Connect with us

Crypto World

Crypto Capital Shifts from Tokens to Stocks as Launches Struggle

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Investor capital is shifting from token launches into publicly listed crypto companies, a trend highlighted by DWF Labs’ research. Drawing on Memento Research data that spans hundreds of token launches across the world’s leading exchanges, the study notes that more than 80% of projects trade below their TGE price, with typical drawdowns of 50% to 70% within roughly 90 days of listing. The pattern appears to be less about ephemeral volatility and more a persistent post-listing dynamic, according to Andrei Grachev, managing partner at DWF Labs, who said most tokens punch a price peak in the first month before a downward drift takes hold.

Key takeaways

  • More than eight in ten token projects fall below their TGE price, with 50%–70% declines typically occurring within about 90 days of exchange listing.
  • Capital is flowing into crypto equities and regulated markets, as crypto IPOs in 2025 reach around $14.6 billion and M&A activity in the sector tops $42.5 billion.
  • The shift is structural, not a temporary market move: institutional buyers prefer governance, disclosure, and the durability of equity-style exposure over pure-token plays.
  • The valuation gap between listed crypto equities and token projects persists, driven by accessibility and the inclusion of public shares in indexes and ETFs.
  • Investors are gravitating toward the “infrastructure” layer—custody, payments, settlement, and compliance—where an equity wrapper can enable licensing, audits, and distribution through established channels.

Sentiment: Neutral

Price impact: Negative. Tokens frequently trade below their TGE price, with 50%–70% drawdowns within ~90 days of listing, indicating immediate negative price impact for public buyers.

Trading idea (Not Financial Advice): Hold. As capital rotates toward regulated crypto equities, a cautious stance on new token launches and a tilt toward asset classes with predictable governance remains prudent.

Market context: The observed rotation toward publicly traded crypto equities mirrors broader shifts in liquidity and risk sentiment, with institutional participants seeking regulated exposure, clear reporting standards, and the potential for indexes and ETFs to dilute onboarding friction.

Advertisement

Why it matters

For traders and investors, the divergence between token launches and equity-backed crypto ventures signals a bifurcated market where real-world adoption and revenue generation in a project can determine value more reliably than token-only narratives. Tokens that fail to secure steady user growth, fees, transaction volume, and retention often fail to justify premium prices, whereas listed crypto companies can rely on audited financials, governance processes, and enforceable rights to attract capital.

Builders and startups in the ecosystem may now prioritize infrastructure assets—custody solutions, settlement rails, and compliance tooling—over purely token-centered incentives. The “equity wrapper” offers a path to licensing, partnerships, and distribution through traditional financial rails, potentially accelerating real-world deployment of decentralized networks.

The data imply a structural shift rather than a one-off market wobble. While tokens will persist as governance tokens and incentive mechanisms within protocols, the near-term funding environment favors assets with tangible revenue streams and clearer ownership structures.

Market participants should watch for three key indicators in the months ahead. First, the cadence of crypto IPOs and SPACs will reveal whether the interest in regulated exposure persists beyond a single cycle. Second, progress in custody, settlement, and compliance infrastructure will indicate whether traditional rails can be scaled to support broader tokenized ecosystems. Third, the timing of token unlocks and new airdrops will continue to influence near-term price action for newly listed tokens, potentially reintroducing selling pressure even as demand for regulated equity exposure grows. The convergence of these factors will shape how liquidity moves through the crypto economy in the near term.

Advertisement

What to watch next

  • Monitoring crypto IPO and SPAC activity in the coming quarters for signs of persistent appetite in regulated markets
  • Tracking custody, settlement, and compliance infrastructure progress that could enable broader institutional participation
  • Watching token unlock schedules and airdrop cadence for any renewed selling pressure on launch tokens
  • Observing whether major exchanges expand regulated product lines (ETFs, ETPs) that channel institutional flows into crypto equities

Sources & verification

  • DWF Labs analysis referencing Memento Research data on 2025 token launches
  • Comments from Andrei Grachev, managing partner at DWF Labs, on post-listing patterns
  • Statements from Maksym Sakharov, co-founder of WeFi, about capital rotation toward infrastructure and equity rails
  • Public data on 2025 crypto IPO fundraising (~$14.6 billion) and M&A activity (over $42.5 billion)

Market shift: capital moves toward crypto equities as token launches struggle

Investor capital is increasingly flowing into publicly listed crypto companies as token launches confront a tougher funding environment. The pattern is grounded in a body of data assembled by Memento Research, which surveyed hundreds of token launches across the world’s leading exchanges. The results point to a recurring dynamic: the bulk of projects do not sustain an initial listing premium. More than 80% of token ventures trade below their TGE price, and the typical drawdown ranges from 50% to 70% within about three months after listing. The implications extend beyond daily price moves, signaling a structural preference among large investors for assets that offer governance, transparency, and legal clarity.

Andrei Grachev, managing partner at DWF Labs, frames these findings as evidence of a persistent post-listing reality rather than mere volatility. He notes that most tokens spike in price during the first month after listing, then trend downward as selling pressure mounts from early buyers and early investors seeking to realize gains. “TGE price is the exchange-listed price set before launch. This is the price the token is expected to open at on the exchange, and it reveals how much the price actually changes due to volatility in the first few days,” Grachev explained. The takeaway is not simply about one bad week but about a structural pattern that re-emerges across numerous launches.

The analysis deliberately focused on token launches tied to projects with products or protocols—not memecoins—highlighting a distinction between listings driven by purely speculative interest and those backed by real-world product development. A separate thread in the data points toird as major pressure points for selling, further contributing to the downward price trajectory observed after token listings. In practice, this means a token’s initial post-listing performance often reflects supply dynamics and initial investor expectations more than sustained user activity.

On the other side of the ledger, capital formation in traditional markets tied to the crypto sector has intensified. 2025 saw crypto-related initial public offerings (IPOs) raise roughly $14.6 billion, a sharp increase from the previous year, while merger and acquisition activity in crypto-adjacent businesses surpassed $42.5 billion—the strongest level in five years. DWF’s Grachev stresses that this surge should be read as a rotation rather than a withdrawal of capital from the crypto space. If capital were exiting crypto altogether, the jump in IPOs and M&A would be hard to reconcile with continued token underperformance and a widening disconnect between token valuations and equity valuations.

In the report, public crypto equities such as Circle, Gemini, eToro, Bullish, and Figure are compared with tokenized projects by looking at trailing 12-month price-to-sales ratios. Public equities traded at multiples spanning roughly 7 to 40 times sales, while tokenized peers hovered in the 2 to 16 times range. The valuation gap, according to the authors, is partly a matter of accessibility: many institutional investors—pension funds and endowments among them—are limited to regulated securities markets, and public shares can be incorporated into indexes and exchange-traded funds. This dynamic creates a built-in bid for equity-like crypto exposure, independent of the performance of any single token.

Advertisement

Sakharov of WeFi adds nuance to the narrative, noting that the shift reflects a preference for cleaner ownership, clearer disclosure, and enforceable rights—features more readily associated with equity than with many token models. He argues that capital is moving toward infrastructure plays—custody, payments, settlement, brokerage, and compliance—where the “equity wrapper” can accelerate licensing, audits, partnerships, and distribution channels into real-world markets. The migration does not imply tokens are vanishing; rather, it signals a bifurcation: serious protocols with recognized revenue potential and governance will mature and attract capital, while a long tail of speculative launches face a tougher financing climate.

For users and investors, the divide matters because it reframes how value is assigned in crypto networks. Tokens may continue to power governance and incentive mechanisms, but the presence of audited financials, governance rights, and legal claims offers a degree of accountability that is increasingly appealing to risk-aware institutions. The shift also shapes how builders design networks. Demand for robust custody and compliant settlement systems may become the default expectation for any project seeking institutional participation or licensing opportunities, effectively pushing infrastructure improvements higher up the roadmap.

Market participants should watch for three key indicators in the months ahead. First, the cadence of crypto IPOs and SPACs will reveal whether the interest in regulated exposure persists beyond a single cycle. Second, progress in custody, settlement, and compliance infrastructure will indicate whether traditional rails can be scaled to support broader tokenized ecosystems. Third, the timing of token unlocks and new airdrops will continue to influence near-term price action for newly listed tokens, potentially reintroducing selling pressure even as demand for regulated equity exposure grows. The convergence of these factors will shape how liquidity moves through the crypto economy in the near term.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Crypto World

Vital Support or Value Trap? Decoding ETH’s Next Big Move

Published

on

Vital Support or Value Trap? Decoding ETH’s Next Big Move

Ethereum remains in a broader corrective phase, trading below key moving averages and inside a well-defined descending structure. While short-term stabilization is visible near support, the higher-timeframe trend still favors sellers unless major resistance levels are reclaimed with strong momentum.

Ethereum Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, ETH continues to respect a descending channel, consistently forming lower highs beneath both the 100-day and 200-day moving averages. The recent breakdown accelerated the price into the $1,750–$1,800 demand zone, where buyers have stepped in to slow the decline, but the structure remains bearish overall.

The $2,300–$2,400 region now acts as a key resistance cluster, aligning with prior breakdown levels and just below the declining 100-day moving average. Unless ETH can reclaim that zone and break above the channel’s upper boundary, rallies are likely to be corrective, with the risk of another leg toward lower channel support still present.

ETH/USDT 4-Hour Chart

On the 4H timeframe, the asset has been compressing inside a symmetrical triangle formed from recent lower highs and higher lows, above the $1,800 horizontal support zone. This short-term symmetrical contraction reflects indecision rather than confirmed reversal, as lower highs are still being printed.

Advertisement

A breakout above $2,000–$2,100 highs would be the first signal of a short-term momentum shift and could open a move toward the $2,300-$2,400 resistance band. Conversely, losing the $1,800 base would invalidate the consolidation thesis and likely trigger renewed downside pressure toward deeper support levels.

On-Chain Analysis

Active address data shows a sharp spike in network activity recently, with the 30-day EMA of active addresses surging to multi-month highs. Historically, similar expansions in activity have coincided with periods of heightened volatility and often precede major directional moves.

However, despite the spike in participation, the asset has not yet confirmed a bullish reversal. This divergence suggests that while engagement is rising, capital flows are not decisively pushing prices higher, and might be indicating panic selling at lows by weaker hands. If elevated activity sustains while the price stabilizes, it could form a constructive base. However, a confirmation would require a clear break above key technical resistance levels.

 

Advertisement
SPECIAL OFFER (Exclusive)

Binance Free $600 (CryptoPotato Exclusive): Use this link to register a new account and receive $600 exclusive welcome offer on Binance (full details).

LIMITED OFFER for CryptoPotato readers at Bybit: Use this link to register and open a $500 FREE position on any coin!

Disclaimer: Information found on CryptoPotato is those of writers quoted. It does not represent the opinions of CryptoPotato on whether to buy, sell, or hold any investments. You are advised to conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Use provided information at your own risk. See Disclaimer for more information.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Disagreement Means a DAO Is Healthy: Curve Finance Founder

Published

on

Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance

Disagreements within a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) are a sign of a healthy DAO, according to Dr. Michael Egorov, founder of the decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Curve Finance.

DAOs are a decentralized organizational structure that relies on smart contracts to automate functions and member voting to govern onchain protocols.

Egorov said that both a 2024 governance proposal involving the Curve DAO and the recent dispute involving the Aave DAO illustrate the importance of disagreements to the structure’s vitality. He told Cointelegraph:

“If everyone automatically agrees on something, it feels like people just don’t really care. They vote for whatever comes in, or they don’t participate at all. The first sign of that would be governance apathy, like when people are not voting at all.”

That earlier Curve DAO matter concerned a 2024 governance proposal to provide Swiss Stake AG, the main developer behind the Curve Finance protocol, with a grant valued at about $6.3 million at the time, which drew significant pushback from members of the Curve DAO.

Advertisement
Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance
The 2024 proposal for a grant to Swiss Stake AG. Source: Curve Governance

Egorov noted that the proposal was revised and resubmitted in December 2025, and the redrafted proposal received over 80% turnout from DAO members.

An analysis last year by blockchain development company LamprosTech found that “Voter turnout in most DAOs rarely passes 15%, concentrating decision-making power in the hands of a small, active group.”

Curve token holders lock up their tokens for a long period, which encourages long-term governance engagement, Egorov said.

Egorov said that DAOs represent a new model for human organization that is distinct from a company or a self-sovereign country, but features elements of a sovereign country, including political parties voicing disagreement about how to govern a protocol.

Related: Core technical contributor to cease involvement with Aave DAO

Advertisement

Aave dispute highlights challenges in onchain governance and intellectual property rights 

In December 2025, a governance dispute erupted between Aave Labs, the main development company of Aave products, and the Aave DAO over fees from the integration with DeFi exchange aggregator CoW Swap.

Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance
One member of the Aave DAO raises questions about fees from the CoW Swap integration. Source: Aave Governance

Members of the DAO were critical of the fees from the integration going directly to a wallet controlled by Aave Labs, and the pushback sparked a debate over which entity has rightful control over intellectual property on the DeFi platform.

A proposal was then submitted to the Aave DAO to bring Aave brand assets and intellectual property under the control of the DAO; it ultimately failed to pass.

Legal recognition of DAOs could mitigate governance disputes

DAOs cannot interact with the real world without regulated legal structures, like business entities or bank accounts, and DAO control over intellectual property is a common governance issue, Egorov said.

DAOs are a great fit for governing anything onchain, he said, adding that users should also experiment with DAOs for offchain elements as well, though centralized companies might be a better fit to manage offchain structures.

Advertisement

If DAOs could be legally recognized and interact with the traditional financial world, owning business entities and bank accounts, it could mitigate governance disputes, Egorov said, adding that the legal system has yet to catch up to the latest technology.

Magazine: Real AI use cases in crypto, No. 2: AIs can run DAOs