2026-01-12 21:22:47

Everyone who has been deeply involved in the Web3 storage track understands one principle: no matter how good the theory is, without practical testing, it’s just empty talk. I have studied the commercial paths of dozens of storage projects, seen many projects with dazzling technical indicators but mediocre execution capabilities, and also encountered a few dark horses that seem insignificant but can precisely meet market demands. Walrus belongs to this category.

When this project was launched, it came with a halo—incubated by Mysten Labs, $140 million in private funding (with a strong lineup of institutional investors), and a $2 billion valuation. But I didn’t follow the trend blindly; instead, I spent over two months verifying through actual testing: is it just good marketing, or does it really have solid skills? I examined it from multiple dimensions such as technical benchmarking, real-world cases, and ecological resource integration, analyzing the entire process from cold start to commercial realization.

After more than two months of in-depth validation, I summarized the implementation approach of the Walrus project team. Its winning strategy doesn’t lie in extreme optimization of a certain technical parameter, but in accurately understanding three key issues: what the track lacks, what ecological resources can provide, and what real application scenarios need. Based on these insights, it has built a cyclical system—technology designed around scenarios, ecological resources enabling deployment, and commercial feedback driving product iteration.

Every decision made by the project team reflects strong practical rationality. They don’t pursue parameters that seem aggressive on the surface but focus on genuine user pain points; they don’t develop independently behind closed doors but leverage existing ecological resources for rapid deployment; they’re not eager for short-term gains but invest effort in building long-term competitive barriers. This pragmatic approach is actually rare in Web3 projects.

My observations are based on actual test data, retrospective case reviews, and industry experience accumulation. From technical adaptation logic, ecological empowerment details, to business monetization models, every step of this project is worth referencing for participants in the storage track.

WAL-2,01%

View Original

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NewPumpamentals

· 01-15 20:15

Wow, over two months to develop a pragmatic boy, this is really rare in Web3. To be honest, what I value most about Walrus's practical implementation is that it’s not just hype. There are too many parameters, and only a few can truly solve pain points. So, will there be follow-up? Or is it just for observation? This cycle system sounds good, but whether it can withstand future market competition is the key. Do you have specific data on technical benchmarks? I feel like the argument has been overdone; it looks more like a post-hoc analysis... Spending over two months on this, but I actually want to know more about user retention.

View OriginalReply0

ColdWalletGuardian

· 01-15 00:53

It took two months of in-depth testing before I dared to draw a conclusion, and I approve of this attitude. There are indeed too many theoretical discussions in the storage track. If you really see Walrus as a dark horse, there's still some gambling element involved. Many projects look good based on technical indicators, but the key is whether the ecosystem can support it. It's rare to not rush to realize profits; most are eager to raise funds tomorrow. It sounds logically consistent, but can it really be so smooth in practice? I have my doubts. This "Three Questions" framework is actually quite versatile and can be used beyond storage. How is the actual testing data? What level of performance do the specific benchmarks show? A pragmatic approach is indeed rare, but surviving in a bear market is the real skill.

View OriginalReply0

MoonMathMagic

· 01-12 21:52

It takes two months to verify before speaking well, I have to give credit for this attitude. Walrus is indeed a bit different, not just a pile of parameters. The ecological collaboration is solidly done, this is what makes a winner. Another project that has been hyped up by marketing, we'll see how it performs after half a year. This approach can indeed be learned, but how many can truly execute it?

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunter007

· 01-12 21:37

More than two months to verify a project, how idle must that be haha --- Is Walrus reliable? I'll wait until after I have dinner to decide --- It's Mysten Labs again, this one has never had a project fail --- Actually testing for over two months isn't as appealing as a one-month airdrop --- It's a good way to sound impressive, but ultimately it depends on how much you can earn in the end --- The true dark horse in the storage track has long been eaten up by institutions --- Is it another PPT project? The hype is quite convincing --- Sounds like a soft promotion for Walrus, but I want to see the data --- I don't care if the parameters are aggressive or not, I only care whether it can rise when listed on exchanges --- This pragmatic approach is indeed rare, but rarity doesn't necessarily mean profit

View OriginalReply0

InscriptionGriller

· 01-12 21:31

Two months of real-world testing? Not bad, much more reliable than those who just glance at a white paper and shout buy. Wait, are these fundraising numbers real? Feels like a $2 billion valuation is hard to believe even when it's just mentioned now. Mysten's incubation definitely adds points, but the gap between Web3 theory and practical implementation... I've seen too many. However, projects that are "not rushing to cut profits to build barriers" are indeed rare. If it's played like this, it might have some potential. Dazzling technical indicators but poor execution—this description is basically a self-portrait of 50% of projects in the crypto space. Why can ecosystem resources empower? They say it so smoothly, but in reality, everyone is just doing their own thing. The three-question logic sounds great but needs to be verified for credibility. Let's see if it's dead or alive in half a year. What about actual testing data? Show the on-chain addresses—no matter how much you boast, everyone can do that. The storage track is inherently a death spiral of technical competition. I still have doubts about how Walrus will break through.

View OriginalReply0

PaperHandSister

· 01-12 21:30

Validate over two months, not blindly following the trend—that's the proper way to do research. Someone is actually digging into real data, unlike some projects that just hype up parameters all day. Walrus's approach is indeed different; they haven't been brainwashed by funding scale. Instead, they focus on scenario needs. It would be great if our crypto circle had more of this rational thinking.

View OriginalReply0

SatsStacking

· 01-12 21:26

Really? Over two months of real-world testing, not just bragging based on the white paper... Walrus might have actually found some tricks this time. This set of logic sounds reasonable, but how many projects can actually stick with it? The 2 billion valuation is still a bit uncertain; we'll see how it unfolds later. However, Mysten's team has a really good eye for selecting projects; they might have bet on the right one this time.

View OriginalReply0

EntryPositionAnalyst

· 01-12 21:24

It took more than two months of verification before I dared to draw a conclusion. I respect this attitude. Walrus indeed doesn't rely on hype about parameters; it relies on a true understanding of scene requirements. But on the other hand, why are such pragmatic types so scarce in Web3... It seems that Mysten Labs' selection of projects this time is quite insightful, not driven by fundraising amounts. A storage project that can integrate ecological resources so thoroughly is definitely worth watching. I'd like to ask if you've encountered any pitfalls during the actual testing process? This cycle system sounds great, but will the implementation be compromised? Compared to projects with explosive parameters, this somewhat "boring" approach is actually more reliable. Long-term barriers are the real key; projects that seek quick gains will be filtered out by time.

View OriginalReply0