一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

Odaily星球日报Опубліковано о 2023-11-01Востаннє оновлено о 2023-11-01

Анотація

相对于其市值,Injective的交易量更高,这可能表明其吸引着更多的市场兴趣,交易更活跃。

原文作者:Axel Bitblaze(@Axel_bitblaze 69 

原文编译:Joyce,BlockBeats

编者按:加密研究员 Axel Bitblaze 从技术、用例、性能、共识机制、市场地位及代币经济学角度分析了 InjectiveOasis 和 Near 三条公链。并根据 Injective 的交易量 / 市值比率较高,认为短期内市场对 Injective 的兴趣更多,其上的交易也更为活跃。BlockBeats 编译如下:

专注于隐私的 L1 解决方案 Oasis Protocol

技术:专注于隐私保护功能;结合安全计算技术(如可信执行环境)以及区块链框架;

共识机制:采用权益证明(PoS)来达成共识;

用例:主要针对需要隐私的应用程序;尤其适用于需要保护敏感数据的医疗保健或金融领域;

性能:具有高可扩展性和低 gas 费;PoS 机制和优化的网络结构的优势;

市场定位:作为一个以隐私为中心的平台,可能会吸引一个利基市场;对处理敏感数据的行业尤其有吸引力。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

DeFi 和衍生品 L1 解决方案 Injective

技术:旨在为衍生品和无 DeFi 创建一个完全去中心化的平台;允许创建无需许可和去中心化的市场;

共识机制:使用 PoS 模型,有助于更快的交易速度和更低的费用;

用例:专注于交易和金融,支持期货、永续期货等一系列金融产品;

性能:高交易吞吐量和低延迟,解决了 DeFi 和交易中的一些常见痛点;

市场定位:对 DeFi 社区和寻找去中心化、安全高效交易平台的交易员具有强烈吸引力。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

Near protocol

技术:利用分片技术实现可扩展性,允许网络在增长时处理更多事务;

共识机制:采用 Nightshade,一种 PoS 的变体,有助于实现高吞吐量和低交易成本;

用例:旨在成为一个开发者友好的平台,支持各种 dApp,包括 NFT、游戏和 DeFi;

性能:采用了一种独特的分片方法(sharding-as-you-go),为区块链不可能三角问题提供了一个潜在的解决方案;

市场定位:专注于可用性和可扩展性,旨在瞄准区块链生态系统中从开发者到最终用户的更广泛细分市场。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

对比分析

1)侧重领域

$ROSE 因其隐私功能而与众不同。

$INJ 针对 DeFi 和交易市场。

$NEAR 将自己定位为适用于各种 dApp 的通用、可扩展区块链。

2)技术优势

$ROSE 隐私保护方法是一个关键的差异化因素,在关注数据敏感性的行业尤其相关。

$INJ 为金融部门提供专业工具,特别是衍生品和交易。

$NEAR 分片技术为可扩展性提供了坚实的基础,对许多 dApp 开发人员具有广泛的吸引力。

3)用例和生态系统

$ROSE 可能会在需要数据隐私的行业中看到利基采用。

$INJ 可以吸引金融机构和 DeFi 爱好者。

$NEAR 由于其灵活性和可扩展性,有可能被更广泛地采用,吸引了多样化的 dApp 开发。

4)投资者视角

$ROSE 对于那些希望投资加密货币隐私领域的人来说可能很有吸引力。

$INJ 可能会吸引对区块链上金融应用的增长和创新感兴趣的投资者。

$NEAR 对于押注区块链技术在各个领域广泛采用的投资者来说,这可能是一个合适的选择。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

代币经济学

1)市值

• $NEAR 1, 228, 940, 901 美元

• $ROSE : 263, 770, 383 美元

• $INJ 1, 152, 649, 407 美元

分析:

与 ROSE 相比,NEAR 和 INJ 的市值明显更高。这表明市场估值更高,投资者的信心或效用感知可能更高。较高的市值通常意味着在市场上的地位更成熟,但也可能意味着更成熟,与小盘币相比,可能提供更低的增长率。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

2) 24 小时交易量及市值比率

$NEAR :

- 交易量: $ 22, 437, 661 

- 交易量/市值比率: 0.02 

$ROSE :

- 交易量: $ 6, 461, 412 

- 交易量/市值比率: 0.02 

$INJ :

- 交易量: $ 51, 954, 873 

- 成交量/市值比率: 0.05 

分析:

$INJ 相对于其市值,交易量明显更高,表明交易更活跃,短期内可能有更高的流动性和投资者兴趣。

$NEAR 和 $ROSE,虽然具有相似的比率,但相比之下不太活跃。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

供应指标:

1)流通供应量

$NEAR : 989, 205, 461 (占总供应量的 98.92% )

$ROSE : 5, 029, 357, 184 (占总供应量的 50.29% )

$INJ : 83, 755, 556 (占总供应量的 83.76% )

2)总供应量和最大供应量

$NEAR : 10 亿总供应量,未定义最大供应量

$ROSE : 100 亿总供应量,未定义最大供应量

$INJ : 1 亿总供应量和最大供应量

$NEAR 其供应量几乎完全流通,表明通胀压力有限。

$ROSE 只有其总供应量的一半在流通,可能导致通货膨胀影响。

$INJ 供应有上限,如果需求保持强劲,则吸引价值升值。

一文对比Oasis、Injective和Near三条公链

代币经济学的结论

• $INJ 脱颖而出 - 相对于其市值,它的交易量更高,这可能表明市场兴趣或投机交易更活跃。

• 流通供应比例至关重要:

$NEAR :几乎完全稀释。

$INJ : 大部分的代币供应量已经达到了设定的最大供应上限,并可以在市场上自由交易。

$ROSE : 相当一部分尚未进入流通。

原文链接

Пов'язані матеріали

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 News10 хв тому

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

Foresight News10 хв тому

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.

marsbit21 хв тому

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

marsbit21 хв тому

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 год тому

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

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片