Solana processes 8x transactions more than BNB Chain – Details

ambcryptoОпубликовано 2026-03-04Обновлено 2026-03-04

Введение

While the broader crypto market moved sideways in February 2026, Solana's on-chain activity surged, processing 3.4 billion transactions—an 11% increase from January. This volume was eight times greater than that of the next largest network, BNB Chain, which handled 424 million transactions. Although Ethereum's mainnet saw only 62 million transactions, its Layer-2 networks like Base and Arbitrum absorbed significant activity. Solana also saw strong institutional support with nearly $950 million in net inflows into its ETFs. Despite a 12% monthly price decline to around $90, realized loss data suggests the worst of the selling pressure may be over, with the market entering a more stable phase.

While the broader crypto market spent February 2026 moving sideways amid global uncertainty, one ecosystem seemed to follow a different path.

New data from DeFi Dev Corp. (DFDV) shows that Solana [SOL] processed over 3.4 billion transactions in February, marking an 11% increase compared to January.

This is noteworthy because during the same period, major networks like Ethereum [ETH] and Bitcoin [BTC] saw activity slow down as market sentiment weakened.

How are other chains performing?

Following behind Solana is the second-largest network, BNB Chain, which handled around 424 million transactions.

This means that Solana processed about eight times more activity than its closest competitor, dwarfing other networks’ on-chain activity.

The data also reveals an important trend within the Ethereum ecosystem wherein Ethereum’s main network recorded only 62 million transactions, placing it near the bottom of the list.

Is Ethereum in trouble?

Even though Ethereum’s main network saw significantly fewer transactions, this does not mean the ecosystem as a whole is declining.

Instead, much of the activity has moved to Layer-2 networks, which offer lower costs and faster transactions.

For example, Base, the Layer-2 network backed by Coinbase, processed 316 million transactions, showing strong retail activity. Meanwhile, Arbitrum recorded 123 million, and Optimism recorded 68 million, and continued to see stable usage.

This suggests that Ethereum’s biggest competitor may not be another Layer-1 chain. Instead, its own scaling networks are gradually absorbing most of the activity, though even these networks still fall far behind Solana’s transaction volume.

Solana witnsses strong institutional push

Beyond network activity, Solana also saw strong support from institutional investors.

Since their launch, Spot Solana ETFs have attracted around $950 million in net inflows with mostly inflow streaks, according to data from Farside Investors.

Meanwhile, on the price front, like many assets that struggled to find direction in February, SOL too witnessed a monthly decline of over 12%, but at press time, it traded around $90.09, rising 7.46% within 24 hours.

Moreover, this coincided with AMBCrypto’s report about Solana holding ~53% of the $15.34 billion USDC supply, making it one of the largest hubs for stablecoin activity.

What is the data saying?

According to Santiment data, Solana’s Net Realized Profit/Loss remained largely negative throughout late January and February, with most bars turning red. This signals that many holders were selling their tokens at a loss as prices declined.

Furthermore, a major spike in early February shows losses nearing $1.3 billion, suggesting a wave of panic selling as SOL dropped sharply from around $140 to below $90.

Since then, the size of the loss bars has gradually decreased, indicating that selling pressure is easing as the price stabilizes between $80 and $90.

This trend suggests that much of the forced selling may already have occurred, with the market entering a more stable phase.

Yet, despite the strong numbers, an important question remains: can this momentum continue in the months ahead, or will market conditions begin to slow it down?


Final Summary

  • Processing 3.4 billion transactions in a single month places Solana far ahead of competing blockchains in raw activity.
  • Realized loss data shows that much of the panic selling may have already occurred, with selling pressure gradually easing as the price stabilizes.

Связанные с этим вопросы

QHow many transactions did Solana process in February 2026, and what was the percentage increase compared to January?

ASolana processed over 3.4 billion transactions in February 2026, marking an 11% increase compared to January.

QAccording to the article, how many more transactions did Solana process than its closest competitor, BNB Chain?

ASolana processed about eight times more transactions than BNB Chain, handling over 3.4 billion compared to BNB Chain's 424 million.

QWhat reason is given for Ethereum's mainnet having relatively low transaction numbers, and which Layer-2 networks are mentioned as handling significant volume?

AThe article states that much of Ethereum's activity has moved to Layer-2 networks, which offer lower costs and faster transactions. The Layer-2 networks mentioned are Base (316M transactions), Arbitrum (123M), and Optimism (68M).

QWhat was the net inflow amount for Spot Solana ETFs since their launch, according to data from Farside Investors?

ASince their launch, Spot Solana ETFs attracted around $950 million in net inflows.

QWhat does the negative Net Realized Profit/Loss data for Solana signal, and what does the decreasing size of the loss bars indicate?

AThe negative Net Realized Profit/Loss data signals that many holders were selling their SOL tokens at a loss as prices declined. The decreasing size of the loss bars indicates that selling pressure is easing as the price stabilizes.

Похожее

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Bitcoin prices declined 13% this week, reversing the recent rebound and signaling a likely transition into the later stages of a bear market. Key on-chain metrics deteriorated, with the short-term holder cost basis falling below the Realized Price—a pattern last seen in early 2022, characteristic of bear market maturity. The rally to ~$82k proved to be a bear market bounce, as evidenced by the 90-day realized profit/loss ratio failing to sustain above the bullish threshold of 2. Daily realized losses surged to $1.35B, including significant selling from long-term holders who accumulated near cycle tops, indicating ongoing supply redistribution. Price was rejected almost precisely at the aggregate US spot ETF cost basis of ~$83k, turning that level into resistance and leaving the average ETF investor underwater again. Spot market selling pressure intensified, with the 7-day volume delta turning significantly negative to its weakest level since February. While a major long liquidation event cleared over $400M in leverage, spot demand has not yet stepped in to absorb the resulting supply. Options markets continue pricing in higher future volatility (elevated volatility risk premium) and maintain a skew toward put options, reflecting persistent demand for downside protection, though not yet panic. Overall, market structure remains fragile. Sustained recovery likely requires a reclaim of the ETF cost basis, a shift back to positive spot demand, and a slowdown in realized loss-taking. Until then, the market risks further downside or extended consolidation within the broader bear trend.

Foresight News2 мин. назад

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Foresight News2 мин. назад

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News20 мин. назад

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News20 мин. назад

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit31 мин. назад

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit31 мин. назад

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

Anthropic has published an article titled "When AI builds itself," discussing the emerging concept of "recursive self-improvement," where AI begins to actively participate in designing, training, testing, and optimizing its own subsequent versions. The company presents internal data showing that by May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its codebase was written by Claude, its AI model. Claude's capabilities have expanded to handling complex, open-ended engineering tasks, achieving a 76% success rate in such areas, and even contributing to research processes, such as optimizing code performance and conducting AI safety experiments. Anthropic outlines an evolution from human-driven development to AI-assisted workflows, culminating in the current stage where AI agents can autonomously write, run, and delegate code. The company cautions that the path toward a "closed loop," where AI continuously improves itself, is becoming visible. It calls for coordinated global mechanisms to potentially slow or pause frontier AI development to allow safety research and societal structures to catch up. However, the timing of this warning coincides with Anthropic's preparations for an IPO, framing the narrative not just as a safety concern but also as a demonstration of Claude's advanced capabilities and its integral role in accelerating Anthropic's own R&D—creating a potential "flywheel" effect for competitive advantage. This contrasts with OpenAI's recent, more policy-oriented discussion of the same risks, highlighting the competitive dynamics in the AI industry as companies position themselves in both the technological and regulatory landscape.

marsbit1 ч. назад

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

marsbit1 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы

Популярные статьи

Обсуждения

Добро пожаловать в Сообщество HTX. Здесь вы сможете быть в курсе последних новостей о развитии платформы и получить доступ к профессиональной аналитической информации о рынке. Мнения пользователей о цене на SOL (SOL) представлены ниже.

活动图片