A certain token with a market cap of only $388 million has appeared on the ETF application lists of multiple mainstream exchanges, forming a stark contrast to TRX's $26 billion and HYPE's $6 billion. More intriguingly, 1.1 billion tokens are staked, accounting for 23% of the circulating supply. What signals does this reveal?
Either the institutional review team has a serious misjudgment of market pricing, or these large stakers possess information that the market has not yet digested. Especially when some top investment institutions continue to increase their staking exposure, the market is often facing a mispricing at a level of 69 times — and such mismatches rarely correct themselves without a major catalyst. Data does not lie; the real money voting by institutions is often more worth paying attention to than market consensus.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasWaster
· 9h ago
Wait, with a market cap of only 388 million, how many more ETFs can there be? Do institutions really know what they're doing, or are they just playing around?
Institutions are pouring money to pledge 23% of the liquidity. Either they see something we can't see, or it's collective hallucination. The 69x mispricing claim is outrageous, but it's definitely worth keeping an eye on.
View OriginalReply0
QuietlyStaking
· 2025-12-31 15:56
Hmm... 1.1 billion tokens staked, 23% liquidity. These numbers are a bit outrageous.
---
Do institutions really understand better than retail investors? I doubt it, but their money definitely talks.
---
Wait, a market cap of only 388 million can apply for an ETF? I find this logic hard to accept.
---
Such a high staking ratio... either genuine belief or laying a trap, no middle ground, right?
---
What sounds good is mispricing; what sounds bad is information asymmetry. Retail investors will always be the last to take the fall.
---
69 times? I don't believe it, but I'm still watching.
---
I want to see which top institutions are increasing their staking; if they reveal their names, I’ll believe it.
---
Wow, more institutional real money voting... Why do I keep hearing this kind of rhetoric?
---
A high staking rate is actually more suspicious. Think in the opposite way.
---
Is the ETF list so chaotic? Can small-cap projects even get on?
View OriginalReply0
LuckyBlindCat
· 2025-12-31 15:54
Institutions really know something we don't, right... 1.1 billion tokens staked with 23% liquidity, this number is pretty intense.
View OriginalReply0
Web3Educator
· 2025-12-31 15:37
nah institutions don't just lock up 1.1b tokens for fun... something's cooking here fr fr
Reply0
quietly_staking
· 2025-12-31 15:33
This guy must really be hiding some inside information in the staking, otherwise how could so many institutions be watching at the same time?
Large institutional staking is like speaking out; it's more effective than shouting until your throat is sore.
With a market cap of 388 million and this kind of display, something does seem off... Let's wait and see.
A certain token with a market cap of only $388 million has appeared on the ETF application lists of multiple mainstream exchanges, forming a stark contrast to TRX's $26 billion and HYPE's $6 billion. More intriguingly, 1.1 billion tokens are staked, accounting for 23% of the circulating supply. What signals does this reveal?
Either the institutional review team has a serious misjudgment of market pricing, or these large stakers possess information that the market has not yet digested. Especially when some top investment institutions continue to increase their staking exposure, the market is often facing a mispricing at a level of 69 times — and such mismatches rarely correct themselves without a major catalyst. Data does not lie; the real money voting by institutions is often more worth paying attention to than market consensus.