Exchange 'Listing Curse' Investigation: Why 89% of New Tokens Ultimately Become Retail Investor Traps?

marsbitPubblicato 2026-03-26Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-26

Introduzione

A 2025 analysis reveals a stark reality: 89% of new tokens listed on Binance ended the year with negative returns, debunking the myth that an exchange listing guarantees profits. These tokens experienced an average price decline of 71-80%, often through a slow, steady bleed rather than a sudden crash. Listings are now widely seen as liquidity events for insiders and early investors to exit, earning the term "retail exit liquidity." Key factors driving this trend include excessive selling pressure from teams and airdrop hunters, overinflated valuations with minimal real users, weak capital flows into new altcoins, a market saturated with over 11 million new tokens in 2025, and a focus on narrative over actual product development. Projects in trend-driven sectors like Memes and RWA were particularly vulnerable due to lacking substance. Binance has also become less tolerant of underperformers, delisting tokens like A2Z, FORTH, and HOOK. The report concludes that only projects with genuine products and strong communities can survive long-term, as a Binance listing is no longer a shortcut to success but a test of sustainability.

Author: Gilmo

Compilation: Yuliya, PANews

Why have many tokens listed on Binance failed?

Recently, while browsing X or cryptocurrency communities, you might be familiar with the phenomenon of "listing on an exchange and then crashing." The days when a Binance listing meant "skyrocketing" seem to be a thing of the past. Instead, a "listing curse" has spread within the community, with many investors watching their account funds evaporate day by day, heartbroken.

So, what exactly is happening behind the scenes?

I. Overview

2025 revealed a harsh reality. Most tokens listed on Binance Spot struggled to maintain their value.

89% of tokens listed on Binance in 2025 had negative returns.

+ Price Performance

Approximately 89% to 94% of listed tokens are in severe loss. The average drawdown after listing ranges from 71% to 80%. Many tokens did not experience a sharp crash but rather a slow decline pattern, with prices gradually falling over time, quietly draining funds.

+ Reputation

A Binance listing was once a significant milestone. Now, it is often seen as a liquidity event for early investors to take profits. Due to the massive selling pressure after listing, many traders even refer to it as the "retail exit zone."

+ Attention Cycle

Most projects gain extremely high attention in the first few days. But after that, interest quickly declines. Without real products or user demand, this momentum soon fades.

+ Operations

Some projects slow down their development after reaching the listing. Subsequently, weak activity and low liquidity lead to their delisting from exchanges.

For example: A2Z, FORTH, HOOK, IDEX, LRC, NTRN, RDNT, SXP

In early 2026: ACA, CHESS, DATA were also delisted

Clearly, Binance no longer supports underperforming projects.

II. Listing Categories

In 2025, Binance listed 87 projects, covering 16 sectors.

+ Networks

Ethereum dominated with about 36%, followed by BNB Chain and Solana.

Notably, Binance has started supporting extremely nascent ecosystems like Nillion and 0G Labs, but due to the lack of real users, this is also a high-risk group.

+ Sectors

DeFi led with 18 projects, followed by AI and Infrastructure.

Trend-driven sectors like Memes and RWA can quickly gain listing opportunities, but due to the lack of core products, their failure rates are higher.

III. So Why Do These Tokens Fail?

Several key factors explain this pattern.

1. Liquidity Events for Insiders

Listings create deep liquidity. This allows teams and early investors to realize profits. Airdrop hunters also add selling pressure immediately after listing.

2. Overvaluation

Some projects launched with valuations in the billions but had small user bases. The gap between valuation and actual usage puts heavy pressure on prices.

3. Weak Market Capital Flows

During 2025, capital was largely concentrated around BTC and ETH. New altcoins received limited and short-lived capital.

4. Emphasis on Narrative Over Product

Many teams invested heavily in storytelling and marketing. Actual product development progressed slowly. Once the initial hype faded, user interest plummeted.

5. Market Saturation

Over 11 million tokens were launched in 2025. Supply increased rapidly, while user attention remained limited. Listing alone no longer drives sustainable growth.

IV. Conclusion

From 2025 to 2026, token listings on Binance will more resemble a final round for project insiders to dump their holdings rather than an opportunity for retail investors to get rich.

Only projects with real products and strong communities have a chance to survive.

You can refer to @defikadic's list to understand which are the truly quality projects:

Domande pertinenti

QWhat percentage of tokens listed on Binance in 2025 had a negative return?

AApproximately 89% of tokens listed on Binance in 2025 had a negative return.

QWhat is the average price drawdown for tokens after being listed on Binance?

AThe average price drawdown after listing ranges between 71% and 80%.

QWhich blockchain network dominated the token listings on Binance in 2025?

AEthereum dominated the token listings, accounting for approximately 36% of the projects.

QWhat are the main reasons cited for the failure of newly listed tokens?

AThe main reasons include liquidity events for insiders, overvaluation, weak market capital flows, prioritizing narrative over product, and market saturation.

QWhich sector had the most token listings on Binance in 2025?

AThe DeFi sector had the most token listings with 18 projects, followed by AI and Infrastructure.

Letture associate

From Theft to Re-entry: How Was $292 Million "Laundered"?

A sophisticated crypto laundering operation was executed following the $292 million hack of Kelp DAO on April 18. The attack, attributed to the North Korean Lazarus group, began with anonymous infrastructure preparation using Tornado Cash to fund wallets untraceably. The hacker exploited a vulnerability in Kelp’s cross-chain bridge, stealing 116,500 rsETH. To avoid crashing the market, the attacker used Aave and Compound as laundering tools—depositing the stolen rsETH as collateral to borrow $190 million in clean, liquid ETH. This move triggered a bank run on Aave, causing an $8 billion drop in TVL. After consolidating funds, the attacker fragmented them across hundreds of wallets to evade detection. A major breakpoint was THORChain, where over $460 million in volume—30 times its usual activity—was processed in 24 hours, converting ETH into Bitcoin. This shift to Bitcoin’s UTXO model exponentially increased tracing complexity by shattering funds into countless untraceable fragments. The final destination was Tron-based USDT, the primary channel for illicit crypto flows. From there, funds were cashed out via OTC brokers in China and Southeast Asia, using unlicensed underground banks and UnionPay networks outside Western sanctions scope. Ultimately, the laundered money supports North Korea’s weapons programs, which rely heavily on crypto hacking for foreign currency. The incident underscores structural challenges in DeFi: its openness, composability, and lack of central control make such laundering not just possible, but inherently difficult to prevent.

marsbit3 h fa

From Theft to Re-entry: How Was $292 Million "Laundered"?

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片