MetaDAO's first ICO failure analysis: When enthusiasm wanes, value and timing face a dual test

This highly anticipated public fundraising event unexpectedly failed, revealing that investors are becoming more rational and cautious in the current market environment.

When project valuations are mismatched with market sentiment, even in popular ecosystems, failure is unavoidable. Hurupay’s setback was not accidental; it occurred at a critical juncture: according to Delphi Digital’s report, by early 2026, bearish market sentiment had already dominated the cryptocurrency space.

Meanwhile, the ICO model is making a strong comeback with a greater emphasis on “interest alignment,” attempting to correct the previous flaws of venture capital-led funding that marginalized retail investors.

Key Event Details

As a new generation issuance platform within the Solana ecosystem, MetaDAO experienced a somewhat awkward “first.”

Its platform’s Hurupay project failed to meet the minimum funding target, becoming the first ICO project on the platform to do so. This event quickly sparked discussion within the community, serving as a microcosmic window into current market sentiment and project screening standards.

The key data for this event are summarized in the table below:

Causes of Failure

Community and market feedback attribute the failure to a combination of several key factors.

The primary and most direct reason was overvaluation of the project. In a cooling funding environment, investor sensitivity to valuation has sharply increased. Any valuation detached from fundamentals is unlikely to gain broad market acceptance.

Secondly, the lack of transparency regarding the team’s background weakened trust. In an industry where transparency directly influences trust, anonymous or opaque teams are increasingly unable to attract large-scale funding support.

Additionally, significant changes were made to the funding terms during the process, further shaking participant confidence. Stability in terms reflects project team commitments and planning ability; last-minute major changes are often viewed as risk signals.

Market Context

Hurupay’s failure is not an isolated incident; it occurred during a delicate turning point in the cryptocurrency market.

By 2026, market analysis indicates that “bearish sentiment has already become dominant,” with some observers even suggesting that the four-year market cycle peak may have already passed. This overall shift in sentiment has made funds more cautious and significantly reduced risk appetite for new projects.

At the same time, market focus is shifting profoundly. Token functionalities are becoming increasingly complex, swinging between ownership rights, governance tools, and user acquisition incentives.

Against this backdrop, funding models are also quietly evolving. Once dormant, ICOs are making a comeback, but their core appeal now differs from early days—aiming to provide retail investors with fairer entry opportunities and to correct the利益偏差 caused by risk capital-led funding in the past.

MetaDAO Platform Mechanism and Performance

In response to this failure, the MetaDAO issuance platform and its mechanisms have also become focal points.

MetaDAO is not just a simple launchpad; it aims to provide a comprehensive solution for “seriously built” projects, including token issuance, governance, and legal protections.

It employs Futurearchy AMM for governance and trading, and leverages DAO legal structures to offer legal asset protection for token holders.

Before Hurupay, the overall performance of ICOs on the MetaDAO platform was quite strong. Data shows that out of nine tokens launched there, three traded above their ICO price, with an average investment return of 194%.

This failure serves as a reminder: even with well-designed platform mechanisms, it is impossible to completely eliminate the risk of individual project failure due to quality issues or market timing.

Industry Trends and Future Insights

The Hurupay case offers multiple lessons for the entire crypto fundraising sector.

First, it confirms the trend of “the market shifting from venture capital-led funding models toward decentralized fundraising.” The resurgence of ICOs is fundamentally a market call for more transparent and fair issuance methods.

Second, it reveals new challenges. Poorly designed ICOs, especially those with overpricing, still struggle to succeed. Market self-correction mechanisms are working, filtering out unqualified participants.

For investors, this means developing more professional judgment. The era of blindly chasing ecosystem hype or platform prestige is ending; in-depth research into project fundamentals, team backgrounds, and valuation reasonableness is more important than ever.

Summary

As of February 10, on the Gate trading platform, tokens related to the MetaDAO ecosystem have not experienced significant volatility. META tokens remain a highly watched infrastructure asset within the Solana ecosystem.

After this failure, various “meme coins” generated by Claude Code on the Solana network continue to experience rapid cycles of emergence, soaring, and then plummeting over 80% to zero.

As the frenzy of speculative trading gradually subsides, projects that truly aim to solve industry problems, with clear models and reliable teams, will ultimately prove their value through the test of time.