IOSG Ventures:如何定价非理性市场的项目公允估值(FDV)?

Odaily星球日报Published on 2024-01-30Last updated on 2024-01-30

Abstract

本文讨论了铭文的前世今生。使技术繁荣的背后,需要加密的使用群体不断地抛出审慎的怀疑。

原文作者:Nelson,IOSG Ventures

引言

《繁花》最近的大火像观众展示了资本市场的秘密,尤其是最后一幕当不同角色通过买卖股票,改变市场流动性来影响股价和自己盈亏的情节。这些情节不仅揭示了股市的复杂性,也反映了股民在市场中面临的不同风险。

在传统金融世界中对市值错误估计十分常见,特别是在互联网泡沫时期,那时流动性股票相对有限,许多公司的股价被高估,而实际资产和盈利能力并不支持这样的市值,导致市场不稳定和最终的崩溃。

类似的情况在当前的加密货币领域也存在。由于加密市场的新兴性和不成熟,加之监管不完善,市场更易受到价格操纵和投机行为的影响。这种环境下,了解资产的真实价值十分重要。

简介

对于新人来说,加密货币二级市场中的流通供应量(Circulating Supply)、总供应量(Total Supply)、最大供应量(Maximum Supply)和市值(Market Capitalization)等词汇,通常是他们首次接触的内容。这些概念在理解加密资产的动态方面至关重要。流通供应量是当前在公众手中并可用于交易的货币数量。总供应量进一步发展,包括所有铸造的货币,减去不再可用的货币。最大供应量代表将永远存在的货币的绝对限制,是货币潜在稀缺性的关键指标。市值通常是通过将一种货币的当前价格与其流通供应量相乘来计算的,提供了有关其市场价值的信息。

这些度量指标是非常有信息量的数字;它们是评估加密货币的健康状况和潜力的基本工具。在探索协议的代币经济学(Tokenomics)时,我们经常会遇到详细的货币分配,但将这些信息转化为不同类型的货币的可行见解可能具有挑战性。在这里,「全面稀释价值」(Fully Diluted Value)的概念变得相关。它通过假设其代币供应完全流通来估计了一个项目的市值,,从而提供了更广泛的长期市场潜力视角。然而,使用今天的价格来计算未来的全面稀释价值是有问题的,通常提供有限的信息,因为它忽视了市场动态随时间可能发生的变化。我们如何有效地计算不同类别的货币,并决定是否将它们纳入我们的计算中?

为了阐明这个问题,Optimism 和 Arbitrum 可能是一个很好的案例研究。在对 Optimism 进行市值计算时,我们发现其对不同代币用途的描述十分复杂。本文旨在梳理这些类别,并为每个类别提供建议的处理方法。我们需要一种客观的方法来测量分配给特定项目的当前市场估值,而不管这个代币在未来是否具有通货膨胀或通货紧缩的动态。我们想要回答一些简单的问题,比如我们应该如何决定一个项目的市值,以及根据估值方法,市场上当前更受欢迎的项目是 Arbitrum 还是 Optimism?

讨论将以以下方式展开,首先分析应在我们的估值计算中考虑的各种类型的货币。这将包括对它们各自的功能、处理方式以及这些选择背后的原理的检查。随后,我们将将这些货币类型与[Optimism]和[Aribitrum]的代币经济学中概述的具体类别一一对照。

代币类型

在明确如何处理每种类别之前,让我们达成一些共识,即 Optimism 的流通供应量、总供应量和最大供应量分别是多少。

根据[Optimism]的定义和[Optimism 的表格记录],OP 代币的长期最大供应量预计约为 43 亿。Optimism 将流通供应定义为 OP 代币的数量,这些代币在没有任何转账限制的情况下自由流通。总供应不仅包括这些流通的代币,还包括受特定分配计划管理的代币。目前,流通供应量为 9.11 亿,而总供应量,包括受分配控制的代币,在 22 亿左右。图示如下:

IOSG Ventures:如何定价非理性市场的项目公允估值(FDV)?

在计算市值时,人们通常只考虑流通供应量。但这并不是一个全面的衡量标准。让我们将这个图表分成三个部分,并讨论应该如何处理它们。

类型 1 :

在区块链中流通的货币

  • 定义:这些是在区块链生态系统内积极交易的货币。

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:这些货币具有活跃的市场价值,是区块链经济的重要组成部分。

未流通的货币:

区分不同类型的非流动货币:尽管这些货币目前没有在流通,但它们被保留用于特定角色,并有可能影响区块链的未来价值。因此,在考虑将它们纳入我们的流通供应计算时,关键是要检查这些货币将在什么条件下分配,并评估它们对生态系统的潜在影响。更具体地说,需要考虑的关键问题是,这些货币的流通是否用于奖励有益于生态系统的社区贡献,还是因为它们为项目提供资金而被分配。比如对于投资人的锁定股,可以将这个情况与现实世界进行类比:当公司上市时,创始人会有一个锁定期,但在计算未流通股份时,我们仍然考虑这部分,尽管这可能与市场流动性不符。

类型 2 :

分配但「锁定」的货币

  • 定义:通常情况下,未包括在流通供应中的总供应部分主要由核心贡献者和投资者持有,也就是 Optimism 所谓的「sugar xaddies」。分配给贡献者和投资者的代币目前被锁定,但根据计划的时间表,它们将在未来解锁并可交易。

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:这些代币已经分配,无论这个项目未来会变得更好还是更差,它们迟早都将可交易。

类型 3 :

未分配的货币

  • 定义:通常情况下,未包括在流通供应中的总供应部分主要由 Optimism 基金会持有。他们保留了这部分代币用于未来分配,分配给开发者、贡献者和其他重要利益相关者,以奖励他们对项目的贡献。

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:不,直到它们被分配

  • 原因:这些代币主要由 Optimism 基金会持有,用于未来投资,如果未来没有产生价值,它们将不会被分配。

更具体的示例:

之前的讨论可能有些晦涩,因此在以下部分,我们想讨论不同的情景。这些案例可能不会在 OP 的情况下发生。

1. 支付员工薪水:这种类型的使用应该在发生后计入。与为贡献者锁定的代币相比,这种情况更具自主性,我们不知道将来会发生什么。

2. 以 USDC 交换代币出售给市场:这种类型的交易也应该在发生后记录。但我们必须记住,这也会膨胀资产负债表的资产端(就像在股票市场上出售库存股票一样)。这是价值交换而不是价值创造的行为。

3. 分配代币给生态系统项目:这是对生态系统未来的投资,通常具有自主性且经过深思熟虑。因此,一旦授予一定的分配,它应该计入市值计算中。

4. 向用户空投代币:这是对其用户的投资,要么是为了获取他们的忠诚度,要么是为了营销其协议,一旦发生,这应该计入其中。

5. 销毁代币:这些应该从计算中扣除,因为它们将来不会再活跃

映射到 Optimism 的具体类别

点击此网页 来查看 Optimism 如何分配其代币以及分配方式。

空投 - 类型 1 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是的

  • 原因:空投类似于「忠诚度 / 营销费用」,可以在一旦授予后自由交易。 参与者可以自由交易这些代币;它们应该被视为类型 1 ,我们需要包括此类别中的所有代币。在分配之前,这些代币由 Optimism 基金会(类型 3)持有。在论坛 (https://gov.optimism.io/t/treasury-appropriation-proposal-foundation-year-2-budget/5979/6) 上已经有很多围绕分配条件的讨论。一个重要的指标是投资回报率(ROI)。

生态系统基金 - 类型 3 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:不纳入,直到分配

  • 原因:在这个类别中有四个不同的子类别:治理基金、合作伙伴基金、种子基金和未分配基金。根据[cryptorank](https://cryptorank.io/price/optimism/vesting) 提供的信息,我们可以得出结论,合作伙伴、种子和未分配基金没有被跟踪,因此不被计算为流通中的代币。而治理基金的一部分被视为流通中的代币。这是正确的决定。这些代币用于未来的投资和增长计划。它们应该在任何分配宣布后计入。

RetroPGF- 类型 3 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:不纳入,直到分配

  • 原因:RetroPGF 代币代表对过去贡献的支付,应该在宣布任何分配后包括在估值计算中。但这种包含应该仅限于已经分配的数量。因为通过这种渠道的分配是定期投票的,基于人们的贡献,就像一家公司将项目外包给其他外部实体一样。这种方法确保了贡献得到适当的认可和奖励,使激励与社区的增长和成功保持一致。而且,这种类型的基金肯定会对这个生态系统具有最高的投资回报率(ROI),因为与购买未来的承诺不同,它更像是对出色成就的补偿。

  • RetroPGF 的性质和分配:RetroPGF,由 Vitalik Buterin 构想,基于奖励过去而不是预期的贡献原则运作。由 DAO(分散式自治组织)管理,它会追溯资助对社区有价值的项目。这些基金的分配由 DAO 负责,被称为「结果预言机」,根据过去的表现和影响分配奖励。

核心贡献者 - 类型 2 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:这些代币代表了实体的原始发行股票,对其基础至关重要。它们属于类型 2 ,应完全包括在估值中。尽管它们有一个「锁定」期,但可以将它们视为限制核心成员在一定时期内出售股票的 IPO 锁定期。这不会影响他们的持股,无论未来发生什么事件。这些股票授予是对他们过去的行为和对生态系统建设的贡献的奖励。即使他们停止积极参与,他们的持股仍将按计划继续增加。

Sugar Xaddies- 类型 2 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:与核心贡献者类似,这些代币对于实体至关重要,应被视为类型 2 ,因此应完全纳入估值中。

映射到 Arbitrum 的具体类别

点击此网页 来查看 Optimism 如何分配其代币以及分配方式。

DAO Treasury- 类型 3 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:不纳入,直到分配

  • 原因:Arbitrum 将其描述为「用于资助组织及其技术的持续发展和维护」。因此,这些代币的分配应该被视为一次性成本或投资。在任何部署之前,这些代币都不在流通中,也不会产生价值。

团队和顾问 - 类型 2 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:与 Optimism 相同

投资者 - 类型 2 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:与 Optimism 相同

空投 - 类型 1 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原因:与 Optimism 相同

Arbitrum 生态系统中的 DAO- 类型 1 

  • 是否在市值计算中纳入:是

  • 原理:这些代币已经分配给不同的 DAO,他们将有独立选择如何分配这些代币。因此,我们可以将这些代币看作是一个两步的空投(从 Aribitrum 到 DAO,然后从 DAO 到用户)。因此,Arbitrum 对这些代币没有控制权。

以下是上述内容的总结:

表 1: 根据功能分类的代币类型

IOSG Ventures:如何定价非理性市场的项目公允估值(FDV)?

表 2 :将 Optimism 代币经济与不同类型匹配

IOSG Ventures:如何定价非理性市场的项目公允估值(FDV)?

表 3 :将 Aribitrum 代币经济与不同类型匹配

IOSG Ventures:如何定价非理性市场的项目公允估值(FDV)?

表 4 :Optimism 与 Arbitrum 2024.1.14 单日基本面对比(数据由 GrowThePie 提供)

IOSG Ventures:如何定价非理性市场的项目公允估值(FDV)?

总结

新的加密项目常常面临着低流通供应的挑战。市值计算主要关注流通供应,往往忽视了为未来用途指定的代币。这可能导致市值数据不准确,并引发问题,如潜在的供应操纵,使准确评估项目估值变得复杂。当二级市场交易者专注于流通市值时,可能会忽视为未来保留的大量代币分配,情况变得更加复杂。

为了解决这些挑战,目标是建立一种方法来评估项目当前的市场估值,而不考虑其未来动态。这旨在提供明确的答案,例如比较像 Arbitrum 和 Optimism 这样的项目的市值。

在应对这个问题时,定义指导市值计算的原则至关重要。这些原则应与每个代币可以生成的价值相一致。例如,为员工、VC 和空投分配的代币应包括在市值计算中,不考虑它们的锁定状态,因为它们具有具体的用途。相反,为未来未定义用途保留的代币不应被视为未来供应,直到其预定用途变得明显。

应用这些原则会产生代币分类的一般规则。具有明确用途和分配的代币,用于 VC、社区、员工或开发人员,应计入市值。但可以应用折扣以考虑长期释放计划。相反,缺乏具体分配的代币应在其预期用途变得明显之前不予考虑。例如,生态系统基金和储备金是其中的示例。

Related Reads

Two Legends Lost in Three Days: Is Google's AI Talent Dam Cracking?

In three days, Google lost two AI legends. On June 18, Noam Shazeer, co-author of the seminal "Attention is All You Need" paper and Gemini co-lead, left for OpenAI. Just 48 hours later, John Jumper, 2024 Nobel laureate and AlphaFold lead, departed DeepMind for Anthropic. This follows Andrej Karpathy joining Anthropic in May. These moves highlight a structural trend: top AI talent is concentrating at mission-driven, pre-IPO firms like OpenAI and Anthropic, while Google becomes a primary source. The exodus stems from a core mission mismatch. Google's ad-centric model often subordinates AI research to product and revenue goals, creating friction for pioneers like Shazeer, who returned in 2024 only to leave again. In contrast, OpenAI and Anthropic offer singular focus on pushing AI boundaries, whether towards AGI or safety-aligned models, which deeply appeals to top researchers like Jumper. Financial incentives amplify the pull. With both OpenAI and Anthropic nearing IPO, employees stand to gain immensely from equity, an upside Google's mature stock cannot match. Furthermore, the 2023 merger of Google Brain and DeepMind, intended to consolidate strength, has instead created cultural tension and slowed the path from research to product, as evidenced by Gemini's pace. This talent redistribution is reshaping the AI landscape. While Google retains vast data and compute resources, its true crisis is the quiet, continuous loss of the people who define the field's future. The real moat in AI is not infrastructure, but the concentration of brilliant minds—a battle Google is currently losing.

marsbit28m ago

Two Legends Lost in Three Days: Is Google's AI Talent Dam Cracking?

marsbit28m ago

Behind the AI Report Card, Lies a Chinese 'Exam Setter'

Beyond the familiar performance charts like MMLU-Pro and MMMU, which major AI models strive to ace, stands a key "examiner": Chinese-Canadian researcher Wenhu Chen. An assistant professor at the University of Waterloo and founder of TIGERLab, Chen addresses the crucial need for more rigorous AI evaluation. As models like GPT-4 began scoring near-perfect results on older benchmarks like MMLU, it became difficult to distinguish their true capabilities. In response, Chen introduced MMLU-Pro in 2024, featuring harder, more reasoning-focused questions with more answer choices, successfully reintroducing meaningful performance gaps. His work extends to multi-modal evaluation with MMMU and its enhanced version, MMMU-Pro. These benchmarks test a model's ability to understand and reason with complex information from images, charts, and text across diverse academic subjects, exposing the significant challenges even top models face in genuine comprehension. Chen's background in complex QA, table reasoning, and his experience at Google DeepMind on projects like Gemini inform his approach. He understands that effective benchmarks must anticipate how models might "cheat" by memorizing data or avoiding visual analysis. His lab also actively researches video understanding and generation models (e.g., UniVideo, Vamba), ensuring his evaluation work is grounded in practical model-building challenges. Now at Meta's Super Intelligence Lab, Chen continues his focus on multi-modal data and evaluation, representing the deep yet often unseen contributions of Chinese talent in shaping the fundamental tools of the AI industry.

marsbit40m ago

Behind the AI Report Card, Lies a Chinese 'Exam Setter'

marsbit40m ago

Alliance Co-founder's Letter to Entrepreneurs: Written at the Moment Cursor Sold for $600 Billion

Alliance Co-founder's Letter to Entrepreneurs: On Cursor's $60 Billion Sale Many aspiring founders see massive exits like Cursor's $60B sale and wonder why they can't achieve the same, often concluding opportunities are exhausted. But great companies aren't built in obvious, crowded spaces. Cursor, like Stripe, Figma, and Shopify before it, started with a non-consensus belief about the future. Before ChatGPT, they believed AI would transform knowledge work. They focused on a genuinely exciting domain, became their own customer, and obsessed over power users. Their journey involved years of "glass-chewing" effort before the market was ready. The pattern is consistent: identify a long-term technological shift, find a missed entry point, and execute for years before the trend becomes obvious. First-generation products (PayPal, Adobe, Amazon) prove a market exists. Second-generation winners (Stripe, Figma, Shopify) rebuild that market around new insights, technology, or changing customer behaviors. Founders must identify their phase in the cycle. Early entrants like Coinbase or Cursor focus on making new technology usable for power users. Later entrants find the "yin" to the established "yang"—the blind spots incumbents miss as they grow distant from individual users. The key is deep market immersion. Use every product in your space. Talk to users. Build an audience. Stop looking for ideas and start *seeing* them everywhere. Then, choose one. The idea must offer a 10x improvement or solve a "hair-on-fire" pain point—something severe enough that users are already crafting workarounds. When building, avoid feature bloat. Ask: why would someone switch? Great startups rarely force new behaviors; they improve familiar workflows with drastically lower friction (e.g., Cursor forked VS Code instead of creating a new editor). Distribution is the underestimated moat. Before product-market fit, achieve distribution-market fit. How do customers discover new tools? Founders like those at Airbnb, Stripe, and Cursor did unscalable, manual work to recruit early users. The final, unteachable ingredient is resilience. Cursor built for years pre-market, faced rejection, and persisted. So did Airbnb, Nvidia, and Rain (which launched post-FTX collapse). The lesson isn't that these founders were smarter, but that they stayed in the game long enough for their insights to compound. Framework: Spot technological cycles. Cultivate unique insight. Obsess over your market. Talk to customers. Find a hair-on-fire problem. Build the simplest wedge. Win your distribution channel. Above all, don't quit when it gets hard. Most people won't do these things consistently. The few who do build the next generation of great companies. Go build.

marsbit44m ago

Alliance Co-founder's Letter to Entrepreneurs: Written at the Moment Cursor Sold for $600 Billion

marsbit44m ago

Weekly Editor's Picks (0613-0619)

Weekly Editor's Picks (0613-0619): Market Insights & Analysis This weekly digest curates in-depth analysis often lost in the information flow, focusing on key insights across macro trends, investment, and technology. **Macro & Geopolitics:** With the Strait of Hormuz reopening and military conflict shifting to negotiation, markets are pivoting from "war shock" to "supply restoration." Trades include shorting crude risk premiums, longing airlines/tourism, Asian energy importers, and bond duration, while shorting inflation expectations. LNG, fertilizer, and chemical chains are also being repriced. **Investment & VC:** Ray Dalio advises against betting on concentrated AI giants dominating indices, advocating for diversified portfolios of high-quality, low-correlation assets instead. Analysis covers the 4-year crypto cycle, predicting the core surviving product by 2029 will be asset trading markets. Current BTC metrics suggest a potential bottoming zone, presenting a patient accumulation window. SpaceX's high-profile IPO at a $2.1T valuation faces scrutiny over fundamentals, with key watchpoints being its likely inclusion in the Nasdaq index and Q2 earnings. Concerns are raised about potential "gamma squeeze" and systemic risks if its narrative-driven valuation gets amplified by passive index funds. Robinhood (HOOD) is noted for breaking its high correlation with crypto, bolstered by its stock trading and new underwriting business. **Web3 & AI:** A warning highlights ~$1.8T in off-balance-sheet AI infrastructure commitments (purchase commitments, leases) as a potential systemic risk if AI monetization lags. AI models are being used for World Cup predictions, adding a new layer for betting markets. A cost breakdown of a $20 AI subscription reveals the supply chain from model companies to cloud, GPUs, and power. **Prediction Markets:** The emergence of prediction market "concept stocks" is noted, with Robinhood developing its own platform, Rothera, signaling a shift from market competition to a "channel war" for user access. **CeFi & DeFi:** The SpaceX IPO tested perpetual contract mechanisms for pre-IPO assets, highlighting challenges in handling corporate actions like stock splits on-chain. The de-pegging of STRC (Strategy's preferred share) to ~$89 reflects market concerns over MicroStrategy's capital structure and BTC-backed leverage model. BlackRock's covered-call Bitcoin ETF (BITA) offers yield but caps upside, appealing to yield-seeking institutions. **Ethereum:** An opinion piece argues Ethereum's core strength is its vast developer community and composability, solidifying its role as the default operating system for the financial internet. **Weekly Hot Topics:** Include the US-Iran deal reopening the Strait of Hormuz, Fed's hawkish hold, Anthropic restricting model access, SpaceX acquiring Cursor, and a humorous stock surge for "Liuliumei" due to its "LLM" ticker.

marsbit49m ago

Weekly Editor's Picks (0613-0619)

marsbit49m ago

Alliance's Co-Founder's Letter to Entrepreneurs: Written on the Occasion of Cursor's $60 Billion Sale

In this letter to entrepreneurs, Alliance reflects on the success of Cursor's $60 billion sale to Elon Musk, using it as a case study to counter the misconception that opportunities in crowded fields like AI or crypto are exhausted. The piece argues that great companies like Cursor, Stripe, Figma, and Shopify are not built by geniuses with perfect ideas, but by founders who start with a non-consensus belief about the future and build for years before that future becomes obvious to everyone. They identify long-term shifts, find overlooked entry points, and execute relentlessly. The framework for success involves: 1. **Identifying your place in the technology cycle**: Early-stage opportunities focus on making new tech usable for power users (e.g., Coinbase, Cursor). Later-stage opportunities involve finding the "yin" to an existing "yang"—the blind spots of first-generation players (e.g., Stripe vs. PayPal, Figma vs. Adobe). 2. **Cultivating unique insights**: Immerse yourself deeply in the market. Use every product, talk to users, and build an audience. Insights will emerge naturally from deep engagement. 3. **Finding a "hair-on-fire" problem**: Look for a 10x improvement or a severe, urgent pain point. The strongest signal is people already building clumsy workarounds. 4. **Building a focused MVP**: Don't just add features because you can. Ask why users would abandon their current tool for yours. The best startups rarely force new behaviors; they improve familiar workflows with drastically lower friction. 5. **Winning a distribution channel**: Distribution is often the moat. Before product-market fit, achieve channel-market fit. Find where your customers are and build an engine to reach them, even through unscalable, manual efforts initially. 6. **Persistence**: The final, unteachable ingredient is resilience. Success stories like Cursor, Airbnb, and Nvidia involved years of grinding, rejection, and perseverance when the path forward seemed unclear. The conclusion is that there is no secret. Most people fail to consistently execute these steps over the long term. The few who do build the companies that define the next era. The world is yours to create.

链捕手54m ago

Alliance's Co-Founder's Letter to Entrepreneurs: Written on the Occasion of Cursor's $60 Billion Sale

链捕手54m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片