Wendy 1
122 Publicações
Wendy 1
🇻🇳 Verified Binance Square & CoinmarketCap | Research | Insight | Onchain | DM for Collab & Promo @wendyr9
0 A seguir
0 Seguidores
0 Gostaram
Publicações
Ver tradução
$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.
Ver tradução
$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.
Ver tradução
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.
Ver tradução
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.
Ver tradução
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.
Ver tradução
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.
Ver tradução
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?
Ver tradução
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.
Ver tradução
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.
Ver tradução
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?
Ver tradução
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.
$BTC A Strategy reportedly vendeu mais 2.225 BTC na semana passada, levantando US$ 135M a um preço médio de venda de US$ 60.773 por Bitcoin. Isso acontece após a venda da semana anterior de 1.363 BTC por US$ 81M, executada a um preço médio de US$ 59.256. Ao longo do período de duas semanas, a Strategy reduziu sua posição em 3.588 BTC, gerando um total de US$ 216M em receitas. As atuais participações reportadas estão em 843.775 BTC.
À medida que o $ANSEM continua a subir, ultrapassando uma capitalização de mercado de US$ 350M+, as participações do $ANSEM de Ansem’s (@blknoiz06) agora valem mais de US$ 204M.
Dois investidores colocaram US$ 10.000 em cripto no fim de 2016.
Um comprou Bitcoin. O outro escolheu Ethereum.
Avançando dez anos:
🔸 Bitcoin: US$ 10.000 → US$ 640.000
🔹 Ethereum: US$ 10.000 → US$ 2,17 milhões
Mesmo capital inicial. Mesmo horizonte de tempo. Resultados bem diferentes.
O Bitcoin entregou aproximadamente um retorno de 64x, enquanto o Ethereum gerou cerca de 217x, impulsionado principalmente pelo seu crescimento explosivo durante o boom de DeFi, NFTs e contratos inteligentes.
É claro que a jornada não foi tranquila. Ambos os ativos passaram por vários períodos de queda (drawdowns) superiores a 70%, e o Ethereum viu ainda mais volatilidade ao longo do ciclo.
A pergunta maior agora é:
O Bitcoin oferece a adoção institucional mais forte, demanda por ETFs e a narrativa de “ouro digital”.
O Ethereum continua sendo o maior ecossistema de contratos inteligentes, impulsionando DeFi, stablecoins, tokenização e ativos do mundo real.
Na próxima década, o capital continuará a favorecer a escassez do Bitcoin e a tese de reserva de valor, ou os efeitos de rede e a utilidade do Ethereum mais uma vez entregarão retornos mais altos?
Se você tivesse US$ 10.000 para investir hoje pelos próximos 10 anos, qual escolheria: $BTC ou $ETH? 👇
Um comprou Bitcoin. O outro escolheu Ethereum.
Avançando dez anos:
🔸 Bitcoin: US$ 10.000 → US$ 640.000
🔹 Ethereum: US$ 10.000 → US$ 2,17 milhões
Mesmo capital inicial. Mesmo horizonte de tempo. Resultados bem diferentes.
O Bitcoin entregou aproximadamente um retorno de 64x, enquanto o Ethereum gerou cerca de 217x, impulsionado principalmente pelo seu crescimento explosivo durante o boom de DeFi, NFTs e contratos inteligentes.
É claro que a jornada não foi tranquila. Ambos os ativos passaram por vários períodos de queda (drawdowns) superiores a 70%, e o Ethereum viu ainda mais volatilidade ao longo do ciclo.
A pergunta maior agora é:
O Bitcoin oferece a adoção institucional mais forte, demanda por ETFs e a narrativa de “ouro digital”.
O Ethereum continua sendo o maior ecossistema de contratos inteligentes, impulsionando DeFi, stablecoins, tokenização e ativos do mundo real.
Na próxima década, o capital continuará a favorecer a escassez do Bitcoin e a tese de reserva de valor, ou os efeitos de rede e a utilidade do Ethereum mais uma vez entregarão retornos mais altos?
Se você tivesse US$ 10.000 para investir hoje pelos próximos 10 anos, qual escolheria: $BTC ou $ETH? 👇
$ETH Abaixo de US$ 2.000 dói — Mas muitas altcoins tiveram desempenho ainda pior em 2026
A negociação do Ethereum abaixo do nível psicológico de US$ 2.000, sem dúvida, prejudicou o sentimento em todo o mercado. No entanto, várias altcoins importantes tiveram quedas bem mais profundas este ano.
Maiores perdas vs. ETH em 2026
🔻 DADOS: -83%
🔻 APT: -67%
🔻 OP: -63%
🔻 ZK: -62%
🔻 VET: -61%
🔻 XTZ: -57%
🔻 DOT: -55%
🔻 ADA: -54%
🔻 AVAX: -52%
🔻 SUI: -51%
A lista destaca uma realidade importante deste ciclo de mercado: ter um desempenho pior que o Bitcoin é doloroso, mas ter um desempenho pior que o Ethereum tem sido ainda mais custoso.
Várias tendências aparecem:
• Tokens de Layer-2 como OP e ZK têm enfrentado dificuldades com desbloqueios de tokens e com o aumento da concorrência.
• Layer-1s legadas, incluindo ADA, DOT, XTZ e VET, continuam a enfrentar desafios para atrair capital e atividade de usuários.
• Projetos com alto FDV, como APT, sofreram com a expansão contínua de oferta e com uma demanda de mercado fraca.
• Até mesmo ecossistemas mais novos, como SUI e AVAX, passaram por correções significativas apesar de forte atividade de desenvolvedores.
Enquanto isso, o próprio Ethereum caiu de forma relevante, mas sua resiliência relativa versus muitas altcoins mais uma vez demonstra a preferência do mercado por ativos maiores e mais líquidos em períodos de incerteza.
A lição de 2026 ficou clara: quando a liquidez se aperta, o capital tende a se consolidar em um pequeno número de ativos dominantes, enquanto muitas altcoins sofrem quedas muito mais acentuadas.
Quais desses tokens você ainda está segurando? 👇
A negociação do Ethereum abaixo do nível psicológico de US$ 2.000, sem dúvida, prejudicou o sentimento em todo o mercado. No entanto, várias altcoins importantes tiveram quedas bem mais profundas este ano.
Maiores perdas vs. ETH em 2026
🔻 DADOS: -83%
🔻 APT: -67%
🔻 OP: -63%
🔻 ZK: -62%
🔻 VET: -61%
🔻 XTZ: -57%
🔻 DOT: -55%
🔻 ADA: -54%
🔻 AVAX: -52%
🔻 SUI: -51%
A lista destaca uma realidade importante deste ciclo de mercado: ter um desempenho pior que o Bitcoin é doloroso, mas ter um desempenho pior que o Ethereum tem sido ainda mais custoso.
Várias tendências aparecem:
• Tokens de Layer-2 como OP e ZK têm enfrentado dificuldades com desbloqueios de tokens e com o aumento da concorrência.
• Layer-1s legadas, incluindo ADA, DOT, XTZ e VET, continuam a enfrentar desafios para atrair capital e atividade de usuários.
• Projetos com alto FDV, como APT, sofreram com a expansão contínua de oferta e com uma demanda de mercado fraca.
• Até mesmo ecossistemas mais novos, como SUI e AVAX, passaram por correções significativas apesar de forte atividade de desenvolvedores.
Enquanto isso, o próprio Ethereum caiu de forma relevante, mas sua resiliência relativa versus muitas altcoins mais uma vez demonstra a preferência do mercado por ativos maiores e mais líquidos em períodos de incerteza.
A lição de 2026 ficou clara: quando a liquidez se aperta, o capital tende a se consolidar em um pequeno número de ativos dominantes, enquanto muitas altcoins sofrem quedas muito mais acentuadas.
Quais desses tokens você ainda está segurando? 👇
Se você investiu US$ 10.000 quando Trump assumiu o cargo, veja quanto valeria hoje 📉 Desde o início do atual mandato de Trump, a maioria dos principais ativos de cripto teve desempenho significativamente inferior, com apenas o Bitcoin provando ser relativamente resistente. 📊 US$ 10.000 investidos então vs. hoje • BTC: US$ 5.910 • ETH: US$ 4 ,890 • TAO: US$ 4 ,570 • LINK: US$ 3 ,280 • SOL: US$ 3 ,060 • KAS: US$ 2,290 • RENDER: US$ 2,090 • INJ: US$ 2,000 • ICP: US$ 1 ,870 • SUI: US$ 1 ,640 • DOT: US$ 1 ,230 • APT: US$ 660 • MELANIA: US$ 125 Os dados destacam a gravidade da recente correção do mercado. Embora o Bitcoin tenha perdido cerca de 41% do investimento inicial, muitas altcoins sofreram quedas de 70%–95%, com tokens especulativos enfrentando as maiores perdas. Notavelmente: • O Bitcoin continua como o melhor desempenho entre os principais ativos. • O Ethereum e os principais tokens ligados à IA, como TAO, têm resistido melhor do que a maioria das altcoins. • Ativos de alta beta, incluindo APT, DOT e MELANIA, viram algumas das perdas mais acentuadas. • A discrepância entre o desempenho do BTC e das altcoins continua aumentando, reforçando o papel do Bitcoin como o principal ativo do mercado durante períodos de incerteza. Este ciclo mais uma vez demonstra uma lição familiar do mundo cripto: em quedas do mercado, o capital tende a migrar para qualidade e liquidez, enquanto os ativos especulativos frequentemente sofrem as maiores retrações. 📉📈
$BTC AS CHAVES PERDIDAS ESTÃO SE MOVENDO NOVAMENTE As antigas carteiras de BTC de Clifton Collins acabaram de enviar mais 500 BTC para a Coinbase Prime. Isso é US$ 30,85M se movimentando a partir de moedas que deveriam ficar efetivamente inalcançáveis por uma década. O mesmo cluster agora depositou 1.500 BTC na Coinbase Prime e na Wintermute em apenas 3 meses. Isso sugere que alguém recuperou o acesso, controlou as chaves o tempo todo, ou encontrou um caminho que o mercado nunca precificou. O sinal maior é o que permanece intocado. 4.500 BTC ainda está lá. Por volta de US$ 276M esperando pela próxima transação. #Bitcoin
Inicia sessão para explorar mais conteúdos