Pareto Rule for data is 99-1: - 1% of onchain data helps you to make money (with proper interpretation) - 99% of it doesn’t lead to valuable decisions but everyone tries to build it. Our business is 1%. Others can spend time for 99%

Hype gets attention. Fundamentals build durable businesses. Join today's @Genzio Space featuring our founder @vasily_sumanov alongside other builders and investors, sharing perspectives on separating signal from noise.

What happens if we value $HYPE against the supply that is actually exposed to its fundamentals? / Not just the liquid float / On this basis: buybacks are priced at roughly >150× annual revenue. The logic is simple: buybacks and burns should be measured against the entire supply they enrich. Locked tokens benefit from supply reduction just as much as liquid tokens do. Illiquidity affects the ability to sell, not the amount of value accrued. Revenue sources analyzed: 1. Buyback & burn (most known) 2. Staking yield (it's also holders revenue even if it is an expense for the protocol) 3. HyperEVM/HyperCore $HYPE burns and 4 = 2+3 Additional utility such as tiered discounts for stakers and buying something like tickers with $HYPE are not included here. In supply, everything is counted incl. team tokens, foundation, community grant, and future emissions that de-facto exist as tokens onchain. The fact that team tokens cannot currently be sold and staked in validators does not change the fact that they receive the full scope of $HYPE’s value accrual.

Token holders could programmatically own revenue flows of a business. It's not just ERC20 for $HYPE $CRV $AERO $YB etc. There is a code, this code shares revenue with holders. For truly programmatic value accrual "disabling buybacks" (how it sounds, lol!) should be impossible.