# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Fees

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Fees", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

2025 Crypto Market Background: Why 'Choosing the Right Exchange' Is More Important Than Choosing the Right Coin

The crypto market in 2025 has matured significantly, shifting focus from pure asset speculation to the importance of choosing the right exchange. New users increasingly prioritize trading experience, security, and platform stability over short-term price movements. For beginners, selecting a suitable exchange is often more critical than selecting individual cryptocurrencies, as a poor platform choice can lead to higher operational costs and psychological stress. Key evaluation criteria for new users include the platform’s operational history, system stability during high volatility, transparent fee structures, and user support mechanisms. Community reputation and public discussion also serve as important references. Based on user feedback and industry data, several exchanges are frequently highlighted for newcomers: - Binance leads in liquidity and asset variety but has a steeper learning curve. - Coinbase is recognized for compliance and user-friendly design, suited for long-term holders. - OKX offers advanced derivatives and tools but may overwhelm absolute beginners. - Bybit is popular among active traders, particularly in futures. - WEEX is noted for its beginner-friendly interface, clear risk reminders, and execution-focused experience. The article emphasizes that rankings are referential, not absolute. The "right" exchange depends on the user’s experience level and trading style. As the market matures, exchanges play an increasingly important role in user education and protection. Choosing a platform that matches one’s needs is more valuable long-term than chasing volatile assets.

marsbit12/23 14:33

2025 Crypto Market Background: Why 'Choosing the Right Exchange' Is More Important Than Choosing the Right Coin

marsbit12/23 14:33

PANews 2025 Public Chain Data Review: 'Naked Swimming' Moment, Who is Growing Against the Trend?

PANews's 2025 public chain data review reveals a year of market correction and divergence. While the total value locked (TVL) across 26 major chains saw minimal growth (5.89%), down sharply from 2024's 119% surge, key metrics highlighted a shift towards fundamentals. The average token price fell by 50%, with new chains like Movement (-95%) and Berachain (-92%) hit hardest. However, underlying on-chain activity surged. Total fees generated grew 60% to $16.75 billion, and aggregate DEX trading volume rose 88%. Solana dethroned Ethereum in DEX volume, processing $1.52 trillion, while BNB Chain grew significantly across most metrics. Hyperliquid emerged as a standout, with a 299% TVL increase and a staggering 9,389% fee growth. BNB Chain and Tron also posted gains. In contrast, Solana's TVL stagnated (+0.8%) and user activity fell, exposing its meme-coindependency. Sui faced significant price pressure from token unlocks. Stablecoin market cap saw a "full bull market," with Solana leading growth at +196%. Funding data showed fewer but larger deals, with Polygon topping total capital raised due to Polymarket's mega-round. The year marked a pivot from "narrative" speculation to a focus on real revenue, user retention, and sustainable ecosystems, setting the stage for a more mature infrastructure landscape in 2026.

marsbit12/23 08:23

PANews 2025 Public Chain Data Review: 'Naked Swimming' Moment, Who is Growing Against the Trend?

marsbit12/23 08:23

Why Does Hyperliquid Earn Less Than Coinbase?

Hyperliquid, a decentralized exchange, processes near-Nasdaq-level perpetual trading volumes but captures significantly lower fees compared to centralized platforms like Coinbase and Robinhood. While Hyperliquid cleared $205.6 billion in notional volume over 30 days, it generated only $80.3 million in fees—an effective take rate of ~3.9 bps. In contrast, Coinbase and Robinhood achieve take rates of ~35.5 bps and ~33.5 bps, respectively, by operating as retail brokers that monetize multiple layers: distribution, balances, subscriptions, and order flow. This gap stems from a structural difference: Hyperliquid positions itself as a low-fee *market layer* (like Nasdaq), providing high-throughput execution and清算 infrastructure, while brokers like Coinbase control user relationships and extract value through higher-margin activities. Hyperliquid’s model includes permissionless distributor frontends (Builder Codes) and product deployment (HIP-3), which drive ecosystem growth but also create long-term fee compression risks by outsourcing high-value distribution. To defend its economics, Hyperliquid is taking steps to retain distribution control, integrate HIP-3 markets natively, and introduce balance-driven revenue streams like USDH (a native stablecoin with 50% reserve收益 sharing) and portfolio margin (10% interest fee on borrows). These moves aim to shift its model from pure exchange-level execution toward a hybrid approach that captures broker-like profit pools—without sacrificing its core infrastructure advantages. The key challenge remains balancing open ecosystem growth with tighter economic integration to avoid being commoditized as a wholesale execution venue.

marsbit12/18 07:03

Why Does Hyperliquid Earn Less Than Coinbase?

marsbit12/18 07:03

Public Chains 2025: The Bustle Belongs to the Casino, the Desolation to the Ecosystem

The 2025 public blockchain landscape reveals a stark divide between hype and reality, with a severe concentration of value and widespread "zombification" of projects. Analysis of DeFiLlama's on-chain fee data exposes a critical structural issue: the crypto space is dominated by a "profit concentration and long-tail zombie" era. Notable examples highlight this crisis. Algorand, a chain with a $1 billion market cap and advanced technology, generated a mere $17 in daily fees, while Cardano, a top-10 asset, saw only around $6,000. These "classic chains" are likened to empty, expensive cities with no real economic activity. The biggest value capturers are not the most technologically elegant chains. Tron leads with $1.24 million in daily fees, succeeding as a low-cost payment rail for USDT transfers—crypto's only true mass-adoption use case. Solana ($600k daily) thrives as a high-frequency casino for meme coins and speculation, and Base ($105k daily) demonstrates that distribution (via Coinbase) is more critical than pure technology. The only validated business models generating significant fees are low-cost payments, high-frequency speculation, and, to a lesser extent, Ethereum's asset settlement layer. The VC-driven model is failing. New chains like Sui, Sei, and Starknet, which raised hundreds of millions, show a severe disconnect between their high valuations and meager daily fee revenue (ranging from $320 to $12,000). Their lifecycle often follows a "pump and dump" pattern: VC funding -> airdrop farming -> token listing -> user exodus -> collapsed on-chain activity. The industry suffers from a massive oversupply of block space with a dire lack of killer applications. The article concludes that investors must shift from valuing narratives to scrutinizing financials. They should avoid "zombie coins" with high valuations and negligible fees, focus on chains with organic, fee-generating demand, acknowledge that distribution and community are now more valuable than pure tech, and see through the VC subsidy game. This is a necessary market correction; only by paying for real, generated value—not promised future stories—can the industry achieve healthy growth.

比推12/18 06:36

Public Chains 2025: The Bustle Belongs to the Casino, the Desolation to the Ecosystem

比推12/18 06:36

The Brutal Reckoning of the Public Chain Market in 2025: The Thriving Casino, The Fake Ghost Town, and VC's Harvesting Scheme

Crypto Public Chains Face a Reality Check: A Grim Settlement in 2025 The crypto market, often perceived as a lens of soaring market caps and futuristic promises, reveals a starkly different reality when analyzed through on-chain fee data. A deep dive into DeFiLlama’s “Fees by Chain” metrics exposes a severe structural issue: the public chain ecosystem is dominated by profit concentration, while the long tail languishes in zombification. Notable examples highlight this disparity. Algorand, a chain backed by Turing Award-winning cryptography, recorded a meager $17 in daily protocol revenue despite a billion-dollar valuation. Similarly, Cardano, a top-ten asset by market cap, generates only around $6,000 in daily fees, indicating a lack of substantial economic activity beyond basic transfers. In contrast, the chains capturing real value are those serving clear, immediate demands. Tron leads with $1.24 million in daily fees, powered primarily by its role as a low-cost payment rail for USDT transfers. Solana follows with nearly $600,000, driven largely by its vibrant on-chain casino of meme coin trading and speculation. Base, backed by Coinbase’s distribution power, has also emerged as a serious contender. These cases underscore that proven, fee-generating business models in crypto are currently limited to payments, high-frequency speculation, and Ethereum’s role as a settlement layer. The analysis further reveals the failure of the VC-driven model. Newer chains like Sui, Sei, and Starknet, which launched with massive funding and high Fully Diluted Valuations (FDV), show alarmingly low daily fees—often in the low thousands or even hundreds of dollars. Their typical lifecycle involves attracting airdrop farmers with incentives, followed by a collapse in organic activity once subsidies end. This reflects a critical issue of “block space inflation”: too many chains have been built, without a proportional growth in killer applications that demand that capacity. The market is at an inflection point. Investors are shifting from valuing narratives to scrutinizing fundamentals. The new imperative is to identify chains that generate genuine, fee-based revenue from organic user demand—not those sustained by speculation, subsidies, or empty promises. This necessary清算 (settlement) in valuation may be painful, but it is essential for the industry's long-term health. The era of paying for dreams is giving way to an era of paying for proven utility.

marsbit12/18 04:08

The Brutal Reckoning of the Public Chain Market in 2025: The Thriving Casino, The Fake Ghost Town, and VC's Harvesting Scheme

marsbit12/18 04:08

Bitcoin Network Activity Drops to Yearly Low. What Has Changed

Bitcoin network activity has dropped to its lowest level of the year, with the 7-day moving average of active addresses falling to 660,000. This decline is attributed to reduced activity following the peak in December 2024, which was driven by Ordinals and Runes protocols. These technologies, used for creating and trading on the Bitcoin blockchain, have shifted transaction dynamics, now accounting for most transactions but contributing only 5-10% of total fee revenue. This shift has negatively impacted miner economics. Daily miner revenue has decreased from around $50 million in Q3 to approximately $40 million, with fees making up a smaller portion of earnings (0.65% in December compared to 2.73% a year ago). Average transaction fees have also fallen to $0.48, down from $3.7 a year earlier. With block subsidies continuing to halve (currently 3.125 BTC per block until spring 2028), miner profitability is increasingly dependent on transaction fees. Fred Thiel, CEO of MARA Holdings, warned that without Bitcoin appreciating by at least 50% annually or a significant rise in network fees, traditional mining could become unprofitable in the coming years.

RBK-crypto12/16 13:14

Bitcoin Network Activity Drops to Yearly Low. What Has Changed

RBK-crypto12/16 13:14

Loss of Tens of Millions in Annual Income Sparks Governance Controversy, Aave Labs Accused of 'Stabbing DAO in the Back'

The recent dispute between Aave Labs and Aave DAO over fee allocation from the CoWSwap integration has exposed deeper governance and value-capture tensions within the Aave ecosystem. Aave Labs switched the default swap integration on its frontend from ParaSwap to CoWSwap, redirecting an estimated $10M+ in annual fees from the DAO treasury to an address controlled by Aave Labs. Aave Labs argues that its frontend is a separate product, not part of the protocol, and has the right to monetize it. Critics, including Aave DAO delegates, contend that the Aave brand’s value was built through DAO-funded efforts, risk management, and community trust, and that the Labs are extracting value that should belong to token holders. The conflict extends to other issues, including the controversial Horizon RWA deployment—which critics say has cost the DAO more than it has earned—and a proposed deployment on MegaETH that bypassed ongoing DAO discussions. The core issue is the blurred line between the protocol, managed by the DAO, and the frontend products, operated by Aave Labs. With Aave V4 intending to move more complexity into abstraction layers, the dispute over who controls—and profits from—the user experience becomes critical for the future of value distribution between equity (Labs) and token holders (DAO).

marsbit12/15 06:56

Loss of Tens of Millions in Annual Income Sparks Governance Controversy, Aave Labs Accused of 'Stabbing DAO in the Back'

marsbit12/15 06:56

Why Crypto Cards Are Doomed to Fail?

Crypto cards are a temporary solution designed to bridge traditional payment systems with the cryptocurrency world, but they are ultimately doomed to fail. They rely on centralized banking infrastructure, depend on compliance with traditional financial regulations, and lack the privacy and decentralization that are core to crypto values. These cards function as an abstraction layer, adding extra fees and complexity while still being controlled by entities like Visa or Mastercard. They do not replace traditional payment systems but instead reinforce them. Most crypto cards operate like liquidity bridges, converting crypto to fiat for spending, which incurs taxable events and additional costs. They also fail to provide true financial inclusivity, as users from restricted countries cannot access them, contradicting crypto’s ethos of equality. While companies continue developing crypto cards to lock users into their ecosystems (e.g., MetaMask using Linea), these efforts are largely superficial, relying on third-party services like Rain for infrastructure. The only model that aligns with crypto principles is EtherFi, which allows users to spend against crypto collateral without selling assets, avoiding taxable events and embodying a true DeFi-TradFi hybrid. Ultimately, crypto cards are a flawed transitional product, not a long-term innovation.

marsbit12/12 11:38

Why Crypto Cards Are Doomed to Fail?

marsbit12/12 11:38

Ripple (XRP) Transaction Fees Drop 89%: Will the Price Fall Below $1.75?

XRP transaction fees have plummeted 89% to around 650 XRP per day, the lowest level since December 2020, according to data from Glassnode. This sharp decline in on-chain fees coincides with a 59% drop in XRP futures open interest and falling funding rates, indicating weakening speculative interest. Analysts warn that these trends could trigger a deeper price correction. Technically, XRP is forming a descending triangle pattern on the charts. A breakdown below the $2 support level could lead to a 15% decline toward the pattern’s target of $1.73. The $2 to $1.98 zone remains a critical support area; losing it may expose XRP to further downside toward $1.61. Market sentiment has also turned negative, with social media fear levels reaching their highest since October. While some analysts suggest this could set the stage for a strong rebound—similar to past cycles—current data points to continued near-term pressure.

cointelegraph_中文12/11 11:49

Ripple (XRP) Transaction Fees Drop 89%: Will the Price Fall Below $1.75?

cointelegraph_中文12/11 11:49

Ethereum Network Fees Drop 62%: Is ETH Price at Risk?

Ethereum network fees have dropped 62% over the past 30 days, raising questions about potential risks to ETH’s price. Despite this decline, the network shows resilience through strong layer-2 growth and maintained price support levels. Key data from Nansen indicates a significant cooling in Ethereum base-layer activity, with fees falling more sharply than on competing chains like Solana. However, layer-2 solutions such as Base and Polygon have seen substantial transaction volume growth—108% and 81%, respectively—suggesting that Ethereum’s expanding ecosystem remains dynamic. Ethereum’s recent upgrade, Fusaka, may have contributed to lower fees by improving rollup efficiency. Meanwhile, ETH’s price rose over 11% amid softer U.S. employment data, though it remains 32% below its August peak. On-chain metrics show reduced activity in decentralized applications (DApps). DEX trading volume on Ethereum fell to $13.4 billion from $23.6 billion four weeks earlier, and DApp revenue hit a five-month low. Total value locked (TVL) in Ethereum DApps also declined, dropping from $100 billion to $76 billion over two months. Still, Ethereum maintains a dominant 68% market share among smart contract platforms. Perpetual futures funding rates held near 9%, reflecting balanced leverage market sentiment. Broader institutional and regulatory developments, including positive comments from former SEC commissioner Paul Atkins on blockchain adoption, may support longer-term confidence. In summary, while Ethereum’s base-layer demand has softened, strong layer-2 growth and ongoing ecosystem development suggest underlying strength. Current data does not indicate fundamental weakness in ETH’s market structure.

cointelegraph_中文12/10 08:55

Ethereum Network Fees Drop 62%: Is ETH Price at Risk?

cointelegraph_中文12/10 08:55

活动图片

Популярные категорииright-arrow

Популярные тегиright-arrow

Project Updates

Others