Over 80% of new coins, including TGE, have reached their peak. The root cause and solution to the Web3 false prosperity lie here.

Original article: Solus Group; Translated by: CryptoLeo

Editor's Note: Recently, analyst Ash stated in a popular post that among the more than 100 new tokens issued in 2025 through Time of Explosion (TGE), 84.7% of the tokens had a lower FDV than at the time of TGE. The median FDV of these tokens was down 71% from their issuance price (median market capitalization down 67%).Only 15% of the tokens saw an increase in FDV compared to their TGE.Overall, most of the new tokens issued in 2025 were at their "TGE peak price". Following this data, I found an even more interesting article (from Solus Group), which also started with project tokens (TGE) and analyzed the price movements of 113 tokens after their TGE in 2025, along with their fundraising status, community activity, and exchange listings. The study found that high fundraising, active communities, and exchange listings—generally considered criteria for evaluating project quality—had little impact on token price movements. Previously, we often used these criteria to select good projects, but in 2025, this project evaluation model had "failed." One set of data is particularly thought-provoking: - Projects trading below their IDO price had an average revenue of $1.36 million. Projects trading at prices higher than their IDO offering price generated an average revenue of $790,000. However, these projects all received venture capital funding, indicating that the market values ​​hype over actual performance, stories over data, and promises over the product itself. Web3 can no longer pretend "everything is fine," and can no longer call bot traffic "growth." Of course, these are only statistical conclusions and not universally applicable. Good projects and large funding rounds still represent the direction of the crypto industry. Odaily Planet Daily translated it as follows: With $2 million in funding, participation from top venture capitalists, 500,000 community followers, and listing on major exchanges, the launch day was a resounding success, with jubilation on Discord and a celebratory atmosphere across social media. In a previous article, we revealed the true nature of the 0.96x ROI: By 2025, the average token will actually die on day one. We proved the system ineffective. Now, we've analyzed 113 token issuance cases since 2025, providing concrete data to prove this—data that most founders dare not face. The results are shocking: large funding rounds are useless, large communities are irrelevant, and every variable you optimize is statistically worthless. But beneath the surface lies something even more distorted, still troubling many founders: Currently, project revenue is a bearish signal; profitable projects' tokens trade at lower prices than unprofitable ones—a dynamic that's a matter of life and death. If we continue to punish the profitable and reward speculators, the entire industry will not survive. Note: Solus Group previously disclosed relevant data, stating that the average return on investment for new TGE project tokens in 2025, calculated from the first day of issuance, was 0.96, meaning that their products were in a loss-making state from day one. Entrepreneur Data Trap: Funding Paradox, High Funding Does Not Equal Token Advantage The correlation between funding and token performance is 0.04, which can be statistically considered zero. Projects that raised $10 million and those that raised $1 million exhibited identical token performance. The chart above demonstrates this—regardless of the funding amount, the distribution of tokens within the range of ROI is random. The best-performing projects were: Myshell, B² Network, Bubblemaps, Mind Network, Particle Network, and Creator.Bid (whose valuation increased 10x to 30x at ATH), raising between $300,000 and $3 million. Meanwhile, projects like Boundless and Analog, which raised over $10 million, only had valuation multiples of around 1x. Current token performance is even worse; regardless of funding size, most tokens have ROIs below 1x. For example, tokens that raised $5 million to $100 million had an ROI of 0.1x to 0.7x (e.g., Fleek, Pipe Network, Sahara AI), the same as tokens from projects with little funding. The fact is: large funding rounds accelerate token death. Projects with minimal funding ($300,000 to $5 million) have higher ROI per dollar raised, execute faster, have lower switching costs, and are less likely to be overwhelmed by quarterly VC token unlocking schedules, where large unlocks can destroy project earnings. If you're chasing $10 million just to "compete," you're preparing for failure. The Myth of Fans: Massive Project Communities Are Just "Paper Tigers" The statistical results are exactly the same for social media accounts with 500,000 followers and those with 50,000 followers. The correlation coefficients are 0.08 (token ATH) and -0.06 (token current status). Data shows that audience size has no predictive value for token performance. Projects with large fan bases exhibit inconsistent performance—some surge, some plummet. The same applies to projects with small audiences; there are no trends, no patterns, and no correlation. Your Discord group is not a community, but a speculative audience waiting to leave. The reality is: price determines community growth, not the other way around. When prices plummet, followers disappear. The chart proves this—the lower left quadrant (decreasing followers + price drop) is very dense. When prices surge, followers sometimes increase, but it's not consistent. This means: Your "active community" never truly focuses on the product—they focus on the token's price movement. Once a token's performance disappoints, it disappears; community growth is a lagging indicator, not a leading one. This isn't just theory, but a publicly stated view by @belizardd (researcher, trader/KOL): Most people come here purely for speculation, not for the product itself. We've found very few protocols performing well after TGE, and those with low initial token FDV, small fundraising amounts, and generous airdrops are the main ones. Frankly, I won't blindly invest in anything now. The risk/reward isn't worthwhile; I'm just waiting for the market to improve. Speculators know the game is broken. They're taking a wait-and-see approach. Meanwhile, the founders are consistently pouring 60% of the budget into Discord bots, Twitter giveaways, and KOL promotions—burning money on statistically insignificant metrics. The real question is: "If the token crashes by 50% tomorrow, how many people will stay?" The answer: almost none.

Token Price Traps: Beware of Overpricing/Underpricing

Median ROI based on token listing price:

Below $0.01: 0.1x (90% loss)

$0.01 to $0.05: 0.8x (survival zone)

$0.05 to $0.50: 0.5x (50% loss)

Above $0.50: 0.09x (91% loss)

To reiterate:

An offering price below $0.01 doesn't make your token "easier to buy," it just makes it seem like a cheap coin that attracts profit-driven capital; they rise quickly and fall quickly.

A pricing above $0.50 doesn't make your token a "premium token," it just makes it seem overpriced. Excessively high token prices stifle the retail market, and even whales won't buy in.

The $0.01 to $0.05 price range is the only viable pricing range for tokens; it's high enough to justify the project's legitimacy, yet low enough to allow for upside potential. Within this price range, only 42 out of 97 projects had a positive median performance for their tokens. If your token economics model values ​​your token at $0.003 or $1.20, stop rebuilding your model; the data indicates your project has failed. Industry Status Quo: 2021-Style Construction Ceases. Losers: Gaming. Average ATH ROI: 4.46x (Minimum). Median Current ROI: 0.52x. GameFi tokens are like lottery tickets; play once, then forget about them forever. The Trap: DeFi Average ATH ROI: 5.09x (Looks good) Median Current ROI: 0.2x (Catastrophic) DeFi experienced an early price surge followed by a crash larger than any other sector, highlighting the stark contrast between hype and reality. Winner: AI Average ATH ROI: 5.99x (Highest Gain) Median Current ROI: 0.70x (Best Retention Rate) The AI ​​token price surged and remained stable. This trend is sustainable, attracting a flood of funds. If you're developing GameFi, your execution needs to be 10 times better than average to achieve average results. If you're in DeFi, be prepared for rapid rises and falls. If you're in AI, the market will give you opportunities, but only if you can deliver results. The requirements are even more stringent in the infrastructure sector: you'll consume more time and resources compared to standard decentralized applications (such as AI agents), but your current median ROI is slightly lower than that of the much-anticipated GameFi sector. The data doesn't care about the projects you're interested in.

IDO/IEO Data Overview: A Good Platform Can't Save a Project

You spend months building connections just to get a seat on Binance Launchpad or a Level 1 IDO allocation,You thought that passing the platform's screening meant you were protected. The data shows otherwise.

You spend months building connections just to get a seat on Binance Launchpad or a Level 1 IDO allocation,You thought that passing the platform's screening meant you were protected. The data, however, shows that this is not the case.

IDO Platforms: Almost All Projects are Losing Money. Only one project achieved a return of +14.6% across the five IDO platforms, and that's it. All other projects had returns between -70% and -93%. The so-called "premium Launchpad" offered no protection for buyers, only a way to lose money. IEO Platforms: The Ultimate Demonstration of Survival Bias. Binance Wallet shows a yield of 11x. It seems incredible, but with only three issuances, the sample size is too small. MEXC showed a return of +122.8% across 14 issuances—a larger sample size, but still an outlier. All other projects? Poor performance. Bybit's IEO token lost 38%, with other projects losing even more. This proves that: Platform selection is like a lottery with a better brand. The victory of a few outliers distorts the average, and with a large number of tokens declining after issuance, the "curatorial services" you pay—whether through relationships, listing fees, or token allocation—do not reliably protect token ROI. Platforms cannot save junk tokens, nor can they help good ones. Reflecting on 2025, Looking Ahead to 2026 Project development based on 2025 failed at every level. Layer Zero: The Foundation Problem: "Guess-Based Token Economics." Unrestrained dumping of tokens into an illiquid market without an organic revenue model to absorb shocks. First Layer: Financing The problem lies in: "Editing on the PDF first, then processing it." Second Layer: Marketing The problem: The KOL model, where paid online followers disappear once the payment stops. Third Layer: Liquidity The problem: The assumption that liquidity increases with hype is incorrect; institutional investors wait for evidence. Layer Four: User Retention The Problem: Zero-Retention Infrastructure. The "project community" consists of 10,000 Telegram users who will abandon you within 90 days. Don't play the old game in 2026. Behind all this lies a deeper issue: while infrastructure is indeed important, even with perfect infrastructure, timing is everything. As Ivan Paskar (Head of Growth at Altius Labs) said: Tokens don't fix broken things—they amplify reality. Right timing = increased momentum. Wrong timing = years of effort wiped out instantly. Most teams don't fail because of their token design; they fail because they misjudge the stage and the macro environment. Timing isn't a detail; it determines everything. Survival isn't about following the old script, but about building a new one. 1. Careful Design Projects targeting $300,000 to $5 million with the highest ROI per dollar are here. More money = more problems. 2. Cost of Survival: The initial offering price should be between $0.01 and $0.05. Other prices are unlikely to survive. If your token's economics doesn't fall within this range, there's something wrong with it. 3. Product First, Token Second: If you can't explain why your token exists in a single sentence, then it doesn't exist. Profitability comes before speculation. 4. Ignore Vanity Metrics: The number of followers is a distraction; wallet activity, retention rate, and revenue per user are the key metrics. 5. Industry Realism Before writing code, understand the failure rate of your industry. GameFi needs twice the execution efficiency to break even. AI has a tailwind—as long as you can deliver results. 6. Integrate or Die The era of mergers and acquisitions is coming. If you can't expand independently, find an acquirer. Acquisitions are not failures, but wise moves. These six principles are important. But the truth is: standard scripts are outdated, and there is no longer a standard pattern that works for everyone.