SocialFi 三强对决:Friend.Tech Vs Stars Arena Vs TOMO

MarsBitPublicado em 2023-10-25Última atualização em 2023-10-25

Resumo

【GPT】Friend.Tech是Socialfi热潮的开创者,累计用户超过75k,TVL逾$44M,Stars Arena和TOMO是FT的两款仿盘产品,SA拓展了社交功能,TOMO更像是FT的升级版,但FT仍有优势,FT的融资信息也成为了SocialFi热潮的催化剂,Key可能成为下一个ERC20。

Friend.Tech带动的Socialfi狂潮席卷各个公链,每条链上基本都产生了仿盘,也都掀起了不错的热度,比如Avalanche上的Stars Arena,和Linea上的TOMO。这篇将从产品体验、数据等方面将FT与这两个仿盘进行对比。01Friend.Tech
作为这波Socialfi热潮的开创者,给加密市场带来新叙事的同时稳坐龙头。上线三月,累计用户超过75k,TVL逾$44M。

SocialFi


(Source:https://dune.com/friendtechdatateam/friendtechdata)
尽管许多key都已经因为过于陡峭的定价曲线而颇为昂贵,成交量相比前两周已经大幅下滑,有趣的是新用户增长不断,日增长甚至创了新高,还是有许多新用户涌入。

SocialFi


(Source:https://dune.com/whale_hunter/friend-tech-ultimate-analytics)
同时,虽然最近有关于SIM SWAP导致FT用户资金被盗的情况发生,负面新闻似乎并没有对FT产生较大的影响。
获利的资金并未迅速离场,大量的闲置资金停留在Friend.Tech内,因此TVL并未因成交量或潜在的风险而大幅下滑。

SocialFi


(Source:https://dune.com/21co/friendtech-analysis)
关于FT上热门的中文区账户,可以参考看板:
https://www.cryptohunt.ai/zh-CN/friendtech/topcn

SocialFi


02Stars Arena
Stars Arena是Avalanche上的FT类产品,与FT玩法类似,通过购买ticket进入对方的私聊房间。
一个明显的功能区别是,SA做得更像推特。可以发布内容,以信息流的形式呈现,用户的操作也更加多样。
除了房间聊天,还可以在对”推文“进行点赞、转发、评论甚至打赏,social的元素相比FT更加丰富,甚至有点像带私聊、群组功能的Farcaster。

SocialFi


(Source:https://www.techflowpost.com/article/detail_14130.html)
SA首发于PC端,在移动端和FT一样需要将网页添加的桌面,注册充值过程和FT差不多,用雪崩C链充值AVAX作为交易货币,整体体验比FT丝滑许多,在裂变方面使用邀请链接,有返佣机制,鼓励传播。
经济模型同样是交易抽成10%,但是分配比例与FT不同,SA将利润7%分配给房主,2%属于平台,另外1%用于返佣奖励,意味着交易量相同时,房主在SA上的收入会高于FT。
SA对于Avalanche来说有增加日活的正向引导作用,得到了Avalanche官方和创始人的大力支持,均已入驻SA。SA的TVL最高时超过$2.5M,拥有接近25k用户。
可惜好景不长,10月7日SA的合约遭到黑客重放攻击,盗取了所有用户在合约中的资产,价值约$2.9M的AVAX。
最终SA追回了90%的被盗资产,目前合约已经通过审计,产品于17日重新上线。上线后,用户需在App内进行钱包迁移才能进行交易之前拥有的资产。

SocialFi


(Source:https://dune.com/_d3f4ult/starsarena)
显然合约被盗对用户的信心损伤是巨大,资产恢复了$2.9M,当天就有1/3的资金流出,TVL一路下跌,目前维持在$1.2M。
03TOMO
用户对新L2上的仿盘都比较积极,错过FT的人都不想再错过仿盘,还有在新公链上增加交互撸空投,潜在的一鱼两吃的期待。
TOMO是Linea上的FT仿盘,不同于FT,它不是一个需要添加到主屏幕的网页,而是从需要从App Store下载的App。
整个注册流程和FT非常类似,需要绑定推特并充值,可以从主网充值也可以从Linea充值。
目前App内的钱包虽然支持提款,但是不能导出私钥,因为它使用的是ERC-4337标准的账户抽象钱包,这是4337在SocialFi的首次尝试。
产品功能上来说也是类似的,通过购买Key进入私人聊天室。区别于FT,除了Key以外还有另一种资产,Vote,即那些尚未开通TOMO账户的推特用户。
用户可以购买他们key的“期货”,一旦他们开通TOMO账户,Vote就可以转换成Key。

SocialFi


经济模型上vote和key遵循相同的规则,即买卖会有5%给到平台,5%给到房主,这点和FT一致。
对于还没入驻,但是vote已经被交易产生费用的情况,交易费会累积保留在未开启的房间,成为待领取的费用,六个月内如果房主都没有入驻,该费用就会分发给vote持有者。
TOMO遵循的定价曲线是key price= x^2/43370,价格曲线相比FT更平滑,意味着相同的持key人数,TOMO的价格会是FT的37%左右,更利于小散户消费,等同于拓展了聊天室的容量。

SocialFi


这是一个非常有意思的微创新,在FT上有大量机器人在盯着刚开通账户的KOL,称为Sniper狙击手,企图尽早以低价购入这些KOL的key获利。
TOMO通过将未开通账户的Key期货化,来消除了机器人在这方面的优势。
在消除机器人影响方面,TOMO允许用户在应用前端一次性购买多个Key。
在FT上用户在应用中一次只能购买一个Key,而合约上并没有数量限制。有的用户会使用机器人一次购买多个Key,这样又快速又便宜(一个个买有人插在当中就会抬高购买成本),实际上会影响普通用户的体验。
通过这两个小的调整,TOMO上并无太多机器人发挥的地方,因此用户体验是相对纯净的。

SocialFi


类似于FriendTech,TOMO也有个积分,目前信息仅与邀请好友有关,后续很可能会与Linea的积分挂钩。
TOMO有Polychain、Ankr、Galex创始人们的深度参与,Linea官方也已入驻,品牌背书充足,同时Linea是大概率会空投的公链,适合早期参与。
目前,TOMO的TVL已经达到$1.3M,相比龙头FriendTech$44M的TVL还有40倍的差距,想象空间够足,不过TOMO上活跃的大多是华语区的KOL,英文区的KOL参与较少,用户增长速度有些停滞。
TOMO通过手续费已经赚取$414k,累计用户4.9k。

SocialFi


(Source:https://app.sentio.xyz/sentio/tomo/dashboards/mfqtRDSI)
04总结
本文对FT的近况,以及两款最有竞争力的仿盘产品进行了分析对比,如下图所示。
SA相比FT,社交功能拓展了许多,更高的创作者赏金以及丝滑体验都非常令人期待,可惜中道崩殂,合约被盗,给用户的信心打击非常大,即使现在恢复上线,TVL也直线下滑;
TOMO更像是一个升级版的FT,操作更流畅,以App形式呈现,同时非常注意解决FT中机器人带来的负面影响。
通过功能设计,尽可能地消除了机器人的不公平竞争,设计更成熟,也有巧思。
如果没有安全问题的话,它会是FT非常有力的竞争者,但是目前缺乏除华语区外的KOL更多参与。

SocialFi


相较于仿盘们的优异表现,FT在产品体验上处于下风,更新速度不够快,极可能很快成为被诟病的点,然而其开拓者的影响力,TVL资金池的深度,以及大量优质用户、KOL的早期参与投入、甚至赋能,刷积分的沉没成本等,都成为了其最深的护城河。
目前只有FT宣布了融资情况,其余项目全乘着FT给到的预期,下一波加速需要更多的融资、空投信息作为催化剂。
这波由FT带动起来的SocialFi热潮,是熊市中不多的热点,Key作为一类新型的Social trading资产,说不定是下一个ERC20,值得参与和期待。

Leituras Relacionadas

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbitHá 26m

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbitHá 26m

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbitHá 31m

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbitHá 31m

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

In 2026, a historic shift occurred in AI as major cloud providers' inference spending surpassed training spending for the first time, signaling a move from "building large models" to "using large models." This shifts the core challenge from computing power to the "memory wall"—the bottleneck of data movement (model weights, activations, KV Cache) between external DRAM and processors, where energy and latency from data transfer far exceed computation itself. Companies like Nvidia face GPU idle time due to bandwidth limits. In contrast, Cerebras Systems adopts a radical "wafer-scale" approach with its Wafer-Scale Engine (WSE). Instead of cutting a silicon wafer into many chips, Cerebras uses almost the entire wafer as one massive chip (WSE-3). This design provides 44GB of on-chip SRAM, delivering memory bandwidth thousands of times higher than traditional HBM (e.g., 21 PB/s vs. Nvidia B200). For LLM inference, weights are streamed layer-by-layer from external MemoryX storage to the chip, avoiding HBM bottlenecks. This results in token generation speeds 1.5–5 times faster than Nvidia's B200 in some models and significant advantages in first-token latency and long-context tasks. Additionally, Cerebras's architecture offers much lower interconnect power consumption (0.15 pJ/bit vs. GPU's ~10 pJ/bit). However, Cerebras faces challenges: SRAM scaling has slowed with advanced nodes, limiting future capacity gains; the chip requires specialized liquid cooling and custom software stacks; and its external I/O bandwidth (150 GB/s) is low compared to NVLink, hindering multi-system scaling for very large models. Competition is intensifying. Major players are pursuing three paths: 1) Developing proprietary inference ASICs (e.g., Google TPU, Microsoft Maia), 2) Leveraging advanced packaging (e.g., TSMC's SoW) to democratize wafer-scale-like integration, potentially eroding Cerebras's process advantage within a few years, and 3) Exploring optical interconnects for ultimate bandwidth. Commercially, Cerebras is transitioning from a hardware vendor to a service provider, facing the immense challenge of building high-power, specialized data centers to meet large contracts (e.g., 250MW/year from 2026–2028). In conclusion, the AI inference era presents a fundamental architectural trade-off. Cerebras opts for extreme physical optimization for low-latency, single-task performance, while Nvidia prioritizes versatility and massive cluster throughput. The path forward remains uncertain, with technology and business models still evolving in the race toward advanced AI.

marsbitHá 36m

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

marsbitHá 36m

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

**Title: Has Bitcoin's Rebound Ended, Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?** **Summary:** Bitcoin's price has declined by 13% this week, signaling a potential return to late-stage bear market conditions. The price fell to around $67k, positioned between the Realized Price and Realized Cap Weighted Average. For the first time since early 2022, the Short-Term Holder cost basis has dropped below this key average, confirming a hallmark of late-cycle bear markets. Profitability metrics have collapsed sharply. The 7-day average of the Realized Profit/Loss ratio plummeted from a local high of 3.16 to 0.29, mirroring the February panic sell-off. Critically, the 90-day average never breached the threshold of 2, indicating the recent rally to $82k was a bear market bounce, not a structural shift. Realized losses surged to $1.35 billion daily, with $770 million coming from Long-Term Holders selling at a loss. This accelerating redistribution of supply from weak to strong hands is a necessary but ongoing process for a market bottom. The rally stalled almost precisely at the aggregate cost basis (~$83k) of US spot Bitcoin ETF investors, turning that level into strong resistance and leaving the average ETF holder underwater again. Spot market flows have turned decisively negative, showing sellers are dominating order books despite the price drop. While a significant futures long liquidation event cleared over $400 million in leverage, providing a potential reset, sustained spot demand is yet to materialize. Options markets continue to price in higher future volatility (Implied Volatility) than recent price action (Realized Volatility) has shown, with a persistent skew towards put options, indicating ongoing demand for downside protection. In conclusion, multiple metrics point to a fragile market structure. Resistance at the ETF cost basis, accelerating realized losses, dominant spot selling, and cautious options pricing all suggest the bear market trend persists. A sustainable recovery likely requires a resurgence of spot demand, ETF holders returning to profit, and a clear reduction in selling pressure.

marsbitHá 37m

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

marsbitHá 37m

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

In today's TechFlow Intelligence Briefing, several major tech stories highlight a growing theme of trust and credibility gaps across AI, crypto, and finance. AI company Anthropic has publicly called for a global pause in AI development, citing risks from Claude's "recursive self-improvement." Ironically, this coincides with reports the company is preparing for a massive IPO targeting a near $1 trillion valuation. This perceived hypocrisy, coupled with widespread user complaints about Claude's declining performance, is sparking debate over whether the safety warning is genuine or a competitive tactic. Meanwhile, in a substantive security move, Anthropic open-sourced a framework for AI-powered vulnerability discovery. In the crypto market, Bitcoin's price drop below $61,000 triggered over $1.16 billion in liquidations, flipping the market into a state where more BTC is held at a loss than at a profit, a historical bearish signal. On the corporate front, SpaceX's highly anticipated IPO is generating immense Wall Street excitement, with Goldman Sachs projecting 100x revenue growth by 2030. However, the S&P 500 has refused to fast-track the company's inclusion post-IPO, potentially limiting immediate institutional demand. Separately, ByteDance's AI app Doubao lost over 6 million monthly active users after introducing a subscription model, highlighting the challenges of AI monetization. Other notable developments include Nvidia certifying HBM4 memory from Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron; Cloudflare's acquisition of front-end tooling company VoidZero; and its CEO warning that bot traffic now exceeds human traffic online. The underlying narrative connects these events: a trust crisis. From AI firms' contradictory actions and crypto volatility to the clash between SpaceX's hyped narrative and institutional rules, a pattern is emerging where stated intentions and actual practices are increasingly misaligned.

marsbitHá 52m

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

marsbitHá 52m

Trading

Spot
Futuros

Artigos em Destaque

Como comprar AVAX

Bem-vindo à HTX.com!Tornámos a compra de Avalanche (AVAX) simples e conveniente.Segue o nosso guia passo a passo para iniciar a tua jornada no mundo das criptos.Passo 1: cria a tua conta HTXUtiliza o teu e-mail ou número de telefone para te inscreveres numa conta gratuita na HTX.Desfruta de um processo de inscrição sem complicações e desbloqueia todas as funcionalidades.Obter a minha contaPasso 2: vai para Comprar Cripto e escolhe o teu método de pagamentoCartão de crédito/débito: usa o teu visa ou mastercard para comprar Avalanche (AVAX) instantaneamente.Saldo: usa os fundos da tua conta HTX para transacionar sem problemas.Terceiros: adicionamos métodos de pagamento populares, como Google Pay e Apple Pay, para aumentar a conveniência.P2P: transaciona diretamente com outros utilizadores na HTX.Mercado de balcão (OTC): oferecemos serviços personalizados e taxas de câmbio competitivas para os traders.Passo 3: armazena teu Avalanche (AVAX)Depois de comprar o teu Avalanche (AVAX), armazena-o na tua conta HTX.Alternativamente, podes enviá-lo para outro lugar através de transferência blockchain ou usá-lo para transacionar outras criptomoedas.Passo 4: transaciona Avalanche (AVAX)Transaciona facilmente Avalanche (AVAX) no mercado à vista da HTX.Acede simplesmente à tua conta, seleciona o teu par de trading, executa as tuas transações e monitoriza em tempo real.Oferecemos uma experiência de fácil utilização tanto para principiantes como para traders experientes.

633 Visualizações TotaisPublicado em {updateTime}Atualizado em 2026.06.02

Como comprar AVAX

Discussões

Bem-vindo à Comunidade HTX. Aqui, pode manter-se informado sobre os mais recentes desenvolvimentos da plataforma e obter acesso a análises profissionais de mercado. As opiniões dos utilizadores sobre o preço de AVAX (AVAX) são apresentadas abaixo.

活动图片