Indepth Research

Provide in-depth research reports and independent analysis, leveraging data, technology, and economic insights to deliver a comprehensive examination of the blockchain ecosystem, project potential, and market trends.

Weekly Editor's Picks (0110-0116)

Weekly Editor's Picks (0110-0116) by Odaily Planet Daily highlights key insights from the past week. The investment section analyzes major 2026 themes: Trump's political pressure reshaping global asset pricing, the structural divergence between onshore and offshore crypto capital flows, and the strategic pivot towards Bitcoin and selective tech investments. It also covers BMNR's investment into MrBeast's company as a bet on programmable attention economies. In prediction markets, institutional players are focused on arbitrage, overshadowing retail participants. The privacy sector sees a resurgence of fundamentalist coins like Monero, while institutions show a clear preference for selective privacy solutions that balance confidentiality with compliance. Policy shifts include South Korea lifting its 9-year ban on corporate crypto investment, potentially reigniting the "Kimchi Premium." Stablecoins are increasingly acting as secondary monetary systems in economies like Venezuela. The meme coin segment examines the short-lived nature of the recent Chinese meme trend and profiles successful trading strategies. Bitcoin and Ethereum developments include a new core maintainer and the EIL interoperability framework aimed at improving cross-L2 communication. Other notable coverage includes Polygon’s $250M acquisition for compliance and user growth, Uniswap’s fee switch implementation linking token value to protocol usage, and a rise in state-level crypto crime. The week also featured Bitcoin nearing $97K, regulatory delays for the CLARITY Act, and various platform updates from X (Twitter) and Solana.

marsbit01/17 02:45

Weekly Editor's Picks (0110-0116)

marsbit01/17 02:45

When Big Money Seriously Enters the Market, How Does the Liquidity Bottleneck of RWA Manifest?

When large capital enters the market, the liquidity bottlenecks of Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization become evident. Tokenized assets, such as gold (e.g., PAXG, XAUT) and stocks (e.g., TSLAx, NVDAx), suffer from significant slippage and shallow market depth compared to traditional markets like CME. For instance, a $4 million trade in tokenized gold can incur up to 150 basis points of slippage, while traditional markets show negligible impact even at $20 million. Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) exacerbate the issue, with trades sometimes facing premiums as high as 68% or persistent slippage of 25–50 basis points. Liquidity shortages also destabilize market structure, causing price volatility and cascading effects like cross-platform liquidations, as seen with PAXG on Binance triggering $9 million in liquidations on Hyperliquid. These problems stem from structural constraints: high minting/redemption fees, slow redemption cycles (T+1 to T+5), and capital inefficiencies for market makers. Without deep, reliable liquidity, tokenized assets struggle to scale, hindering their use as collateral or in DeFi. The solution requires a new market structure that integrates off-chain liquidity, eliminates redemption delays, and avoids fragmenting liquidity across platforms. Tokenization itself isn’t flawed, but the current market infrastructure fails to support it at scale.

比推01/16 15:07

When Big Money Seriously Enters the Market, How Does the Liquidity Bottleneck of RWA Manifest?

比推01/16 15:07

The Divergence in Value Logic Between Eastern and Western Crypto KOLs

The article explores the fundamental differences in value logic between Eastern and Western crypto KOLs. The author, drawing from experience with venture capitalists in both regions, observes that Eastern perspectives focus heavily on practical, tactical aspects of projects—such as revenue models, tokenomics, and operational logistics—treating crypto ventures like traditional businesses. In contrast, Western narratives prioritize grand, aspirational stories capable of promising 10x to 100x returns, often glossing over practical details to attract major capital. This divergence leads to opposing definitions of "key opinion." Eastern KOLs tend to deconstruct and critically analyze, while Western ones build on ambitious, high-concept narratives aimed at securing large-scale investments. The author notes that although the most influential narratives and capital formations often originate from the West (e.g., restaking, Rollup, FHE), many of the industry’s most profitable ventures (like CEXs, DEXs, payment systems) are dominated by Eastern players. Structural factors, such as lower capital costs in the West due to institutional backing, and cultural differences—Eastern societies being more pragmatic and battle-tested—contribute to this divide. The author concludes that Eastern KOLs shouldn’t be seen as "degenerate" but as fundamentally oppositional in approach. Success, they argue, lies in challenging Western narratives with Eastern value logic, forcing the global conversation to engage with a more grounded, critical perspective.

marsbit01/16 10:06

The Divergence in Value Logic Between Eastern and Western Crypto KOLs

marsbit01/16 10:06

Encrypted 'Fat Protocols': Key Players in 10 Core Profit Areas

This article, originally titled "Fat Protocols: Key Players in 10 Core Profitability Areas," argues that the original "fat protocol" thesis, where value disproportionately accrues to the base blockchain layer, is outdated. By 2026, value will instead flow to "control points"—entities that capture fees regardless of which chain or application wins. These include interfaces controlling user intent, trading venues internalizing liquidity, issuers with strong balance sheets, and protocols tokenizing inefficient assets. The summary ranks the top 10 "fat" layers based on revenue, users, ARPU, and market dominance: 1. **Fat Wallets (e.g., Phantom):** Dominant on the intent layer, evolving into active financial venues with significant revenue from swaps and perpetual trading. 2. **Fat Blockchains (e.g., Ethereum):** Remains the core settlement layer for high-value transactions and MEV, with strong defensive moats. 3. **Fat Perp DEX (e.g., Hyperliquid):** The most profitable trading format, with Hyperliquid monopolizing the market by integrating liquidity and execution on a dedicated chain. 4. **Fat Lending (e.g., Aave):** The leading DeFi lending platform, characterized by scale, resilience, and steady institutional capital. 5. **Fat RWA Protocols (e.g., BlackRock BUIDL):** Growth is driven by scale and trust, bridging TradFi and on-chain finance with tokenized assets like U.S. Treasuries. 6. **Fat LRT/Restaking (e.g., EigenLayer):** Profits by renting Ethereum's security to Active Validation Services (AVS) and expanding into off-chain compute. 7. **Fat Aggregators (e.g., Jupiter):** Capture value by controlling routing, pricing, and execution quality on DEX trades. 8. **Fat Stablecoin Issuers (e.g., Tether):** Extremely profitable by earning yield on treasury holdings backing the stablecoin supply. 9. **Fat Prediction Markets (e.g., Polymarket):** Profit from attention and event-driven trading, creating a highly profitable layer with strong narrative power. 10. **Fat MEV (e.g., Flashbots):** MEV is an invisible tax on block space, with entities like Flashbots institutionalizing its extraction and redistribution. The key takeaway is that value accumulation has shifted from the base protocol to specific, high-control business models and infrastructure layers across the crypto ecosystem.

marsbit01/16 09:45

Encrypted 'Fat Protocols': Key Players in 10 Core Profit Areas

marsbit01/16 09:45

Farewell to 'Storytelling' for Funding: What Kind of Projects Can Survive Beyond 2026

Title: Beyond Storytelling: What Projects Will Survive Beyond 2026 The venture capital landscape in crypto has fundamentally shifted. In 2025, top market maker and investor Wintermute Ventures approved only 4% of the 600 projects it reviewed. This reflects a broader trend: total crypto VC deals plummeted 60% from 2024, with capital concentrating heavily in later-stage rounds (56% of total funding). The driver is a radical change in market structure. Institutional capital now dominates (75% of liquidity), but it is largely trapped in major assets like BTC and ETH. The altcoin narrative cycle collapsed from 61 days to just 19-20 days, leaving little time for money to flow to smaller projects. The traditional four-year bull cycle is broken; a 2026 recovery requires a major catalyst. Consequently, VC investment logic has moved from "spray and pray" to a survival-of-the-fittest model. Funding now targets projects that can prove viability from the seed stage. Key requirements for survival include: 1. **Hard Proof of Product-Market Fit:** Real data points are mandatory, such as 1,000+ active users or $100k+ in monthly revenue, with a DAU/MAU ratio above 50%. 2. **Capital Efficiency & Default Alive Status:** Startups must achieve "default alive" status, with monthly burn not exceeding 30% of revenue. Large, cash-burning teams are untenable. 3. **AI Integration & Technical Sophistication:** AI is no longer optional; it's essential for reducing development cycles and optimizing operations. Privacy tech like zero-knowledge proofs is critical for compliance, especially in RWA tokenization. 4. **Liquidity & Exchange Compatibility:** Projects must plan their exchange listing path from day one, ensuring compatibility with institutional liquidity channels like ETFs. For investors, the mandate is clear: adapt or fail. The new standard is not "how big the story can be" but "can this project prove its ability to generate revenue from seed." Investment must focus on AI-crypto fusion, compliance, and emerging markets. The era of betting on narratives is over; execution and sustainable profitability are now the only metrics that matter.

marsbit01/16 09:13

Farewell to 'Storytelling' for Funding: What Kind of Projects Can Survive Beyond 2026

marsbit01/16 09:13

Key Data for Gate 2025 Spot Listing: Nearly 80% of Exclusive Projects Closed Higher Within 30 Minutes of Opening, with a Median Increase of Approximately 81%

Based on an analysis of 447 new assets listed on Gate.io in 2025, key data reveals significant trends in post-listing performance. The majority (71%) of new listings were initial listings (including 28 exclusives), with the rest being non-initial listings. In the critical price discovery window, initial listings, particularly exclusives, showed markedly higher median gains and positive return rates. Notably, nearly 80% of exclusive listings were in positive territory 30 minutes after launch, with a median gain of approximately 81%. This performance advantage for initial listings was sustained across the 5-minute to 24-hour windows but diminished over longer timeframes. By 72 hours, the median gain for the entire sample neared breakeven, declining to negative figures at the 7-day and 30-day marks. The proportion of assets trading above their listing price also fell over time, from 61.7% at 30 minutes to just 35.1% after 30 days. The data indicates that while short-term, high-multiple gains are possible—especially for high-profile exclusive and initial listings—returns are not linear and tend to converge or decline significantly after approximately three days. This highlights Gate.io's effectiveness in capitalizing on market attention and executing listings that generate early wealth effects, particularly for assets with strong narratives like AI infrastructure and meme coins.

marsbit01/16 07:30

Key Data for Gate 2025 Spot Listing: Nearly 80% of Exclusive Projects Closed Higher Within 30 Minutes of Opening, with a Median Increase of Approximately 81%

marsbit01/16 07:30

When Big Money Gets Serious, RWA Liquidity Issues Come to the Fore

Liquidity is the foundation of asset confidence, but the reality for tokenized real-world assets (RWA) like gold and stocks reveals a critical structural flaw. While tokenization promises enhanced capital fluidity and DeFi integration, most tokenized assets suffer from dangerously thin liquidity, making them impractical for meaningful capital deployment. Analysis shows extreme slippage in major tokenized gold assets (PAXG, XAUT). A $4 million trade incurs nearly 150 basis points (bps) of slippage on perpetual exchanges, compared to just 3 bps for a $20 million trade in traditional CME gold futures. Spot markets for these assets offer less than $3 million in effective depth. In AMM DEXs like Uniswap, average slippage consistently ranges between 25–50 bps, with individual trades experiencing premiums as high as 68%. The problem extends to tokenized equities. A $1 million trade in tokenized Tesla (TSLAx) sees ~5% slippage, while NVIDIA (NVDAx) reaches an unworkable 80%. Traditional markets handle the same trades with ~15 bps impact. This liquidity scarcity isn't just about high transaction costs; it destabilizes the entire market structure. Thin order books are prone to manipulation and price anomalies. A 10% price swing on a centralized exchange (CEX) can trigger cascading liquidations across interconnected DeFi protocols, demonstrating how localized illiquidity amplifies systemic risk. The core issue is structural. Market makers face high friction: slow, costly minting/redemption processes (10-50 bps fees, T+1 to T+5 settlement), inability to hedge efficiently, and significant opportunity cost compared to deeper crypto markets. Current solutions (AMMs, order books) disperse rather than concentrate liquidity. For RWA to scale, a new market structure is needed—one that leverages off-chain liquidity for price discovery, eliminates redemption delays, and doesn't force market makers to hold illiquid inventory. Tokenization hasn't failed; the supporting market infrastructure has yet to be built.

Odaily星球日报01/16 04:25

When Big Money Gets Serious, RWA Liquidity Issues Come to the Fore

Odaily星球日报01/16 04:25

活动图片