97%持有者处于亏损状态,Arbitrum生态补贴打法或难救币价

Odaily星球日报Опубліковано о 2024-07-11Востаннє оновлено о 2024-07-11

Анотація

尽管币价表现不尽人意,但从数据来看,目前Arbitrum在众多L2中仍处于领先优势。

原文作者:Nancy,PANews

Arbitrum 无疑是数据表现较为强劲的 Layer 2 “优等生”之一,而跌势不止的币价是其“硬伤”,即便流通市值较上线之初已然翻倍。

4 个月新增近 26 亿美元解锁量, 97% 持有者处于亏损状态

与上线之初的 10.2 亿美元初始流通市值相比,如今 Arbitrum 代币 ARB 的流通市值已超 23 亿美元,但持有者却无法摆脱持续“失血”之困。IntoTheBlock 数据显示,Arbitrum 的价格表现疲软,目前有高达 97% 的 ARB 持有者处于亏损状态,仅有 3% 的持有者在当前价格持平,几乎没有持有者盈利。

97%持有者处于亏损状态,Arbitrum生态补贴打法或难救币价

根据 CoinGecko 数据显示,ARB 在今年 1 月创下 2.26 美元的历史新高,较 2023 年 3 月上线时涨幅达 67.4% ,但随后 ARB 开始一路下跌,并在近期创下历史低点,当前较峰值下跌 69% 。而其流通市值,却仅比高峰期下降 30% 。相比之下,ARB 的竞品 OP 的价格较上线之初的最高涨幅为 235% ,当前价格较峰值下跌超 65.6% ,流通市值则较高点下滑 61.2% 。

97%持有者处于亏损状态,Arbitrum生态补贴打法或难救币价

Arbitrum 流通市值

ARB 持续数月的颓废走势与其大额代币解锁有着直接关系,今年 3 月开始 Arbitrum 团队和投资者开始解锁大量 ARB 代币。根据 PANews 统计, 3 月至今,Arbitrum 来自团队和投资者的解锁量已超 13.8 亿枚 ARB,总价值超 25.9 亿美元。

97%持有者处于亏损状态,Arbitrum生态补贴打法或难救币价

而 Arbitrum 还将在每月 16 日还将面临着更多 ARB 解锁,比如 7 月开始将新增 Arbitrum DAO Treasury 的解锁,价值高达 24.1 亿美元,直至 2027 年 3 月预计增发约 400% 。根据 Token Unlocks 数据显示,截至 7 月 10 日,ARB 的解锁进度暂为 31% 。

若市场流动性持续走低,Arbitrum 持续的巨量解锁无疑会带动其代币价格进一步下探。比如加密分析平台 DYOR 不久前对此表示,鉴于现在的流动性,如果投资机构每个月卖出解锁额度的 5% ,如 ARB 等资产价格将可能下跌 30% 至 70% 。

多项数据仍具领先优势,生态补贴打法或难救币价

尽管币价表现不尽人意,但从数据来看,目前 Arbitrum 在众多L2中仍处于领先优势。

Dune Analytics 最新数据显示,截至 7 月 10 日,Arbitrum 创建账户总量超 3175.1 万个,交易总数已突破 8 亿笔。Arbitrum 链上桥接总锁仓量 TVB 已突破 300 万枚 ETH,桥接地址总量约 73.7 万个。且L2 BEAT 数据显示,Arbitrum One 以 161.2 亿美元 TVL 稳居第一,市场占比达 40.1% ;Growthepie 数据显示,Arbitrum 稳定币市值突破 40.7 亿美元位居首位,全年涨幅 116% ,超过 Base、OP Mainnet 和 ZkSync Era 等L2;过去 6 个月的活跃地址数增速达 205% ,超过 ZkSync、OP Mainnet 等。

97%持有者处于亏损状态,Arbitrum生态补贴打法或难救币价

Arbitrum 的生态数据无疑是靠大撒币模式补贴出来的。

一直以来,Arbitrum 不断打补贴这张牌助攻自身生态发展。例如在游戏上,今年 6 月 Arbitrum 批准了 2.25 亿枚 ARB 提案,用于资助 Arbitrum 上的游戏开发,旨在将 Arbitrum 打造成游戏领域的领先区块链,这些资金将在三年内进行分配;在 RWA 上,Arbitrum 拟为 RWA 发展计划分配 3500 万枚 ARB,旨在通过 RWA 生态系统的增长来实现每年 Arbitrum 1% 的财务多元化,现已获得超 99% 的投票支持率。

与此同时,Arbitrum 还在四处“撒钱”赞助项目,仅在 2023 年就 50 多个项目提供约 1060 万美元赠款,且这一年 Arbitrum 还推出了一项短期激励计划,旨在从 DAO 金库向 Arbitrum 上的活跃协议分配最多 5000 万枚 ARB 资金,有 106 个项目申请首轮资助。而在今年,Arbitrum 也在不断为各类项目资金支持,比如不久前 Open Campus 宣布获得 Arbitrum 基金会的资助,用于推出首个专为教育设计的 Layer 3 区块链 EDU Chain;Pendle 宣布获得 Arbitrum STIP 的 100 万枚 ARB 资助;Synthetix 推出 Arbitrum 流动性激励计划,提供 200 万枚 ARB 奖励来吸引流动性提供者、稳定币流动性和 Perps 交易活动;Curve Finance 声称已收到来自 Arbitrum 超 23.7 万枚 ARB 捐赠,用于向 Arbitrum 链上的 Curve 池提供激励。

不过,Arbitrum 这种通过代币补贴建设生态的做法也引发不满,在社区看来,这种方式不仅未能给代币赋能,还增加了抛压。例如 Continue Capital 联创 Pima 发文直言,很多公司的领导层缺乏资源资本配置的技能,资金留存度如果只是为了掠夺性补贴是毫无长期价值,补贴的终极是为长期货币化现金流服务。KOL BITWU.ETH 则表示,Arb 是典型“低流通、高排放”的生态补贴打法,最终导致“市值不断增长、代币趋势波动”。说白了,这种方式就是不断牺牲二级市场,更适合趋势交易者,不是那种死拿就获得巨额赔率的币,这些币的价值早就被机构挖掘完了,得到了充分的估值,未来只有贝塔收益,没有阿尔法收益。

97%持有者处于亏损状态,Arbitrum生态补贴打法或难救币价

此外,Arbitrum DAO 还考虑借鉴科技巨头的做法实施并购来实现生态扩张。Arbitrum DAO 在今年 5 月批准了 Areta 公司的创始合伙人 Bernard Schmid 提出的一项为期八周的并购试点计划,营销公司、业务开发、基础设施提供商、稳定币发行人和零知识技术是最具吸引力的潜在收购目标。如果试点成功,Schmid 计划提出一个更加雄心勃勃的提案:建立一个拥有 1 亿至 2.5 亿美元资金池的并购部门,并在两年内识别和收购潜在目标。DeepDAO 数据显示,Arbitrum 财库持仓价值为 26 亿美元,其中 97.4% 为代币 ARB,较峰值下降了超 65.7% 。

值得一提的是,Arbitrum 还尝试在产品和治理等方面进行迭代更新来优化开发者和用户体验,例如今年 4 月,Arbitrum 基金会拟更改 Arbitrum 扩展计划,以允许在任何区块链上部署新的 Orbit 链;上月底 Arbitrum 基金会提议采用新交易排序策略 Timeboost,来增强网络交易的效率和公平性;Arbitrum 宣布将推出结合零知识证明和 Stylus MultiVM 的功能等。

在治理提案中,对代币有直接刺激作用的是,Arbitrum 提出的新 ARB 质押奖励提案,拟使用 50 %排序器费用奖励质押,从而增强 DAO 的经济安全性并降低资金库遭受攻击的风险。DeFi 研究员@DefiIgnas 对此表示,在此计划中,使用未来剩余排序器费用的 50% 来奖励 ARB 代币质押者,假设年度费用为 12, 000 ETH,且 ARB 价格为 1 美元,这将转化为 7% 的 APY,这种与代币持有者分享收入的机制对于处在下跌状态的 ARB 来说是个明智的提案。

从目前来看,面对巨量解锁压力,Arbitrum 的生态补贴打法尚未对 ARB 价格起到明显提振作用,而随着市场对低流通高 FDV 玩法的争议愈演愈烈,Arbitrum 将面临更大挑战。

原文链接

Пов'язані матеріали

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbit2 хв тому

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbit2 хв тому

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Title: STRC Deeply Discounted, mNAV Falls Below Break-even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Redefined The recent volatility in MSTR and STRC highlights the need to reassess the core business model of Bitcoin reserve companies. These entities function more like leveraged, single-asset banks rather than software/tech firms. Consequently, they should be valued using banking metrics, not based on their total Bitcoin holdings. The key valuation metric is mNAV (market net asset value), akin to a price-to-book ratio. It compares the company's market capitalization to the equity value of its Bitcoin holdings after deducting all senior debt and preferred equity (like STRC). As of June 24, Strategy's mNAV was 1.10x. The focus should be on "net Bitcoin per share" (the Bitcoin claim per share after senior claims) and its growth rate, equivalent to a bank's book value and return on assets. Given STRC's 19% discount to its $100 par value (yielding 14.2%), issuing new MSTR equity at the current price to buy more Bitcoin is inefficient. It slightly dilutes the widely watched "total Bitcoin per share" metric while providing minimal improvement to the more critical "net Bitcoin per share." The article analyzes four potential uses for $1 billion in new equity: 1. **Buy Bitcoin:** Least effective. Improves net Bitcoin per share only marginally while diluting total Bitcoin per share. 2. **Repurchase STRC:** Most effective for balance sheet repair. The discount creates immediate value, increasing net Bitcoin per share by 1.0%, reducing debt burden, and lowering future dividend obligations. 3. **Boost Cash Reserves:** Dramatically improves the "cash coverage ratio" for STRC dividends from 9.8 months to 16.8 months, a crucial liquidity metric in a tightening funding environment. 4. **50/50 Split (STRC buyback & cash):** A balanced approach improving all key metrics. Strategy's own Q1 report indicates its internal break-even mNAV for profitable equity issuance to buy Bitcoin is 1.22x. With the current mNAV at 1.10x, such a move would be value-destructive. The core assumptions of its previous expansion model—issuing STRC at par and maintaining ample dividend coverage—have broken down. The recommended path is to use new capital to optimize core financial health: repurchasing discounted STRC and/or bolstering cash reserves. This would repair the balance sheet, signal liquidity strength, support STRC's price, lower its yield, and potentially reopen the par-value issuance channel. The current STRC discount represents a low-cost capital opportunity to restart this positive cycle. Bitcoin reserve companies must be evaluated as banks, focusing on book value, leverage, and liquidity resilience.

Foresight News3 хв тому

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Foresight News3 хв тому

South Korean Institutions' Crypto Race: Dual Explosion of Stablecoins and RWA

**Summary: South Korea's Institutional Crypto Race: Stablecoins and RWA Take Off** South Korea is undergoing a structural shift in its crypto ecosystem, moving beyond its historical role as a major retail trading hub. Major financial institutions and internet platforms are now building institutional-grade blockchain infrastructure, with stablecoins and Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization as the primary drivers. The push for a regulated Korean won stablecoin market is a major policy and corporate focus. This is driven partly by an estimated $115 billion outflow into dollar stablecoins like USDC, threatening the domestic financial system. Banks (e.g., KB Financial, Hana), payment giants (e.g., Shinhan Card, BC Card), and internet super-apps (KakaoPay, NAVER Pay) are all conducting pilots. The goal is to anchor future digital finance to the Korean won and local regulations. In RWA, South Korea is advancing rapidly within regulatory sandboxes, focusing on unique domestic assets beyond typical global templates like US Treasuries. Projects involve tokenizing ships (with Hyundai Heavy Industries), defense supply chain assets, and K-pop intellectual property, alongside more conventional assets. A legal framework is set for 2027, and platforms like NXT are preparing for regulated trading. Key opportunities for crypto-native projects lie in providing the underlying technology these traditional institutions lack: global distribution channels for tokenized assets, cross-chain liquidity solutions, and enabling infrastructure tools (e.g., for asset packaging and management). Partnerships, such as Solana with Shinhan Card or LayerZero with the Korea Gold Exchange, exemplify this proactive approach. Crucially, user access is being shaped by consumer platforms. NAVER's planned acquisition of Upbit's operator Dunamu and Kakao's development of a unified wallet aim to seamlessly integrate crypto with everyday payments for tens of millions of users. The race is now about which protocols and projects will become the foundational standards as regulation solidifies and institutional adoption accelerates.

Foresight News1 год тому

South Korean Institutions' Crypto Race: Dual Explosion of Stablecoins and RWA

Foresight News1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片