Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

marsbitPubblicato 2026-05-11Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-11

Introduzione

"Hook Summer" Arrives? Sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite Uniswap v4 Narrative Amidst a slight market recovery, attention within the Ethereum ecosystem has shifted to Meme coins built on Uniswap v4's Hook protocol. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD have become market focal points, with market caps ranging from millions to tens of millions, bringing concentrated liquidity to a narrative-dry market. Uniswap v4 Hooks are "plugin smart contracts" that allow developers to inject custom logic at key points in a liquidity pool's lifecycle (initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps, etc.), making the AMM programmable. Recent representative projects include: * **sato**: Market cap peaked over $38M; uses a v4 curve mechanism for minting/burning, locking ETH as reserve. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, positioning as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Market cap neared $6.6M; a "lending AMM protocol" allowing users to borrow ETH against deposited LO0P tokens without immediate selling pressure. * **FLOOD**: Market cap approached $6M; channels trading reserves into Aave v3 to generate yield, which is retained in the pool. The emergence of these Hook-based tokens could drive long-term growth for the Uniswap ecosystem by attracting users and liquidity to v4 pools. Combined with Uniswap's activated fee switch (partially used to burn UNI), the long-term outlook for UNI appears positive. However, short-term UNI pr...

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Wenser(@wenser 2010 )

After a slight recovery in the broader market, the heat for Meme coins in the Ethereum ecosystem has rekindled. Following ASTEROID, ecological tokens backed by the Uniswap v4 Hook protocol, such as sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD, have gradually become the focus of market attention, with market capitalizations ranging from millions to tens of millions of dollars, bringing rare concentrated liquidity to the narrative-dry crypto market. Odaily Planet Daily will briefly summarize the information about these tokens in this article and explore whether this boom can drive a recovery in the price of UNI.

Has Hook Summer Arrived? 4 Major Ecological Tokens, Intelligent Liquidity Management

According to Uniswap official documentation, Hook is a "plugin smart contract" tailored for liquidity pools in Uniswap v4. Unlike traditional Uniswap V2/V3 which only has a fixed constant product curve (x*y=k), it allows developers to automatically inject custom logic before and after key lifecycle nodes of the pool (initialization, adding/removing liquidity, Swap, Donate, etc.), thereby turning the entire AMM (Automated Market Maker) into programmable "Lego bricks". Aside from the previous uPEG, recent representative related projects are as follows:

sato: Market Cap Peak Exceeded $38 Million

CA:0x829f4b62eebe12af653b4dd4ffc480966f7d7f09

Current Market Cap: ~$28 Million

On May 4th, when sato first emerged, Odaily Planet Daily provided a brief introduction. At that time, its market cap was only $9 million. This token is minted and burned through the Uniswap v4 curve mechanism. Buying generates new tokens and locks ETH as reserves, while selling exchanges ETH from the reserves and burns tokens. By then, its cumulative buy volume had approached 1000 ETH. Subsequently, sato's market cap once exceeded $30 million.

Although community users later discovered its curve mechanism had a buy-sell spread, causing its market cap to once fall below $13 million, its innovative mechanism and first-mover advantage keep its current market cap around $28 million, with a 24-hour trading volume close to $6 million.

sat1: Market Cap Peak Exceeded $10 Million

CA:0x8f66337a0c2a02202fd91dd596c411cf977c6060

Current Market Cap: ~$800,000

On May 8th, sat1, under the concept of "optimized sato", reached its speculative peak. Thanks to vigorous promotion by crypto KOL Han Ba Long Wang in WeChat groups, the token's market cap once surpassed $10 million. However, with subsequent backlash, the project eventually spiraled down, losing over 90% of its value.

Lo0p: Market Cap Peak Approached $6.6 Million

CA:0x20ea861b3acec90d3a15b4755d9a1cf1f161496e

Current Market Cap: ~$960,000

Official Account: https://x.com/lo0pio

On May 10th, Lo0p's market cap once exceeded $6 million, with a daily increase of over 110x. Similarly, Lo0p's main concept is "a lending AMM protocol based on Uniswap v4 Hook," aiming to solve the idle ETH capital efficiency problem in LP pools. Users buy LO0P tokens by binding the curve, locking them as collateral (without selling), and can directly borrow ETH from the pool reserves at a 40% LTV. Borrowing does not directly impact the spot price; after liquidation, the mechanism attempts to refill the LP band. The Hook injects custom logic during the Swap/liquidity lifecycle, achieving "collateral lending + LP收益 + loan interest" compound returns while maintaining pool price stability. Its core mechanism lies in "built-in lending."

FLOOD: Market Cap Peak Near $6 Million

CA:0xff003fbe8b8d5e7f271a9cb9f2780003daed2aa8

Current Market Cap: ~$1.4 Million

Official Account: https://x.com/flood_markets

On May 10th, FLOOD's market cap once broke $5 million. As the speculative heat cooled down, the current market cap is around $1.4 million. It is reported that FLOOD has a total supply of 50 million tokens. Its special mechanism is: asset reserves generated from user purchases enter the corresponding Aave v3 market to earn yield; transaction fees are also retained in the pool, used to increase reserves and affect the token price. The core lies in Aave integration for automatic yield, with the Hook mechanism playing the role of "automatic rebalancing and yield recycling". No wonder some community users bluntly stated: "Buying funds enter the pool → pool assets generate interest on Aave → interest stays in the pool → long-term price push, so this is using my money to deposit and earn interest?"

Hook Mechanism Tokens Drive Uniswap Ecosystem Development: UNI Bullish Long-Term, But Limited Short-Term Gains

Thanks to the rapid development of the Uniswap v4 Hook mechanism, ecological tokens in this sector have now become a type of Meme coin and project ecological token. In the long run, they can further attract users and capital liquidity to participate in Uniswap v4 liquidity pool trading and development.

Combined with the previous news that "Uniswap has opened the fee switch, with part of the protocol fees used to burn UNI tokens," the long-term fundamentals of UNI show a steady and positive trend.

However, in the short term, the emergence of Hook mechanism tokens cannot directly drive the price increase of the UNI token. Intermediate factors include the token lifecycle and sustainability, token price volatility and transaction fee proportions, and the impact of crypto regulatory policies and overall market trends on the UNI token.

Therefore, in summary, the Hook ecosystem is "long-term nourishment" for UNI, but in the short term, it's more like a "catalyst" than a "booster."

Also according to the Uniswap official website page, the current v4 TVL is temporarily reported at $595 million, slightly lower than v3 ($792 million) and v2 ($966 million) liquidity pools. Therefore, v4 and the Hook ecosystem still need time to accumulate strength and gradually grow into mainstream liquidity management protocols in the market.

Finally, Odaily Planet Daily reminds readers that the above tokens are early-stage technological innovation experimental products and may contain unknown bugs or other risks. Please be aware of the relevant risks when participating in trading. The above information does not constitute investment advice.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is a Hook in Uniswap v4 according to the article?

AA Hook in Uniswap v4 is a plugin-style smart contract designed for liquidity pools. Unlike the fixed constant product curve in traditional Uniswap V2/V3, Hooks allow developers to inject custom logic automatically at key lifecycle points of a pool, such as initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps, and donations, making the AMM programmable like Lego blocks.

QWhat was the core mechanism of the Lo0p token mentioned in the article?

AThe Lo0p token's core mechanism was 'built-in lending.' It functioned as a lending AMM protocol based on Uniswap v4 Hooks, aiming to solve the idle ETH capital efficiency problem in LP pools. Users could buy LO0P tokens, lock them as collateral, and borrow ETH directly from the pool reserves at a 40% LTV. This process did not directly impact the spot price, and after liquidation, the mechanism would attempt to refill the LP band.

QHow does the FLOOD token's mechanism integrate with Aave v3, and what was a community member's humorous critique of it?

AFLOOD's mechanism involved channeling the asset reserves generated from user purchases into the corresponding Aave v3 market to earn yield. Trading fees were also retained within the pool to increase reserves and influence the token price. A community member humorously critiqued it by saying, 'Buying funds enter the pool -> pool assets go to Aave to earn interest -> interest stays in the pool -> pushes the price up in the long run. So this is using my money to deposit and earn interest?'

QWhat is the article's view on the impact of Hook-based tokens on the UNI token's price in the short and long term?

AThe article views Hook-based tokens as 'long-term nutrients' for UNI, potentially attracting users and liquidity to the Uniswap v4 ecosystem, which is positive for its long-term fundamentals. However, in the short term, they are seen more as a 'catalyst' rather than a 'booster' for UNI's price, as immediate price movement is influenced by other factors like token lifecycle, fee proportions, crypto regulations, and overall market trends.

QWhat warning does Odaily Planet Daily give to readers regarding the tokens discussed in the article?

AOdaily Planet Daily warns readers that the discussed tokens are early-stage technological innovation experiments that may contain unknown bugs or other risks. It advises participants to be aware of the associated risks when trading and clarifies that the information provided does not constitute investment advice.

Letture associate

7 Months After the Collapse of Huiwang, Southeast Asia's Escrow Platforms Undergo a Major Reshuffle

Following the collapse of Huione Pay—dubbed the "Alipay of Southeast Asia"—seven months ago, the region's underground financial guarantee platform sector is undergoing a significant reshuffle. This power vacuum has been swiftly filled by emerging platforms such as XinBi, Tiger/Navigator, JinBei (renamed JinBo), Dali/Tiancheng, and FullyLight. These platforms, operating largely via Telegram and offering services like escrow for illicit transactions, have absorbed the vast user base and markets left behind by Huione. While positioning themselves as "trust intermediaries," their primary clientele consists of networks involved in online scams, money laundering, illegal gambling, and even human trafficking. For instance, the Tiger/Navigator platform explicitly provides "escrow" services for kidnapping-for-ransom operations ("强押车交易"). Data underscores the immense scale: Huione alone processed over $103 billion in cryptocurrency payments and facilitated over $31 billion through its escrow market before its downfall, linking it to Cambodia's notorious Prince Group. Since its collapse, competitors have seen explosive growth. For example, the XinBi platform has accumulated over $1.6 billion in total USDT revenue, while platforms like NewPay, OkPay (under Dali), and FullyLight Wallet collectively processed over $4.8 billion in USDT in a single year. This ecosystem thrives in regions like Cambodia and Myanmar, where regulatory gaps allow these platforms to act as critical financial infrastructure for sprawling cybercrime industries, from scam compounds to online casinos. The article concludes that the moniker "Southeast Asian Alipay" is a misnomer, obscuring the platforms' fundamental role in enabling serious criminal enterprises rather than representing legitimate financial innovation.

Odaily星球日报17 min fa

7 Months After the Collapse of Huiwang, Southeast Asia's Escrow Platforms Undergo a Major Reshuffle

Odaily星球日报17 min fa

The Changing Landscape: What Are Crypto VCs Experiencing?

Title: The Shifting Landscape of Crypto Venture Capital The era of dedicated crypto venture capital funds is undergoing a significant transformation. Once essential for navigating the sector's complexity and high risk, these specialized funds are now facing an identity crisis as the market matures. This shift mirrors historical patterns in other specialized investment classes like cleantech and SPACs, where initial information advantages dissipate as technologies become mainstream and integrated into existing industry frameworks. The article argues that crypto is reaching a critical inflection point, transitioning from a "building phase" to an "integration phase." Major players like Stripe, BlackRock, and Visa now engage with crypto not for its novel mechanics but as a foundational financial infrastructure. Their needs—regulatory compliance, banking partnerships, distribution channels—align with traditional fintech, a domain easily understood by large, generalist funds like Sequoia and Founders Fund. This evolution creates a "barbell effect" within the VC landscape. On one end are massive, diversified platforms that can incorporate crypto as one vertical among many. On the other are small, nimble funds focused on niche, experimental projects. The middle ground—medium-sized dedicated crypto funds—is being squeezed out. Their typical fund size makes it impossible to generate sufficient returns solely from early-stage crypto bets, yet they cannot compete with giants for later-stage deals. Consequently, leading crypto-native firms like Paradigm and Framework Ventures are expanding into AI, robotics, and other sectors, driven partly by LP pressure for better returns amid a broader VC DPI crisis. Others, like Dragonfly and a16z, have narrowed their crypto focus predominantly to financial infrastructure like stablecoins, reframing the sector's core narrative. For crypto entrepreneurs, this consolidation presents challenges. While generalist funds offer larger checks and broader resources, crypto projects now compete fiercely with AI for attention and capital within these firms. Furthermore, the long-term, non-commercial foundational work that built the ecosystem—funded by dedicated crypto VCs—is less likely to attract generalist capital focused on direct returns. The conclusion is that "crypto investor" as a standalone category is becoming obsolete, akin to "internet investor." Crypto is becoming a baseline infrastructure layer. The future will see a barbell structure: large-scale growth financing handled by generalist funds, while pioneering, speculative projects are funded by small, specialized vehicles. The dedicated crypto funds of the 2017-2021 boom, which incubated core infrastructure, are giving way to this new, bifurcated reality.

Foresight News35 min fa

The Changing Landscape: What Are Crypto VCs Experiencing?

Foresight News35 min fa

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

Title: As Consensus Forms Faster, What Are Young Investors Betting On? In the rapid evolution of tech investment, a new generation of young investors is navigating a landscape where AI, robotics, commercial aerospace, and quantum computing are advancing simultaneously. Traditional investment logic based on financial models is giving way to a need for deep technical understanding and the ability to act before industry consensus forms. An analysis of trends from the "WAIC FUTURE TECH" list of young investment leaders reveals key shifts in focus. The first major trend is the movement of AI from the digital screen into the physical world. Investment is shifting from large language models and chatbots towards embodied AI, robotics, AI hardware, and edge computing. While demonstrations generate excitement, the real challenge lies in achieving scalable, reliable, and cost-effective delivery in complex real-world environments like factories and logistics. Success depends not just on algorithms but on the integration of sensors, actuators, and control systems. Second, the competitive focus for large models is moving beyond raw capability toward building an "intelligence flywheel." The goal is to create self-reinforcing systems where user interaction generates data, improving the model, which in turn enhances the user experience and attracts more engagement. Companies that successfully embed AI into workflows to create these closed-loop systems can build lasting value that isn't easily erased by the next model upgrade. Third, facing a potential bottleneck in high-quality human-generated data, investors are looking at new underlying technologies. Reinforcement learning and self-play, as demonstrated by AlphaGo Zero, offer paths for AI to generate its own experience. Scientific foundation models, which aim to build general AI capabilities for fields like life sciences and materials discovery, represent a non-consensus direction that could unlock new frontiers of knowledge and data. Finally, in deep-tech areas like quantum computing, commercial aerospace, and space-based infrastructure, patient capital is essential. These fields have long, uncertain development and validation cycles involving complex engineering, supply chains, and regulations. Investment here requires a long-term view, focusing on foundational team capabilities and the eventual emergence of market demand, even if commercial returns are distant. Collectively, these trends illustrate how young investors are adapting to a new era. They are learning to make earlier, technically-informed judgments, balance hype with real-world viability, and provide the patient capital needed to build the deep-tech foundations of the future.

marsbit1 h fa

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片