Protocols must prove demand by stablecoin liquidity per token.

admin3 weeks ago

The average stability liquidity per token decreased to $ 5,500 in March 2025, down to $ 5,500, showing the sound reasons that the protocol should hold.

According to A Recent report By dispersion of research firms, this drop shows how token issuance, which is currently surpassing 40 million assets, diluted the capital available without increasing demand or user maintenance.

The report turns this trend as evidence of Zero Island dynamics from the Crypto Capital Allocation, and the inflow of the new tokens surpasses the expansion of capital pools, reducing liquidity, weakening the community and reducing participation.

Without durable revenue sources, user interests often disappear according to short -term incentives such as air drops. Without sustainable economic structure, attention was not asset, but responsibility.

Liquidity compression

The report used stablecoin liquidity as a representative for capital availability. As the number of tokens has soared, new capital inflows have been stagnant, and many encryption projects have been established.

The playbook (starting the community through a fluoride server and airdrop campaign), which has few resources per token, no longer produces continuous participation.

Instead, the report argued that the project should now show product market suitability and continuous demand through profit generation.

Revenue is a financial indicator and functions as a mechanism to inform relevant and economic use. The protocol that creates and maintains cash flow is in a better position that justifies token evaluation, established governance legitimacy, and maintains user participation.

The report distinguishes mature platforms such as Ethereum (ETHE), which depends on ecosystem depth and basic incentives, and new protocols that need to occupy their positions through consistent performance and transparent operation.

Various capital demands and strategies

The report describes the four mature stages of the encryption project (explorer, hiking price, Titan and season). Each category represents a different relationship from capital formation, risk allowance and value distribution.

Explorer is an early stage protocol that works through centralized governance, volatility, and incentive -centered profits. Some of Synthetix and Balancer use short -term spikes, while the main goals are survival rather than profitability.

Climbers with annual income from $ 10 million to $ 50 million begin to switch from emission base growth to user maintenance and ecosystem governance. This project must explore strategic decisions on growth to distribution while maintaining momentum.

Titans, such as AAVE, Uniswap, and Hyperliquid, generate consistent profits, have a decentralized governance structure, and operate as a powerful network effect. Their focus is category, not diversification. Titan’s existing Treasury and Operating Running can perform token repurchase or other value sincerity programs.

In contrast, the season is a short -term phenomenon that is driven by overdrafts and social exercise. Projects such as Friendtech and Pumpfun experienced short activities, but have difficulty in maintaining user’s interests or revenue consistency in the long run.

Some can evolve, but maintain speculative play without continuing most infrastructure relevance.

Revenue distribution model

The report, which recorded similarities similar to the public stock market, pointed out that young companies generally reinvest their income, while mature companies return capital through dividends or repurchase.

In encryption, this difference is similar to the maturity of the protocol. Titan is located in a position to implement repurchase or structured distribution, and it is recommended to focus on reinvestors until the explorer and climbing are secured.

According to the report, Buybacks is a flexible distribution tool that is particularly suitable for projects with volatile revenue or seasonal demand patterns.

However, this report warned that unplanned repurchase could benefit short -term traders rather than long -term holders. Effective repurchase programs require strong financial preparation, evaluation rules and transparent executions. Without these, the distribution can erect trust and make a wrong capital.

Trends reflect wider changes in traditional markets. In 2024, BUYBACKS surpassed dividends by accounting for about 60%of the company’s profit distribution.

This approach can control capital revenue according to market conditions, but when incentives that make repurchase decisions are misleading, the risk of governance still remains.

Investor relationships are key

The report has identified investor relationships (IR) in a critical but low -developed function in the encryption project. Despite the public’s claim of transparency, most teams optionally disclose financial data.

To build a durable trust with token holders and organizations, a more institutional approach, including quarterly reports, real -time dashboards and clear token deployment disclosure.

Major projects have begun to implement these standards. AAVE’s “Purchase and Distribution” program, supported by $ 99 million of Treasury, allocates $ 1 million per week for structured repurchase.

Hyperklicade uses only 54%of sales and 46%in LP incentives by using only profits without external venture funding. After reaching the financial sustainability, Jupiter introduced a trash trust trust as a non -parenting mechanism to manage $ 9.7 million in JUP for future distribution.

This example shows that responsible capital allocation depends on timing, governance and communication as well as market conditions. As token liquidity continues to decline per asset, pressure on projects that prove survival through cash flow and transparency will be strengthened.