L1 prices collapsed in 2025, but fundamentals held firm – What changed?

ambcryptoPublished on 2025-12-26Last updated on 2025-12-26

Abstract

L1 token prices collapsed sharply in 2025, with significant yearly declines: TON fell 73.8%, Avalanche and Sui both dropped around 67%, Solana decreased 35.9%, and Ethereum declined 15.3%. Only BNB and TRX posted gains. However, fundamental on-chain metrics remained strong. Tron led in revenue with $3.5B, while Solana generated the most fees at $699.9M. User activity stayed high, with BNB Chain having 59.8M active addresses and Solana 39.8M. The data indicates the downturn was a market repricing rather than a structural decline, as networks with real usage and revenue maintained robust fundamentals despite price corrections.

L1s got absolutely pulverized this year. Prices collapsed hard, but was that really the end?

An analysis shared on the 25th of December by Schizoxbt showed severe underperformance across major Layer-1 tokens. Large-cap status offered little protection as multiple networks posted steep yearly drawdowns.

Ethereum ended the year down 15.3%, while Solana fell 35.9% over the same period. Avalanche and Sui declined 67.9% and 67.3%, respectively, reflecting sustained downside pressure.

TON recorded the sharpest drop, falling 73.8% during 2025. Only BNB and TRX posted gains, rising 18.2% and 9.8%, respectively, against broader weakness.

The data reinforced a harsh lesson for investors. Market capitalization alone did not guarantee resilience during provider risk-off conditions.

But price action told only part of the story.

Revenue and Fees: Did network monetization really weaken?

While token prices fell, on-chain revenue data painted a noticeably different picture. Token Terminal data showed activity remained heavily concentrated across a handful of Layer-1 networks.

Tron led all Layer-1s in revenue, generating approximately $3.5 B over the past 365 days. Ethereum followed with $305.3 M, while Solana generated roughly $206.8 M during the same period.

Fee generation showed a similar pattern. Solana led in fees with $699.9 M, while Ethereum recorded $549.3 M in cumulative fees.

BNB Chain also remained economically relevant, producing $260.3 M in fees despite muted price action. The consistency of suggested usage did not collapse alongside token valuations.

User activity: Were traders actually leaving Layer-1s?

Monthly active address data further challenged the bearish narrative surrounding Layer-1s. User activity remained elevated on networks, dominating transaction throughput.

BNB Chain led with 59.8 M active addresses, while Solana followed at 39.8 M. NEAR Protocol recorded 38.7 M, placing it firmly among high-usage networks.

Sei Network reported 10.6 M active addresses, rivaling Bitcoin at 10.3 M. Ethereum trailed slightly with 9.3 M, reflecting steady but slower growth.

The numbers suggested participation persisted even as prices corrected.

Fundamentals vs. price action

The divergence between prices and fundamentals became the defining theme of 2025. Layer-1 tokens appeared to undergo repricing rather than structural deterioration.

Losses deepened after many Layer-1s peaked near all-time highs in early October. The subsequent October sell-off accelerated downside momentum and amplified year-end drawdowns.

However, capital and activity consolidated around networks generating real usage, fees, and revenue. Speculative premiums faded, while economically productive chains retained relevance.


Final Thoughts

  • The 2025 drawdown highlighted how Layer-1 valuations corrected sharply after October’s all-time highs.
  • However, on-chain revenue and user data suggested the sector faced repricing pressure, not structural decline.

Related Questions

QAccording to the analysis by Schizoxbt, which two Layer-1 tokens were the only ones to post gains in 2025?

ABNB and TRX were the only ones to post gains, rising 18.2% and 9.8%, respectively.

QWhich Layer-1 network generated the most revenue over the past 365 days, and how much was it?

ATron led all Layer-1s in revenue, generating approximately $3.5 billion over the past 365 days.

QDespite the price collapse, what did the data on monthly active addresses suggest about user activity on Layer-1 networks?

AThe data on monthly active addresses suggested that user participation persisted and remained elevated, challenging the bearish narrative that traders were leaving.

QWhat was the defining theme of 2025 for Layer-1 tokens, as described in the article?

AThe defining theme was the divergence between prices and fundamentals, where tokens underwent a repricing rather than a structural deterioration.

QWhat event in October 2025 is cited as accelerating the downside momentum for Layer-1 token prices?

AThe subsequent October sell-off, which occurred after many Layer-1s peaked near all-time highs in early October, accelerated the downside momentum and amplified year-end drawdowns.

Related Reads

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit30m ago

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit30m ago

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbit49m ago

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbit49m ago

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbit58m ago

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbit58m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片