In addition, there are still some concerns with cards. For example, during the upward phase of card markets, participating in gacha draws was positively expected in value, but now that the market is declining, the expected value of gacha has turned negative, suppressing demand for gacha draws. As a participant myself, I’ve found the current experience of drawing cards to be quite frustrating—I essentially approach it with the expectation of losing everything. Consequently, the token price is also heavily influenced by the card market cycle. Buying at a low point may still be reasonable, but purchasing now requires careful consideration of the card market cycle, unlock schedules, and potential buybacks, making holding quite painful.

Due to the lean team structure with fewer layers of communication, leaks are rare. However, the smaller team size also leads to a moderate constraint on productivity. That’s why Hyperliquid doesn’t follow the Binance model of multiple internal teams competing—where the best-performing one gets promoted. Instead, it’s more like the “pack mentality” @traderjoe725 previously described. Yet, when your product reaches peak excellence, people naturally begin building ecosystem-related tools—wallets and frontends are now independently becoming distribution layers for Hyperliquid. HIP-3 was pioneered by TradeXYZ, and now the staking protocol Kinetiq is building a high-performance Layer 2 on HyperEVM. It’s the classic case of “if you build it, they will come.”

It’s becoming increasingly clear: on one side are highly native assets like BTC and ZEC; on the other are assets deconstructed from the Web2 world, bringing Web2 liquidity into the crypto market—essentially, the capture of native crypto value versus the tokenization of traditional assets. Many have already thoroughly explained RWA-related concepts, such as @bonnazhu’s point that “essentially, crypto is a low-cost financial engineering tool that enables possibilities traditionally difficult to construct.” This is both an advantage and an opportunity—to do what traditional systems cannot. As a practical speculator, you must either fully commit to one side—betting on native crypto assets or on the tokenization of traditional assets—or position yourself in the middle, betting on the infrastructure that connects both sides.

Hyper mode, new highs achieved

By the way, here are my thoughts on solana:Grass7B4RdKfBCjTKgSqnXkqjwiGvQyFbuSCUJr3XXjs, solana:CARDSccUMFKoPRZxt5vt3ksUbxEFEcnZ3H2pd3dKxYjp, and kinetiq:native. Looking back at Grass’s historical price behavior, its sharp spike at TGE was driven by an airdrop flip scheme—tokens were concentrated in the hands of the team, enabling them to pump and dump. The team is fundamentally very tight-fisted and solely focused on maximizing their own gains. Although they previously claimed the project was highly profitable, there was no independent third-party verification, so the market largely didn’t believe them, and few people promoted it. Later, the S2 airdrop distributed USDC instead of GRASS, reducing sell pressure and signaling that the team was preparing to pump. However, this preparation took a long time—likely waiting for a third-party report to validate their revenue. Now that the report has been released and confirmed legitimate income, the price has risen. But the market’s reaction has been slow (possibly because Grass has a poor reputation and trust remains low); the report came out on September 22, but significant price movement didn’t occur until October. Where are we now? If Grass doesn’t transfer its project’s economic value onto the token, this rally is likely over. The only worthwhile move is to wait for clarity on GRASS’s tokenomics and act quickly to capture the next phase of confirmed upside. Beyond that, there’s little else. The team’s actions will always be motivated by pumping and dumping—don’t view this project through a long-term lens. Tokenomics will inevitably be revealed soon; just look at its restless price action—it could be announced any day now. As for CARDS, I’m personally interested, but its token distribution structure is poor, with monthly unlocks. Although CARDS has expanded its narrative into infrastructure and underlying liquidity for collectible cards, I believe its current valuation is already in the overpriced range and not ideal for participation. If a low entry point emerges, it could still be worth considering—but if you do, treat it primarily as a long-term spot hold. Regarding KNTQ, I’ve thought about this project extensively: the team has execution capability and strong social media presence with overseas KOLs supporting it. Elysium is a high-performance scaling solution that complements HyperLiquid Core’s spot and HyperEVM offerings. Another notable point is the vesting schedule: KNTQ unlocks begin on November 27, with monthly vesting and relatively small single unlock amounts. Allocations go to the team (23.5%) and investors (7.5%). Currently, KNTQ’s buyback volume isn’t sufficient to offset this unlocking pressure. However, I don’t believe unlocking is the primary driver of price movement—it’s far more dependent on Elysium’s performance post-launch. Long-term, if Elysium turns out to be another dead chain, there’s no reason to participate. From the team’s incentive perspective, they may hold or even push the price higher before unlocks begin. So holding some KNTQ position now isn’t problematic in my view. My main concerns are: first, overall market conditions; second, the team’s lack of experience operating a public blockchain. That said, their Markets product has been executed well. Also worth watching: Jeff’s and HyperLiquid’s level of support and commitment to Elysium. If you bought at $0.35, maintain a cautious and flexible stance.

Demand for high-performance blockchains still exists, particularly in sectors like PerpDex, AI agents, and payments. These are essentially the same narratives previously promoted by Monad and MegaETH, but none of them achieved a commercial闭环. This is because high performance addresses supply capacity, not demand creation. Yet the demand remains. As a result, new high-performance blockchains will continue to emerge, competing with earlier projects. For example, BNB’s new chain, along with @Kinetiq_xyz and @0xOmnia’s upcoming @Enter_Elysium, are advancing fresh narratives that address the limitations of Hyperliquid’s HyperEVM. At their core, they’re all telling the same story—what differs is the origin of their first wave of real demand. BNB’s new chain leverages its existing brand, user base, and assets to expand outward and capture more demand for high-performance chains. Elysium, by contrast, builds on Hyperliquid’s existing trading demand, aiming to integrate on-chain assets, liquidity, and other financial applications—such as speculate’s HIP-4 and card gacha—into Hyperliquid Core’s spot trading infrastructure. My experience tells me that the first movers rarely succeed. Often, it’s the second wave—those who learn from predecessors’ mistakes—who seize opportunities on validated demand trends and deliver products better aligned with industry and market needs, thereby capturing users and value.

Ethena Pay is a new product launched by Ethena. I’ve always believed that the most important aspect of a stablecoin product isn’t telling a big story, but truly integrating into users’ daily lives—by distributing stablecoins and expanding use cases. Ethena Pay combines earning, spending, and transfers into one platform; users can unlock higher membership tiers by locking up $ENA, gaining rewards of up to 6% and cashback of up to 5%. Next, it will be important to see whether these incentives drive real user adoption and sustained usage, while further fueling value for its token.

Pearl-2:native is already at $2; let’s discuss the derivative opportunities with limited sustainability. First, there’s Near’s solana:8SMMso8Muv8d6i4WmMDthKt6TN1ysN6937sx3DKLXZqB—Rhea’s COO, @aescobar0g, has already started advising to pay attention to PRL. I suspect PRL may soon be listed on Near Intents. If it does, trading will need to go through Rhea’s channel. Capturing attention should be no issue. Second, there are Crypto AI inference-related projects. While not directly related, they may still attract some attention.

Ethereum: 0x0d8775f648430679a709e98d2b0cb6250d2887ef is a ticker that native crypto market participants find acceptable and that external investors can easily understand. 1. I believe BAT’s greatest advantage in this market is that it doesn’t need to prove itself as a successful company again. It has a strong user base, and the outlook for its new products appears stronger than those of similar offerings in the crypto space. A solid user base translates to higher future revenue potential. 2. Since @brave and @AttentionToken began rolling out their roadmap and product details, BAT has been in a state of positive sentiment reversal. I consider it a better candidate than $STRK, as STRK is about to begin unlocking its tokens, whereas BAT is nearly fully diluted. 3. Brave is a privacy-focused browser that aligns with current user preferences and narrative trends. Due to its previously low token positioning, market interest in its token was minimal—until recently, when the market began re-evaluating BAT.

Using BTC as an adjective for projects has become one of the core PR narratives in today’s market. For example, ZEC is called “privacy BTC,” and PRL is called “AI inference BTC.” The project we’re discussing today, Quantus, is also frequently described as “post-quantum BTC.” Since this topic isn’t widely discussed in Chinese-speaking circles, I’ll provide a brief overview. 1. Its current market cap ranges between $30M–$40M. At a price of $130, the fully diluted valuation (FDV) is $2.73B—already a very high valuation. Daily inflation is 2,200 tokens (equating to $286K at $130), and the remaining uncirculated supply decreases linearly by approximately 0.0144% per day. This is a critical premise: if you’re considering buying, you must fully understand the mechanics behind this model. 2. The rise of quantum narratives—amidst $STRK’s strong price performance, the market is now seeking additional quantum-resistant assets. 3. Although Safetrade offers a quantus:native trading pair, liquidity is insufficient. Currently, Near Intents is the only viable entry point for meaningful capital inflows and outflows. Quantus and Near have collaborated on quantum-resistant technology; we can now log into Near Intents (Near’s sole quantum-resistant signature tool) via the Quantus wallet. Their partnership is therefore very tight—Quantus and Near co-hosted an event called “Quantum & Privacy Day” in 2049. In my view, Near needs a new token to drive growth—a token unavailable elsewhere—that can serve as an exchange-like entry point through its Intents product to attract new users. 4. The communities that previously followed and promoted ZEC heavily overlap with those driving Quantus. Quantus appears to be ZEC’s successor. Much of crypto’s activity revolves around炒作 assets based on market attention—and those who control narrative power need to create new stories, new assets, and new hype after ZEC. DYOR