Coingecko Data: 11.5 Million Projects Died in 2025, The Most Devastating Year in Crypto History

marsbitPublicado a 2026-01-14Actualizado a 2026-01-14

Resumen

According to data from GeckoTerminal, 53.2% of all cryptocurrency projects have failed, with the vast majority of these failures—86.3%—occurring in 2025 alone. A staggering 11.6 million token projects died in 2025, making it the most devastating year in crypto history. This sharp decline in token viability is linked to extreme market turbulence, particularly within the memecoin sector. A record-breaking liquidation event on October 10, 2025, where $19 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated in 24 hours, triggered a chain reaction that led to the collapse of 7.7 million projects in Q4 alone. Despite the high failure rate, the total number of crypto projects exploded—growing from 428,383 projects on GeckoTerminal in 2021 to over 20.2 million by 2025. This surge is largely attributed to the rise of token launch platforms that made creating low-quality memecoins exceptionally easy. In comparison, 2024 saw 1.4 million project failures, accounting for 10.3% of all failures in the past five years, while failures from 2021 to 2023 made up just 3.4%. The data includes tokens that had at least one trade before failing and only counts "graduated" tokens from platforms like pump.fun.

Author:Shaun Paul Lee

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

How Many Cryptocurrencies Have "Died"?

According to data from GeckoTerminal, 53.2% of cryptocurrency projects have failed, with the majority of these failures concentrated in 2025. In 2025 alone, 11.6 million token projects came to an end, accounting for 86.3% of all failed projects. This phenomenon is closely related to the severe market turbulence throughout the year, particularly the impact on the memecoin sector.

This sharp decline in token viability may be related to the market turmoil throughout the year, especially affecting the meme coin sector.

Shockingly, the fourth quarter of 2025 alone saw 7.7 million token projects collapse, accounting for 34.9% of all failed projects. This sharp decline is closely linked to the "liquidation chain reaction" that occurred on October 10. In this record-breaking event, a staggering $19 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated within 24 hours, making it the single largest day of deleveraging in cryptocurrency history.

Despite the extreme volatility in the cryptocurrency market in 2025, the total number of cryptocurrency projects grew dramatically. From 428,383 projects on GeckoTerminal in 2021, this number had surged to nearly 20.2 million projects by 2025. This growth is largely attributed to the rise of various token issuance platforms, which made creating low-quality memecoins and projects exceptionally easy.

86.3% of Cryptocurrencies Died in 2025

As of December 31, 2025, a total of 11.6 million cryptocurrency projects had failed, setting a new historical record for the number of failed projects in a single year. These failed projects account for 86.3% of all failure cases between 2021 and 2025.

This was followed by 2024, which saw approximately 1.4 million project failures, accounting for 10.3% of the total failures over the past five years. 2024 was also the second-highest peak for the growth in the number of cryptocurrency projects, with over 3 million new projects entering the market. However, before the launch of the pump.fun platform in 2024, the number of cryptocurrency failures remained at a relatively low six-figure level. In contrast, the total number of failed projects between 2021 and 2023 accounts for only 3.4% of the total failures over the past five years.

Year-by-Year Statistics: Cryptocurrency Failure Data

The following statistics show the number of failed cryptocurrency projects each year from 2021 to 2025:

Research Methodology

This study analyzed tokens and cryptocurrency projects (collectively referred to as "cryptocurrencies") that were once listed on GeckoTerminal between July 1, 2021, and December 31, 2025, but are no longer actively traded. These projects are classified as "failed" or "dead" and are grouped according to the year of their last active trade.

Only tokens that had at least one trade before failing are counted.
Additionally, only token projects that had "graduated" within the pump.fun platform were included.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

A social media claim has brought attention to Hyperliquid (HYPE) and the growth of its related ETF products. According to a June 20 post on X by AlphaOnChain, three Hyperliquid ETFs launched in May 2026 have collectively amassed $158 million in assets under management, led by a Bitwise fund with $88 million and a 21Shares fund with $66 million. The article notes this claim is from social media and not verified by official issuer data, advising caution. Nonetheless, the report highlights that HYPE is gaining traction as a notable altcoin narrative. Its focus on on-chain perpetual trading and exchange infrastructure places it at the intersection of DeFi and derivatives, attracting traders looking for high-conviction plays beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum. The key takeaway is that while social momentum can influence short-term markets, sustainable growth for HYPE would require confirmed demand, liquidity, and continued ecosystem development.

bitcoinistHace 11 min(s)

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

bitcoinistHace 11 min(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbitHace 23 min(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbitHace 23 min(s)

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbitHace 36 min(s)

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbitHace 36 min(s)

Weekly Token Unlock: XPL to Release Millions in Token Value

Weekly Token Unlocks: XPL and SoSoValue Tokens Worth Over $10 Million Set for Release This week sees significant token unlocks for two projects. SoSoValue, an AI-powered crypto investment research platform, will unlock 13.03 million tokens, valued at approximately $3.87 million. The project aims to merge CeFi efficiency with DeFi transparency. Separately, Plasma, a Layer 1 blockchain designed for global stablecoin payments, will unlock 110 million tokens worth about $10.42 million. The network focuses on high throughput, stablecoin-native features, and full EVM compatibility. Both projects have provided their detailed token release schedules.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Weekly Token Unlock: XPL to Release Millions in Token Value

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Bitcoin Must Hold $60K Or Risk Major Breakdown, TradingView Analyst Warns

Bitcoin has reached a critical juncture around the $60,000 level, which analysts view as a major technical and psychological support zone. According to a TradingView analysis, a successful hold above this demand area could pave the way for a recovery toward $81,000. However, the warning is clear: a decisive and sustained break below $60,000 would invalidate the bullish outlook, likely triggering stop losses and a deeper market correction. The current setup is described as a binary test—maintaining support keeps the recovery narrative alive, while losing it would signal a shift toward a more significant downturn.

bitcoinistHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot

Futuros