Jeonlees

Tonight, let's delve into
"How to Hold USD1 and Kill Two Birds with One Stone with WLFI"
Live Stream Time: 7 February at 20:00 UTC+8
Preview Link🔗:Live Stream Link

Tonight, let's take a closer look at
"How to hold USD1, and achieve two goals with WLFI"
Live Stream Time: 7 February at 20:00 UTC+8
Live Preview Link🔗:直播链接

#何时抄底？ #加密市场回调

My article was forwarded by the official account!! Thank you for the official recognition!! @Binance News I will continue to create 💪@币安广场

Is 2026 still talking about L1? I originally wanted to walk away, but the data $VANRY is a bit 'outrageous.' To be honest, when I see the words 'new generation public chain' now, I reflexively want to laugh — it's not that the project isn't working hard, but the market's patience for narratives has been exhausted. After reviewing the information on Vanar Chain, it seems more like it's trying to force itself from a 'public chain story' into an 'AI infrastructure stack': the official website directly puts things like Kayon (on-chain AI logic/compliance) and Neutron Seeds (data compression/storage) front and center, which is quite ambitious. But what I care more about is whether there is 'real feedback' regarding heat and price. As of 2026-02-07, VANRY is around $0.0062, with a 24h trading volume of about $2 million – $3.6 million, and a market cap of about $13.5 million – $14.28 million; there is a 24h increase, but it's a pullback over 7 days (which is very real, not a show). Simply put, this size: a big bullish candlestick can lead people to 'mistakenly believe they understand the future,' and a big bearish candlestick can throw people back to 'who am I and where am I?' Recently, I saw the community mention actions related to AI Integration on 2026-01-19 (note: I will treat it as the 'starting point for inspection,' rather than the climax). So my current attitude towards @vanar is very simple: I won't follow trends to talk about metaphysics, but focus on three things — real on-chain usage (not tweeting), whether Neutron/Kayon has reusable landing for developers, and whether quantifiable cooperation/commercialization rhythms appear. If it can't achieve this, it's just 'AI skin L1'; if it does, this small market cap may actually have high elasticity. Personally, I will place it in a 'small observation position,' but I won't get excited just because of the word 'AI.' The market no longer rewards imagination, only delivery. @Vanarchain $VANRY #Vanar

I don't like to write 'grand narratives' for projects, especially at this stage where you start to doubt life — but for XPL (Plasma), I'm willing to take another look because its core is not about 'storytelling', but the settlement efficiency of stablecoin payments in this hard lane; the data will speak for itself.
First, let's look at the most realistic aspect: the price has been hovering around $0.08–$0.09 these days, market sentiment is very poor, but trading volume has not died, reaching over a hundred million dollars in 24 hours, indicating that it's not 'nobody is playing anymore', but rather 'someone is aggressively trading'. I won't say it's definitely a washout, but this kind of volume-price structure at least represents: liquidity is still there, and positions are being exchanged. If you're trading short-term, this is more worth being cautious and studying than 'quietly declining' — stimulating but dangerous, don't get too carried away.
Next, look at the on-chain 'hard indicators'. Plasma focuses on large-scale payment settlements with USDT and not on letting you mine new coins every day on-chain. So you'll see a very counterintuitive picture: the scale of stablecoins on the chain (Stablecoins Mcap) is at the level of tens of billions of dollars, while the on-chain transaction fees are only a few hundred dollars a day — this is not 'nobody is using it', but rather it has brought the 'payment experience' to nearly frictionless: low fees, quick confirmations, and aimed at stablecoin circulation. If you've done cross-border transfers/e-commerce payments, you'll understand: users don't care how sexy your EVM is, they only care about how fast the money arrives, how low the costs are, and whether there will be delays in approval.
Then there’s the token itself. The official design starts with a total supply of 10 billion XPL, with circulation around ten to twenty billion (different platforms show slight variations), what does this mean? It means the price of XPL in the short term is more like a 'market sentiment thermometer', but in the medium term, we need to look at two things:
1) Whether the on-chain stablecoin and trading activity can continue to rise (otherwise it's just a 'payment chain but nobody is paying');
2) Whether the unlocking/incentive rhythm will give you a punch at some stage (I will regularly check the official unlocking schedule, and I won’t make random guesses before confirming).
Finally, about the hot topic: recently, the 'stablecoin chain/stablecoin payment' sector has been reignited, competitors are also upgrading and marketing, and the market will naturally compare Plasma. My attitude is very simple: don't take 'the rapid rise' as 'doing it right'.
@Plasma $XPL
#plasma

$OWL I've heard you're still brushing something alpha😭
The fluctuations are too big, the reverse orders only ran away with 4%
After keeping an eye on it, I lost 8-9u, which is higher than the rewards from the trading competition
I hope to participate in multiple projects in a day, I'll just take it as a loss
Every day I check in to complete tasks, I didn't manage well, I might lose a few dozen u
Recently, I saw on x that the KOL I've been following for a long time brushed owl and lost over 2000u….
#何时抄底？

Recently, the two hot topics of "the revival of the privacy track + the real landing of RWA" came together, and the first thing that came to my mind was not those currencies that are the loudest, but @dusk_foundation. Dusk has always put "compliance and auditable privacy" on the main stage — this route, to be honest, is not sexy, but more like the kind that can survive.
Dusk and NPEX are promoting a "regulated on-chain trading application," with the publicly stated scale mentioning the tokenization of over 300 million euros worth of securities assets to be moved on-chain for trading/settlement testing. You can treat it as marketing, but at least it's not "I'm planning to do this," but rather has put the amount and scenario out there — which is rare in RWA.
Looking at the recent technical pace: the DuskDS L1 upgrade on December 10, 2025, has been positioned by both the officials and third parties as a key node to "lay the groundwork for performance/data availability for subsequent modules like DuskEVM." Many people don't like to watch these infrastructure upgrades, but if you really want to carry out compliant asset trading, chain stability, data layer costs, and finality are the "boring metrics" that are critical.
Dusk is using Chainlink's interoperability and data standards (CCIP, Data Streams, DataLink) to serve the narrative of "bringing regulated securities on-chain and connecting to a broader ecosystem." My understanding is: this is not the kind of collaboration that paints a rosy picture for retail investors, but more like completing the engineering piece of the chain of "data credibility + cross-chain circulation + compliant assets."
Finally, regarding the market that everyone is most concerned about: as of 2026-02-06 (today), some market pages show the DUSK price is around $0.08, with a 24h trading volume in the tens of millions of dollars, with considerable volatility. To put it simply: the heat has come, and funds will follow, but "coming quickly and leaving quickly" is the norm.
I prefer to regard Dusk as a target for "event-driven + infrastructure realization": first, to see if NPEX can truly generate on-chain compliant trading volume, and second, to see if the DuskEVM ecosystem can bring developers/applications in. If both of these are just slogans, it will also return to silence like most narrative coins after the excitement; but as long as one of them is realized, its positioning will not be as a "privacy coin," but rather as "a piece of the puzzle in compliant financial infrastructure," and the valuation logic will change.
@Dusk $DUSK
#Dusk

$XPL just wrote for 7 days, can increase by over 100 points every day. After 7 days, it can reach more than 900 points.
Is this hitting the G-point of the square every day? Moreover, each article's view count can reach over 10k, and each one can be pushed on the feed👀
We participated in the event from the beginning, usually increasing by only 30-40 points a day, but today directly added over 9 points, which made me laugh.
Such amazing teachers 👍 are worth learning from.

If writing normally doesn’t give points, everyone will start to engage in evil practices.
I also started to engage in evil practices….

Plasma's route is very clear: focusing on high-frequency transfers and settlements around USDT. If you’ve really struggled in exchanges/OTC/cross-border payments before, you know that transfers aren’t that romantic: slow arrival, high fees, network congestion, and the other party finds it troublesome. Any one of these issues can drive users away. Plasma commercializes the experience: confirmation speed and costs are kept very low, and the daily fees on the chain seem a bit “meager” (in the hundreds of dollars), but I actually think this aligns well with the logic of payment chains: it aims for “smooth like Alipay,” not “making every transfer feel like paying taxes.”

The second indicator: “who is using it.” I don’t blindly believe in “KOLs shouting signals,” what I look at is the scale and liquidity of stablecoins on the chain. The stablecoin scale of this Plasma chain is at the level of several billion dollars, which is not a small amount. Many chains talk about ecosystems every day, but their stablecoin pools are as thin as paper—if you really want to do payment settlements, having no depth in stablecoins is just empty talk. At least XPL doesn’t disappoint on the “money pool” front.

But I won’t pretend to be optimistic: having a stablecoin scale doesn’t mean being actively real. The market loves to play the trick of “filling the water but not opening the gate.” So I will focus on something more direct: transfer frequency and trading activity. If the funds are just lying idle, then XPL is just a “decoration”; if the funds are continuously circulating, then it’s more like a “utility public chain.”

The third and most crucial indicator: will you continue to use it after using it. This brings us back to the tokens. The trading heat of XPL is quite high now, and the short-term volatility is fierce—at this time, you will see many people using XPL as “emotional chips” to speculate, rather than as a “payment infrastructure” equity ticket. In simple terms: buying it doesn’t necessarily mean you are optimistic about payments, but possibly just because it can pump or dump.
@Plasma $XPL #plasma

$XPL What exactly counts as a 'bottom ticket' or 'patience tax'?

Let me set aside my emotions: Recently, the risk appetite in the market has clearly cooled down, and there is a mix of chasing and fearing the 'payment/stablecoin narrative' (typical: institutions and traditional payment companies are gravitating towards stablecoins, but the secondary market is squeezing the bubble). Traditional payment players like Klarna have publicly stated their intention to promote USD stablecoins and reduce cross-border costs, indicating that 'stablecoin payments' are not just talk but are genuinely competing for the track.

So, what is Plasma's position? It has always been somewhat 'narrow-focused': defining itself as an L1 optimized for stablecoin transfers, rather than a 'jack-of-all-trades' blockchain. The mainnet Beta and XPL are set to launch on 2025-09-25, essentially betting that 'stablecoin settlement' will become the next major infrastructure competition.

Can we buy in now? Personally, I will look at it from three perspectives:
1) Has the narrative turned into real demand? The external trends for stablecoin payments are strengthening (traditional finance entering, regulatory frameworks advancing, on-chain payment infrastructure mergers accelerating), which is a plus for a project like Plasma that is 'going deep in a narrow lane'.
2) The time bomb of token structure: Plasma has disclosed the token distribution and compliance schedule (for example, the distribution to U.S. participants is arranged around 2026-07-28), and around these time points, the market often prices in 'expectations' in advance. If you don't keep an eye on it, you may be caught off guard.
3) The 'secondary damage' on the price/emotion level: I have seen some tracking mention that XPL has retraced significantly from the high range in early 2026, and the sentiment has shifted from 'telling stories' to 'validating work'. At this point, buying at the bottom is not impossible, but it feels more like 'picking up chips in batches', rather than going all in as a savior.

So my conclusion in plain language: XPL is suitable for mid-term observation using 'payment chain fundamentals', but don't treat it as a sentiment reversal ticket in the short term. If you want to buy in, it's best to layer according to nodes and risk appetite: part of it bets on narrative realization, while part is left for the market to continue to hammer out 'cheaper certainty'. Brothers, don't fall in love with the price, just cooperate with the logic.

@Plasma $XPL #plasma

Today (February 5th), I revisited the Dusk project, and my mindset is somewhat complicated: it is not the kind of project that takes off just because of an announcement. Rather, it resembles the development of a foundational system that can be accepted by regulators without sacrificing privacy — it sounds boring, but in finance, when it comes to implementation, this kind of 'boring' is often more valuable.
First, let's lay out the hard data: the current price of $DUSK is approximately $0.09, with a market cap of about $46-47 million, a 24h trading volume of around $16 million, and liquidity is neither small nor can it be considered 'mainstream'. The hotspot in these two weeks is not in the 'narrative' but rather in the operational and security pressures that have intensified following the mainnet's transition to sustainable operation. Dusk's official team issued an incident notice regarding the bridge in mid-January: it clearly stated that the mainnet was not affected, there were no issues at the protocol layer, but the bridge services would be temporarily suspended for a more comprehensive hardening and security review. I am more inclined to trust this kind of announcement — because being willing to discuss 'where the weaknesses are and how to address them' is more reliable than shouting slogans every day.
Another 'market hotspot' that can be leveraged today is: after market fluctuations and a revival of the privacy sector, there has been a differentiation in capital behavior concerning DUSK. There is summarized information indicating that during a pullback after a period of upward movement, some 'ordinary whales' have been reducing their positions, while top addresses are actually accumulating (for instance, it was mentioned that top addresses have increased their holdings by tens of millions). I do not take this as gospel, but it at least indicates that DUSK's current trading logic has shifted from 'telling stories' to 'focusing on progress + focusing on risk'.
My own conclusion is quite straightforward: Dusk's key to success does not lie in short-term K-lines but in whether it can transform 'compliant and auditable privacy' into reusable financial components — especially after the mainnet, where the 'dirty and tiring work' of bridges, wallets, monitoring, and permissions is what institutions care about the most. The bridge incident's suspension itself is a negative point, but the way it is being handled is a positive point: you can see that it is making up for gaps according to financial-grade standards instead of pretending nothing is wrong.
I will continue to monitor two things about this project: first, whether the pace of bridge restoration and security reinforcement is transparent; second, the real usage after the mainnet (not just trading volume, but whether applications/settlements/fees can hold up).
@Dusk $DUSK
#Dusk

XPL price has dropped significantly, and the rewards have not been distributed yet; it has already decreased by more than 30% 😭
Brothers, let me say this: the reason I have been focusing on $XPL is simple—the stablecoin line has transitioned from "self-indulgence in the crypto world" to "payment infrastructure competing for territory." Just look at the data; the trading volume of stablecoins in retail size has increased from 314 million transactions in January to 3.2 billion transactions in December 2025, a tenfold growth. This is not achieved through mere hype; it is driven by real use cases.
Back to Plasma itself, I don't want to use empty words; let's look directly at "the pricing given by the market + what the project is doing." Currently, the price of XPL is around $0.09, with a circulating market cap of about $160-170 million, and a 24-hour trading volume close to $90-100 million, indicating that it is not one of those "PPT chains with no trading activity." But at the same time, don't pretend you don't see it—it has pulled back around -55% in the last 30 days, and when sentiment collapses, it will drop just as you can see.
What I'm more concerned about as a "hotspot" is: Plasma has recently pushed StableFlow, a large stablecoin settlement channel, to the forefront, focusing on low-fee/low-slippage settlements from networks like Tron to Plasma; and it is also adding NEAR Intents, a liquidity entry for "chain abstraction/intention execution"—if these two things are implemented smoothly, the narrative for XPL will upgrade from "saving gas" to "turning stablecoins into usable payment rails."
My own conclusion is cautiously optimistic: **In the short term, watch for volatility and pullbacks; don't treat it as a stable asset; in the medium term, look at two lines—the actual usage of the settlement channel and whether the cross-chain entry can continuously bring stablecoin flows.** If these two points are achieved, XPL will truly have the fate of being a "payment underlying."
@Plasma $XPL
#plasma

Today I came across a discussion by @vanar, and my first reaction was not 'another L1', but rather: what this chain lacks the most right now is not the narrative, but the 'continuity of landing evidence'. First, let's lay out the data: $V$VANRY is around $0.0062, with a 24h trading volume of about $1.7M-$2M, a circulating supply of about 2.26 billion, and a maximum supply of 2.4 billion; more critically, there has been a significant pullback in the past period, with Binance's statistics showing a drop of as much as -50% over 90 days—this is not a conclusion that 'the project is not working', but it indicates that the market's patience for 'results' is declining.
So where is the hot spot? I think Vanar has recently staked itself in two directions: entertainment/game traffic + PayFi/compliant payments. On the entertainment side, community articles mention that in early 2026, VGN Network will add 12+ cooperative games, with developer activity up by 89% year-on-year (I will take this as a 'clue', but it still needs to be validated by on-chain data).
The payment side is even tougher: in the partnership with Worldpay, Worldpay's annual processing scale is noted to be $2.3T, covering 146 countries. If this kind of cooperation really passes the pilot, the significance is much greater than 'just adding another DEX'.
So I currently see @vanar's logic as very simple, even a bit 'life-preserving first':
Don't ask how beautiful the narrative is, just focus on three things:
1) Is there a continuous increase in on-chain activity and real users (don't just look at a single day's spike);
2) Do game/entertainment applications 'retain people', instead of everyone leaving as soon as the event ends;
3) Are there clear milestones in payment partnerships (merchant pilots, settlement paths, compliance scope), otherwise it easily turns into a press release asset.
I'm not hyping, nor bashing. At the $VAN$VANRY stage, the best catalyst is not 'concept', but 'verifiable growth curve'. Brothers, whoever can turn 'cooperation' into 'data' is the one who deserves to seize a trend.
@Vanar $VANRY
#Vanar

The two hottest terms in the circle today are "compliance" and "privacy." Most projects just put these two terms on the first page of their PPT and call it a day, but I recently revisited Dusk (@dusk_foundation), and it feels more like: it's not telling a story, but rather tightening the screws on a "financial pipeline that can be accepted by regulators"—tightening slowly, tightening quietly, but it feels quite legitimate.
Let me first explain why it caught my attention again: the official disclosures previously revealed the mainnet rollout timeline, clearly mentioning that on January 7, it will enter "operational mode," with key milestones like the mainnet bridge, and these things cannot be glossed over with slogans—either the chain runs stably, or it will be exposed on the spot. Additionally, with its connection to NPEX in the Netherlands, public information mentions that three parties (NPEX, Dusk, Cordial Systems) will create blockchain-driven exchange/market infrastructure and also discuss terms like "zero-trust custody," which are not what retail investors like to hear; this is aimed at legal/risk control. Recently, the community has been circulating a number: "€300 million level security tokenization asset plan"—if this number ultimately becomes "tradable, settleable, and auditable," that will be Dusk's true watershed.
But I won't pretend: the biggest problem with this project is also quite obvious—compliance assets do not have the same rhythm as DeFi's "mine upon launch". You need to interface with licenses, matchmaking, clearing, KYC/AML boundaries, and even how data sources are fed and audits are conducted; any step could drag the progress to a crawl. So my attitude towards $DUSK is very simple: don't treat it as a pure speculative token; it feels more like betting whether a "compliance RWA pathway" can truly function. If it works, the valuation logic will change; if it doesn't, no amount of narrative will return to "only trading".
The final conclusion of "prioritize survival": I won't chase the hype to buy high, but I will keep an eye on two things—when DuskTrade/NPEX will finally show real transactions and settlements, and whether there are continuous data on the stability of the mainnet operation. If these two points can be achieved, $$DUSK will have moved from "narrative" to "financial infrastructure".
@Dusk $DUSK
#Dusk