From "Heaven-Sent Public Chain" to "Heaven-Forsaken Public Chain": What Led to the Collapse of Berachain?

比推Publicado a 2026-01-15Actualizado a 2026-01-15

Resumen

Once hailed as a "top-tier public chain," Berachain has seen a dramatic decline, with its new nickname "doomed chain" reflecting its severe downturn. Launched in February 2025 with an innovative Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) consensus mechanism aimed at boosting DeFi efficiency, the project initially attracted significant interest. Its TVL surged to $3.3 billion, with over 140,000 active addresses. However, the ecosystem quickly deteriorated. TVL has since collapsed to $180 million, and the chain’s daily revenue dropped to just $84. The sharp decline is attributed to several critical issues. The tokenomics heavily favored venture capitalists (VCs), who received 34.31% of the total token supply, while retail participants received minimal allocations. This high Fully Diluted Valuation (FDV) and low circulating supply model led to artificial price spikes followed by a steep crash—BERA fell from a high of $9 to around $0.7, a drop of over 90%. Internal challenges also mounted. The foundation cut most of its retail-focused marketing team and saw key developers, including the chief developer, leave. Community trust eroded further when a Balancer protocol vulnerability forced a network halt in November 2025. Additionally, major token unlocks are scheduled starting February 2026, with 12.16% of supply—including significant VC holdings—set to be released, likely increasing selling pressure. Despite attempts at strategic shifts, including a partnership to use BERA as a reserve asset, the...

Author: Ma He, Foresight News

Original Title: Token Price Crash, Layoffs, Developers Fleeing—Is Berachain Becoming a Heaven-Forsaken Public Chain?


On January 14, BERA experienced a sudden surge, rising from $0.5 to $0.9, a rare occurrence amid a previous 12-week consecutive decline. That day, the Berachain Foundation released its year-end summary for 2025, highlighting ecosystem expansion, technical optimization, and community engagement after the mainnet launch, but also candidly acknowledging the pressures brought by market volatility.

After the Berachain mainnet launch, both TVL and token price experienced severe fluctuations. This may not only be due to market cycles but also the combined result of internal strategies and external pressures.

TVL Drops from $3 Billion to $180 Million, Chain Revenue $84 in 24 Hours

In February 2025, Berachain officially launched its mainnet, introducing an innovative Proof of Liquidity (PoL) consensus mechanism. This mechanism aims to incentivize application and user participation through liquidity proof rather than traditional Proof of Stake, making Berachain a Layer 1 chain designed specifically for DeFi applications, intended to enhance capital efficiency and user adoption. Initially, the ecosystem expanded rapidly, attracting hundreds of dApps, including DEXs like BEX, lending protocols, and NFT markets.

TVL once soared to $3.3 billion, with over 140,000 active addresses and 9.59 million transactions. The Foundation also supported multiple ecosystem projects through the RFA (Request for Application) and RFC (Request for Comment) programs and collaborated with institutions like BitGo to provide custody services, enhancing the project's professionalism. Additionally, Berachain's community building and marketing strategies were outstanding in the early stages. Bear-themed NFT series (such as Bong Bears) attracted a large number of users, and airdrops and incentive programs further stimulated participation. These initiatives helped Berachain become a hotspot in the DeFi space in the first half of 2025, ranking as the sixth-largest DeFi chain.

However, as the token price continued to decline, data from DefiLlama shows that its TVL has fallen to $180 million, with 24-hour chain revenue at $84, and the total stablecoin supply on the chain is $153.5 million.

Retail First? Majority of Tokens Allocated to VCs, Major Unlock in February

In its year-end update, the Berachain Foundation admitted that the "retail first" strategy in the crypto market had generally underperformed, leading to a reallocation of resources. This directly triggered a series of issues. First, layoffs and team changes. As part of the strategic adjustment, the Berachain Foundation cut most of its retail marketing team, shifting focus to foundational development. Berachain's lead developer, Alberto, is also leaving to co-found a Web2 company with former banking colleagues.

The Foundation emphasized that the departure was amicable, but this undoubtedly weakens the project's core technical strength. In the community, some developers have already moved to other chains like Monad, further exacerbating the talent drain.

Perhaps the "retail first" strategy promoted by the Berachain Foundation never truly took off.

The project initially emphasized community-driven approaches, but in practice, the incentive mechanisms failed to consistently attract users, and token allocation left retail investors out in the cold.

Although the PoL mechanism is innovative, its complexity (such as the multi-token model, including BERA and BGT) deterred users, leading to a sharp decline in network activity. In November 2025, the project paused the network due to a Balancer protocol vulnerability, fortunately without affecting user funds.

The BERA token price has fallen from a high of $9 to the current $0.7, a drop of over 10 times in just one year for the once so-called "heaven-sent" public chain token.

This collapse stems from a low circulation and high FDV model, leading to artificially inflated prices followed by a rapid crash, and these issues are rooted in Berachain's token distribution mechanism. Early contributors received 16.82% of the total supply, while private sale investors received a staggering 34.31% of the token share, typical of a VC coin. Additionally, NFT holders could receive tens of millions of dollars in tokens, while testnet users received only $60 in airdrops, sparking controversy over "wealth disparity" and marginalizing some loyal users.

This runs counter to the "retail first" slogan; the project is essentially a VC-dominated low-circulation, high-FDV model: early investors entered at $0.82, achieving 10-15x returns, while retail investors bear the crash. Foundation founder Smokey admitted that if done over, he would not sell so many tokens to VCs and has repurchased some to reduce dilution. In October 2025, the Berachain Foundation partnered with Greenlane Holdings to launch BeraStrategy, making BERA a reserve asset, but this failed to reverse the token's decline.

Furthermore, VCs like Brevan Howard's Nova fund hold refund rights, allowing them to request a full refund of $25 million before February 2026, further highlighting Berachain's tilt toward VCs.

Community dissatisfaction is high, with many users calling it the "ultimate fraudulent L1."

On February 6 this year, Berachain will unlock 63.75 million BERA, approximately 12.16% of the total supply. Of the unlocked portion, private sale investors account for 28.58 million. Starting from March this year, BERA will unlock 2.53% of the total supply each month. Given the current liquidity drought, the continuous large unlocks this year may trigger significant selling pressure.


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

BitPush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

BitPush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original Link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7603193

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat were the main factors that led to the collapse of Berachain's token price and TVL?

AThe collapse was driven by a combination of internal strategy flaws and external market pressures. Key factors included the project's high Fully Diluted Valuation (FDV) with low initial circulation, significant token allocations to venture capitalists (VCs) rather than retail users, the complexity of its Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) mechanism, loss of key developers, and upcoming large token unlocks that created selling pressure.

QHow did Berachain's token distribution model contribute to its problems?

ABerachain's token distribution was heavily skewed towards VCs and early contributors, with 34.31% allocated to private sale investors and 16.82% to early contributors. This left retail users with minimal allocations, contradicting the project's 'retail-first' marketing. The low circulation and high FDV model artificially inflated the price initially, leading to a sharp decline when early investors began selling.

QWhat was the significance of the upcoming token unlocks in February for Berachain?

AOn February 6, Berachain was scheduled to unlock 63.75 million BERA tokens, representing 12.16% of the total supply. This included 28.58 million tokens for private sale investors. Given the already low liquidity and declining price, these unlocks were expected to create substantial selling pressure, further depressing the token value.

QWhy did Berachain's innovative Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) consensus mechanism fail to sustain user engagement?

AThe PoL mechanism, while innovative, was complex and involved a multi-token system (BERA and BGT) that confused users. This complexity reduced network activity and participation, as users found it difficult to engage with the ecosystem effectively, leading to a decline in TVL and overall chain activity.

QWhat internal challenges did Berachain face regarding its development team and community?

ABerachain experienced significant internal challenges, including the departure of key developers such as Chief Developer Alberto, who left to start a Web2 company. The foundation also cut most of its retail marketing team, shifting focus to core development. Additionally, community developers migrated to other chains like Monad, exacerbating talent loss and reducing project momentum.

Lecturas Relacionadas

After Three Consecutive Quarters of Decline, Can the Crypto Market Find a Window for Stabilization in Q3?

The cryptocurrency market has just concluded its worst-performing quarter since 2022, with total capitalization dropping 12.6% to $2.1 trillion. All core metrics indicate capital is leaving the sector, not just rotating within it. Bitcoin fell 14.2% and Ethereum dropped 25.4% in Q2, breaking their previous correlation with US tech stocks. A key driver is the reversal in US spot Bitcoin ETF flows, which saw a net outflow of approximately $4.67 billion in Q2, including a record monthly outflow near $4.5 billion in June. While recent data suggests long-term holders are accumulating again, sustained ETF outflows mean continued selling pressure. Market focus is now singularly on the Federal Reserve. The upcoming July FOMC meeting is seen as the most critical event for Q3. A dovish signal could support Bitcoin reclaiming a $68,000-$84,000 range, while a hawkish stance might establish a new trading band around $50,000-$56,000. Additionally, regulatory uncertainty persists, with the progress of the crucial *CLARITY Act* stalling in the Senate, reducing its perceived 2026 passage probability to 40-45%. Despite the broad downturn, a few sectors showed growth. Prediction markets saw nominal volume surge 48.7% year-over-year to $113.8 billion, and tokenized collectibles transaction volume rose 143% quarterly to $1.4 billion. The Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization sector also continued steady growth, now representing ~$28.1 billion in on-chain value. The market's foundation for an extreme crash appears limited, with Bitcoin price hovering near its 200-week moving average. However, the trading paradigm has shifted from narrative-driven speculation to decisions based on price action, policy developments, and interest rate expectations, making a broad sentiment-driven rally unlikely in the near term.

marsbitHace 10 hora(s)

After Three Consecutive Quarters of Decline, Can the Crypto Market Find a Window for Stabilization in Q3?

marsbitHace 10 hora(s)

BIT Trading Moment: BTC Still Suppressed by Weekly 200 EMA, Rejection May Restart Decline; Storage and Semiconductors that Surged Last Night Begin Falling in Evening Trading

**Crypto & Stock Market Wrap: Bitcoin Tests Resistance, Stocks Retreat After AI Surge** Bitcoin consolidates around $66,000, facing key resistance near $68,000—an area seen as a major psychological and technical hurdle where previous rallies have failed. Analysts note the cryptocurrency is caught between its 200-week moving average (~$63,333) and 200-week EMA (~$68,328). A clear break above $68k is needed to signal a stronger bullish trend, while a rejection could lead to a retest of $63k support. Market sentiment remains cautious, with low futures open interest pointing to a low-liquidity rebound rather than a full bull market. Bitcoin spot ETFs saw another $203 million inflow. US stock futures pointed lower after a strong Tuesday session led by a massive rebound in semiconductors and memory stocks. The rally was fueled by renewed optimism about AI-driven hardware demand, with Micron, SanDisk, and SK Hynix surging. However, those gains reversed in pre-market trading. Super Micro Computer (SMCI) soared over 20% after hours on strong guidance and a record backlog. Other standouts included Rocket Lab and nuclear energy plays Oklo and X-Energy. Rising oil prices (Brent above $91) and climbing Treasury yields (10-year near 4.64%), however, are reigniting inflation concerns and acting as a headwind for equities. In Asia, markets were mixed. South Korea's KOSPI pared early gains to close slightly higher as semiconductor stocks like SK Hynix gave back initial surges. Japan's Nikkei edged lower as the yen hit a fresh 38-year low against the dollar, raising fears of potential market intervention. Key events to watch include the Samsung Galaxy launch, AMD's AI event, and a slew of major tech earnings from Alphabet, Tesla, and IBM after the close on Wednesday, followed by the ECB meeting and Intel's earnings on Thursday.

marsbitHace 10 hora(s)

BIT Trading Moment: BTC Still Suppressed by Weekly 200 EMA, Rejection May Restart Decline; Storage and Semiconductors that Surged Last Night Begin Falling in Evening Trading

marsbitHace 10 hora(s)

Former CFTC Chairman, Circle President Tarbert: Preaching Long-Termism While Cashing Out $30 Million Himself

Former CFTC Chairman and Circle President Heath Tarbert has consistently advocated for a long-term vision in public, urging patience from investors as Circle’s stock price has fallen significantly from its peak. However, it has been revealed that since Circle’s IPO, Tarbert has continuously sold his CRCL shares through pre-arranged trading plans, cashing out approximately $30 million, without making any public market purchases. This contrast between his public messaging and personal actions has drawn criticism. Tarbert joined Circle in July 2023 as Chief Legal Officer, leveraging his regulatory experience to help guide the company through its IPO and expansion. Despite promoting stablecoins as long-term infrastructure, he established a 10b5-1 trading plan just before Circle went public, leading to substantial stock sales over the following year. In March 2026, he initiated another plan to sell more shares. His career trajectory highlights a pattern of moving between high-level regulatory roles and influential positions in the financial sector. After resigning as CFTC Chairman in early 2021, he joined Citadel Securities as Chief Legal Officer just 27 days later, during a period of intense regulatory scrutiny for the firm. He later joined Circle, aiding its efforts to navigate regulatory challenges for its public listing. While Tarbert's expertise in policy and compliance is valuable to companies like Circle, his actions—advocating long-term confidence while personally divesting—raise questions about the alignment between his public statements and his private financial decisions, leaving investors who followed his advice to bear the market risks.

marsbitHace 11 hora(s)

Former CFTC Chairman, Circle President Tarbert: Preaching Long-Termism While Cashing Out $30 Million Himself

marsbitHace 11 hora(s)

Gate Research Institute: The 'Wall Street-ization' Wave of Crypto Financial Products – Competition or Integration?

The article titled "Gate Research Institute: Are Crypto Financial Products Sparking a 'Wall Street' Wave—Competition or Convergence?" explores the evolving relationship between the crypto ecosystem and traditional finance (TradFi). The piece begins by reflecting on Bitcoin's original 2009 vision of decentralization, disintermediation, and moving away from banks. It then contrasts this with the 2024 landscape, where key crypto assets like Bitcoin are increasingly held through Wall Street products like ETFs issued by giants like BlackRock. The article questions whether this signifies that TradFi is systematically taking over the rights to issue, price, custody, and distribute crypto financial assets. The core argument is that this is not a zero-sum takeover but rather a bidirectional convergence where each side addresses the other's weaknesses. Crypto offers 24/7 global markets, programmable settlement, and open access but lacks compliant channels, institutional-grade custody, deep fiat liquidity, and mainstream distribution. TradFi possesses these but is constrained by legacy systems, limited operating hours, and slow settlement. Two primary convergence paths are highlighted: * **Path A (CEX to TradFi):** Exemplified by Gate, which has progressed from offering tokenized stocks and CFDs to providing direct, real stock trading (US, Hong Kong, South Korea) within its platform, using USDT. * **Path B (TradFi to Crypto):** Exemplified by Robinhood, which has integrated crypto trading, acquired exchanges like Bitstamp, and is moving traditional assets like stocks onto the blockchain via tokenization and its own Layer 2. Both paths are ultimately competing to become the next-generation, unified financial account—a "super account" where users can seamlessly trade cryptocurrencies, stocks, ETFs, RWA (Real World Assets), and tokenized treasury products in one interface. The growth of RWA and tokenized treasuries (e.g., BlackRock's BUIDL) is presented as the asset-layer fusion, providing stable, yield-bearing assets on-chain and acting as a bridge between the two worlds. In conclusion, the "Wall Street-ization" of crypto is framed as a mutual transformation. Decentralized ideals persist in the protocol layer, while at the application layer, a more efficient, global, and accessible unified capital market is emerging from this convergence. The future competition lies not between crypto exchanges and stockbrokers, but between platforms vying to offer the most comprehensive asset coverage, liquidity, and user experience within a single account.

marsbitHace 11 hora(s)

Gate Research Institute: The 'Wall Street-ization' Wave of Crypto Financial Products – Competition or Integration?

marsbitHace 11 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片