Solana Market Analysis: $2.8B Revenue Milestone Fuels Bullish Case Despite Recent Pullback

bitcoinistPublished on 2025-10-09Last updated on 2025-10-09

Abstract

Solana (SOL) slipped to $221 at press time, down 3.9% in the last 24 hours after failing to hold above...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

Solana (SOL) slipped to $221 at press time, down 3.9% in the last 24 hours after failing to hold above $230. The move follows a quick retrace from this week’s $238 high and a break below the 100-hour MA near $225.

Related Reading: Ripple Is Giving The XRP Ledger An AI Brain — Here’s How

Near term, traders are watching $218–$212 as the first support band (deeper bids near $210–$215), while $230–$235 caps rebounds, with a heavier $245–$250 supply zone above.

If bulls reclaim $230 on strong volume, momentum could re-target $245; a daily close below $212 risks a slide toward $200. Despite the dip, SOL continues to print higher-lows on the multi-week trend, keeping the broader uptrend viable.

Solana SOL SOLUSD

SOL's price trends sideways on the daily chart. Source: SOLUSD on Tradingview

$2.8B Annual Solana Revenue Supports Fundamental Strength

Beyond price, Solana’s fundamentals are flashing green. A new analyst report tallies $2.85 billion in annualized on-chain revenue over the past year, $240 million per month on average, peaking at $616 million in January during the memecoin frenzy.

Trading platforms are the flywheel, contributing 30% ($1.12B), with apps like Photon and Axiom at times generating $260M in a single month. Thanks to sub-$0.01 fees and high throughput, Solana’s revenue run-rate has outpaced Ethereum’s early-cycle trajectory and coincides with 1.2–1.5 million daily active addresses.

DeFi metrics back the story; $13B TVL, 6x YoY growth in stablecoin volumes, and >$500M in tokenized RWA activity signal of durable, non-speculative usage. Upcoming performance upgrades (e.g., Firedancer) aim for dramatic latency and throughput gains, reinforcing the network’s moat for high-frequency DeFi.

Institutional Access, SOL ETFs, and the Q4 Setup

Institutional participation is also expanding on multiple fronts. Public balance sheets reportedly hold $4B in SOL, while staking-enabled trust products and pending U.S. spot SOL ETF applications (from issuers including Fidelity, VanEck, Grayscale, Franklin Templeton, 21Shares, and Bitwise) could unlock the next leg of demand.

Several filings face October deadlines, and prediction markets handicap a very high probability of approval by year-end. In the near term, price may remain choppy as leverage resets across crypto, but Solana’s revenue scale, user growth, and pipeline of upgrades provide a sturdy backdrop.

Related Reading: XRP Price To Teleport To $6.9 Once Wave 3 Of 3 Is Completed

For traders, the roadmap is straightforward: hold $218–$212 to preserve the bullish structure; flip $230, then $245, to revive momentum. For long-term investors, the multi-billion-dollar revenue milestone and rising institutional rails keep the $300+ debate alive once risk appetite returns.

Cover image from ChatGPT, SOLUSD chart from Tradingview

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.
James Halver

James Halver

Follow

Full Profile

Related Posts

Solana

Solana Sees Explosive Stablecoin Growth – Here’s How Much Supply Is Held In The Blockchain

1 day ago
Solana

Solana’s Q3 Revenue Sharp Growth Puts It Ahead Of All Major Crypto Networks

5 days ago
solana

Solana Corporate Playbook Expands With VisionSys AI’s $2 Billion SOL Treasury Plan

6 days ago
Bitcoin

Institutions Dump Massive Amounts Of Bitcoin And Ethereum As XRP And Solana Buying Ramps Up

1 week ago
Solana

Solana Ecosystem To Gain Boost With New Alliance Between Crypto.com And Sharps Technology – Details

1 week ago
bitcoin btc btcusd

Crypto ETFs Suffer Worst Streak Since Launch as Bitcoin and Ethereum Record Heavy Outflows

1 week ago

Related Reads

Three Years Later: Looking Back at My Predictions About ChatGPT in 2023

Three Years Later: Revisiting My 2023 Predictions on ChatGPT In March 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's launch, I made 20 predictions about its future. Now, in mid-2026, I've used AI agents to fact-check each one against the latest data. Overall, most major directional forecasts were correct, with only one outright error (incorrectly stating GPT-4 had 100 trillion parameters). Key successes included predicting that RAG and retrieval architectures would become the standard for handling knowledge and hallucinations, that natural language interfaces (LUI) would create a massive new industry layer beyond the models themselves, and that China would develop viable large language models, significantly closing the performance gap with Western counterparts within about three years. Predictions about the absence of mass unemployment, the rise of a new "robot network" for agent communication, and ChatGPT not possessing consciousness also held true in their core arguments. However, the "devil was in the details." Errors frequently involved specific numbers, timelines, or overlooking distributional effects. I tended to overestimate the speed of adoption (e.g., for agent networks) while underestimating the ultimate scale of capabilities or costs (e.g., AI winning IMO gold without tools, or the extreme capital required for frontier models). Other misjudgments included: underestimating how AI would reinforce, not dissolve, information filter bubbles; incorrectly assuming AI-generated content would easily circumvent copyright (it has instead triggered record-breaking settlements); and misidentifying where value would be captured (it accrued overwhelmingly to the compute layer, like Nvidia, not just the application or model layers). Key lessons from reviewing these predictions are: 1) Directional and mechanistic insights are far more reliable than precise numbers or absolute statements. 2) There's a consistent bias to overestimate short-term speed but underestimate long-term magnitude. 3) Errors often lie in missing distributional impacts within a generally correct aggregate trend. 4) Predictions phrased with nuance and caveats aged the best. 5) Some fundamental debates (e.g., on machine consciousness or the ultimate value chain) remain unresolved even after three years. This exercise is less about scoring the past and more about establishing rules for clearer thinking about the next three years of AI.

marsbit3h ago

Three Years Later: Looking Back at My Predictions About ChatGPT in 2023

marsbit3h ago

Three Years Later: Looking Back on My 2023 Predictions for ChatGPT

Looking Back After Three Years: Revisiting My 2023 Predictions on ChatGPT In March 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's debut and before GPT-4's release, I made over twenty predictions about AI's future based on limited information and intuition. Now, in May 2026, I revisited those forecasts using an AI-driven analysis with 41 Opus 4.8 agents to cross-reference them with the latest data. The assessment used symbols: ✅ Correct, 🟢 Mostly Correct, 🟡 Partially Correct, ❌ Incorrect. Overall, the directional judgments held up well, with only one major factual error regarding GPT-4's rumored parameter size (incorrectly cited as 100T). However, nuances and degrees of accuracy revealed more. **What Was Largely Correct:** Predictions about mechanisms and directions proved accurate. The rise of RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) as the standard architecture for combating AI hallucination was confirmed, as was the transformative potential of LUI (Language User Interface) in creating a new industry layer atop GUIs. The emergence of "robot networks" (agent-to-agent communication protocols) and China's rapid catch-up in developing capable large models (closing the performance gap with top models to ~2.7%) were also on point. The analysis affirmed that LLMs lack consciousness and that the Turing Test merely measures perceived intelligence. **What Was Off Target:** Errors often involved specific numbers, over-optimistic timelines, or misjudged distributions. The prediction that value would primarily accrue to the application layer was half-right but missed NVIDIA's dominance as the profitable infrastructure layer. Forecasts about AI circumventing copyright issues and fostering a "global common ground" by averaging human viewpoints were incorrect; instead, major copyright settlements occurred and AI personalization is increasing. Estimates for model training costs ("$5-10 billion cap") were significantly off, underestimating frontier costs and overestimating replication costs. The notion that LLMs could never do complex math without tools was disproven by later models winning IMO gold. **Key Patterns from the Review:** 1. **Direction over precision:** Judgments about mechanisms and trends were more reliable than specific numbers or definitive statements. 2. **Timing bias:** There was a tendency to overestimate short-term speed but underestimate long-term magnitude and transformation. 3. **The distribution blind spot:** Aggregate-level correctness often masked uneven impacts (e.g., on young professionals' employment). 4. **The value of qualifiers:** Predictions framed with caution (e.g., "reportedly," "for now," "prototype in 2-3 years") aged better. 5. **Some debates continue:** Issues like the nature of "emergent abilities" or machine consciousness remain unresolved. This three-year review highlights that while seeing the big picture is crucial, humility regarding specifics, timelines, and disparate impacts is essential for future forecasting.

链捕手5h ago

Three Years Later: Looking Back on My 2023 Predictions for ChatGPT

链捕手5h ago

AI Bubble Warning: AI Investments Are Negative Returns for Most Tech Giants

The article issues a stark warning about a potential AI investment bubble. It notes that while the AI boom shares similarities with the TMT bubble of the late 1990s, its scale is vastly larger, currently driving 93% of U.S. GDP growth. Major hyperscale cloud providers like Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Oracle are planning to invest trillions in AI data centers over the coming years. However, calculations based on analyst projections for 2025-2030 reveal a concerning math problem: expected capital expenditure growth far outpaces projected revenue growth. Even under an extremely optimistic scenario of zero costs, the implied return on investment for most of these tech giants (except Amazon) is deeply negative. This suggests that the current trajectory could lead to one of history's largest shareholder value destruction events. The piece outlines two potential escapes: AI generating vastly more revenue than currently anticipated—a near-impossible task—or a significant cutback in the planned investment splurge. The latter scenario could trigger a domino effect, severely impacting the entire tech supply chain (from Nvidia to TSMC), potentially pushing the U.S. economy into recession, and causing a major stock market downturn. The author suggests upcoming high-profile IPOs by companies like OpenAI and Anthropic might represent a transfer of risk from early investors to public market participants. While the peak of the hype cycle might sustain investment through 2026, the fundamental financial dilemma remains unresolved, setting the stage for a potential market correction in 2027 or 2028, similar to the years following Alan Greenspan's "irrational exuberance" warning.

marsbit6h ago

AI Bubble Warning: AI Investments Are Negative Returns for Most Tech Giants

marsbit6h ago

From Tokens to Machine Labor: AI is Shifting from Tool to "Worker"

The article "From Token to Machine Labor: AI is Evolving from Tool to 'Worker'" argues that the business model for AI is shifting beyond simply selling computational resources (tokens, GPU hours) or model access. Instead, a new "machine labor market" is emerging, where the core economic transaction is the purchase of economically useful work directly performed by software. The central thesis is that AI pricing will evolve through four stages: 1) raw tokens, 2) standardized LLM capabilities (e.g., text generation), 3) industry-specific labor markets (e.g., legal review, radiology), and finally 4) a programmable results market where tasks like resolving a support ticket are bid on and priced based on outcome. In this future, buyers will care less about *which* model or GPU completes a task and more about whether the work meets specified standards for accuracy, latency, and cost. This transition reframes the impact of AI on human labor. Rather than simple replacement, it suggests a re-coordination where machines handle standardized, verifiable work, freeing humans for roles involving oversight, context management, responsibility, and final judgment. In some cases, this "last 1%" of human input becomes more valuable as it enables the other 99% to be automated. Furthermore, as AI reduces the cost of work, demand may expand, creating larger markets (e.g., 24/7 customer service) rather than just cheaper versions of existing ones. The article concludes that while infrastructure (GPUs, models, tokens) remains crucial upstream, the market is converging on a simpler, tradeable unit: machine labor that can be defined, measured, priced, and procured based on contractible specifications.

marsbit6h ago

From Tokens to Machine Labor: AI is Shifting from Tool to "Worker"

marsbit6h ago

Xiaomi MiMo's 99% Price Cut is Not Marketing! Luo Fuli Posts on X to Refute Critics

The price of Xiaomi's MiMo-V2.5 series API has been permanently reduced by up to 99%, specifically for the "Input (Cache Hit)" cost, which covers users re-reading historical context in long conversations. MiMo's head, Luo Fuli, published a detailed technical blog to clarify that this drastic price cut stems from genuine engineering breakthroughs, not a marketing stunt or a simple price war. The core of the achievement lies in six key engineering optimizations. First, the model architecture adopts a Hybrid Sliding Window Attention (SWA), reducing the memory footprint (KVCache) to 1/7th of a traditional model. Second, a dual-pool memory management system actually utilizes these savings, allowing a single GPU to handle over 5 times more concurrent users. Third, an upgraded prefix caching mechanism achieves a cache hit rate of 93-95% for repeated reads, meaning most such requests bypass GPU computation entirely. Fourth, a self-developed distributed cache (GCache) utilizes idle SSD space on existing GPU servers, eliminating additional storage costs. Fifth, an intelligent scheduling system (LLM-Router) efficiently routes requests to maximize cache reuse and performance. Sixth, Multi-Token Prediction (MTP) accelerates the model's text generation ("output") side. Together, these systemic optimizations dramatically lower the real computational cost per request, enabling the 99% price reduction for cached inputs while reportedly maintaining positive gross margins. Luo Fuli's disclosure aims to shift the narrative from "price war" to a demonstration of substantive AI engineering progress.

marsbit8h ago

Xiaomi MiMo's 99% Price Cut is Not Marketing! Luo Fuli Posts on X to Refute Critics

marsbit8h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of SOL (SOL) are presented below.

活动图片

Top Questions