Why higher initial market caps = weaker token performance?

Here’s the math:
If your token launches with a $1M IMC, it’ll perform ~1.37% better than the same token launched at a $2.7M IMC.

So if you go from $1M to $10M IMC, your early performance could drop by ~4–5% purely because of launch size.

Every extra dollar of IMC adds friction to post-TGE performance.

Read more

Don't over-optimize insider share, other than maybe for optics.

Our report showed that there is no clear correlation between higher or lower insider allocations and token price success.

Learn more

Your ad copy needs to clearly say what the user gets, why it matters, and what they should do next.

❌ Left example
What’s wrong with it?

- Doesn’t tell the user what you’re offering
- No reason to care
- No clear next step
- Could be literally any project

✅ Right example
Why it works:

- Tells you what you get: staking rewards + early access
- Tells you why it matters: real yield + governance rights
- Tells you what to do next: stake now, and it’s easy

If you need quality ads for your project, dm @Alex_Simplicity

Your content should match your team's personality

That's what we learned from the best-performing projects in 2025. If the founding team is serious, your Twitter should be serious. If you're degens, lean into it.

Walrus, despite being a heavy infrastructure project with $140M backing, leaned into humour authentically and saw its token jump 357% one month after TGE (still +192% since).

Hyperlane went the other way. Their posts avoided hype and stuck to matter-of-fact updates only, which aligned with their brand the most.

HYPER shot up by 533% in the first week post launch, evidencing that merely posting playful / high energy posts isn’t indicative of community perception of the project’s token.

Why you shouldn't over-optimize token unlocks

Our research analyzed 40 token launches and tested this hypothesis.

Here’s what we found:

- No statistical relationship between how fast a token unlocks and its price performance.

- Whether a project unlocked more or less than the median, there was no significant difference in returns (p = 0.299).

- Even after removing outliers and using robust regression models, the effect remained statistically irrelevant.

Some fast-unlocking tokens performed better than slow ones but the difference was not reliable or consistent.

What does it mean?
Trying to micromanage unlock schedules for price control is largely pointless.

What drives price is what those tokens represent.

Read more

Despite $13.5B burned since 2021, Ethereum’s supply is still growing at +0.8% per year

The pump and ETH burn has been great, but issuance continues.


ETH is up 40%+ the last month, crossing $3,600 (bullish)

Since 2021, Ethereum has burned 4.6M ETH worth ~$13.5B (extra bullish)

But here’s a core fact that most ignore and is why ETH supply is growing despite the burn:


Scarcity depends on network activity:

→ High fees = deflationary ETH

→ Low fees = supply grows

It’s dynamic, not fixed.


But network activity is high, why aren’t fees high too?

Because of:

→ Dencun upgrade (lowered L1 transaction fees)

→ L2 activity inherently shifting volume (and fees) off the mainnet

This is why ETH isn’t deflationary today, but was in periods of lower activity levels.


→ High activity = more fees burned = deflation

But also consider: high activity = more txns. processed = more validator rewards = more ETH issued


ETH supply growth depends on which side outweighs the other = why supply doesn't automatically shrink just with high activity