What is Ethereum Triple Halving and its Impact on ETH?

Crypto Basics

What is Ethereum Triple Halving and its Impact on ETH?

Discover the significance of Ethereum halving and its potential impact on ETH. Gain insights into this key event in the world of cryptocurrency.

S. Vishwa

9 Minutes

MIN

Index

Overview of Solana Blockchain

In the fast-paced world of cryptocurrencies, Ethereum has always been at the forefront of innovation. While "halving" is commonly associated with Bitcoin, Ethereum has its unique approach to this concept.

The Ethereum halving, often referred to as the "Triple Halving," is a multifaceted process that has profound implications for the future of this popular cryptocurrency.

In this article, we will delve deep into the Ethereum halving phenomenon, exploring its significance in the ever-evolving crypto market.

The Basics of Ethereum Halving

To understand the Ethereum halving, it's important first to grasp the fundamentals of Ethereum's underlying technology. Ethereum operates on a consensus mechanism known as Proof of Work (PoW), similar to Bitcoin.

Miners solve complex mathematical problems in this system to validate transactions and create new blocks. As a reward for their efforts, miners are given Ethereum coins.

However, Ethereum has been undergoing a significant transformation with the introduction of the Ethereum 2.0 upgrade. This upgrade involves transitioning from the PoW consensus mechanism to a more energy-efficient and scalable model called Proof of Stake (PoS).

Unlike PoW, where miners compete to validate transactions, PoS relies on validators who lock up a certain amount of Ethereum as a stake. These validators are then chosen to create new blocks based on factors such as the amount they stake.

This transition to PoS brings about several significant changes to the Ethereum ecosystem. It eliminates the energy-intensive process of mining and reduces the daily issuance rate of Ethereum tokens.

Additionally, the Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) 1559 introduces a new fee structure that burns a portion of the transaction fees, further reducing the overall supply of Ethereum.

Staking: A Shift in the Ethereum Landscape

One of the key components of the Ethereum halving is the shift from mining to staking. Under the PoS model, validators are chosen to create new blocks based on the amount of Ethereum they have staked.

This means that the more Ethereum a validator holds, the higher their chances of being selected to validate transactions.

Staking Ethereum has several advantages over traditional mining. First and foremost, it is more energy-efficient, as it does not require the use of powerful computational hardware.

This shift to a more sustainable consensus mechanism aligns with Ethereum's commitment to environmental sustainability.

Secondly, staking Ethereum helps to reduce the overall supply of Ethereum in circulation. When Ethereum is staked, it is effectively locked up for a certain period of time, making it temporarily unavailable for trading or selling.

This reduction in circulating supply creates scarcity, which can potentially drive up the price of Ethereum over time.

Moreover, staking Ethereum allows validators to earn staking rewards. These rewards are proportional to the amount of Ethereum staked, providing an additional incentive for users to participate in the network and contribute to its security and stability.

ETH Gas Fee Burning: A Deflationary Mechanism

Another crucial aspect of the Ethereum halving is the implementation of EIP-1559, which introduces a new fee structure for transactions on the Ethereum network.

Under the previous fee model, users would bid for transaction priority by suggesting a gas fee. This often resulted in bidding wars during periods of network congestion.

EIP-1559 sets a base fee for transactions, which adjusts dynamically based on network demand. Crucially, this base fee is burned or permanently removed from circulation rather than being given to miners or validators.

By burning a portion of the transaction fees, Ethereum's overall supply can decrease during times of high network usage. This deflationary pressure can offset the inflationary issuance of new coins, potentially leading to Ethereum becoming a deflationary asset over time.

The introduction of fee burning has several implications for the Ethereum ecosystem. First, it improves the predictability and stability of transaction fees, making it easier for users to estimate the cost of their transactions.

This is particularly beneficial for developers and users of decentralized applications (dApps), as it creates a more user-friendly experience and reduces the barriers to entry.

Second, fee burning helps to align the incentives of miners and validators with the long-term success of the Ethereum network. In the PoW model, miners are primarily motivated by the block rewards they receive for validating transactions.

However, as the issuance of new coins decreases over time, transaction fees become a more significant source of income for miners. By burning some of these fees, Ethereum ensures miners are vested in the network's sustainability and efficiency.

Reduced Token Issuance: Limiting the Supply of Ethereum

In addition to the shift to PoS and the burning of transaction fees, the Ethereum halving also involves a significant reduction in the daily issuance rate of Ethereum tokens.

Under the PoW model, miners were rewarded with newly issued Ethereum tokens for validating transactions and securing the network.

However, with the transition to PoS and the phasing out of traditional mining, the daily issuance rate of Ethereum tokens has been significantly reduced.

This reduction in token issuance limits the supply of new Ethereum entering the market, creating scarcity. When combined with the burning of transaction fees, this reduction in supply can exert upward pressure on the price of Ethereum.

The reduced token issuance has several implications for Ethereum as an investment. First, it helps to mitigate the potential impact of inflation on the value of Ethereum.

As the issuance of new coins decreases, the inflation rate decreases as well, making Ethereum a more attractive asset for long-term holders.

Second, the reduction in token issuance aligns with the principles of scarcity and supply and demand economics. With a limited supply of new coins entering the market, the value of existing coins can increase, assuming continued demand for Ethereum.

The Impact of Halving on Ethereum

The Ethereum halving, or the "Triple Halving," has profound implications for the Ethereum network, its participants, and the broader crypto ecosystem. Here's an in-depth exploration of its impact across various aspects:

Reward System Changes for Validators

With the transition to PoS, the Ethereum halving represents a shift in the reward system for validators. Instead of relying on mining rewards, validators are rewarded with staking rewards based on the amount of Ethereum they stake.

These rewards are proportional to the stake and other factors, incentivizing validators to actively participate in the network and secure its operations.

Transaction Fees: A More Efficient and Predictable System

The introduction of EIP-1559 and the burning of transaction fees have significant implications for users of the Ethereum network.

Ethereum has created a more efficient and predictable fee system by setting a base fee for transactions and burning a portion of these fees. This benefits users by reducing the volatility of transaction fees and creating a more user-friendly experience.

Deflationary Pressure and Scarcity

The Ethereum halving introduces deflationary pressure on the Ethereum supply through a combination of reduced token issuance and the burning of transaction fees. This deflationary nature can create scarcity, potentially leading to upward pressure on the price of Ethereum.

It aligns with supply and demand economics principles, where a limited supply combined with continued demand can drive price appreciation.

Impact on Stakeholder Dynamics

The Ethereum halving has implications for various stakeholders within the Ethereum ecosystem:

Miners: The transition from PoW to PoS renders traditional mining obsolete. Miners will need to adapt by either transitioning to staking or focusing on mining other PoW cryptocurrencies.
Investors: Understanding the Ethereum halving is crucial for investors. The potential deflationary nature of Ethereum, combined with its position as a leading smart contract platform, can influence investment strategies and long-term outlook.
Developers and Dapp Creators: The reduction in gas fees and enhanced transaction efficiency resulting from the Ethereum halving can attract more developers and users to the Ethereum ecosystem. This fosters innovation and growth within the network, creating new opportunities for developers and dApp creators.

Ethereum Halving and Its Relation to Bitcoin

Ethereum and Bitcoin, as leading cryptocurrencies, both have mechanisms in place to control inflation and ensure the longevity of their respective networks.

While they share similar goals, the methods and implications of their halving events are distinct. Let's delve deeper into the comparison between the Ethereum halving and the Bitcoin halving:

Definition of Halving

The Ethereum halving, or the "Triple Halving," is a continuous process without a fixed date. It encompasses the shift to PoS, the burning of transaction fees, and the reduction in token issuance.

In contrast, the Bitcoin halving is a predetermined event that occurs approximately every four years. During the Bitcoin halving, the block rewards for miners are reduced by 50%, decreasing the rate of new Bitcoin issuance.

Purpose and Impact on Mining

The Ethereum halving aims to transition to a more energy-efficient consensus mechanism (PoS) and potentially make Ethereum deflationary over time. As a result, traditional mining becomes obsolete, and miners must adapt by either transitioning to staking or mining other PoW cryptocurrencies.

On the other hand, the Bitcoin halving aims to control inflation by reducing the rate at which new Bitcoins are introduced into circulation. The reduction in block rewards puts downward pressure on mining profitability, leading to a potential reduction in the number of miners or a consolidation of mining power.

Effect on Supply and Price Implications

The Ethereum halving, through the combination of reduced token issuance and the burning of transaction fees, limits the supply of new Ethereum entering the market. This reduction in supply, coupled with continued demand, can exert upward pressure on Ethereum's price over time.

Historically, the Bitcoin halving has been associated with price surges in the months following the event. However, it's important to note that various factors, including market sentiment, regulatory changes, and macroeconomic conditions influence price dynamics.

Network Security and Historical Context

The Ethereum halving introduces PoS as a more energy-efficient and secure consensus mechanism. Validators are incentivized to act honestly, as they have Ethereum at stake. Misbehaving validators risk losing their staked Ethereum, ensuring the security and integrity of the network.

On the other hand, Bitcoin relies on PoW and miners' computational power to validate transactions. As block rewards decrease, transaction fees become a more significant incentive for miners, ensuring continued network security.

In terms of historical context, Ethereum's journey has been marked by continuous evolution and various upgrades, such as the introduction of EIP-1559 and the Ethereum Merge.

These milestones contribute to Ethereum's position as a leading smart contract platform and highlight the importance of innovation and adaptability in the blockchain and crypto space.

Conclusion

The Ethereum halving, or the "Triple Halving," is a testament to Ethereum's adaptability, resilience, and vision for the future. It aims to enhance Ethereum's efficiency, sustainability, and value proposition through the transition to PoS, burning of transaction fees, and reduction in token issuance.

This sets a precedent for other cryptocurrencies, emphasizing scalability, security, and user-centric design. The Ethereum halving creates new opportunities for investors, developers, and users, fostering growth and innovation within the ecosystem.

Disclaimer

The information provided on this website does not constitute investment advice, financial advice, trading advice, or any other advice, and you should not treat any of the website's content as such.

Token Metrics does not recommend buying, selling, or holding any cryptocurrency. Conduct your due diligence and consult your financial advisor before making investment decisions.

Create Your Free Token Metrics Account

Access our Ratings Page for valuable token insights

Explore our Market Page for a comprehensive market overview

Stay in the loop with exclusive weekly Newsletters filled with insider tips and updates

Join our private Telegram group for exclusive community access

Create Your Free Account

Exploring Investments in Crypto and Web3 Companies: An Analytical Overview

Token Metrics Team

MIN

Introduction

The landscape of digital assets and blockchain technology has expanded rapidly over recent years, bringing forth a new realm known as Web3 alongside the burgeoning crypto ecosystem. For individuals curious about allocating resources into this sphere, questions often arise: should the focus be on cryptocurrencies or Web3 companies? This article aims to provide an educational and analytical perspective on these options, highlighting considerations without providing direct investment advice.

Understanding Crypto and Web3

Before exploring the nuances between investing in crypto assets and Web3 companies, it's important to clarify what each represents.

Cryptocurrencies are digital currencies that operate on blockchain technology, enabling peer-to-peer transactions with varying protocols and use cases.
Web3 broadly refers to a decentralized internet infrastructure leveraging blockchain technologies to create applications, platforms, and services that prioritize user control, privacy, and decentralization.

Web3 companies often develop decentralized applications (dApps), offer blockchain-based services, or build infrastructure layers for the decentralized web.

Key Considerations When Evaluating Investment Options

Deciding between crypto assets or Web3 companies involves analyzing different dynamics:

Market Maturity and Volatility
Cryptocurrencies generally exhibit higher price volatility influenced by market sentiment, regulatory news, and technology updates. Web3 companies, often in startup or growth phases, carry inherent business risk but may relate more to traditional company valuation metrics.
Fundamental Drivers
Crypto assets derive value from network utility, adoption, scarcity mechanisms, and consensus protocols. Web3 firms generate value through product innovation, user engagement, revenue models, and ability to scale decentralized solutions.
Regulatory Environment
Both realms face evolving regulatory landscapes globally, with different degrees of scrutiny around cryptocurrencies and blockchain enterprises. Awareness of legal considerations is essential for educational understanding.
Technological Innovation
Web3 companies typically focus on developing novel decentralized infrastructures and applications. Crypto projects may emphasize improvements in consensus algorithms, interoperability, or token economics.

Analytical Frameworks for Assessment

To approach these complex investment types thoughtfully, frameworks can assist in structuring analysis:

Scenario Analysis: Evaluate various future scenarios for cryptocurrency adoption and Web3 technology evolution to understand possible outcomes and risks.
Fundamental Analysis: For crypto, analyze network activity, token utility, and supply models. For Web3 companies, consider business plans, technological edge, leadership quality, and market positioning.
Technology Evaluation: Examine the underlying blockchain protocols and development communities supporting both crypto projects and Web3 startups, assessing innovation and sustainability.

Leveraging AI-Driven Tools for Research

Due to the rapidly evolving and data-intensive nature of crypto and Web3 industries, AI-powered platforms can enhance analysis by processing vast datasets and providing insights.

For instance, Token Metrics utilizes machine learning to rate crypto assets by analyzing market trends, project fundamentals, and sentiment data. Such tools support an educational and neutral perspective by offering data-driven research support rather than speculative advice.

When assessing Web3 companies, AI tools can assist with identifying emerging technologies, tracking developmental progress, and monitoring regulatory developments relevant to the decentralized ecosystem.

Practical Tips for Conducting Due Diligence

To gain a well-rounded understanding, consider the following steps:

Research Whitepapers and Roadmaps: For crypto tokens and Web3 startups, review technical documentation and strategic plans.
Evaluate Team Credentials: Analyze the experience and transparency of project founders and teams.
Monitor Community Engagement: Observe activity levels in forums, GitHub repositories, and social media to gauge project vitality.
Use Analytical Tools: Incorporate platforms like Token Metrics for data-supported insights on token metrics and project evaluations.
Consider Regulatory Developments: Stay informed about jurisdictional policies impacting blockchain projects and cryptocurrencies.

Understanding Risk Factors

Both crypto assets and Web3 companies involve unique risks that warrant careful consideration:

Market Risk: Price volatility and market sentiment swings can impact crypto tokens significantly.
Technological Risk: Innovative technologies may have bugs or scalability challenges affecting project viability.
Regulatory Risk: Changes in legal frameworks can alter operational capacities or market access for Web3 entities and crypto tokens.
Business Model Risk: Web3 startups may face competitive pressures, funding challenges, or adoption hurdles.

Conclusion

Deciding between crypto assets and Web3 companies involves analyzing different dimensions including technological fundamentals, market dynamics, and risk profiles. Employing structured evaluation frameworks along with AI-enhanced research platforms such as Token Metrics can provide clarity in this complex landscape.

It is essential to approach this domain with an educational mindset focused on understanding rather than speculative intentions. Staying informed and leveraging analytical tools supports sound comprehension of the evolving world of blockchain-based digital assets and enterprises.

Disclaimer

This article is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult with professional advisors before making any decisions related to cryptocurrencies or Web3 companies.

Research

Why Is Web3 User Experience Still Lagging Behind Web2?

Token Metrics Team

MIN

Introduction to Web3 UX

The evolution from Web2 to Web3 marks a significant paradigm shift in how we interact with digital services. While Web2 platforms have delivered intuitive and seamless user experiences, Web3—the decentralized internet leveraging blockchain technology—still faces considerable user experience (UX) challenges. This article explores the reasons behind the comparatively poor UX in Web3 and the technical, design, and infrastructural hurdles contributing to this gap.

Contextual Understanding: Web2 vs Web3

Web2 represents the current mainstream internet experience characterized by centralized servers, interactive social platforms, and streamlined services. Its UX benefits from consistent standards, mature design patterns, and direct control over data.

In contrast, Web3 aims at decentralization, enabling peer-to-peer interactions through blockchain protocols, decentralized applications (dApps), and user-owned data ecosystems. While promising increased privacy and autonomy, Web3 inherently introduces complexity in UX design.

Technical Complexities Affecting Web3 UX

Several intrinsic technical barriers impact the Web3 user experience:

Decentralization and Interoperability: Decentralized networks operate without centralized control, making transaction speed and reliability variable compared to Web2's central servers.
Blockchain Transaction Latency: Block confirmation times, network congestion, and gas fees create delays and unpredictability in user interactions.
Wallet and Key Management: Users must manage private keys and wallets, which can be confusing and risky for non-technical audiences.
User Onboarding Frictions: Requirements like acquiring cryptocurrency tokens for transaction fees create an additional barrier unique to Web3.

Design and Usability Issues in Web3

The nascent nature of Web3 results in inconsistent and sometimes opaque design standards:

Complex Terminology and Concepts: Terms like gas, smart contracts, staking, and cryptographic signatures are unfamiliar to average users.
Poorly Standardized UI Components: Unlike Web2, where UI/UX libraries and guidelines are well-established, Web3 lacks uniform design principles, leading to fragmented experiences.
Minimal User Feedback: Web3 apps sometimes provide limited real-time feedback during transactions, causing uncertainty.
Security and Trust Indicators: The responsibility to confirm transaction legitimacy often falls on users, which can be overwhelming.

Ecosystem Maturity and Resource Constraints

Web2 giants have invested billions over decades fostering developer communities, design systems, and customer support infrastructure. In contrast, Web3 is still an emerging ecosystem characterized by:

Smaller Development Teams: Many dApps are developed by startups or hobbyists with limited UX expertise or resources.
Rapidly Evolving Protocols: Frequent changes impact stability and user familiarity.
Limited Educational Resources: Users often lack accessible tutorials and support channels.

Such factors contribute to a user experience that feels fragmented and inaccessible to mainstream audiences.

Leveraging AI and Analytics to Improve Web3 UX

Emerging tools powered by artificial intelligence and data analytics can help mitigate some UX challenges in Web3 by:

Analyzing User Interaction Data: Identifying pain points and optimizing workflows in dApps.
Automated Risk Assessment: Platforms like Token Metrics offer AI-driven analysis to help users understand token metrics and project fundamentals, supporting better-informed user decisions without direct financial advice.
Personalized User Guidance: Contextual prompts and chatbot assistants could help users navigate complex steps.

Integrating such AI-driven research and analytic tools enables developers and users to progressively enhance Web3 usability.

Practical Tips for Users and Developers

For users trying to adapt to Web3 environments, the following tips may help:

Engage with Educational Content: Prioritize learning foundational blockchain concepts to reduce confusion.
Use Trusted Tools: Platforms providing in-depth analytics and ratings, such as Token Metrics, can offer valuable insights into projects.
Start with Simple dApps: Experiment with established, user-friendly applications before engaging in more complex services.

For developers, focusing on the following can improve UX outcomes:

Adopt Consistent UI/UX Patterns: Align interfaces with familiar Web2 standards where possible to flatten the learning curve.
Enhance Feedback and Transparency: Clearly communicate transaction statuses and risks.
Streamline Onboarding: Reduce or abstract away wallet configurations and gas fee complexities.
Prioritize Accessibility: Make interfaces usable for non-technical and diverse user groups.

Conclusion: Web3 UX Future Outlook

The current disparity between Web3 and Web2 user experience primarily stems from decentralization complexities, immature design ecosystems, and educational gaps. However, ongoing innovation in AI-driven analytics, comprehensive rating platforms like Token Metrics, and community-driven UX improvements are promising. Over time, these efforts could bridge the UX divide to make Web3 more accessible and user-friendly for mainstream adoption.

Disclaimer

This article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or an endorsement. Users should conduct their own research and consider risks before engaging in any blockchain or cryptocurrency activities.

Research

Exploring the Languages Used for Smart Contract Development

Token Metrics Team

MIN

Introduction

Smart contracts have become an integral part of blockchain technology, enabling automated, trustless agreements across various platforms. Understanding what languages are used for smart contract development is essential for developers entering this dynamic field, as well as for analysts and enthusiasts who want to deepen their grasp of blockchain ecosystems. This article offers an analytical and educational overview of popular programming languages for smart contract development, discusses their characteristics, and provides insights on how analytical tools like Token Metrics can assist in evaluating smart contract projects.

Popular Smart Contract Languages

Smart contract languages are specialized programming languages designed to create logic that runs on blockchains. The most prominent blockchain for smart contracts currently is Ethereum, but other blockchains have their languages as well. The following section outlines some of the most widely-used smart contract languages.

Solidity: Often considered the standard language for Ethereum smart contracts, Solidity is a high-level, contract-oriented language similar in syntax to JavaScript and influenced by C++ and Python. It is statically typed and supports inheritance, libraries, and complex user-defined types. Solidity is compiled into EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine) bytecode executable on Ethereum and compatible blockchains.
Vyper: Developed as an alternative to Solidity, Vyper emphasizes simplicity, auditability, and security. With a syntax inspired by Python, it is designed to be more readable and to reduce the potential for errors in contract code, though it currently has fewer features than Solidity.
Rust: Rust is gaining popularity especially on blockchains like Solana, Near, and Polkadot. It is a systems programming language known for safety and performance. Rust smart contracts tend to be compiled to WebAssembly (Wasm) bytecode, enabling cross-chain compatibility and faster execution on supported platforms.
Michelson: Michelson is a low-level stack-based language used to write smart contracts on Tezos blockchain. It is designed for formal verification, allowing high-security guarantees which is important for mission-critical applications.
Move: Move is a language developed by Facebook's Diem project and adapted by blockchains like Aptos and Sui. It offers resource-oriented programming to handle digital assets safely and efficiently.
Clarity: Used primarily on the Stacks blockchain, Clarity is a decidable language, which means actions of the contract can be predicted and verified before execution. It favors safety and transparency.

Criteria for Language Selection

Developers evaluate smart contract languages based on various factors such as security, expressiveness, ease of use, and compatibility with blockchain platforms. Below are some important criteria:

Security Features: Languages like Vyper and Michelson prioritize simplicity and formal verification to minimize vulnerabilities.
Community and Ecosystem: Solidity benefits from a large developer community, extensive documentation, and extensive tooling which facilitates easier development and auditing.
Performance Efficiency: Languages compiled to Wasm such as Rust-based smart contracts can offer superior speed and reduced resource consumption.
Formal Verification and Auditing: Languages that support rigorous mathematical verification methods help ensure contract correctness and prevent exploits.
Interoperability: The ability of a smart contract to work across multiple blockchains enhances its utility and adoption.

Overview of Leading Smart Contract Languages

Solidity remains the dominant language due to Ethereum's market position and is well-suited for developers familiar with JavaScript or object-oriented paradigms. It continuously evolves with community input and protocol upgrades.

Vyper has a smaller user base but appeals to projects requiring stricter security standards, as its design deliberately omits complex features that increase vulnerabilities.

Rust is leveraged by newer chains that aim to combine blockchain decentralization with high throughput and low latency. Developers familiar with systems programming find Rust a robust choice.

Michelson’s niche is in formal verification-heavy projects where security is paramount, such as financial contracts and governance mechanisms on Tezos.

Move and Clarity represent innovative approaches to contract safety and complexity management, focusing on deterministic execution and resource constraints.

How AI Research Tools Support Smart Contract Analysis

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning have become increasingly valuable in analyzing and researching blockchain projects, including smart contracts. Platforms such as Token Metrics provide AI-driven ratings and insights by analyzing codebases, developer activity, and on-chain data.

Such tools facilitate the identification of patterns that might indicate strong development practices or potential security risks. While they do not replace manual code audits or thorough research, they support investors and developers by presenting data-driven evaluations that help in filtering through numerous projects.

Practical Considerations for Developers and Analysts

Developers choosing a smart contract language should consider the blockchain platform’s restrictions and the nature of the application. Those focused on DeFi might prefer Solidity or Vyper for Ethereum, while teams aiming for cross-chain applications might lean toward Rust or Move.

Analysts seeking to understand a project’s robustness can utilize resources like Token Metrics for AI-powered insights combined with manual research, including code reviews and community engagement.

Security should remain a priority as vulnerabilities in smart contract code can lead to significant issues. Therefore, familiarizing oneself with languages that encourage safer programming paradigms contributes to better outcomes.

Conclusion

Understanding what languages are used for smart contract development is key to grasping the broader blockchain ecosystem. Solidity leads the field due to Ethereum’s prominence, but alternative languages like Vyper, Rust, Michelson, Move, and Clarity offer different trade-offs in security, performance, and usability. Advances in AI-driven research platforms such as Token Metrics play a supportive role in evaluating the quality and safety of smart contract projects.

Disclaimer

This article is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult professionals before making decisions related to blockchain technologies and smart contract development.

Token Metrics Media LLC is a regular publication of information, analysis, and commentary focused especially on blockchain technology and business, cryptocurrency, blockchain-based tokens, market trends, and trading strategies.

Token Metrics Media LLC does not provide individually tailored investment advice and does not take a subscriber’s or anyone’s personal circumstances into consideration when discussing investments; nor is Token Metrics Advisers LLC registered as an investment adviser or broker-dealer in any jurisdiction.

Information contained herein is not an offer or solicitation to buy, hold, or sell any security. The Token Metrics team has advised and invested in many blockchain companies. A complete list of their advisory roles and current holdings can be viewed here: https://tokenmetrics.com/disclosures.html/

Token Metrics Media LLC relies on information from various sources believed to be reliable, including clients and third parties, but cannot guarantee the accuracy and completeness of that information. Additionally, Token Metrics Media LLC does not provide tax advice, and investors are encouraged to consult with their personal tax advisors.

All investing involves risk, including the possible loss of money you invest, and past performance does not guarantee future performance. Ratings and price predictions are provided for informational and illustrative purposes, and may not reflect actual future performance.

Sign up in seconds