AH啊豪

The primary market Chinese MeMe is on fire again‼️
Just entered 2026, Chinese MeMe coins
"I'm here now" have made a large group of people rich overnight
"Binance Life" has also listed on spot trading
Directly baffling foreign friends!

So there are still many opportunities in the primary market now!
But many people still don't take seriously the high fees in the primary market, not knowing that spending just one minute can save hundreds or even thousands of dollars in profits💰
👇👇👇
Now fill in Ahao's wallet invitation to save 30% in fees (the highest proportion allowed within market compliance). Over 300 people have already signed up, and future upgrades will allow me to adjust the ratio in real time for brothers. It's automatically returned by the system, no need for my intervention, completely worry-free about the risk of being scammed‼️
1️⃣ Enter Web3 wallet
2️⃣ Click Invite Friends
3️⃣ Click Participate Now
4️⃣ Enter: AAA111
5️⃣ Confirm Complete✅
Brothers who are bound can come to the homepage to join the group,
And sound the call to launch together on great projects!
#币安上线币安人生 $我踏马来了

Today, I will talk to everyone about the value logic of XPL from the perspective of payment practicality!

When discussing the value of XPL, I prefer to focus on its core positioning as a "global digital dollar payment infrastructure." The project does not pursue a large and comprehensive ecosystem but instead focuses on the core utility of stablecoin payments, which makes its advantages particularly prominent.

As of January 2026, the TVL of stablecoins on the Plasma chain has firmly ranked second globally, with a scale between 4.5 to 5.5 billion USD, among which USDT holds an absolute dominance. Behind this data is the real application of zero-fee USDT transfers, supported by the Paymaster sponsorship mechanism.

Users do not need to hold XPL to complete payments, significantly lowering the usage threshold and making it highly attractive in high-frequency small scenarios like cross-border remittances. Additionally, the sub-second transaction confirmation achieved by the PlasmaBFT consensus further enhances the payment experience.

The upcoming private testing of the Plasma One digital bank aims to bridge offline payment scenarios through stablecoin bank cards and cashback functions, connecting crypto assets with daily payments.

In my view, the long-term value of XPL is always tied to the transaction scale and infrastructure completeness of this "payment highway," rather than short-term market sentiment.
#plasma $XPL @Plasma

I have deeply analyzed the WAL's smart contract virtual machine and its compatibility trade-offs

The virtual machine of the WAL chain promotes itself as 'highly compatible with EVM'. To test this, I attempted to directly deploy a Solidity contract that I previously wrote for Ethereum, which contains some complex logic, onto the WAL testnet.

The deployment was successful, and the basic functionalities ran normally. This is indeed the biggest advantage, meaning that the vast developer resources and mature toolchain available on Ethereum can be migrated almost seamlessly.

However, I still found some subtle 'incompatibilities'. These mainly occur in precompiled contracts and some specific opcodes. To integrate its privacy features, WAL has modified or replaced some of the underlying cryptographic primitives of EVM. For example, the standard ecrecover may have been replaced with their own privacy signature verification function. This means that some complex contracts that heavily rely on these specific functionalities (such as certain advanced multi-sign wallets or zk-SNARK verifiers) need to be modified to run.

The team's choice is very clear: to sacrifice a bit of 'absolute compatibility' for the core privacy features. This is not an issue for most ordinary DeFi contracts, but for seasoned developers who want to deploy the same bytecode across multiple chains, it may add an extra assessment step. This is actually an implicit trade-off in the technical approach: is it better to pursue extreme compatibility to reduce migration costs, or to reserve the freedom to modify the underlying for unique features? WAL has clearly chosen the latter.
#walrus $WAL @WalrusProtocol

I analyzed the value capture logic of the Dusk token (DUSK) at its current stage.

When looking at a project's tokenomics, I tend to ask: What is the primary use of the token right now, at this moment? For DUSK, the answer is currently very clear and singular: it is the fuel (Gas) of the network.

As the mainnet focuses on providing privacy and compliance services for enterprise-level applications, its Gas fee model is also distinctive. It is not a simple auction but is related to the complexity of the transaction, especially whether zero-knowledge proof computation is enabled. This means that executing a complex privacy-compliant transaction will consume significantly more DUSK than a simple transfer.

Therefore, the direct value driver of DUSK at this stage comes from the number and complexity of "privacy-compliant transactions" on its network. This is a very focused logic. However, currently, the daily transaction volume on the network is still sluggish, with most activities being testing and ecosystem building. Gas fee demand has yet to reach scale.

Staking and node rewards are another aspect. But as mentioned earlier, the design of the "hidden PoS" mechanism suppresses the mindset of purely pursuing staking rewards for easy gains, and encourages participants to be responsible for network security and service quality. Thus, the value of DUSK cannot simply be measured by staking annualized returns.

My conclusion is that DUSK is currently an option that is deeply reliant on its "technical platform adoption prospects." Its value capture mechanism is well-designed and targets high-value financial transactions.

But whether the channels are well-established can attract a torrent of compliant financial flows is the only key to determining its success or failure.

Before the influx arrives, the token reflects more of a discounted expectation for this future demand, and the volatility will naturally be quite large.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk_Foundation

The Governance Value of VANRY: It's More Than Just 'Voting Rights'

Regarding the governance function of VANRY, I feel it has been discussed a lot, but the challenge lies in how to implement it effectively.

According to its roadmap, VANRY stakers will be able to vote on core matters such as protocol upgrades and the use of treasury funds in the future.
This sounds quite standard, but what I want to emphasize is that effective governance requires very low technical and participation thresholds.

For example, will Vanar provide an easy-to-understand voting interface and translate complex proposals (such as adjustments to technical parameters) into clear options?
Or will ordinary token holders give up voting due to high understanding costs, resulting in power being concentrated in the hands of a few?
Moreover, can governance truly address critical issues, such as the specific decisions on projects funded by the ecological fund, or will it remain limited to some minor parameters?

I believe the true release of VANRY's governance value depends on these pragmatic mechanism designs.
Only when enough token holders feel that their votes are meaningful and easy to exercise will governance not be just a hollow phrase.

$VANRY
#vanar
@Vanarchain

Don't just think about borrowing! I've discovered another reason to hold LISTA tokens.

When everyone talks about ListaDAO, they always mention how to use it for low-interest borrowing to arbitrage. But recently, I looked at its ecological planning and feel that its platform token LISTA may be underestimated.

Besides the common governance function, LISTA has a core use for paying the borrowing interest of the stablecoin lisUSD. This means that the more lisUSD is minted, the greater the potential demand for LISTA will be. This is not just my wild guess; if you look at its recent proposals and roadmap, the focus is clearly on expanding the application scenarios of lisUSD, such as integrating with more DEXs and lending protocols.

This reminds me that holding some platform tokens with actual consumption scenarios early on often pays off in the long run. My mindset has changed a bit: I no longer see ListaDAO just as a one-time arbitrage tool but rather as an ecosystem worth observing and participating in for the long term.

I will use its lending function and also consider holding a small portion of LISTA tokens as a “ticket” for the development of this ecosystem. Of course, this is definitely not investment advice, just a personal strategy adjustment.
#usd1理财最佳策略listadao $LISTA @lista_dao

Data does not lie: I looked into the recent interest rate changes of ListaDAO

I am a data person, so I pay special attention to the real-time interest rates of on-chain protocols. Recently, I have been monitoring several major lending pools of Lista Lending and found some interesting fluctuations.

Take the pool that allows borrowing USD1 against collateral of BNB, for example. Last week, during market fluctuations, the borrowing rate suddenly jumped from the usual around 2% to 5.2%. This clearly indicates that many people simultaneously needed to borrow USD1 to cover their positions or buy the dip, leading to the liquidity pool being quickly drained, and the rate was subsequently pushed up by the market. However, interestingly, once the market sentiment stabilized, the rate gradually fell back below 2%.

This observation made me realize two things:
First, its interest rate is a real signal of market supply and demand. A sudden spike in rates often indicates that some concentrated demand or pressure has emerged on-chain, which itself is an indicator worth paying attention to.
Second, for users looking to arbitrage with it, timing is crucial. You cannot just look at the advertised "average low rate"; you must confirm in real-time the borrowing cost and target return to see if there is still enough room at the moment you actually operate. My current habit is to refresh the page before making a move to check the current specific values, rather than relying on memory. After all, the market changes every minute.
#usd1理财最佳策略listadao $LISTA @lista_dao

My confusion: How to choose the yield-generating assets in the Lista ecosystem?

After using ListaDAO for a while, I actually have a bit of 'choice paralysis.' It seems that there are more and more yield-generating assets in its ecosystem, such as slisBNB (liquid staking token), and various yield-bearing stablecoins like asUSDF or PT-USDe.

In theory, these can all be used as collateral to borrow money, achieving the so-called 'one fish, multiple eats.' But specifically how to choose, I did a detailed comparison:

· If you pursue mainstream and stability: directly using blue-chip collateral like BTCB or ETH is probably the most worry-free. These assets have high recognition and the best liquidity.
· If you want to layer on more native yield: then using slisBNB may be more cost-effective. If you collateralize it to borrow USD1, you can not only earn the interest spread, but slisBNB itself also continuously generates staking rewards in BNB. This is equivalent to having a principal that benefits from both staking and borrowing yields.
· As for those yield-bearing stablecoins, for example, if you hold PT-USDe, it is already generating yield, and if you use it as collateral to borrow USD1 to earn financial management returns, it sounds great. But there is an invisible risk here: these derivative assets are more complex and may face greater decoupling or liquidity risks in extreme market conditions.

So my conclusion is that there is no absolute best, only what is most suitable for your own risk preference. Personally, I mainly use BTCB and BNB, which are more common, and for the more complex yield-generating assets, I am still in the learning and observation phase, not daring to take large positions.
#usd1理财最佳策略listadao $LISTA @lista_dao

Hands-on Practice: This is How I Use Lista Lending's 'Preferential Interest Rates'

To be honest, I used to think that low-interest loans were just a gimmick. But recently, ListaDAO and WLFI collaborated to bring the borrowing rate for USD1 down to 0.39%, which made me want to try it out myself.

My specific operation was as follows:

1. I first exchanged some USDT for WLFI tokens on PancakeSwap (this is the 'ticket' required for the collaboration).
2. Then I connected to Lista Lending and found the USD1 borrowing pool that displayed a 0.39% APY in the lending market.
3. I collateralized some BNB and borrowed USD1. This interest rate is so low that it is almost negligible; borrowing 1000 dollars results in only 3.9 in interest for a year.
4. The money I borrowed was immediately deposited into another protocol offering stablecoin mining, which has an annualized return of about 8%. With this quick turnaround, the net profit margin is around 7.6%.

Personally, I feel that the trick here is that ListaDAO is using this ecological cooperation approach to provide 'subsidies' to early and active users. It attracts you to use its products with extremely low interest rates, and once you get used to this lending channel, you might later try its other more complex modules, such as minting stablecoin lisUSD. For me, this is a tool for obtaining liquidity at an extremely low cost. Of course, you must always pay attention to the deadlines for such promotional activities and the price fluctuations of WLFI itself. My own principle is: you can take advantage, but never be greedy; take the profit when it’s good.
#usd1理财最佳策略listadao $LISTA @lista_dao

A reminder from an experienced user: The 'hidden costs' of the Lista strategy

As a user who has experienced various features of ListaDAO for some time, I want to remind new friends: don’t just get excited about the high interest rate on paper; some hidden costs can easily be overlooked.

First, gas fee costs. Especially when the BNB Chain network is congested, completing a series of operations such as collateralizing, borrowing, transferring, and depositing may accumulate significant gas fees. Particularly if your capital amount is not large or if you operate frequently, this expense can erode a considerable part of your profits.

Second, capital efficiency costs. Your collateral (like BTCB) is locked up, which means you miss the chance to participate in other opportunities directly with it. If Bitcoin suddenly surges during your collateral period, you may feel that the 'opportunity cost' is a bit high. Although you may earn through arbitrage, psychologically, you can’t help but compare.

Third, energy costs. This is not a 'deposit and forget' strategy. You need to regularly check the collateral rate, pay attention to changes in borrowing rates, and keep a close eye on whether financial products are due. This requires time and energy, and to some extent, it is also a cost.

Therefore, I am now more inclined towards a 'laid-back' approach: only using a portion of idle assets for operations, setting a conservative collateral rate, and choosing financial products with relatively matching terms to reduce frequent operations.

Lower expectations, manage risks well, earn money that you can understand within your range of cognition, and this way, your mindset will be more stable.
#usd1理财最佳策略listadao $LISTA @lista_dao