Tracking 118 Coins Launched in 2025: 85% Are Below Their Initial Valuation at Launch

深潮Published on 2025-12-22Last updated on 2025-12-22

Abstract

An analysis of 118 Token Generation Events (TGEs) that occurred in 2025 reveals a significant downturn in post-launch performance. The study compared each token's current fully diluted valuation (FDV) to its valuation at issuance. Key findings show that 84.7% (100 out of 118) of these assets are currently valued below their initial TGE price. This indicates that approximately 4 out of every 5 new tokens are trading at a lower valuation than at launch. The median token experienced a 71% decline in FDV (and a 67% drop in market cap) since its release. Only 15% of the tokens analyzed have maintained a valuation higher than at their TGE. The report concludes that participating in a TGE can no longer be considered a form of "early investment" under these market conditions.

Author:Ash

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

We tracked 118 Token Generation Events (TGEs) launched in 2025 and compared their current fully diluted valuation (FDV) with their valuation at issuance. The results are as follows:

  • 84.7% (100 out of 118) currently have a valuation lower than at TGE;

  • This means approximately 4 out of every 5 newly issued tokens are valued below their issuance level;

  • The median token's fully diluted valuation (FDV) has fallen by 71% since issuance (market cap down 67%);

  • Only 15% of tokens remained "green" (i.e., above issuance valuation) after TGE.

Nowadays, participating in a TGE can hardly be considered "early investment" anymore. How lamentable.

View the complete data via the link

Related Questions

QWhat percentage of the 118 tokens tracked from 2025 TGEs are currently valued below their initial valuation?

A84.7% (100 out of 118 tokens) are currently valued below their initial TGE valuation.

QHow does the median token's Fully Diluted Valuation (FDV) perform compared to its issuance valuation?

AThe median token's FDV has declined by 71% since its issuance.

QWhat proportion of the tracked tokens maintained a valuation higher than their initial issuance?

AOnly 15% of the tokens remained 'green' (valued above their initial issuance valuation).

QAccording to the article, what is the current perception of participating in a Token Generation Event (TGE)?

AParticipating in a TGE is no longer considered 'early investment'.

QWhat metric, besides FDV, is mentioned to have declined for the median token since issuance?

AThe market capitalization of the median token has declined by 67% since issuance.

Related Reads

Fei-Fei Li's Team Clarifies the Concept of 'World Models', Sora Merely a Renderer

"World Models" has become a widely used yet confusing term in AI. To address this, a team led by Fei-Fei Li and World Labs proposed a functional taxonomy based on the Partially Observable Markov Decision Process framework. This taxonomy categorizes systems called "world models" into three distinct projections: Renderers, Simulators, and Planners. Renderers, like OpenAI's Sora and other video generation models, focus on producing photorealistic visual outputs for human perception. They prioritize visual fidelity over physical accuracy. Simulators, such as NVIDIA Omniverse, aim to compute precise future environmental states for computational tasks like engineering analysis or digital twins. Planners, like Vision-Language-Action models, take in observations and goals to output executable actions for robots or agents. The article clarifies that most current "world models," including Sora, are primarily Renderers. They generate convincing visuals but lack the core ability to simulate state transitions based on actions, a key requirement for a true world model in classic reinforcement learning definitions. This conceptual confusion has practical implications, leading to potential misalignment in technology selection, investment, and public understanding of AI capabilities. Clear categorization is crucial. It helps enterprises avoid costly mistakes (e.g., using a renderer for robot training), allows investors to accurately assess markets, and enables researchers to build comparable benchmarks. While future systems may integrate these functions, recognizing current boundaries is essential for honest assessment and progress.

marsbit1h ago

Fei-Fei Li's Team Clarifies the Concept of 'World Models', Sora Merely a Renderer

marsbit1h ago

Bloomberg Uncovered: How Do China's Wealthy Circumvent the Annual $50,000 Limit to Transfer Assets?

**Summary: How Wealthy Chinese Circumvent $50,000 Annual Foreign Exchange Limits** Despite China's strict capital controls, including an annual $50,000 per person foreign exchange quota, an estimated $150 billion in funds still leaves the country annually via various gray and underground channels. This report outlines the evolution of China's "capital wall" and the methods used to bypass it. **The Evolving Capital Controls:** * **Foundation (1994):** The system of "current account convertibility with strict capital account controls" was established. * **Quota Set (2007):** The $50,000 individual annual forex purchase limit was formalized. * **Crackdown Begins (2015-2017):** Following market volatility, enforcement tightened. Banks were required to scrutinize transactions, and channels like using UnionPay cards for Hong Kong insurance premiums or buying overseas property were blocked. * **Digital & Legal Upgrades (2024-2026):** Enhanced algorithms now flag suspicious patterns (e.g., "smurfing"). The Common Reporting Standard (CRS) provides Chinese tax authorities with data on citizens' offshore accounts. Unlicensed cross-border brokers have been targeted. **Five Primary Methods for Moving Capital:** 1. **Underground Banking / "Hawala" (Duiqiao):** The largest-scale method. No money crosses borders. Clients pay RMB to a domestic account; an overseas associate deposits equivalent foreign currency into the client's offshore account. Risks include high fees, account freezes, and legal penalties. 2. **"Smurfing" or "Ant Moving":** Using multiple individuals' $50,000 quotas to pool funds for one offshore recipient. Increasingly detected by anti-money laundering algorithms. 3. **Trade Invoice Manipulation:** Businesses over-invoice imports or under-invoice exports via offshore shell companies, creating a pretext to transfer excess funds abroad under the guise of trade. 4. **Channel Migration:** After a crackdown on internet brokers, funds flow toward more compliant but costly channels like major banks' cross-border wealth management services or Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) quotas. 5. **Structural Arrangements:** High-net-worth individuals use complex, high-cost legal structures involving offshore trusts, insurance, and investment migration programs to transfer asset ownership. **Regulatory Response: Focusing on People, Not Just Money** The current strategy extends oversight from enterprises to **individual residents**. Tools like CRS allow retroactive visibility into offshore assets. Cryptocurrencies, once seen as a potential loophole, are now actively monitored and prosecuted as an illegal channel. The underlying driver remains: with significant wealth concentrated among millions of affluent households seeking diversification amid domestic economic shifts, the incentive to move assets offshore persists despite regulatory barriers.

marsbit1h ago

Bloomberg Uncovered: How Do China's Wealthy Circumvent the Annual $50,000 Limit to Transfer Assets?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片