가입 후 초대 링크를 공유하면 동영상 재생 및 초대 보상을 받을 수 있습니다.

Valueverse
@valueverse_ai
Data & Research platform for tokens' value Revenue captured by token holders, and what the market pays for every $1 of it. TG:
가입 July 2024
44 팔로잉 중    2.8K 팬
Comparing results for buyback vs. ve-tokenomics. A small case study comparing two baskets consisting 4 biggest buyback tokens and 3 biggest ve-tokens. Takeaways: 1. The peformance gap "buyback vs. ve" is much smaller that it was stated in the original post: $67 vs $300 -> $81 vs. $139 2. The highest valuation multiples are concentrated in major assets like $HYPE and $UNI. This suggests that market attention and valuation premiums remain heavily concentrated in the largest projects. Ongoing observations: 1. Buybacks outperformed on price returns. $100 invested in each of the four buyback tokens one year ago would be worth $130 on average today (equal-weighted across the group). 2. ve-tokenomics underperformed. The same $100 investment across each of the three ve-tokens would be worth just $72 on average. 3. But price performance doesn't tell the whole story. Both groups generate economic value for token holders beyond price appreciation. 4. To account for this: - Buybacks: we account the reduction in total supply as a kind of an income, since each remaining token represents a larger share of the supply. - ve-tokenomics: we account for revenue claimable by token holders. 5. $HYPE was the strongest price performer. Excluding $HYPE, the buyback group's average ending value drops from $130 to $115. 6. Accounting for accumulated revenue in the position: Buybacks: $130 → $139 ve-tokenomics: $72 → $81 7. $HYPE and $UNI have relatively small supply reductions: just 1.6% and 1.3%, respectively. We calculate these figures against maximum supply (the FDV basis), since buybacks increase the proportional ownership of all remaining tokens. 8. $PUMP and $CAKE burned significantly larger portions of their supply, making their buyback-driven value accrual more substantial. 9. $PUMP and $CAKE trade at roughly the same P/FCFt multiples as $CRV and $PENDLE, around 17x, despite their fundamentally different value accrual mechanisms. 10. $AERO stands out with a P/FCFt below 10x, making it one of the cheapest assets in this comparison on a token-holder revenue basis. All the results are presented at the infographic Source: Valueverse API
더 보기