this serve as another reminder that security remains one of the most important aspects of crypto ownership.
Some basic precautions include:
• Store large holdings in a hardware wallet
• Never share or digitally store your seed phrase
• Carefully review every wallet signature before approving it
• Stay cautious of phishing websites and fake wallet pop-ups
While blockchain transactions are transparent, recovering stolen assets is often extremely difficult once funds have been moved across chains.
Source: @zachxbt, Arkham Intelligence.
A long-time Solana holder reportedly lost approximately 181,000 SOL, worth around $14.2 million, after their wallet was compromised.
According to on-chain investigator @zachxbt, the attacker quickly moved the stolen funds through several steps:
• Stole 181,000 SOL from the victim’s wallet
• Sold the entire SOL balance
• Bridged the proceeds from Solana to Ethereum
• Swapped the funds into approximately 7,918 ETH
The movement of funds can be tracked on-chain, highlighting both the transparency of public blockchains and the speed at which stolen assets can be laundered across multiple networks.
Incidents like this serve as another reminder that security remains one of the most important aspects of crypto ownership.
Some basic precautions include:
• Store large holdings in a hardware wallet
• Never share or digitally store your seed phrase
• Carefully review every wallet signature before approving it
• Stay cautious of phishing websites and fake wallet pop-ups
While blockchain transactions are transparent, recovering stolen assets is often extremely difficult once funds have been moved across chains.
Source: @zachxbt, Arkham Intelligence.
Not All “Privacy Coins” Are Actually Privacy Coins
The term privacy coin is often used too broadly.
In reality, these projects solve very different problems.
1. Retail transaction privacy
Projects like Monero (XMR), Zcash (ZEC), Dash (DASH), Pirate Chain (ARRR) and Zano (ZANO) are what most people traditionally mean by privacy coins.
Their goal is to protect transaction details by hiding the sender, receiver, amount, or a combination of all three.
2. Institutional confidentiality
Projects such as Concordium (CCD) and Canton Coin (CC) focus on a different use case.
Instead of anonymous payments, they aim to keep business transactions confidential while still allowing regulators or auditors to access information when authorized.
3. Computational privacy
ZAMA takes another approach.
Rather than hiding transactions, it enables applications to perform computations directly on encrypted data through Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE).
The privacy exists during computation, not during asset transfers.
4. Zero-knowledge scaling
Projects like Starknet (STRK) and zkSync (ZK) are frequently mistaken for privacy coins.
In reality, they use zero-knowledge proofs to improve scalability and verify transactions efficiently.
Transaction data itself remains publicly visible on-chain.
Why this distinction matters
“Zero-knowledge” doesn’t automatically mean “private.”
Likewise, a project using cryptography doesn’t necessarily aim to provide anonymous transactions.
Understanding the difference between transaction privacy, institutional confidentiality, encrypted computation, and scaling technology helps avoid one of the most common misconceptions in crypto.
The term privacy coin is often used too broadly.
In reality, these projects solve very different problems.
1. Retail transaction privacy
Projects like Monero (XMR), Zcash (ZEC), Dash (DASH), Pirate Chain (ARRR) and Zano (ZANO) are what most people traditionally mean by privacy coins.
Their goal is to protect transaction details by hiding the sender, receiver, amount, or a combination of all three.
2. Institutional confidentiality
Projects such as Concordium (CCD) and Canton Coin (CC) focus on a different use case.
Instead of anonymous payments, they aim to keep business transactions confidential while still allowing regulators or auditors to access information when authorized.
3. Computational privacy
ZAMA takes another approach.
Rather than hiding transactions, it enables applications to perform computations directly on encrypted data through Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE).
The privacy exists during computation, not during asset transfers.
4. Zero-knowledge scaling
Projects like Starknet (STRK) and zkSync (ZK) are frequently mistaken for privacy coins.
In reality, they use zero-knowledge proofs to improve scalability and verify transactions efficiently.
Transaction data itself remains publicly visible on-chain.
Why this distinction matters
“Zero-knowledge” doesn’t automatically mean “private.”
Likewise, a project using cryptography doesn’t necessarily aim to provide anonymous transactions.
Understanding the difference between transaction privacy, institutional confidentiality, encrypted computation, and scaling technology helps avoid one of the most common misconceptions in crypto.
This or That: Which Projects Would You Choose?
Let’s make it simple.
If you could only pick one project from each pair, which would you choose?
Layer 1
🔹 SUI or SEI
DePIN / Compute
🔹 AKT or IO
Lending
🔹 MORPHO or SYRUP (Maple)
DePIN / AI Compute
🔹 AETHIR or RENDER
RWA
🔹 ONDO or PLUME
If I had to choose today:
✅ SUI
✅ IO
✅ MORPHO
✅ RENDER
✅ ONDO
Of course, every project has different strengths. Some focus on ecosystem growth, some on infrastructure, while others target institutions or AI.
There isn’t a single “correct” answer, and that’s what makes these comparisons interesting.
What’s your list?
Let’s make it simple.
If you could only pick one project from each pair, which would you choose?
Layer 1
🔹 SUI or SEI
DePIN / Compute
🔹 AKT or IO
Lending
🔹 MORPHO or SYRUP (Maple)
DePIN / AI Compute
🔹 AETHIR or RENDER
RWA
🔹 ONDO or PLUME
If I had to choose today:
✅ SUI
✅ IO
✅ MORPHO
✅ RENDER
✅ ONDO
Of course, every project has different strengths. Some focus on ecosystem growth, some on infrastructure, while others target institutions or AI.
There isn’t a single “correct” answer, and that’s what makes these comparisons interesting.
What’s your list?
Robinhood Chain Reached $100M TVL in Just 9 Days. Is Distribution the Real Moat?
Robinhood Chain has officially become the fastest Layer 2 ever to reach $100 million in TVL, doing so in just 9 days.
Current ranking:
🥇 Robinhood: 9 days
🥈 Boba: 10 days
🥉 Arbitrum: 13 days
• zkSync Era: 17 days
• Base: 17 days
• Metis: 30 days
What’s interesting is how Robinhood achieved it.
Unlike many recent L2 launches, Robinhood didn’t rely on a token, an airdrop or a points campaign. Instead, it launched with something arguably more valuable: distribution.
With millions of existing users, tokenized stock trading available from day one, and promotional incentives like free gas, Robinhood quickly attracted liquidity and activity.
However, TVL alone doesn’t tell the whole story.
A significant portion of the liquidity currently comes from a small number of DeFi protocols, and history shows that reaching $100M TVL quickly doesn’t necessarily guarantee long-term success. Projects like Base, Boba and zkSync all reached the milestone at different times, but their adoption trajectories have been very different.
The next questions worth watching are:
• Can Robinhood maintain growth after promotional incentives end?
• Will users remain active beyond the initial launch period?
• Can TVL become more diversified over time?
Early momentum is impressive, but long-term adoption is what ultimately defines a successful blockchain ecosystem.
Source: DefiLlama.
Robinhood Chain has officially become the fastest Layer 2 ever to reach $100 million in TVL, doing so in just 9 days.
Current ranking:
🥇 Robinhood: 9 days
🥈 Boba: 10 days
🥉 Arbitrum: 13 days
• zkSync Era: 17 days
• Base: 17 days
• Metis: 30 days
What’s interesting is how Robinhood achieved it.
Unlike many recent L2 launches, Robinhood didn’t rely on a token, an airdrop or a points campaign. Instead, it launched with something arguably more valuable: distribution.
With millions of existing users, tokenized stock trading available from day one, and promotional incentives like free gas, Robinhood quickly attracted liquidity and activity.
However, TVL alone doesn’t tell the whole story.
A significant portion of the liquidity currently comes from a small number of DeFi protocols, and history shows that reaching $100M TVL quickly doesn’t necessarily guarantee long-term success. Projects like Base, Boba and zkSync all reached the milestone at different times, but their adoption trajectories have been very different.
The next questions worth watching are:
• Can Robinhood maintain growth after promotional incentives end?
• Will users remain active beyond the initial launch period?
• Can TVL become more diversified over time?
Early momentum is impressive, but long-term adoption is what ultimately defines a successful blockchain ecosystem.
Source: DefiLlama.
$BTC Strategy reportedly sold another 2,225 BTC last week, raising $135M at an average sale price of $60,773 per Bitcoin. That follows the previous week’s sale of 1,363 BTC for $81M, executed at an average price of $59,256. Across the two-week period, Strategy reduced its position by 3,588 BTC, generating a combined $216M in proceeds. Current reported holdings stand at 843,775 BTC.
As the $ANSEM continues to rise, crossing a $350M+ market cap, Ansem’s (@blknoiz06) $ANSEM holdings are now valued at over $204M.
Two investors put $10,000 into crypto at the end of 2016.
One bought Bitcoin. The other chose Ethereum.
Fast forward ten years:
🔸 Bitcoin: $10,000 → $640,000
🔹 Ethereum: $10,000 → $2.17 million
Same starting capital. Same time horizon. Very different outcomes.
Bitcoin delivered roughly a 64x return, while Ethereum generated about 217x, largely driven by its explosive growth during the DeFi, NFT, and smart contract boom.
Of course, the journey wasn't smooth. Both assets experienced multiple drawdowns exceeding 70%, and Ethereum saw even greater volatility throughout the cycle.
The bigger question now is:
Bitcoin offers the strongest institutional adoption, ETF demand, and digital gold narrative.
Ethereum remains the largest smart contract ecosystem, powering DeFi, stablecoins, tokenization, and real-world assets.
Over the next decade, will capital continue to favor Bitcoin’s scarcity and store-of-value thesis, or will Ethereum’s network effects and utility once again deliver higher returns?
If you had $10,000 to invest today for the next 10 years, which would you choose: $BTC or $ETH ? 👇
One bought Bitcoin. The other chose Ethereum.
Fast forward ten years:
🔸 Bitcoin: $10,000 → $640,000
🔹 Ethereum: $10,000 → $2.17 million
Same starting capital. Same time horizon. Very different outcomes.
Bitcoin delivered roughly a 64x return, while Ethereum generated about 217x, largely driven by its explosive growth during the DeFi, NFT, and smart contract boom.
Of course, the journey wasn't smooth. Both assets experienced multiple drawdowns exceeding 70%, and Ethereum saw even greater volatility throughout the cycle.
The bigger question now is:
Bitcoin offers the strongest institutional adoption, ETF demand, and digital gold narrative.
Ethereum remains the largest smart contract ecosystem, powering DeFi, stablecoins, tokenization, and real-world assets.
Over the next decade, will capital continue to favor Bitcoin’s scarcity and store-of-value thesis, or will Ethereum’s network effects and utility once again deliver higher returns?
If you had $10,000 to invest today for the next 10 years, which would you choose: $BTC or $ETH ? 👇
$ETH Below $2,000 Feels Painful — But Many Altcoins Have Performed Even Worse in 2026
Ethereum trading below the psychological $2,000 level has undoubtedly hurt sentiment across the market. However, several major altcoins have experienced significantly deeper drawdowns this year.
Biggest Underperformers vs. ETH in 2026
🔻 DATA: -83%
🔻 APT: -67%
🔻 OP: -63%
🔻 ZK: -62%
🔻 VET: -61%
🔻 XTZ: -57%
🔻 DOT: -55%
🔻 ADA: -54%
🔻 AVAX: -52%
🔻 SUI: -51%
The list highlights an important reality of this market cycle: underperforming Bitcoin is painful, but underperforming Ethereum has been even more costly.
Several themes emerge:
• Layer-2 tokens such as OP and ZK have struggled with token unlocks and increasing competition.
• Legacy Layer-1s including ADA, DOT, XTZ, and VET continue to face challenges attracting capital and user activity.
• High-FDV projects like APT have suffered from continued supply expansion and weak market demand.
• Even newer ecosystems such as SUI and AVAX have experienced significant corrections despite strong developer activity.
Meanwhile, Ethereum itself has fallen substantially, but its relative resilience versus many altcoins once again demonstrates the market’s preference for larger, more liquid assets during periods of uncertainty.
The lesson from 2026 has been clear: when liquidity tightens, capital tends to consolidate into a small number of dominant assets, while many altcoins experience much steeper drawdowns.
Which of these tokens are you still holding? 👇
Ethereum trading below the psychological $2,000 level has undoubtedly hurt sentiment across the market. However, several major altcoins have experienced significantly deeper drawdowns this year.
Biggest Underperformers vs. ETH in 2026
🔻 DATA: -83%
🔻 APT: -67%
🔻 OP: -63%
🔻 ZK: -62%
🔻 VET: -61%
🔻 XTZ: -57%
🔻 DOT: -55%
🔻 ADA: -54%
🔻 AVAX: -52%
🔻 SUI: -51%
The list highlights an important reality of this market cycle: underperforming Bitcoin is painful, but underperforming Ethereum has been even more costly.
Several themes emerge:
• Layer-2 tokens such as OP and ZK have struggled with token unlocks and increasing competition.
• Legacy Layer-1s including ADA, DOT, XTZ, and VET continue to face challenges attracting capital and user activity.
• High-FDV projects like APT have suffered from continued supply expansion and weak market demand.
• Even newer ecosystems such as SUI and AVAX have experienced significant corrections despite strong developer activity.
Meanwhile, Ethereum itself has fallen substantially, but its relative resilience versus many altcoins once again demonstrates the market’s preference for larger, more liquid assets during periods of uncertainty.
The lesson from 2026 has been clear: when liquidity tightens, capital tends to consolidate into a small number of dominant assets, while many altcoins experience much steeper drawdowns.
Which of these tokens are you still holding? 👇
If You Invested $10,000 When Trump Took Office, Here's What It Would Be Worth Today 📉 Since the beginning of Trump's current term, most major crypto assets have significantly underperformed, with only Bitcoin proving relatively resilient. 📊 $10,000 Invested Then vs. Today • BTC: $5,910 • ETH: $4 ,890 • TAO: $4 ,570 • LINK: $3 ,280 • SOL: $3 ,060 • KAS: $2,290 • RENDER: $2,090 • INJ: $2,000 • ICP: $1 ,870 • SUI: $1 ,640 • DOT: $1 ,230 • APT: $660 • MELANIA: $125 The data highlights the severity of the recent market correction. While Bitcoin has lost roughly 41% from the initial investment, many altcoins have experienced drawdowns of 70%–95%, with speculative tokens suffering the largest declines. Notably: • Bitcoin remains the strongest performer among major assets. • Ethereum and leading AI-related tokens such as TAO have held up better than most altcoins. • High-beta assets including APT, DOT, and MELANIA have seen some of the steepest losses. • The dispersion between BTC and altcoin performance continues to widen, reinforcing Bitcoin's role as the market's dominant asset during periods of uncertainty. This cycle once again demonstrates a familiar crypto lesson: during market downturns, capital tends to rotate toward quality and liquidity, while speculative assets often experience the deepest drawdowns. 📉📈
$BTC LOST KEYS ARE MOVING AGAIN Clifton Collins’ old BTC wallets just sent another 500 BTC to Coinbase Prime. That is $30.85M moving from coins that were supposed to be effectively unreachable for a decade. The same cluster has now deposited 1,500 BTC to Coinbase Prime and Wintermute in just 3 months. This suggests someone either recovered access, controlled the keys all along, or found a path the market never priced in. The bigger signal is what remains untouched. 4,500 BTC still sits there. Around $276M waiting behind the next transaction. #Bitcoin
Log in to explore more content