Cas Abbé

Why I wrote this
I am a trader and an anylyst. I would like to consider the way Binance will be the best in the world in 2026. It is not a marketing analysis, but my own and is based on verifiable data at the end of 2025 to early 2026.

Pre-eminence of trading volumes and market share

Binance is by far the biggest centralized exchange. According to the market-share analysis carried out by CoinGecko, in December 2025 Binance will dominate 38.3 per cent of all global spot trading, equaling 361.8 billion US dollars (or less than 609 billion US dollars in November). Binance controls 39.2% of the top-10 exchange volume over the whole year of 2025 with 7.3 trillion in spot trades and the other nine exchanges with 18.7 trillion. In comparison, the closest competitor, Bybit, only acquired 8.10 of volume.

(maximum market share in 2025) According to Finance Magnates, Binance was able to maintain a 51.8% share what with a monthly volume of $583.5billion even during a downturn in March 2025. The independent statistics of CoinLaw show that by June 2025 Binance had retained 41.1% of the world spot.

1- Binance controls things till early 2026. According to an AInvest analysis of February 2026, Binance is dominating with 39.2% market share, and its competitors such as Bybit and MEXC each had about 8%. This confirms that, although there is certain erosion by new entrants, Binance remains way ahead of them.

2- The number of users is enormous and increasing. By the end of 2025, Binance had over 300000 registered users.

January 2026 report by Blockhead states that the exchange had 100 millennium more users in under 18 months suggesting the exchange is growing at a rate of approximately 180,000 new users. Another example provided by Blockhead is the Kaiko numbers that Binance processes a range of 35 to 45 percent of the world-wide bitcoin and Ethereum trade and secures more than 170 billion customer dollars.
3- Trading volume scale. In a year-end report released by Binance (summarized by multiple sources), the exchange reported total trading volume, including over 7.1 trillion in spot trading, of over 34 trillion in total trading volume of all products. Its median daily spot volume was approximately 16.3 billion dollars and this is a sign of deep liquidity.

The creation of a multi-product ecosystem.
BNB Chain: the demand expansion.
1- Massive user activity. The BNB Chain 2025 recap reveals that there were more than 700,000 unique addresses and the total BSC and opBNB networks recorded more than 4 million daily active users. Transaction activity increased consistently: the average daily transactions rose to 10.78million and to 31 million in October 2025, which is the growth of 150 per cent annually.
2- Reliability and throughput. The network was running without loss of time even during trading surges throughout 2025. When at full capacity it handled as many as 5 trillion units of gas daily. Lorentz, Pascal, and Maxwell hard forks in infrastructure provided a reduction in block time (to 0.75 seconds) at a bandwidth of more than 133 million gas per second.
3- Real-life assets and stablecoins. The market cap of BNB Chain increased to the total of 14 billion in stablecoin and became the best-regarded chain of active stablecoin users. BNB Chain real-world assets (RWA) reached more than 1.8 billion dollars with the help of such institutional investors as BlackRock and Franklin Templeton.
4- Security improvements. The protocol-level countermeasures and Goodwill Alliance have assisted in decreasing the attacks on sandwiches by 95 percent and wallet defenses, as well as MEV mitigation, heightened fairness.
Product innovation that took place attracted users.
Alpha: 2.0 (Web3 discovery platform). In the Binance 2025 report, there is a feature that stands out, Alpha 2.0, whereby users are able to engage in on-chain launches and airdrops, directly within Binance. At the end of the year it topped 17mm users, 1 trillion in trading volume, and paid out 782mm in rewards in 254 airdrops. These campaigns stopped 270,000 attempts of frauds, which were blocked by the risk-control systems.
Smart Money and Demo Trading. Its Smart Money feature, which gives signals using blockchain flows, attracted 1.2 million users, and the Demo Trading tool (to allow beginners to trade with virtual funds) reached 300,000 users.
Earn and staking products. Binance had yields in over 100 PoS coins. Its Earn program has given out 1.2 bn. in rewards in 2025. Competitive yields were offered by locked savings and dual-investment campaigns, and the fees charged on trading in BNB (up to 25 per cent off) made the platform some of the lowest cost trading in the industry.
BNB deflation through burns. The operation of dual burn of Binance suppressed the supply. By the beginning of October of 2025 the total burned had surpassed 169.7 millionBNB and only 140-145 million BNB was left in circulation. About 1.4-1.6⠻BNB was burned during quarterly auto-burns and the on-chain real-time burn with around 30,000-50,000BNB every quarter. On the whole, the average quarterly burns of 1.56 millennium Burns of BNB allow supporting long-term token economics at about 4 -5 per annual.
Peer-peer and payments growths.
Binance Pay adoption. In January 2026, the network of Binance Pay had over 20 million merchants and had paid out $280 billion in total transaction volume. By 2025, payment volumes will increase by 38 percent on the year before, and the number of users will increase by 30 percent. More than 98 per cent of B2C transactions were settled in stablecoins, which underscores the need to settle in low-volatility currencies.
Rapid merchant growth. In a November 2025 article, it is stated that the number of merchants using Binance Pay had grown 1,700-fold between 2025 and 2025, and was now up to 20 million merchants. It records domestic integrations, including the support of Brazilian Pix system, QR payments in Argentina and integration into the tourism platform in Bhutan.
Fiat & P2P trading boom. Fiat and P2P volumes grew 38 % in 2025. OTC fiat trading has grown by 210% and this is an indication of institutions and high-net-worth adopting Binance as a main source of liquidity. These fiat rails assist the users in the emerging markets to acquire crypto more conveniently.
The institutional adoption and compliance is a turning point
Institutional growth. Year-over-year institutional trading volumes on Binance were up 21 percent and VIP clients were up 18 percent. Binance Pay business allowed companies to expedite cross-border payments and tokenized collateral structures raised a lot of money.
Regulatory milestones. In November 2023 Binance rejected entry into a guilty plea and accepted over 4 billion dollars of fines as penalties on counts of anti-money-laundering and sanctions violations. The officials of the U.S. complained that the company had adopted growth at the expense of compliance. The case provoked Binance to revamp its compliance. By the end of 2025 the exchange was fully licensed in accordance with the Abu Dhabi ADGM, being the first crypto exchange to receive a global license in the region. The licence regards independent regulated entities in exchange, clearing-house and broker-dealer. The officials of ADGM complimented Binance on good standards of governance and risk-management practices. The press release also pointed out that Binance had over 300 million users and over one hundred and twenty five trillion in cumulative volume.

Compliance metrics. According to Binance, its direct exposure to key categories of illicit funds decreased by 96 per cent since 2023. By 2025 the exchange had blocked the loss of 6.69 G in potential fraudulent losses and served 5.4 users and over 71000 law enforcement requests. It reclaimed more than 131million dollars associated with illegal operations and trained over 160 military officers.
SAFU fund and Proof of reserves. The evidence-based proof-of-reserves report published by Binance indicates that the assets of users are held in 1:1 ratio, and the major coins ratio is 105–108%. In February Binance declared that its Secure Asset Fund for Users (SAFU) had been entirely changed into 15,000 bitcoin, which is approximately worth 1.005 billion, to strengthen the reserve base. One separate article reported that Binance has addressed rumours of huge outflows by referencing its on-chain proving-reserves, and has even suggested an annual “Withdrawal Day" to all exchanges.
Challenges and competition
Although it is dominant, Binance has headwinds:
Competitor market share loss. According to CoinGecko and AInvest statistics, Binance has lost market share that was more than 50 per cent at the beginning of 2025 to approximately 39 per cent at the beginning of 2026. Liberal fee offers by competitors (e.g. zero-fee promotion by MEXC), and the so-called Universal Exchange models, combining trading, payments and DeFi, are all threatening to suck the liquidity out.
Regulatory scrutiny. Current research in the U.S and Europe persists. According to CoinLaw, Binance operates in 15+ jurisdictions with a fine of 4.3bn issued by the U.S authorities and France investigations. It is expensive and cumbersome to be compliant in various jurisdictions.
Trust rebuilding. The DOJ resolution and massive fine exemplifies how the history of breaching compliance hurt trust. Binance is now spending a significant part of its resources on compliance (almost a quarter of the staffs are in this division) and is open to external audit, but it will take time to restore complete confidence.
Contest of attention between users. Other centralized exchanges and new entrants like Bitget, OKX and Gate.io are innovating rapidly as well as DeFi protocols. They frequently serve small markets (perpetual DEXs, tokenized stocks) that can eat away the volumes of Binance unless the exchange keeps innovating.
My take on the case, why Binance filed and won the charge.
In my opinion, there are a few reasons as to why Binance will still be the leader in crypto in February 2026:
1. Intensive depth and product bulk. Binance has hundreds of coins and close to two thousand trading pairs. Its deep order books enable orders of large size to be slipping slowly and this attracts professional traders and institutions. It is affordable to retail traders due to low base fees (0.1 ℻ 0.1 ) and a 25 ℛ 0 100 discount offered on payment with BNB.
2. Relentless innovation. New features (Alpha 2.0, Smart Money, Demo Trading) are constantly added to the site to maintain the interest of the users and add value to what they can get by merely trading at the spot. Through the on-chain launches, trading education and airdrops, and the same application, Binance has built a sticky ecosystem.
3. Strong network effects. Having more than 300 million users and 700 million addresses on BNB Chain, Binance is advantaged by the fact that individuals conduct trade where they have the greatest liquidity. This vicious cycle deters them to defection to smaller exchanges.
4. Worldwide coverage of payments and on-ramps. The fact that Binance Pay has expanded to reach more than 20 million merchants, as well as supported local systems of payments (Pix, QR in Argentina, Bhutan tourism) provides users with some applicable spending opportunities of crypto. Massive P2P and fiat volumes demonstrate that Binance can now be regarded as an indisputable point of contact between traditional finance and digital assets.
5. Comppliance as the result of institutional trust.
The new regulation of post-2023 and the license to ADGM indicate the shift towards transparency and regulations. Evidence -of-reserves, a capitalized SAFU fund and a 96% decrease in illicit coverage assuage institutions and regulators. Fines and investigations persist, but the fact that the company is ready to deal with regulators is peculiar to some of its peers.
6. BNB Chain ecosystem synergy. In a manner akin to integrating DeFi, NFTs and tokenization into its exchange, Binance could be able to use a high-throughput, low-cost blockchain to control. The capacity of the BNB Chain to handle tens of millions of transactions per day without downtime allows BNB Chain to settle quickly and experiment.
Conclusion and lessons
The case of Binance depicts how scale, innovation, and compliance may exist together. The platform has endured and persisted to be the largest crypto exchange with a mix of deep liquidity, extensive product suite, robust payment rails and constant compliance with regulatory requirements. The fact that it is starting to shift toward transparency, ADGM licensing, evidenced by proof-of-reserves and a fund backed by Bitcoin demonstrate, that to become the market leader currently, it takes more than mere aggressive growth; it takes institutional level trust. The rivals are gaining on and regulatory oversight will not disappear soon. But at this point Binance has assumed the lead and is bearing the brunt by becoming an essential part of the traders, investors, merchants and builders throughout the crypto ecosystem.

The first time I heard the term Fogo, people were complaining about nothing other than speed, throughput and low latency. I have observed how that cliche was repeated a million times. Fast chains are simple to define and difficult to construct. The other question that prevented me was different.

What does Fogo do when nobody is around to watch him act as an exchange backbone?
I’m not talking marketing. I mean actual operations: the rotation of leadership, area management, the maintenance of the validators, the access of the developers to the reliable assets, and the behavior of the network in the pressure. In that perspective, Fogo is not really a crypto project, but a project that uses real-time systems, which happen to be a blockchain.
This paper is my attempt to describe that angle in the simplest terms.
The thesis: Fogo is not only developing speed but also time discipline.
The most expensive issues in trading are not a bit slower. Their unpredictability is timing, intermittent failure, and systems which do not under load behave in the same way that they do during tests.
The fundamental design decisions that Fogo makes are based on what I would call time discipline: block production and leadership are predictable, network latency is controlled, and performance is not an open network, but a controlled environment.
Fogo clearly spells out timing parameters even in its testnet setting. The docs established an objective of 40-milliseconds blocks and 375 block leader (one leader generates blocks of approximately 15 seconds and then relinquishes leadership).

That might not be much, but it is an indication of something definite: “we want timing that you can plan upon.

Zones: the exchange concept that crypto does not speak much of.

There is an ugly secret of traditional finance that co-located infrastructure is the best execution strategy. You put systems physically near hardware limits of cut latency.

Fogo realizes that fact. It is documented as a zone-based architecture in which validators are run close to each other in order to maximize performance. The objective is ultra-low consensus latency, where zones are represented by geographical span and preferably single data centers.

That’s why I think it matters.

The majority of chains pursue such a slogan as global decentralization, and years later fill performance gaps with quick fixes. Fogo begins by accepting the fact that performance-sensitive markets require co-location, and devises a mechanism to re-distribute that benefit geographically.

Even in the testnet documentation, it is explained that epochs may relocate consensus to other zones with such names as APAC, Europe, and North America.

It is not the story that we are centralized. It is we are serious about the trade-off, and we switch it around.

Why hourly zone rotation is not a mere technical gimmick.
The testnet epochs of Fogo are 90,000 blocks approximately one hour and each epoch shifts consensus to another zone.
An hour is a substantial heart, in relation to trading infrastructure. It is long enough to have a consistent performance monitoring, but not too long to demonstrate that you can work in the regions without one of them becoming a monarch.
This to me is the dark secret: Fogo is conducting an operations rhythm. It is as though to say, we can run this system elsewhere, we can do it again, on time.
That is the most common crypto-network reliability practice disregarded at the outset. It is what exactly institutions appreciate.
Infrastructure layer: RPC reliability and developer access: The boring part.
Here is another item that I look into: who invests in the foundations developers actually use.
With spotty RPC access, a chain can spend its time fast but be unusable. It is consensus rather than failed requests, low response times, and broken endpoints that are perceived by most users.
One practical signal I discovered here is the ecosystem team discussions on Fogo. xLabs published that in testnet, it operated six RPC nodes in various regions (two per region) to enhance the access to developers and stability.
This is important as it indicates that the ecosystem has thought in terms of production: multi-region access, redundancy and in the best case, accessibility to developers is in the first-class, rather than the second-class, needs.
I like the fact that xLabs makes it clear that these RPC nodes were not part of consensus and were not validators. They only were to render the network useful.
Such maturity sign can be important. People construct real systems and are concerned with endpoints and not ideology alone.
FOGO as an activity: gas, staking, and validator discipline.
The other angle that is not loud but is significant is the way that Fogo presents its token. The token is used by the validators in its MiCA-oriented whitepaper to process transaction: a gas requirement, as well as a staking requirement: validators need to stake in order to secure the network and receive rewards, and delegators can stake by delegating to validators.
I am not repeating some general token utility. I concentrate on the operational implication.
When your agreement is based on co-location areas and narrow schedule, you must have validators who are professional in their behavior. One of the limited resources of a network to practice discipline is staking: with governance and incentives, bad behavior can be penalized.
The whitepaper on MiCA also categorises the token as a utility token needed to access and interact with the protocol and is stated, there is no issuer in the meaning of MiCA.
No matter, as to whether you pay attention to EU frameworks or not, the longer indication is this: Fogo is thinking in formal system terms, and not in crypto-native language.
The part I come back to is this one.
Everybody can guarantee pace in a smooth demo. The actual test is how the system will remain stable when the network is not idle, when the nodes crash, when regions change and when developers abuse it.
The design decisions that Fogo made, including zoning, deterministic leaders rotation, short leaders terms, and a scheduled epoch rotation are essentially an effort to make the behavior of a public-chain more like an exchange-behavior.
It is not aiming at faking the perfection of the world, but it is trying to control the sources of chaos.

Provided that the network has a consistent execution of execution between the zone switches, it may probably be able to support actual trading volumes. In case it cannot, it might be quick but would not be reliable.
So it should not be Fogo is fast but Fogo is training to become predictable.
In my opinion, the meaning of a performance chain is wrongly perceived by most people.
They tend to believe that performance is bragging rights - in the form of performance poster, benchmark screen shots or viral charts.
Valuable chains are long-term in that they promise performance as a service level.
This is in terms of predictable timing, predictable accessibility, predictable behavior amidst stress, and predictable operation parameters. The test-net documentation provided by Fogo can be seen as an example of this, as it is written by the people who would like to see the system being measured and checked not to be admired.
The fact that the independent infrastructure teams are talking about multi-region RPC deployment and validator testing, demonstrates that the ecosystem is adopting this attitude.
Fogo tries to change the mindset of taking chains as narratives to considering chains as systems.
My verdict: Operational honesty is the most special bet by Fogo.
The new story which I perceive can be as follows:
Fogo tells the truth about the requirements of real-time markets: co-location-like behaviour, limited latency, predictable leadership and infrastructure which can be used as load increases. It attempts to design these conditions and at the same time rotate geography, with the use of staking and validators, and is compatible with the SVM environment.
This is not a simple avenue to take, and it is not the most trending topic on crypto Twitter, since it does not have flashiness.
But when Fogo is successful, it will not have a reputation of being another fast chain. It will be remembered instead as one of the earliest chains to take market performance as an operational discipline, that which is run, watched over, changed and tested, and not just proclaimed.
#fogo @Fogo Official
$FOGO

I have read a lot of next-generation L1 pitches they start with TPS, end with a token chart and in between say they are enterprise-ready as though they are a switch. There is another reason why I was attracted to Vanar. They do not say something with the most sincere intentions, but it is an attitude.

Vanar would like to be a system that can be used in the real world. Not only does it work well in an ideal setup, but it even works with a failure of nodes, endpoints halting, traffic bursts, and real users demanding the app to keep running.

It might not be very interesting, but it is. Adoption lives exactly here.

The most adopted truth that most of the people would not want to believe is the fact that reliability is the product.

Most networks sell speed. However, when launching the real applications, teams do not select a chain simply because it is the fastest. The question that they pose is which chain will not shock them when it comes to production.

Shockers kill products, budgets and good faith.

The latest report by Vanar regarding the upgrade of V23 protocol is centered on resilience and operations as opposed to pure performance. Various articles distributed by the media indicate that it was not a normal update. It was developed with a payments-grade ethos, and a federated agreement model based on the Stellar vision of consensus and focusing on stability in the event of failure.

Although you are cutting the marketing later, it still counts: We design to up, not to applause.

A network, which will consider infrastructure validators and not only stakers.

Most people miss this. Most networks make it a game to participate in, join, stake, earn. Your node is not consistently considered to be healthy, reachable and useful by the network. That will result in inflated node count, unreliable uptime, and a deceive of decentralization.

Vanar discusses a more practical problem: open-port verification which is the inclusion of node reachability in the security model and the attaching of rewards to the fact of reachability. The concept is also straightforward: when your node is not reliably reachable, it should not be rewarded in such a way that it is contributing.
It is not a crypto innovation in the sense that it is a production principle: the rewards must not be based on claims only, but on actual service.
That is where the network does not feel that it is a token economy but rather SRE playbook.
Scaling does not imply that it never fails, it means graceful degradation.

Live systems break down - networks, hardware, and humans do not set things up straight. It is not a question of whether the failures occur it is whether the chain collapses when they occur.
The V23 messaging of Vanar highlights resilience several times, with a further consideration on the existence of consensus, the increased fault tolerance, and the recovery.
I do not mean by this that distributed systems are magically solved--nothing is. But Vanar is choosing the appropriate field of battle: the battle of confidence.
It is an uncommon move in this industry.
The dullness that really trains developers.
Frankly speaking, the simplest method to estimate, whether a chain is trying to be adopted in the first place, is to look at its onboarding journey, rather than the whitepaper or hype video.
The onboarding path.
Chainlist and thirdweb are the primary locations where builders are present as of now: Vanar. Chainlist provides chain configuration to wallets which can add it through a normal flow. Vanar mainnet and the chain ID are displayed in a format that teams can use instantly by Thirdweb.
Then consider the official network information: there is a public RPC endpoint, there is a public WebSocket endpoint, there is chain ID and there is a clean and normal explorer.
That is important since developers do not like the novel rituals; they prefer to have the same ones. A network that is stepwise eliminates drop-off.
So when I see:
RPC: https://rpc.vanarchain.com
WS: wss://ws.vanarchain.com
Chain ID: 2040
I don’t just see endpoints. I observe a network that is attempting to become user friendly.
The actual stress test is payments and Vanar is leaning into it.

In the event that any of the categories present poor infrastructure, it is payments. Checks discard quaintness, lengthy queues, and leave till later.
The collaboration between Vanar and Worldpay is among the limited crypto measures that indicate the willingness to fulfill actual rails. Worldpay is the company that handles more than 2.3 trillion transactions every year in 146 countries, which is the magnitude that Vanar will be operating at.
Here enterprise-ready no longer is a phrase, but an obligation.
The mention of the words payments implies a requirement of reliability, compliance, predictable behavior and clean failure handling.
Vanar stooping into that arena is not the prudent thing to do, but it is the grave thing.
Why the number of nodes will not impress me, but will the discipline of the nodes.
Numerous initiatives boast of a giant node count. However, I pose an even more pointed question, how many of those nodes are healthy, accessible, and actually a part of a healthy network?
More recent Vanar write-ups assert that approximately 18,000 on-chain nodes were under network after V23, and the network continued to have a very high transaction success rate despite a high daily volume.
I do not have such numbers as a prize; I have them as a challenge-claim.
This is why open-port check is important: it demonstrates that Vanar is not only worried about the quantity of nodes but their quality.
Pointlessly stated: in order to achieve enterprise adoption, you should not execute your validator set as a vibes-based community; you require standards.
The Hidden Distribution Edge: Operation Familiarity.
It may be in simple terms: winning chains are not necessarily the most advanced. Their friction is normally minimal.
Vanar does not just distribute its strategy, but it targets to be part of the tools developers already have at their disposal. It provides network-set up flows, which are comparable to other EVM chains and also offers publicly available endpoints that can be tested immediately without requesting permission to access the team.
This acquaintance develops unobtrusively. Developers experiment the first time because it is easy, the next developer duplicates it, and a small project is deployed by a group of developers and is soon added to the list of supported networks.
It is the growth of ecosystems, this is not done through big announcements but by repeated low-friction decisions.
My opinion: Vanar Sells Confidence, and That Matters.
In retrospect, I would have Vanar portray the chain as being like a reliable infrastructure rather than a dice gambler casino.
This is reflected through the operational resilience emphasis in V23, its verification of nodes as a real operator, its obvious network structure and open endpoints, and its association with a payments giant such as Worldpay, where failures are a tangible business risk and not a simple bug.
The story is unlike AI, metaverse or speed-focusing chains. It is more expensive to raise since trust cannot be declared, it needs to be earned.
Conclusion: The Chains That Last Are the Chains You Can Work.
I do not believe that the feature count will be the determinant of the next wave of adoption. It will be determined by the ones that make builders and businesses feel safe to remain.
In my opinion, the biggest bet made by Vanar is no a headline feature. It is a working philosophy: it is a production machine in which reliability, verification, predictability are more than a hype.
They are not merely developing tech when they continue to lean into that. They’re building trust.
#Vanar @Vanarchain
$VANRY

The majority of the Layer-1 blockchain-related discussions reiterate the concepts of TPS, block time, and charts. I believe that this is an incorrect point of view on the part of Fogo. The more I look into it the more it is becoming apparent that Fogo is actually a market-structure project wrapped in a Layer-1.

What I am trying to say is this; speed is not the objective of Fogo. It is intended to ensure that on-chain trading is more equitable and clean by transforming trade matching. That is an ambition that is not merely professing to have low latency, but is like the way that real exchanges work: first, execution; second, marketing.

The thesis: the quality of the market is better than the speed of the raw

You have long enough been trading to understand that it does not help you to be fast to avoid bad fills. Even using fast blocks, latency games, reordering, and even toxic order flow will eat you. Simply put, the construction of a high-speed chain may continue to make a market a tax.

That worldview is evident through Fogo messaging publicly. They talk about the taxes levied on traders: Friction tax, bot tax, speed tax and toxic flow. The words used are audacious, yet the underlying message is uncompromising the actual danger is not slow confirmations, it is unjust competition that takes advantage.

That is why the greatest interest to me of Fogo is not the chain itself but what it facilitates at the market layer.

Ambient and the big swing: Dual flow Batch Auctions.

The most notable one is Ambient Finance, an everlasting DEX on Fogo that is going to execute Dual Flow Batch Auctions (DFBA).

On-chain trading nowadays is likely to be in two worlds. The former is AMMs: simple and easy, but not necessarily effective in the case of fast market changes. The second one is continuous order books (CLOBs): they have smaller spreads and improved price discovery, but they are susceptible to latency games and MEV, since the first to see and trade tends to win.

DFBA is a mere combination of the merits of both worlds and elimination of the most vile flaw: the speed-based extraction. Ambient claims that DFBA combines CLOB accuracy with fairness through batching orders and clearing out the block at the end of the block, at an oracle-based price.

It is the oracle-bound marketplace that actually initiates the change of market-structure.

Why change bundling affects trading psychology.

Everyone in a continuous market is a race. The quickest users can push other users slower, jump queues, and take advantage of them. Through this reason, common traders tend to believe that they are trading with ghosts.

In the batch auction, the game changes. Orders are stacked up throughout the block and all clear at the end. According to Ambient, in contrast to continuous matching, DFBA aggregates orders and clears at block end, at a single clearing price on each side with the help of an oracle such as Pyth.

The moral of the story: the batching shifts competition on speed to price. When everybody clears simultaneously, you cannot win by being a millisecond faster, you have to quote better.

This, therefore, makes DFBA a legitimate call towards justness, rather than just another low-charge DEX.

The detail of the so-called dual flow is more important than one may assume.

Another suggestion made by Ambient is to split the orders into the maker and taker flows at the stage of batch accumulation.

Some omit this point, yet it is important since it separates the liquidity provision and consumption flows and the auction solves them to restrict reordering games.

The aim: smaller spreads and the snipers will not be advantaged.

That is quite a change to the typically DeFi story of increased leverage, increased points, and increased hype. It is a plea of integrity in the market.

Promised in crypto markets most underestimated is price improvement.

The writings of DFBA point out that price-improvement opportunities can be provided by batches. Ambient provides a simple example: when you place a buy order and the market falls, the competitors can revise the quotes atomically so that you can get a better price without the market racing.

That is a case that is prevalent in mature markets but uncommon on-chain.

Numerous DeFi casinos just claim to offer small slippage. DFBA tries to provide real fairness in the market movement.

Given that the ecosystem of Fogo can provide such on a regular basis, it is an upscale addition compared to another 10x headline TPS.

How DFBA attempts to reduce MEV without faking MEV disappears.

Most of the projects purport to eradicate MEV, and this sounds like a fairy tale. I find it appealing that DFBA aims at changing the process which facilitates front-running.

According to Ambient, front-running in the case of an unpredictable oracle final auction price is extremely hard and post-quiet-period.

Not a promise, that is mechanism design, when the clearing price is not predictable by an order placed by a bot, then the bot loses its advantage.

It will not eradicate all the MEV, but it is capable of restraining the most dangerous type of it, namely speed-based reordering which is detrimental to ordinary traders.

The solver model: Service based competition.

The description of the participants of auction is another indicator of maturity provided by Ambient. They mean external solvers and market makers providing competitive bids in the manner of solver models such as CoW Swap but made part of the batch process.

This is interesting in that it would make liquidity a competitive layer which would help in enhancing user execution, and not a mere pool.

In simple terms: the system challenges professionals to compete in the case of a better fill. It is an institutional concept as it coincides with the aspiration of Fogo of market-grade trading.

Market quality also includes resilience.

This is another angle that is not given due consideration by most hype threads, what happens when the oracle is stressed?

The DFBA write-up does not evade that. According to it, in case of oracle lag, the system can add delay to the auction. In case the oracle stops completely, oracle-pegged liquidity is switched off, and makers revert to offering fixed prices.

That is important since it demonstrates an effort of graceful degradation and not all breaks.

In actual finance the systems do not get bonus points on perfect days. They are respected because of their way of conducting themselves on bad days.

The underlying design in this story as to why Fogo will matter.

Although my angle is on market structure, it should not be ignored that the chain is important since the mechanism must be realistic.

Ambient specifically states that DFBA may be fully deployed in smart contracts on the SVM of Fogo, where compute costs are minimal and no changes are needed to the consensus-layer.

That is a significant line: it implies that Fogo can now run such market mechanisms in high frequency without making each block a costly, slack event. DFBA auctions every block only works when the execution is efficient.

So yes—speed matters. In this story, it is not speed, but speed that enables it.

My lesson: Fogo is not creating the road and only the rules of trading

In one sentence, to say that Fogo is different, I would say the following: It is attempting to correct on-chain trading at the rules layer.

Most chains sell throughput. The ecosystem at Fogo is in the process of experimenting with a market structure that makes speed advantage less, uses competition that pushes towards price, and allows price improvement, all without leaving anything off the block or hidden.

Neither is that a guarantee of success. Market design is hard. But it is actually a new direction as opposed to the vicious cycle of new L1, same DEX, same MEV pain.

There are some chances that Fogo will not be another fast SVM chain in case DFBA-style execution gains momentum. It will be remembered as a chain that contributed to transitioning the on-chain markets away in the past of the fastest but the best priced. And to merchants, that is what makes the difference between a casino and a place.

#fogo $FOGO @fogo

When humans are talking about AI agents on chain, they usually refer to speed, fees, and loud demonstrations. However, the initial actual problem I observe is safety. Cryptocurrency transfers already involve people making mistakes due to the length of the wallet address that is not forgiving. Suppose agents transfer payment at speed and scale and many times over. In the absence of guardrails we will have an economy of permanent errors rather than agent economy.

This is why I am paying special attention to a more subtle aspect of Vanar direction identity, uniqueness and safer routing. It is not glitzy, yet it will dictate how ordinary individuals and companies will consider money automation.

Transferring Money to Hex Strings Is a Human Bug Just Waiting to Be an Agent Disaster.

The address format used today 0x... is machine friendly but inhumane to humans. Even cautious users commit copy-pasting errors, address the wrong recipient, or are unable to check whoever they are transacting with. The most bad thing is that when the money is dispatched it is gone.

In agent-driven systems, the risk is increased. Agents do not stop to scan a hex string thrice as a suspicious human. They are speed and completion-oriented. The challenge is then the following one: how do we allow the agents to transfer money fast without having to coin-flip each transaction?

One of the solutions proposed by vanar-aligned builders is human-readable names which are routed over wallet integrations. There would be no longer be send to a hex, but send to a name. There are public mentions, such as readable style names of the type.vanar and MetaMask Snap-based name resolution, including george.vanar. With such UX, automation is ensured.

The Second Threat: Bots are not only harvesting Airdrops - they are poisoning Markets.

Individuals do not recognize the extent to which on-chain systems are hurt by bots. They cultivate prizes, however, what is more significant they corrupt exploration and faith. When a marketplace, PayFi app or even an agent service is overwhelmed with fake users, the system turns noisy, unfair and easily manipulated.

Sybil resistance is also important here, but it is not a buzzword, it is a fundamental safety measure. When your application fails to differentiate between a real person and ten thousand wallets, reward systems, reputation systems or agent processes are gamed. When that occurs, hardcore users drop.

The ecosystem created by Vanar relies on a certain tool: Biomapper created by Humanode. It provides privacy-preserving sybil resistance, which can be implemented with dApps with minimal code. Humanode reported the implementation of Biomapper on Vanar and states that it enables it to provide biometric sybil protection without exposing user data.

This can only scale with Sybil Resistance Without KYC.

This is the fine line because complete KYC of all of them will kill adoption. A lack of identity and anonymity portends bot farms. We must have a middle ground: demonstrate uniqueness but not by making us all paperwork.

The Biomapper messaging of Humanode can be seen as intriguing as it provides sybil resistance without revealing personal data to the on-chain. It is important: not only enterprises and actual users do not want to see their names in public books, but also not to have their systems exploited by robots and counterfeit accounts.

This is where also Vanar makes his thesis more real-life. To get PayFi, market access and consumer apps to work, you require a mechanism that will block bots without creating a surveillance machine.

Name + Uniqueness + Settlement Names + Uniqueness + Settlement The Stacks I Believe Will Win Customers Use The Trust Stack

In perspective, the most secure system of agent trading resembles a three-layered stack:

First, there is the readability of human identity in terms of payments and permissions. Second, uniqueness tests to eliminate gaming. Third, expedited financing to render automation helpful.

The ecosystem of Vanar encompasses all three. When referring to names, community: On naming, reference to the .vanar -style name and Snap-based resolution minimizes routing errors. On uniqueness, Biomapper allows dApps to filter bots without impacting privacy. About networking, in documentation Vanar emphasizes standard support of EVM wallets using public RPCs and common wallet implementations, meaning that identity and uniqueness layers do not need to re-implement a common set of workflows.

The thing is: guardrails only work when they can be implemented in a regular working process.

Why This Angle Is More Important Than Another TPS Claim.

A lot of chains can boast of speed and a lot can boast of a low price. However, the trick lies in the trust at scale particularly when automation comes into play.

I do not simply inquire, Is it fast? in case I am a business. I ask:

Am I able to make my users make payments to the correct individual?
Can bots drain my incentives?
Is it possible to establish equitable access without revealing confidential identity?

This is why I consider identity and sybil resistance as the main infrastructure and not fringe benefits. In their absence, you have a crowd that is thrilled momentarily and system that is abused permanently, rather than a healthy user base.

The Vanar public ecosystem pages introduce the chain as the AI-based infrastructure of PayFi and actual application, but the long-term credibility will require a secure user experience on non-cryptocurrency individuals.

My Thesis: Safety, not Hype, Will Be the First Agent Chains Winner.

I believe that the initial wave of the real agent commerce will appear rather pedestrian on the surface. It will be:
Names instead of hex.
Less KYC uniqueness checks.
Applications that prevent the blocking of bot clusters but not actual users.
Routing which minimizes irreversible errors.
That’s why I’m optimistic. Chains that become popular with the mainstreams will not clam the loudest but will silently fix ugly issues that we all attempt to ignore.
Whenever I think of Vanar I do not limit it to a single feature. I envision a greater direction: it must be made on-chain activity automatable.
By making name based routing normal, enabling privacy friendly uniqueness proof and making such protections lightweight to builders, Vanar will not simply construct an AI-native story. It will pave the way of agent commerce to become normal.
#Vanar @Vanarchain
$VANRY

The pattern followed by most new blockchains in the layer-one model is to raise substantial amounts of capital, aggressively market, ship subsequently, and hope that liquidity and hype keep it alive in the tumultuous initial months. Fogo was different when it decided to take the more difficult way. It embraced a community-first distribution strategy based on Flames and early involvement and maintained the sale component small. That choice is significant as the chain based on trading requires more than people; it requires constructors, liquidity providers, and individuals to actually test the network.

In this article, I will do a bare statement; distribution is product design. When you get distribution wrong, you fail to create a network, you simply create a chart.

The thesis: unsafe at any rate, market infrastructure cannot be made by using sell-pressure schedules.

Fogo also seeks to be a layer-one, high-performance, single-validated-message (SVM) layer-one that is already a high bar technically. However, there is a second hurdle that is equally challenging making a believable token economy in which early adoption is not controlled by one short-term action dumping.
When your first year is largely spent in opening the doors of Calendars, your chain is a marketplace of exits, rather than a marketplace of trades. That is why I concentrate on the way in which teams organize the initial ownership: who gets the tokens and when and why.
The purpose of the tokenomics write-up by Fogo is quite clear: valuable distribution to community airdrops and community ownership, and big buckets such as core contributors are locked up under long vesting curves.
The reason why Flames is more important than airdrops as a concept.

Airdrops are not difficult to promote, but not easy to do properly. It is not about giving out tokens, it is about whom to give them to.

The appeal of Fogo Flames program is that it is structured in the form of participation loop: it rewards people who actually attended early: use testnet, participate in the ecosystem, bridge activity, and other quantifiable behavior.

I do not merely read it and see that there are marketing points. I observe a team that is attempting to divide two groups:

- One group wants a token event.

- There is a group of people who want to develop and trade on a rapid chain.

The second group is more needed by a trading-first layer-one than the first one.

The underestimated indicator: Fogo was ready to cancel a presale.

Later in 2025 coverage, several outlets reported that Fogo eliminated an intended presale and transitioned its focus to community distribution via Flames and similar initiatives.

You love or hate token sales, but calling off one sends a strong message since it is the very reverse of the least path to an easy fund-raising. It also helps in diminishing I bought first, I sell first dynamism that can prevail during a launch.

To me, the point isn’t moral. It is mechanical: a market place cannot begin its existence as a liquidation event.

The term small sale can only have a sense when it is also small and well identified.

The official tokenomics listing on Fogo has a Binance Prime Sale (2%) and defines other buckets such as Community Airdrop (6%).

This matters for two reasons.

First, it creates a distinct boundary on what was sold, rather than allowing the strategic allocations to later expand into something bigger.

Second, it renders the story decipherable. When you are trusting, it has a characteristic of clarity: people can see what has taken place and what has not taken place.

Another form of community ownership is community ownership that is locked.

I like one aspect of the structure: not all of their own community ownership is liquid cash. The Echo fundraising allocation, as an example, is said to be locked at TGE and has a longer unlock schedule.

That forms an alternative set of behavior. The ones who purchased using community channels but are locked are more of long-term stakeholders than short-term sellers. That would suit a chain that would like to be infrastructure, since infrastructure must have patient capital--in particular, early.

The additional value of distribution to a trading-first chain.

When you are creating a chain of apps, sometimes you can get away with a sloppy first year. However, when you are constructing a chain to markets, say order books, liquidations, real time risk systems, your reputation has been determined in the first few months.
Markets are concerned with dependability, availability, and stability. A token economy which generates perpetual sell and disorderly liquidity may leak into the perception of the chain.
And therefore when Fogo writes performance, I do not simply interpret it as engineering. I interpreted it as a stack level objective: chain performance and ecosystem behavior performance.
The Flames -Ownership loop is actually a coordination mechanism.
The most effective incentive programs do not simply pay individuals, they organize individuals.
Any good points program accomplishes three things:
1. It arouses action in a foregoing manner--people arrive early.
2. It concentrates on the right actions - testing, building, liquidity.
3. It forms a social identity in which participants are made to feel like stakeholders.
The Flame system The Flame framework, which are converted into tokens based on milestones on main-net, is a system of coordination: do the work early, own later.
That precisely is how you want to bootstrap a chain which is meant to be traded. You must be actually used before being on stage, not on.
What is profounder is that distribution defines the building.
This is a perspective that is not talked about because enough: token distribution does not only have an impact on price, it also defines product preferences.
Without the presence of early tokens becoming widely held, the results of hype cycles will be pursued by builders. When builders and operators have early tokens in their possession, the builders will aim at uptime, tooling, and real flows- since that is exactly what the token-holders require in order to win.
The strategies of Fogo encourage early involvement, which pour valuable sums into community buckets, and lock a few sizeable sums. This pushes the ecosystem towards being driven to operate the chain instead of trading the narrative.
The next thing I will observe is whether the incentives will cause good habits.
I have hope that everything is heading in the right direction; I am not naive about the risk. Farmers can be attracted to any points program. Mercenaries can be attracted through any airdrop. The true test is what is after launch: will those who participated remain and develop or will they fade away?
It is not possible to know only by looking at tweets. Look instead at whether:
1- Apps keep shipping.
Liquidity continues to come where it is required.
2- Rewards do not result in users returning to a product, just in case they have a better UX.
When Fogo is able to transform early participation in Flames to long-term operator behavior, distribution ceases to be a launch strategy, but it turns into culture.
The conclusion: I put more trust to the chain that will not go to easy hype rather it chooses hard alignment.
The performance thesis of Fogo is already grandiose. The thing that made me take more notice is its readiness to make distribution of tokens a product attribute: match those who test, construct, and utilize, and then restrict the section that is merely bought to sell.
Well, that is not an assurance of excellence. Nothing does.
However, it is the type of decision that provides a trading-first L1 its genuine opportunity to be more than just a rarity in crypto: a market infrastructure that does not begin by cannibalizing itself.
#fogo $FOGO @fogo