FDV「超标」的 WLD一直涨,FDV还有参考价值吗?

Odaily星球日报Pubblicato 2024-02-23Pubblicato ultima volta 2024-02-23

Introduzione

不关注FDV,关注什么?

原文作者:Kaori,BlockBeats

原文编辑:Jack,BlockBeats

WLD 在一周的时间从 2 美元最高涨至 9 美元,AI 板块内外都沸腾了起来,但加密市场却因 WLD 的 FDV 出现分歧。

FDV(Fully Diluted Valuation)是指一个代币的完全稀释价值,与当前币价乘以当前代币流通量得到的市值(Market Cap)相对应,FDV 是当前币价乘以代币供应总量得到的一个指标。

这对 Degen 来说是一个很熟悉的名词,但如果你刚刚听说也别着急,本篇文章就将以 WLD 为例向你解释 FDV 的意义,新周期我们是否还应该以 FDV 作为炒币的参考指标,以及 FDV 反映了哪些理解市场的新角度。

WLD 的 FDV 有参考价值吗?

WLD 当前流通供应量约为 1.3 亿,撰稿时市值为 11 亿美元,排名第 76 位;而其供应总量为 100 亿枚,FDV 达到 856 亿美元,已经超越 SOL、BNB 等一梯队公链,甚至是 AI 概念的世界龙头 OpenAI 的市值。

FDV「超标」的 WLD一直涨,FDV还有参考价值吗?

市场分歧也就出现在这里,有人认为 WLD 的 FDV 已经高到离谱,这个价格完全无法维持,仅仅只是蹭 AI 热度的泡沫;而另一部分人则认为 WLD 的流通量低到离谱,还得看做市商愿意拉到哪,FDV 只是一个唬人的幌子。

Worldcoin 白皮书显示 WLD 启动时的最大流通供应量为 1.43 亿枚,其中 1 亿枚 WLD 贷款给在美国境外的做市商, 4300 万枚 WLD 将分配给在测试启动阶段通过 Orb 验证的使用者。而自 World App 正式上线以来,单一用户总共可领取 77 枚 WLD 津贴。但在法国、香港等地,WorldCoin 面临很大的监管压力,线下扫描虹膜的设备和站点都遭到了一定的限制,用户手中的代币很大一部分无法提现。

另一方面, 5 家 WLD 做市商已于去年 10 月底归还 2500 万枚 WLD,剩余 7500 万枚 WLD 在 12 月 15 日返还给了 Worldcoin 项目方。随后,Worldcoin 称与这 5 家做市商敲定了新的贷款协议,于 2023 年 12 月 16 日生效,这一次贷款总额为 1000 万枚 WLD,期限为 6 个月。

因此,当前市场上的 WLD 流通代币只包括两部分,一是通过 APP 领取每日津贴并且已经提现的用户手里那部分代币,二是做市商手里的那 1000 万,这部分流通量相对于 WLD 的总供应量来说只占比仅有 1.33% 。此外,WLD 的解锁期在 150 天后,因此,短期来说 WLD 的 FDV 不具有参考性,而超过 OpenAI 市值的讲法更像是一个 AI meme。

不关注 FDV,关注什么?

什么人炒币要看 FDV?

对于需要长期持仓某个币种的人来说,比如机构或者稳健型投资者,他们需要通过 FDV 进行投后管理或者仓位管理。这个时候 FDV 结合市值就是一个监测代币前景的有效指标,可以让投资者更好地判断一个项目的价值是否极度偏离标准。但对于普通散户投资者,在短期交易时主要考虑的应该是代币的供需关系以及叙事和情绪。而如果关注 FDV 还需要结合代币的发行时间表。

FDV 变得不那么重要,其实背后也反映了加密行业的一些变化,而正是这些变化需要我们关注 FDV 以外的东西。

供需关系

首先是整个加密行业的人在变多,以前只有 ICO 和散户,但现在买家越来越多,利益相关方也在增多。一个大项目要几轮融资卖币、空投一大笔、做市商、CEX 等许多方面都在影响代币的供需关系。在这样的行业发展背景下,代币总供应量所反映的 FDV 在一定时期内就不具备参考价值。

需求增多,因此代币总量越来越大,线性解锁时间周期越来越长,往好处想项目希望新人进来还能买自己的币,是某种长期主义的体现。而如果要想降低 FDV 对代币价格的影响,项目方还需要在解锁时机、以及创造需求方面继续深耕。

FDV「超标」的 WLD一直涨,FDV还有参考价值吗?

左:FTT 解锁时间线;中:OP 解锁时间线;右:STRK 解锁时间线(未更新最新版本)

解锁时间线对币价的影响可以拿最近刚完成空投的天王项目 Starknet 来说,StarkWare 宣布调整其早期贡献者和投资者的 STRK 代币解锁计划,从一次性在 4 月 15 日释放 13 亿代币到只解锁 6400 万代币然后线性释放这种更渐进的方式进行。这个消息公布后,STRK 价格突破 2 美元,较之前上涨了 14% 。此时的 STRK FDV 仍然很大,但市场反应明显消化了这个利好。

FDV「超标」的 WLD一直涨,FDV还有参考价值吗?

STRK 24 小时价格走势图

STRK 上线则可以一窥供需对一个大项目代币短时的价格影响。Starknet 上线 Binance 为什么会冲到 7 刀变成单机币?因为彼时链上空投领取被卡,大户无法砸盘,而几大做市商往 CEX 里充币,导致短期需求相对较高,供小于求。至于长期的供需关系,则需要项目方平衡好各方利益关系,但 FDV 已经不是这种解锁时间较长的大项目所考虑的必须因素了。

FDV「超标」的 WLD一直涨,FDV还有参考价值吗?

再拿 WLD 举例,前文我们粗略计算得知目前市场上的流通供应量仅占总量的 1.3% ,而其中做市商拿着 1% ,从拉盘角度来说,WLD 此时的 FDV 毫无参考价值。因为决定 WLD 释放的 Orb 很少,真正能从 APP 提币出来的人很少。

短期操作,情绪为王

除了供需关系,WLD 的上涨逻辑还需要考虑叙事的力量。一周前,OpenAI 推出文生视频大模型 Sora,WorldCoin 作为从一上线就被冠以 Sam Altman 的加密项目也受益于这波 AI 板块情绪热潮。而昨日在小幅下跌之后得益于英伟达财报营收上涨,WLD 的价格仍然维持在 8 美元区间。

Arthur Hayes 曾说「我宁愿投资感知成功概率为 0.01% 、叙事处于病毒式增长阶段的代币,也不愿投资感知成功概率为 50% 、但叙事已达到常识阶段的代币。如果成功的概率从 0.01% 上升到 1% ,因为这个叙事很快感染了很多人,我的钱就会增加 100 倍。」

强庄控盘遇上 AI 届热火朝天,WLD 的这波拉涨的逻辑其实很好理解。相反,如今拿 FDV 说事的人倒让人想起那句有些幽默的「FUD 的时候就说 FDV,喊单的时候就说 MC」。

真金白银

行情好是因为流动性充足,BTC 的 2 月行情可以通过 ETF 的资金流入流出进行验证。2 月 14 日,CoinShares 研究主管 James Butterfill 称自比特币现货 ETF 推出以来,净流入总额已超 40 亿美元。一周后,比特币现货 ETF 累计净流入超 50 亿美元,达 50.52 亿美元。

而昨日,据 BitMEX Research 数据, 2 月 21 日所有美国现货比特币 ETF 净流出 3570 万美元,系 1 月 25 日以来(累计 17 个交易日)首次净流出。

而由于再质押的火热,很大一部分 ETH 都被投入到这个赛道上的热门项目里。从 Blast 的锁仓质押开始再到 Pendle 拉盘带动 LRT 的上涨,EigenLayer 等头部项目的持续吸引,ETH 的流通量在这个时间段减少,也体现在了价格层面。

我们无法准确预测代币市场的价格表现,但可以关注钱,这比看市值除以 FDV 的比率要更及时反馈市场情况。

FDV 还有价值吗?

这个市场越来越专业,价格发现能力变得更强,那 FDV 到底有没有价值呢?至少在一些大型龙头项目上,我们仍然能看到 FDV 对定价的影响。

比如 Layer 2 两大龙头 OP Mainnet 和 Arbitrum,OP 的价格基本上保持在 ARB 的两倍,这两者之间的价格差异是因为曾经 OP 的 FDV 是是 ARB 的一半,尽管流通量上 OP 只比 ARB 少 3 亿枚左右。

FDV「超标」的 WLD一直涨,FDV还有参考价值吗?

左图为 OP 价格走势、右图为 ARB

OP Stack 的广泛采用为 OP 的需求量奠定了一定基础,但随着 Arbitrum Orbit 持续发力完善其技术堆栈和去中心化治理,这场关于 Layer 2 的马拉松竞赛远未结束。随着竞争加剧,如果未来对 ARB 的交易需求超过 OP,就算 ARB 的 FDV 仍然高过 OP,但反映在价格上 ARB 也会超过 OP。

由此可见,市场逻辑与标准也是在变化的,ARB 与 OP 的实质差距,可以看作 FDV 理论胜败的风向标。如果未来 ARB 市值逐渐超过 OP,则坚持 FDV 至上论的投资者可能就要重新思考市场逻辑了。但不管怎么说,在加密市场上关注某个单一指标是无法前进的。

Letture associate

Soaring Export Data for Memory Chips, Market Is Redefining the Valuation Anchor for Memory Stocks

Korean storage export data for the first 20 days of June shows substantial year-on-year increases in both value and price-per-kilogram for categories like DRAM, NAND, and SSDs. This signals a potential shift beyond simple demand recovery, indicating rising prices and a product mix shift towards higher-value items, possibly influenced by AI infrastructure needs. A key point is that the surge in price-per-kilogram is not simply a uniform chip price hike. It reflects a combination of actual price increases and, more importantly, an export structure increasingly dominated by high-value-density products like HBM (High-Bandwidth Memory) and advanced DRAM, which are critical for AI servers. This suggests AI-driven demand may be spilling over from just HBM into broader memory markets. SK Hynix stands to benefit directly due to its leading HBM position. For Samsung and Micron, the implication is potential for greater margin elasticity if the tightness in high-end memory spreads to enterprise SSD and NAND prices. However, the storage sector remains cyclical. Risks include supply expansion, inventory changes, and potential slowdowns in broader AI capital expenditure. Ultimately, while the strong export data supports upward revisions for storage company earnings and fuels discussion of an "AI infrastructure bottleneck premium," a definitive valuation shift from a cyclical to a structural story depends on upcoming quarterly reports. Investors need confirmation from SK Hynix, Samsung, and Micron that improvements in average selling prices, product mix, and, crucially,毛利率 are sustained over multiple quarters.

marsbit3 min fa

Soaring Export Data for Memory Chips, Market Is Redefining the Valuation Anchor for Memory Stocks

marsbit3 min fa

Why Does SpaceX Have Such a High Valuation Ceiling? The Answer Lies in Musk's Business Blueprint

SpaceX achieved a record-breaking IPO on June 12, 2026, with its market cap surging past $2.1 trillion. This valuation reflects its central role within Elon Musk's expansive, interconnected technological ecosystem. The article details how four core components form a synergistic closed-loop system: 1) **The "Brain" (xAI & Orbital Compute):** xAI provides AI models and massive ground/space-based supercomputing for simulation and decision-making across the system. 2) **The "Neural Logistics Core" (Starlink & Starship):** Starlink's low-latency satellite network enables global data transmission, while Starship's low-cost, reusable launch capacity aims to make large-scale space deployment economically viable. 3) **The "Physical Body" (Tesla & Optimus):** Tesla's manufacturing prowess and energy products support hardware production and power, pivoting toward mass-producing the Optimus humanoid robot for terrestrial and potential space-based labor. 4) **The "Human Interface" (Neuralink & X):** Neuralink seeks direct brain-computer communication, and the X platform provides real-time societal data. Together, these elements create three reinforcing "flywheels": manufacturing/logistics, data-driven iteration, and energy/compute/network synergy. This integrated approach promises lower costs, faster innovation cycles, and potential infrastructure-as-a-service offerings. However, it also concentrates technical, regulatory, and corporate governance risks. Ultimately, SpaceX's high valuation stems from its position as the indispensable infrastructural backbone—handling space transport, global communications, and future orbital computing—tying together Musk's entire vision for a self-reinforcing technological empire.

marsbit8 min fa

Why Does SpaceX Have Such a High Valuation Ceiling? The Answer Lies in Musk's Business Blueprint

marsbit8 min fa

Snap, Unprofitable for Nine Years, and a Decade-Long AR Obsession Without Return

Snap's AR Obsession: A Decade of Betting Against the Odds On June 16, Snap CEO Evan Spiegel unveiled the new AR glasses, Specs, priced at $2,195, causing the company's stock (SNAP) to plummet nearly 10%. The launch was met with intense criticism online, with investors questioning why a consistently unprofitable company would stake its future on an expensive product its core young user base can't afford. Snapchat, known for pioneering features like ephemeral Stories and popular AR lenses (like the iconic dog filter), has a history of innovation often copied by rivals like Instagram and Meta. Despite this, it has struggled to translate first-mover advantage into commercial success. Since its 2017 IPO, Snap has reported annual net losses, with a Q1 2026 loss of $89 million. Its stock is down 94% from its 2021 peak, hampered by iOS privacy changes, competition, and a young demographic less attractive to major advertisers. In this challenging context, Spiegel is doubling down on AR. He calls 2026 a "crucible moment," having recently laid off 16% of staff while reportedly investing over $3.5 billion cumulatively in its AR glasses line over nearly a decade. The new Specs represent a significant leap from the 2016 camera-focused Spectacles, offering true AR overlays, gesture control, and standalone operation. However, at $2,195, it faces tough comparisons. While more advanced than Meta's $799 Ray-Ban smart glasses, critics point to its heavier weight, short battery life, and features largely replicable by a smartphone. Facing pressure from investors to cut losses on the Specs project, Spiegel has refused, framing it as essential to Snap's long-term vision. The company finds itself in a paradoxical position: cutting costs while heavily funding a decade-long, unproven bet. Some see Specs as an awkward but necessary step in AR's evolution, akin to early mobile phones. Whether Spiegel is a visionary outlier or a gambler destined to fail remains an open question, highlighting the tension between long-term ambition and short-term market demands.

marsbit30 min fa

Snap, Unprofitable for Nine Years, and a Decade-Long AR Obsession Without Return

marsbit30 min fa

Annualized Revenue Exceeds $20 Billion, Kalshi Aims to Become the First Prediction Platform IPO?

Kalshi, a leading U.S. prediction markets platform, is reportedly in early, informal discussions for an Initial Public Offering (IPO). The company's annualized revenue now exceeds $2 billion, fueled by its dominance of over 90% of the domestic prediction market activity. This growth stems from a surge in trading volume—reaching a total of $52.7 billion—and an increase in fee rates, largely driven by sports event contracts like the NBA playoffs and the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Monthly active users are approximately 2 million. Kalshi recently raised $1 billion in a funding round led by Coatue Management, valuing the company at $22 billion. It has also expanded its offerings to include Bitcoin perpetual contracts and plans to launch a dedicated trading platform, Kalshi Pro. However, Kalshi's path to an IPO faces significant regulatory hurdles. The core risk involves jurisdictional conflicts, as multiple U.S. states are challenging its operations under local gambling laws. For instance, Arizona has filed criminal charges against the platform, while states like Kentucky have filed lawsuits. Kalshi and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) argue that its event contracts fall under exclusive federal jurisdiction as "swaps." The outcomes of these ongoing legal battles could critically impact Kalshi's core revenue and its IPO timeline. Analysts suggest that while an IPO could theoretically occur by late 2026, a more likely timeframe is late 2027 or 2028, contingent on resolving legal issues and favorable market conditions. If successful, its fundraising could significantly exceed $1 billion, given its current valuation and revenue multiple.

Foresight News47 min fa

Annualized Revenue Exceeds $20 Billion, Kalshi Aims to Become the First Prediction Platform IPO?

Foresight News47 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片