➥ liquid staking on hyperliquid: over $1.1b in tvl as a $HYPE holder, i've been looking for ways to earn more yield on my holdings, and liquid staking is one sector i'm paying closer attention to. most ppl know hyperliquid for perps, but its defi ecosystem is expanding too. liquid staking allows users to earn staking rewards while keeping their capital available for lending, borrowing and other defi strategies. here are 3 projects i've been looking into, ranked by tvl: [1] @Kinetiq_xyz | $901.7m tvl - staking apy: 1.95% - 30d fees: ~$1.58m - 30d protocol revenue: ~$158k the largest player with over 80% market share. its kHYPE is integrated across defi, while kinetiq:native has a buyback mechanism funded by performance fees. [2] @stakedhype | $200.9m tvl - staking apy: 1.97% - total staked: 2.29m HYPE - holders: 36,491 the second-largest protocol, associated with @ValantisLabs, offering liquid staking through stHYPE. [3] @hyperbeat | ~$13.9m tvl - staking apy: 1.55% - total staked: ~163k HYPE - holders: ~9.2k offers beHYPE, developed with @ether_fi, with potential utility across HyperEVM defi. kinetiq and stHYPE currently dominate the liquid staking market on hyperliquid. i think the next opportunity could come from wider lst adoption across lending markets and yield strategies. i'm still holding $HYPE, with kinetiq:native on my watchlist. but tvl growth alone isn't enough to justify a token investment. revenue, buybacks and valuation matter too.

I think this is a good time to accumulate more $ETH looking at the ETH/BTC chart, ETH is currently trading around 0.029 BTC, right at a major accumulation zone that has been tested multiple times. historically, ETH has gone through similar periods of underperformance against BTC before recovering strongly. ofc, history doesn't guarantee the same outcome, but I think the current risk/reward is worth paying attention to. btw, many people keep saying $ETH is a dead chain. but I strongly believe Ethereum is here to stay. Just look at the numbers: – $44.5B in DeFi TVL – $141.8B in stablecoin supply – ~$13B in RWA active AUM – 36.1% of ETH supply staked – ~2M daily transactions – ~$5.1M in daily app revenue these numbers tell me that Ethereum still has a massive ecosystem with real users, capital, and economic activity. I've already accumulated more $ETH, and I'm comfortable holding it for the long term. Keep conviction on $ETH. nfa.

Gm, Elysium mainnet is getting closer, and I'm paying more attention to early launchpads building in the ecosystem. Here are 7 projects worth watching: [1] $KLEOS | @TheKleos_ 33.33% of creator rewards go toward buybacks & burns. The founder reported burning 7.47% of total supply, while $KLEOS staking is designed to distribute 40% of token trading fees to stakers in $HYPE. [2] ethereum:0x0b010000b7624eb9b3dfbc279673c76e9d29d5f7 | @obolworld An early Elysium launchpad play I've already bought into. I entered around $120K MC and I'm watching how the project develops ahead of mainnet. [3] $BOXA | @Boxa_Elysium A launchpad with custom fees, holder rewards and buyback & burn. The team reported 28.2M $BOXA burned, equivalent to 2.82% of total supply. The platform also reported 1,937 wallets and over 10K transactions. [4] $ELYSP | @ElysiumPump One of the earliest launchpads on Elysium, now with Uniswap v4 pools, custom fees in HYPE, holder rewards and buyback & burn. Also building cross-chain one-click buys and a non-custodial HYPE OTC service. [5] $STOCKIUM | @Stockium Combining memecoins with tokenized stocks like NVDA, SPY and QQQ. Features include custom tax allocation, holder rewards and stock-paired launches. The team reported 65.42M $STOCKIUM burned (6.54% of supply), with around 171 HYPE spent on Elysium buybacks. [6] $EOS | @eleosfun A launchpad with 4 modes: classic, taxed, stocks and vows. Holders can earn HYPE from trading taxes, liquidity is permanently locked, and creators can only reduce token taxes after launch. [7] $ELYXA | @elyxa_trade An all-in-one launchpad and trading terminal for Elysium. The team says 100% of protocol fees go toward buyback & burn, with over 10% of $ELYXA supply reportedly burned. Also developing Synapse, a feature for launching tokens directly from tweets. I think early launchpads could benefit if Elysium attracts enough liquidity and onchain activity. But I'd pay more attention to actual users, trading volume, protocol revenue and sustainable buybacks than market cap alone. NFA.

quick update on ethereum:0x0b010000b7624eb9b3dfbc279673c76e9d29d5f7 | @obolworld i bought my first bag yesterday, and it's now trading around $400k MC. pretty good start! but i think the bigger opportunity is still ahead, with @Enter_Elysium mainnet scheduled for November 9. as a $HYPE holder, i'm still betting on early projects building around the Hyperliquid ecosystem. [1] Obol is positioning itself as a launchpad on Elysium, with a 1% trading fee model that benefits holders, creators, or funds perps positions. [2] with perps integrated from day one, i think Obol has a chance to attract more attention as Elysium grows. ofc, $400K MC is still early, but also highly speculative. the real test will be adoption and trading volume after mainnet. i'm still holding my bag and watching closely. ofc, nfa

basically, i see 2 possible scenarios for $BTC rn. [1] $75k-$77k: the daily EMA200 support zone. i consider this my GOLD buying zone. [2] $68k-$70k: the weekly EMA50 support zone. if we get there, i'd consider it my DIAMOND buying zone. my strategy: allocate some capital at current levels and keep some dry powder for $68K-$70K if it happens. trying to catch the exact bottom is extremely difficult, so i'd rather accumulate gradually than wait for the perfect entry. my watchlist: $ETH $HYPE $NEAR $TAO $UNI $PENDLE already bought: $ETH $HYPE $NEAR ofc, nfa. stick to your own plan.

➥ Hyperliquid as the onchain pricing layer for global assets i recently bought more $HYPE, and one of the main reasons is the growing opportunity i see beyond crypto perp trading. Watching @entropyIO, @tradeparagon, and @papertrade_xyz develop here has made me more interested in what @HyperliquidX enables builders to create. The expansion now includes public equities, private companies, commodities, indices, and entirely different trading models. Here's why i think this matters for my $HYPE investment thesis. [1] @entropyIO is one of the launches I find most interesting. Its Anthropic pre-IPO market gives traders continuous price exposure to a company that has no publicly traded stock. Alongside equity markets like SanDisk, it brings financial assets with very different pricing conditions onto Hyperliquid. RedStone supplies the external references used alongside Entropy's own market liquidity. Private-company valuations usually update around funding rounds and occasional secondary transactions. A continuously traded market lets investors react to new information immediately. [2] @tradeparagon adds another reason to pay attention. Its markets span crypto indices, equities, and rates. Giving traders more direct ways to express a view on the broader market, with published methodologies they can inspect. That expands what users can actually do with capital already inside the ecosystem. [3] @papertrade_xyz shows how much room there is for different trading models, too. ~$65.9M in TVL and $37.4M in cumulative distributions to PAPER stakers within just 1 week after launch. Its synthetic perps offer up to 1,000x leverage, with traders taking positions against a protocol-owned pool using Hyperliquid prices. What interests me is the economics behind that activity. Papertrade's staker distributions include fees and surplus pool profits. That makes trader outcomes central to the revenue model. I want to see whether participation and payouts remain healthy after the launch rush. [4] @eqxlabs brings share-backed spot markets into the picture. Its first 11 planned markets include SPY, QQQ, NVDA, and AAPL, with 24/7 trading on HyperCore's native spot order book. EQX says the tokens will be backed 1:1 by underlying shares, with dividends reinvested and no added issuer fees. That gives users another way to hold a share-backed spot token alongside the ecosystem's perpetual markets. These tokens are legally issuer debt instruments backed by shares, and direct redemption is reserved for authorized participants. [5] @tradexyz already demonstrates the scale available for global-asset markets. $59.38B traded in Sept, or 23.9% of Hyperliquid's total perp volume, with stocks, commodities, and equity indices dominating its activity. The builder incentives are a big part of why I think this expansion can continue. HIP-3 market operators can retain up to 50% of trading fees. That gives teams a direct business model for bringing useful markets onto Hyperliquid. Higher standard fees can support builder revenue, but many eligible markets use growth mode, which sharply reduces trading costs. For example, XYZ's base-tier taker fee falls from 0.09% to 0.009% under growth mode. Builders need enough recurring activity to cover liquidity support, data, and operations at those lower rates. I'm watching open-interest caps for the same reason. HIP-3 caps outstanding exposure at both market and DEX level. Increasing capacity can accommodate demand, but the liquidity and liquidation systems need to support larger positions. Compared with an exchange focused entirely on crypto perps, I think equities, indices, and commodities offer more independent reasons for users to return. Earnings, rate decisions, and supply shocks keep creating trades, even when crypto has little happening. @Lighter_xyz, @Aster_DEX, and @variational_io keep the competitive pressure high. Execution quality and total trading cost will matter increasingly as access becomes more common. For $HYPE, I'm separating ecosystem growth from direct value accrual. HIP-3 DEX deployers currently need to stake 500,000 HYPE, while the Assistance Fund converts trading fees into HYPE that is burned. Papertrade's distributions accrue to PAPER stakers; they don't automatically become HYPE buybacks. Discounted HIP-3 volume also produces less revenue per dollar traded. More assets attracting demand, builders earning from useful products, and protocol revenue supporting HYPE. That's the long-term thesis behind my recent $HYPE purchase. I believe Hyperliquid has the potential to capture a much broader market than crypto perps alone. But what matters next is whether that expansion translates into sustainable volume, revenue, and real demand for HYPE. I've already increased my exposure, and i'll be watching how this ecosystem develops. NFA.

when was the last time you got a token from a real cashflowing business at a $30m fdv? few hours left on the $1WIN token sale and it's already 5.4x oversub fyi: @1win has been shipped around since ~2016 and already did ~$376M GGR in Brazil alone in 2024, #1 in that market and tday is the last day to get in the $1WIN sale at $30m fdv $0.03/token, 130M tokens in the sale 100% unlocked at TGE, no vesting buybacks funded by gaming revenue + 10% burn on $1WIN spent in-product for context ethereum:0x046eee2cc3188071c02bfc1745a6b17c656e3f3d sits ~$116m fdv and ethereum:0x8881562783028f5c1bcb985d2283d5e170d88888 ~$416m. so $1WIN is coming in at ~1/4 of rollbit and 1/14 of shuffle $13M+ already committed (3.5x oversubscribed) and the last hours usually get crowded, imo. so you in or fading it? i’m already in, but nfa!

just to clarify something about my shopping list. the reason i haven't bought $TAO, $UNI, or $PENDLE yet isn't because i think they're bad investments. i still see long-term potential in all of them. but rn, my priority is optimizing my portfolio rather than holding too many tokens at once. i'd rather focus my capital on a few high-conviction positions that i can actively manage and understand well. ofc, you can still accumulate those tokens if they fit your own strategy and risk tolerance. we don't need to hold the exact same portfolio to make money in this market. sometimes, fewer positions mean better decisions. just focus on: $ETH $HYPE and $NEAR rn

Stocks down, crypto down, gold down, silver down... When everything is bleeding, what should we do? we've seen similar situations in 2008, 2020, and 2022. Different causes, but liquidity played a key role in each. Personally, here's my approach: [1] Keep cash and stablecoins. Don't rush to go all-in. I've deployed around 40% of my portfolio so far. [2] Focus on high-conviction assets like $BTC, $ETH, $HYPE, $NEAR, $TAO, and $PENDLE. [3] Avoid leverage. Surviving matters more than catching the exact bottom. [4] DCA gradually. Always leave room for another dip. [5] Watch macro conditions, especially Fed policy, inflation, and liquidity. I believe opportunities will always come back. The key is having enough capital to take advantage of them. Patience is also a position.

Crypto Enters the Era of Value Investing I’m getting more interested in tokens I can value using the money their protocols actually earn. Crypto now has businesses with paying users, recurring revenue, and mechanisms that return part of that revenue to the token. That gives me a much stronger reason to research something beyond its next catalyst. Zeneca’s latest research estimates annual spending on token buybacks and burns grew from $190M in 2021 to $1.85B in the year to Oct 2026. Coverage has expanded, but the scale is still worth paying attention to. So I believe we’re getting more opportunities to price a token against measurable demand funded by its own business. From a macro perspective, I still care about liquidity, rates, and risk appetite. Those conditions affect what investors are willing to pay. But I also want to understand what can sustain demand for a token when fresh speculative money slows down. A protocol earning money from customers and consistently buying its token gives me something concrete to evaluate. Hyperliquid is a clear example, its Assistance Fund converts trading fees into HYPE, and those tokens are burned. Usage creates a direct source of token demand. Pendle offers a different model: 80% of V2 yield and swap fees fund PENDLE buybacks, with repurchased tokens distributed to eligible active sPENDLE holders. That rewards participation, but has different supply effects from a permanent burn. I can be bullish on a protocol and still pass on its token. The product might be growing while most of the economics go to liquidity providers, the team, or the treasury. Fees, protocol revenue, and value returned to holders are separate numbers. So I’m paying closer attention to: → Revenue that holds up after incentives decline. → The amount actually reaching holders. → Buybacks relative to emissions and upcoming unlocks. → The growth already assumed by today’s valuation. If a token’s price halves while its dollar buyback budget stays unchanged, that budget can purchase twice as many tokens. For a business that keeps earning and burning, a drawdown can make each dollar of buybacks more effective. The difficult part is checking whether the revenue will hold up. Annualizing one exceptional trading week can make an expensive token look cheap. I think some of the best research opportunities are finding protocols whose earnings are more durable than their valuation suggests. I’m ranking conviction in the business and token mechanics; valuation still determines whether I’d buy. [1] $HYPE - Trading fees flowing through Hyperliquid’s Assistance Fund buy HYPE & burned. [2] $PENDLE - 80% of V2 yield and swap fees fund buybacks distributed to eligible active sPENDLE holders. [3] $SKY - Protocol surplus funds SKY purchases for burns or staking rewards, with new emissions disabled. [4] $RAY - 12% of pool trading fees fund RAY buybacks + trading activity and competition determining how durable those purchases are. [5] $PUMP - Its current program commits 50% of revenue to buybacks and burns for one year from April 2026. [6] $PONS - Its published V1 model directs 80% of protocol fees into PONS buybacks and burns. [7] $STONK - StonkFun has measurable spending on STONK purchases. But the recent revenue slowdown makes me cautious about projecting last month’s earnings forward. PONS and STONK are particularly interesting research candidates because small valuations and meaningful buybacks can coexist. The opportunity depends on how much revenue survives when activity cools. A low multiple calculated during a launch frenzy can disappear quickly if earnings fall faster than the token price. For anyone who wants to research this themselves, this i the quick calculation: Buyback multiple = market cap ÷ annual spending on token buybacks. A $1B token receiving $50M in annual buybacks trades at 20× that spending. I’d also check FDV and future supply, then recalculate using quieter periods. Tools that make this easier: - @DefiLlama: compare revenue and holder revenue across 7-, 30-, and 90-day periods. Read each protocol’s methodology. - @coingecko: check market cap, FDV, supply, and trading markets. - @Tokenomist_ai: check available unlock and emissions schedules. - @solscanofficial / @blockscout: verify purchases, burns, supply, and treasury movements. The setup that excites me is a growing business, meaningful value reaching its token, and a price that still underestimates both. That gives me a thesis I can track, update, and build conviction around.