Coingecko Data: 11.5 Million Projects Died in 2025, The Most Devastating Year in Crypto History

marsbit2026-01-14 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-01-14 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

According to data from GeckoTerminal, 53.2% of all cryptocurrency projects have failed, with the vast majority of these failures—86.3%—occurring in 2025 alone. A staggering 11.6 million token projects died in 2025, making it the most devastating year in crypto history. This sharp decline in token viability is linked to extreme market turbulence, particularly within the memecoin sector. A record-breaking liquidation event on October 10, 2025, where $19 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated in 24 hours, triggered a chain reaction that led to the collapse of 7.7 million projects in Q4 alone. Despite the high failure rate, the total number of crypto projects exploded—growing from 428,383 projects on GeckoTerminal in 2021 to over 20.2 million by 2025. This surge is largely attributed to the rise of token launch platforms that made creating low-quality memecoins exceptionally easy. In comparison, 2024 saw 1.4 million project failures, accounting for 10.3% of all failures in the past five years, while failures from 2021 to 2023 made up just 3.4%. The data includes tokens that had at least one trade before failing and only counts "graduated" tokens from platforms like pump.fun.

Author:Shaun Paul Lee

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

How Many Cryptocurrencies Have "Died"?

According to data from GeckoTerminal, 53.2% of cryptocurrency projects have failed, with the majority of these failures concentrated in 2025. In 2025 alone, 11.6 million token projects came to an end, accounting for 86.3% of all failed projects. This phenomenon is closely related to the severe market turbulence throughout the year, particularly the impact on the memecoin sector.

This sharp decline in token viability may be related to the market turmoil throughout the year, especially affecting the meme coin sector.

Shockingly, the fourth quarter of 2025 alone saw 7.7 million token projects collapse, accounting for 34.9% of all failed projects. This sharp decline is closely linked to the "liquidation chain reaction" that occurred on October 10. In this record-breaking event, a staggering $19 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated within 24 hours, making it the single largest day of deleveraging in cryptocurrency history.

Despite the extreme volatility in the cryptocurrency market in 2025, the total number of cryptocurrency projects grew dramatically. From 428,383 projects on GeckoTerminal in 2021, this number had surged to nearly 20.2 million projects by 2025. This growth is largely attributed to the rise of various token issuance platforms, which made creating low-quality memecoins and projects exceptionally easy.

86.3% of Cryptocurrencies Died in 2025

As of December 31, 2025, a total of 11.6 million cryptocurrency projects had failed, setting a new historical record for the number of failed projects in a single year. These failed projects account for 86.3% of all failure cases between 2021 and 2025.

This was followed by 2024, which saw approximately 1.4 million project failures, accounting for 10.3% of the total failures over the past five years. 2024 was also the second-highest peak for the growth in the number of cryptocurrency projects, with over 3 million new projects entering the market. However, before the launch of the pump.fun platform in 2024, the number of cryptocurrency failures remained at a relatively low six-figure level. In contrast, the total number of failed projects between 2021 and 2023 accounts for only 3.4% of the total failures over the past five years.

Year-by-Year Statistics: Cryptocurrency Failure Data

The following statistics show the number of failed cryptocurrency projects each year from 2021 to 2025:

Research Methodology

This study analyzed tokens and cryptocurrency projects (collectively referred to as "cryptocurrencies") that were once listed on GeckoTerminal between July 1, 2021, and December 31, 2025, but are no longer actively traded. These projects are classified as "failed" or "dead" and are grouped according to the year of their last active trade.

Only tokens that had at least one trade before failing are counted.
Additionally, only token projects that had "graduated" within the pump.fun platform were included.

İlgili Okumalar

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit11 dk önce

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit11 dk önce

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

A zero-knowledge proof tool can help modern Bitcoin wallets migrate assets before quantum attacks in milliseconds. However, approximately 1.1 million bitcoins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto before 2012 are fundamentally unprotected by such solutions, as they reside in older P2PK addresses lacking the hierarchical structure required for this cryptographic rescue. This exposes a critical divide: post-2012 HD wallets can potentially "upgrade" signatures using tools like Project Eleven's, while early coins are cryptographically isolated. The community faces a political, not technical, dilemma with four contentious options: 1) Let quantum attackers seize the coins, risking market instability; 2) Hard fork to freeze vulnerable addresses, seen as violating property rights; 3) Implement extreme spending limits to slow any attack; 4) Redistribute "orphaned" coins, breaking immutability. Each solution threatens a core Bitcoin tenet. The market is already pricing in this governance risk, as evidenced by institutional divestment citing uncertainty. The true crisis isn't the arrival of quantum computing, but the community's inability to reconcile its foundational principles with an existential technological shift.

marsbit19 dk önce

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

marsbit19 dk önce

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Matt Hougan, Bitwise's CIO, identifies the fusion of traditional finance and on-chain finance as the core driver for the next crypto bull market. He expects this cycle, propelled by real-world utility and global finance adoption, to be the largest yet, centered on stablecoins, asset tokenization, 24/7 trading, instant settlement, and institutional DeFi growth. The article outlines two primary investment approaches tied to this trend. The first focuses on native crypto applications with strong revenues and sustainable tokenomics, exemplified by Hyperliquid (HYPE). Its Layer-1 chain is gaining significant trading volume from traditional assets like oil and equities. Its model of using 99% of revenues for token buybacks is a key strength. The second approach targets established traditional firms building at scale on crypto rails, like Robinhood. The launch of its Robinhood Chain, enabling global trading of tokenized stocks and DeFi activities, represents a major move towards this fusion. The author also notes other serious contenders like Coinbase, Figure, BlackRock, and JPMorgan. Ultimately, the thesis is that the most profound success will come when blockchain technology seamlessly integrates into finance, becoming invisible to end-users. Investors are advised to position ahead of this convergence.

Foresight News23 dk önce

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Foresight News23 dk önce

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbit30 dk önce

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbit30 dk önce

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbit39 dk önce

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbit39 dk önce

İşlemler

Spot