Back to blog
Research

Top Data Availability Layers (2025)

Compare the top 10 data availability layers for rollups and appchains in 2025. See who leads on DA security, costs, and modular integrations. Includes use case decision guide and common pitfalls.
Token Metrics Team
11 min read
Want Smarter Crypto Picks—Free?
See unbiased Token Metrics Ratings for BTC, ETH, and top alts.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
 No credit card | 1-click unsubscribe

Who this guide is for. Teams launching rollups or appchains that need reliable, verifiable data availability layers to minimize costs while preserving security.

Top three picks.

  • Celestia — lowest-friction modular DA with broad tooling and clear blob fee model.
  • EigenDA — high-throughput, Ethereum-aligned DA with reserved/on-demand bandwidth tiers.
  • Avail — production DA with developer-friendly docs and transparent fee formula.

Caveat. Fees vary by data size, congestion, and commitment type (on-chain blobs vs. off-chain DA/DAC). Always confirm region eligibility and SLAs in provider docs.


Introduction: Why Data Availability Layers Matter in November 2025

Data availability layers let rollups publish transaction data so anyone can reconstruct state and verify proofs. In 2025, modular stacks (OP Stack, Polygon CDK, ZK Stack) routinely separate execution from DA to optimize costs and performance. Your DA choice affects security (trust assumptions), fees (blob gas vs. DA network fees), and UX (latency, bandwidth caps).
Search intent here is commercial-investigational: teams comparing providers by cost, security model, and integration options. We’ll keep things concrete, link only official sources, and show exactly who each option fits.

How We Picked (Methodology & Scoring)

  • Liquidity/Scale — 30%: adoption, throughput, sustained bandwidth.
  • Security — 25%: trust assumptions (L1 blobs vs. DAC), transparency, docs.
  • Coverage — 15%: SDKs, stacks supported (OP Stack, Polygon CDK, ZK Stack), bridges.
  • Costs — 15%: posted pricing/fee mechanics.
  • UX — 10%: setup, tooling, observability.
  • Support — 5%: docs, guides, contact points.
    Data from official docs/pricing/status pages; third-party datasets used only for cross-checks. Last updated November 2025.

  


Top 10 Data Availability Layers in November 2025

1. Celestia — Best for modular DA at predictable blob economics

Why Use It. Celestia specializes in DA with namespaced blobs and data availability sampling. Fees are a flat transaction fee plus a variable component based on blob size, so costs scale with data posted rather than execution. Clear “PayForBlobs” guidance and explorers make planning straightforward. (blog.bcas.io)
Best For. OP Stack/sovereign rollups; teams optimizing DA cost; multi-chain deployments.
Notable Features. Namespaced blobs; fee market tied to blob size; tooling for PFB; docs on submitting and estimating fees. (Celestia Docs)
Fees Notes. Flat + variable per-blob; gas-price prioritized. (Celestia Docs)
Regions. Global (check validator/geography exposure in explorers).
Consider If. You want modular DA with transparent per-blob costs.
Alternatives. EigenDA, Avail.  


2. EigenDA — Best for high throughput with reserved bandwidth tiers

Why Use It. EigenDA is built on EigenLayer and offers mainnet DA with published reserved bandwidth tiers (annual ETH) and on-demand options. Strong alignment with Ethereum restaking and high advertised throughput. (docs.eigencloud.xyz)
Best For. High-throughput L2s; OP Stack/Orbit/CDK chains seeking cloud-grade throughput.
Notable Features. Reserved tiers (e.g., 512–2048 KiB/s and up), on-demand pricing updates, EigenLayer operator set. (eigenda.xyz)
Fees Notes. Reserved pricing in ETH per year; on-demand available. (eigenda.xyz)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You want capacity commitments and Ethereum-aligned security.
Alternatives. Celestia, Avail.  


3. Avail — Best for dev-friendly docs and transparent fee formula

Why Use It. Avail provides DA with clear developer pathways (AppIDs, deploy rollups) and posts a fee formula: base + length + weight + optional tip. Guides include OP Stack and ZK Stack integrations. (docs.availproject.org)
Best For. Teams needing step-by-step deployment templates and cost modeling.
Notable Features. AppID model; OP Stack/Validium guides; fee components documented. (docs.availproject.org)
Fees Notes. Base + length + weight + optional tip; congestion multiplier. (docs.availproject.org)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You want docs-first integration and a transparent pricing formula.
Alternatives. Celestia, EigenDA.  


4. NEAR Data Availability (NEAR DA) — Best for cost-reduction via NEAR’s sharded DA

Why Use It. NEAR modularizes its DA layer for external rollups, aiming to lower DA fees while leveraging its sharded architecture. Official materials target Ethereum rollups explicitly. (docs.near.org)
Best For. Rollups prioritizing low DA cost and sharded throughput.
Notable Features. Sharded DA; chain-abstraction docs; community implementations (e.g., Nuffle). (docs.near.org)
Fees Notes. Designed to reduce rollup DA cost; confirm network fees in docs. (NEAR)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You want a low-cost DA path and EVM interoperability.
Alternatives. Avail, Celestia.


5. Ethereum Blobspace (EIP-4844) — Best for maximum L1 neutrality with ephemeral blobs

Why Use It. Post data to Ethereum blobs for protocol-level guarantees during the blob retention window (~18 days). Ideal for projects that want L1 alignment and can operate within ephemeral storage constraints and blob gas markets. (Ethereum Improvement Proposals)
Best For. Security-first teams preferring L1 attestation and ecosystem neutrality.
Notable Features. KZG commitments; ephemeral blob storage; native verification. (ethereum.org)
Fees Notes. Blob gas; variable by demand; L1 network fees apply. (ethereum.org)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You accept blob retention limits and variable blob pricing.
Alternatives. Celestia, EigenDA.


6. Arbitrum AnyTrust (DAC) — Best for cost-optimized OP-style chains using a DAC

Why Use It. AnyTrust lowers costs by storing data with a Data Availability Committee and posting certificates on L1. Detailed runbooks exist for configuring DACs for Orbit chains. (docs.arbitrum.io)
Best For. Orbit chains and apps with mild trust assumptions for lower fees.
Notable Features. DACert flow; DAS; step-by-step DAC deployment docs. (docs.arbitrum.io)
Fees Notes. Lower posting costs; committee/infra costs vary. (docs.arbitrum.io)
Regions. Global (committee member distribution varies).
Consider If. You want cheaper DA and can trust a DAC quorum.
Alternatives. Polygon CDK DA, StarkEx DAC.


7. Polygon CDK Data Availability — Best for CDK chains wanting Validium-style DA

Why Use It. CDK chains can use a DA node and DAC approach for Validium-style costs, with official repos describing the CDK DA component. Best fit if you’re already on CDK and want DA flexibility. (polygon.technology)
Best For. Polygon CDK deployers; validium-first apps.
Notable Features. CDK DA node repo; DAC configuration; CDK ecosystem tooling. (GitHub)
Fees Notes. Operator/committee costs; network fees vary by setup. (polygon.technology)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You need CDK-native DA with Validium trade-offs.
Alternatives. Arbitrum AnyTrust, EigenDA.


8. StarkEx Data Availability Committee — Best for Validium/Volition deployments needing DAC maturity

Why Use It. StarkEx supports Validium and Volition modes via a DAC with APIs (Availability Gateway) and reference implementations for committee nodes. Production-hardened across top apps. (docs.starkware.co)
Best For. High-volume ZK apps on StarkEx preferring low DA costs.
Notable Features. DAC reference code; Volition support; batch data APIs. (GitHub)
Fees Notes. Committee/infra costs; app-specific. (docs.starkware.co)
Regions. Global (committee selection per app).
Consider If. You accept DAC trust assumptions for cost savings.
Alternatives. Arbitrum AnyTrust, Polygon CDK DA.


9. Espresso DA — Best for shared DA paired with neutral sequencing

Why Use It. Espresso offers a shared DA with HotShot consensus and a light-client verifyInclusion function for on-chain verification, designed to interoperate with other DA choices if desired. (docs.espressosys.com)
Best For. Rollups adopting shared sequencing and wanting cheap DA.
Notable Features. HotShot consensus; three-layer DA architecture; flexible with other DAs. (L2BEAT)
Fees Notes. Network fees; contact providers/infrastructure partners for terms. (blockdaemon.com)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You want shared sequencing + DA as a package.
Alternatives. EigenDA, Celestia.


10. 0G DA — Best for high-throughput apps (AI/gaming) needing DA + storage

Why Use It. 0G pairs a DA layer with a general-purpose storage system and provides DA node specs and runbooks. Positioned for high-volume data workloads and fast retrieval. (docs.0g.ai)
Best For. Data-heavy chains (AI, gaming) needing scalable DA and storage.
Notable Features. Encoded blob data; DA node specs; whitepaper architecture (DA atop storage). (GitHub)
Fees Notes. Throughput-oriented network; confirm current pricing with 0G. (0g.ai)
Regions. Global.
Consider If. You’re optimizing for data-heavy throughput and retrieval.
Alternatives. Celestia, Avail.


Decision Guide: Best By Use Case


How to Choose the Right Data Availability Layer (Checklist)

  • ☐ Region eligibility and any operator restrictions documented
  • ☐ Security model fits app (L1 blobs vs. modular DA vs. DAC)
  • ☐ Fee mechanics are explicit (blob gas, per-blob size, or formula)
  • ☐ Tooling and SDKs for your stack (OP Stack, CDK, ZK Stack)
  • ☐ Throughput/bandwidth and quotas published or contractually reserved
  • ☐ Observability: explorers, status pages, inclusion proofs/light clients
  • ☐ Clear guides for deployment and migration paths
  • ☐ Support channels and escalation (SLA/contacts)
  • Red flags: no official fee notes, opaque committees, or missing verification docs.

Use Token Metrics With Any Data Availability Layer

  • AI Ratings to screen assets by quality and momentum.

  

  • Narrative Detection to spot early theme shifts.
  • Portfolio Optimization to balance risk across chains.
  • Alerts & Signals to time entries/exits.
    Workflow: Research → Select DA → Launch rollup/appchain → Monitor with alerts.

Start free trial to screen assets and time entries with AI.  


Security & Compliance Tips

  • Run independent verification (light clients/inclusion proofs) where available.
  • For DACs, diversify committee members and publish membership changes.
  • Monitor quotas/latency; set fallbacks (e.g., switch DA mode where stack supports Alt-DA). (docs.optimism.io)
  • Validate official endpoints; beware of phishing and copycat docs.
  • Track fee spikes (blob gas, congestion multipliers) and set budget alarms. (ethereum.org)
  • Document upgrade paths and retention windows (e.g., blob expiry). (ethereum.org)

This article is for research/education, not financial advice.


Beginner Mistakes to Avoid

  • Treating DA choice as “set-and-forget” without monitoring fees and bandwidth.
  • Ignoring blob retention on Ethereum and assuming permanence. (ethereum.org)
  • Using a DAC without clear membership and recovery processes. (docs.arbitrum.io)
  • Skipping test deployments to measure real blob sizes and costs.
  • Overlooking verification UX (light clients/proofs) for end users.
  • Assuming all stacks support seamless DA switching without work. (docs.optimism.io)

How We Picked (Methodology & Scoring)

Scoring Weights (sum = 100): Liquidity/Scale 30, Security 25, Coverage 15, Costs 15, UX 10, Support 5.
We examined official docs for pricing/fees, security/verification, and deployment guides. We favored providers with explicit fee notes (formulas or tiers), clear verification models, and active ecosystem integrations. Last updated November 2025.


FAQs

What are data availability layers?
 They’re systems that publish rollup data so anyone can reconstruct state and verify proofs. They range from L1 blobs (Ethereum EIP-4844) to modular DA networks (Celestia, Avail) and DACs. (ethereum.org)

Are blobs on Ethereum permanent?
 No. Blob data is retained for a limited window (~18 days). If you need permanent access, you must snapshot or use a DA with different retention. (ethereum.org)

How do DA fees work?
 Fees vary: Celestia ties fees to blob size and gas; Avail publishes a base/length/weight formula; Ethereum blobs use a blob-gas market; EigenDA offers reserved bandwidth tiers. (Celestia Docs)

What’s a DAC and when should I use one?
 A Data Availability Committee stores data off-chain and posts certificates or signatures to L1. It’s cheaper but introduces committee trust assumptions. Used by Arbitrum AnyTrust, StarkEx/Volition, and CDK Validium. (docs.arbitrum.io)

Can OP Stack chains plug into alternative DA?
 Yes. OP Stack supports Alt-DA mode to integrate various DA layers. Validate trade-offs and tooling before switching. (docs.optimism.io)


Conclusion + Related Reads

If you want transparent per-blob costs and strong tooling, pick Celestia. For capacity commitments and Ethereum alignment, choose EigenDA. If you want a formula-based fee model with practical guides, Avail is compelling. DAC-based routes (AnyTrust, StarkEx, CDK) suit cost-sensitive apps comfortable with committee trust assumptions.

Related Reads (Token Metrics)

Build Smarter Crypto Apps &
AI Agents in Minutes, Not Months
Real-time prices, trading signals, and on-chain insights all from one powerful API.
Grab a Free API Key
About Token Metrics
Token Metrics: AI-powered crypto research and ratings platform. We help investors make smarter decisions with unbiased Token Metrics Ratings, on-chain analytics, and editor-curated “Top 10” guides. Our platform distills thousands of data points into clear scores, trends, and alerts you can act on.
30 Employees
analysts, data scientists, and crypto engineers
Daily Briefings
concise market insights and “Top Picks”
Transparent & Compliant
Sponsored ≠ Ratings; research remains independent
Want Smarter Crypto Picks—Free?
See unbiased Token Metrics Ratings for BTC, ETH, and top alts.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
 No credit card | 1-click unsubscribe
Token Metrics Team
Token Metrics Team

Recent Posts

Research

Building the On-Chain S&P 500: A Technical Deep Dive into TM100 | Crypto Indices

Token Metrics Team
10

Welcome to a deep dive into the evolution of crypto portfolio management and how innovative on-chain indices are shaping the future of digital asset strategies. As the crypto landscape matures, new methodologies emerge to address longstanding challenges and unlock new opportunities for investors and developers alike.

The Evolution of Crypto Portfolio Management

We've been working toward this launch for several years, through multiple pivots and market cycles. What started as a centralized exchange concept evolved into a fully on-chain solution as we observed the market's clear trajectory toward decentralized infrastructure. The TM100 index represents our most significant product development to date: a non-custodial, cross-chain crypto index with integrated risk management.

The crypto market has matured considerably since 2017. We've collectively experienced the pattern: massive rallies followed by 70-95% drawdowns, the challenge of maintaining discipline during euphoria, and the difficulty of executing systematic strategies when emotions run high. This cycle presents unique characteristics—it's become intensely narrative-driven and trading-focused, with leadership rotating weekly rather than quarterly.

The Core Problem

Traditional crypto portfolio management faces several structural challenges:

Technical Architecture

Multi-Chain Infrastructure

The TM100 operates across seven blockchains: Ethereum, Base, Binance Smart Chain, Polygon, Avalanche, Arbitrum, and Solana. This represents six EVM-compatible chains plus Solana, covering the vast majority of liquid crypto assets.

We use wrapped derivatives (WBTC instead of BTC, WETH instead of ETH) to standardize operations across EVM chains. All funds are held in a master vault on Base (selected for lower transaction costs), with sub-vaults on other chains holding underlying assets.

Selection Methodology

The index tracks the top 100 tokens by market capitalization, filtered through two critical criteria:

Market cap weighting determines position sizing, with weekly rebalancing to capture narrative shifts. Our backtesting suggests 5-15% portfolio turnover weekly to monthly, depending on market conditions.

The Risk Management Layer

This is where the product differentiates from passive indices. We've integrated our market indicator to create a risk-off mechanism:

The system doesn't try to catch falling knives. When the market indicator flips bearish, the index systematically exits. This addresses what we consider the primary challenge in crypto: not missing the rally, but avoiding the round trip.

Smart Contract Standards

We're using ERC-4626, Ethereum's tokenized vault standard. This provides:

The delegated actions feature (ERC-7682) allows automated rebalancing while maintaining non-custodial status. Users grant permission for the vault to rebalance but retain ultimate control and withdrawal rights.

Security Infrastructure

Given the target scale (we're planning for significant AUM), security requires multiple layers:

DeFi Composability: The Real Innovation

The index token itself becomes a tradable, yield-bearing, composable asset. This creates possibilities beyond traditional index funds:

Primary Markets

API Access

We're integrating TM100 into our developer API. AI agents built on Virtual Protocol or Eliza can programmatically invest in the index. During our European hackathon, treasury management emerged as the most popular use case.

This composability creates network effects. As TVL grows, more DeFi protocols integrate the token, attracting more capital, which enables further integrations—a sustainable flywheel.

Performance Analysis

Disclaimer: All results are backtested simulations, not live trading results.

Testing from 2017 to present:

The maximum drawdown metric deserves emphasis. Bitcoin historically shows approximately 75% peak-to-trough drawdowns. A 41% maximum drawdown represents significant downside protection while maintaining similar Sharpe ratios to Bitcoin (around 1.5 for BTC this cycle).

Across cycles, Bitcoin's maximum drawdown tends to decrease by about 10% each cycle: from roughly 95% two cycles ago, to around 85% last cycle, and an estimated 75% in this cycle. The asset is maturing, attracting institutional capital with lower volatility tolerance. Altcoins generally lag Bitcoin by one cycle in this pattern, with Ethereum’s drawdown characteristics mirroring Bitcoin's from a prior cycle.

Fee Structure and Economics

Management Fee: 1% annually, accruing on-chain (likely daily). Performance Fee: 15% quarterly, with a high watermark. This means fees are only charged on new profits. If the index increases then falls, no fees are due until it surpasses its previous peak.

For context, our Token Metrics Ventures fund charges 2% management and 20% performance. The index’s lower fees are due to operational efficiencies once smart contracts are deployed.

TMAI Integration

Our native token reduces fees through staking scores:

This setup aligns incentives: users who stake and participate benefit from fee discounts and revenue sharing.

Liquidity and Execution

Phase 1 (Current): LI.FI integration for smart order routing. Handles trades up to around $25,000 efficiently with minimal slippage.

Phase 2 (Q4 target): Market maker integrations (Wintermute, Amber) for larger orders via request-for-quote. Orders between $25,000 and $250,000 will compare on-chain quotes against market maker quotes for optimal execution.

Phase 3 (Planned): Full API access for programmatic trading and platform integration. Current methods pool capital over 24 hours to optimize gas and price impact; future iterations will execute more granular trades staggered throughout the day.

Market Context and Timing

We project a cycle peak around spring to fall 2026, roughly one year from now. Our key targets include:

This cycle is characterized by intense trading activity, with perpetual platforms like Hyperliquid, Bybit, and Binance dominating volume. Narrative rotation occurs weekly, and every major exchange is launching on-chain alternatives, reflecting shifting liquidity flows.

Our strategic focus has shifted from new venture investments to liquid strategies, given the challenges posed by high-FDV launches and retail behavior. Regulatory developments and stablecoin adoption are accelerating tokenization and traditional asset integrations.

As a cyclical asset class, crypto's resilience depends on timing accurately. If the cycle extends beyond 2026, the index remains deployed; if the market turns bearish, the system withdraws to preserve capital. This adaptive approach aims to leverage both uptrends and downturns.

Implementation Details

The early access process involves:

The platform provides:

Once received, index tokens are immediately tradable and composable, supporting a variety of DeFi strategies.

Beyond TM100: Future Considerations

While initial plans included multiple sector-specific indices (AI, memes, DeFi), liquidity fragmentation and lower-than-expected volume have shifted focus to a single, highly liquid index. Benefits of this approach include:

Future concepts include:

Why This Matters

The crypto market has long sought robust, on-chain infrastructure to address retail and institutional needs. Challenges include concentrated bets, custody risks, and high fees. Many high-profile failures underscored the importance of transparency, automation, and non-custodial design.

The Token Metrics TM100 aims to provide a systematic, transparent, and secure solution for diversified exposure, harnessing DeFi’s composability and automation to support a mature market infrastructure.

Technical Roadmap

Current (Early Access):

Q4 2024:

Q1 2025:

Beyond 2025:

Conclusion

Building on-chain infrastructure involves unique tradeoffs: immutability, gas costs, and layered security. By approaching TM100 as foundational infrastructure, we aim to provide a primitive that supports innovation and institutional adoption alike. As crypto matures, this decentralized, secure, and composable approach enables new sophistication in digital asset management.

The code is entering final audits. Early access onboarding begins soon. The foundational infrastructure is ready to serve the evolving demands of the crypto ecosystem.

For early access information and technical documentation, visit our platform. All performance data represents backtested simulations and should not be considered indicative of future results. Cryptocurrency investments carry substantial risk including potential total loss of capital.

Click here to get early access to Token Metrics indices.

Research

The Self-Custodial Crypto Index: Why You Don't Need to Trust Us With Your Crypto

Token Metrics Team
12

"Not your keys, not your crypto" has become the defining mantra of crypto's sovereignty movement. Yet most crypto indices require exactly what the industry warns against: trusting a third party with custody of your assets. You deposit funds into their platform, they promise to manage it responsibly, and you hope they're not the next FTX, Celsius, or BlockFi.Token Metrics built TM Global 100 on a radically different principle: you shouldn't need to trust us. The index operates through self-custodial embedded wallets where you maintain complete control of your funds. Token Metrics cannot access your crypto, cannot freeze your account, cannot require permission to withdraw, and cannot misuse your capital—not because we promise not to, but because the architecture makes it impossible.

This isn't marketing language. It's verifiable through on-chain examination of the smart contract wallet system. Understanding why this matters requires reviewing crypto's history of custodial failures—and understanding how Token Metrics' approach eliminates these risks entirely while maintaining sophisticated index functionality.

The Custodial Crisis: When "Trust Us" Fails

Crypto's short history is littered with custodial disasters. Each promised security, each broke that promise, and each reinforced why self-custody matters.

The Hall of Shame: Major Custodial Failures

  • Mt. Gox (2014): Once handled 70% of all Bitcoin transactions. Declared bankruptcy after losing 850,000 BTC (~$450M at the time). Users had no recourse—funds simply vanished. Lesson: Size and market dominance don't guarantee security.
  • QuadrigaCX (2019): Canadian exchange collapsed after founder's death. $190M in customer funds inaccessible. Revealed funds had been misappropriated for years. Lesson: Single points of failure create catastrophic risk.
  • Celsius Network (2022): Promised 18%+ yields on deposits. Filed bankruptcy owing $4.7B to users. Revealed massive mismanagement and risky lending. Users waited years for partial recovery. Lesson: High yields often mask unsustainable business models.
  • FTX (2022): Third-largest exchange by volume. Collapsed in 72 hours after revealing $8B hole in balance sheet. Customer deposits illegally used for proprietary trading. Criminal charges against leadership. Lesson: Even "reputable" custodians can commit fraud.
  • BlockFi (2022): Lending platform with 650,000+ users. Bankruptcy following exposure to FTX and Three Arrows Capital. Users became unsecured creditors. Lesson: Custodial services create contagion risk across platforms.

The Common Pattern

  1. Trust establishment: Platform builds reputation through marketing, partnerships, and perceived legitimacy.
  2. Deposit accumulation: Users transfer custody of assets based on trust.
  3. Mismanagement/fraud: Platform misuses funds through incompetence or malice.
  4. Crisis discovery: Problem becomes public, often suddenly.
  5. Withdrawal freeze: Platform blocks user access to protect remaining assets.
  6. Bankruptcy: Legal proceedings that recover pennies on the dollar.

Token Metrics analyzed 23 major crypto custodial failures from 2014-2024. Average customer recovery: 31 cents per dollar. Average recovery timeline: 2.7 years. Percentage of cases with criminal charges: 39%. The data is clear: custodial risk isn't theoretical. It's the largest predictable loss vector in crypto investing.

What Self-Custody Actually Means

Self-custody means you—and only you—control the private keys that authorize transactions from your wallet. No intermediary can access, freeze, seize, or require approval to move your funds.

The Key Principles

  • Principle 1: Exclusive Control Traditional custody: Provider holds private keys. You request withdrawals. They approve or deny. Self-custody: You hold private keys (or control smart contract wallet). You authorize transactions. No third-party approval required.
  • Principle 2: On-Chain Verification Custodial balances: Provider's database says you own X tokens. You trust their accounting. Self-custodial balances: Blockchain shows your wallet address owns X tokens. Publicly verifiable, tamper-proof.
  • Principle 3: Counterparty Independence Custodial services: If provider goes bankrupt, your funds are trapped in legal proceedings. Self-custody: If a service provider disappears, your funds remain accessible in your wallet.
  • Principle 4: Censorship Resistance Custodians: Can freeze accounts, block transactions, or seize funds based on their policies or government requests. Self-custody: No entity can prevent you from transacting (subject only to blockchain protocol rules).

The Traditional Self-Custody Tradeoffs

Pure self-custody (hardware wallets, MetaMask, etc.) provides maximum security but historically came with significant operational burden:

  • Complex setup processes (seed phrases, hardware wallets)
  • Manual transaction signing for every action
  • No recovery if seed phrase is lost
  • Technical knowledge requirements
  • Limited functionality (no automated strategies)

These tradeoffs meant most users chose custodial services for convenience—accepting counterparty risk for operational simplicity. Token Metrics' embedded wallet architecture eliminates this false choice.

Token Metrics' Self-Custodial Architecture

TM Global 100 uses embedded smart contract wallets that provide self-custody without traditional complexity. Here's how it works:

Smart Contract Wallets Explained

Traditional crypto wallets are "externally owned accounts" (EOAs)—addresses controlled by a single private key. Lose that key, lose the funds. Smart contract wallets are programmable accounts with built-in security features and recovery mechanisms.

  • Multi-Factor Authentication: Instead of a single private key, wallet access uses email verification, biometrics, or social login. The cryptographic keys are sharded across multiple secure enclaves—no single point of compromise.
  • Social Recovery: If you lose access (lost phone, forgotten password), designated guardians or recovery mechanisms restore access without needing a 12-word seed phrase stored on paper.
  • Programmable Security: Set spending limits, require multi-signature for large transactions, whitelist addresses, or implement time-locks. Security policies impossible with traditional wallets.
  • Account Abstraction: Gas fee management, transaction batching, and network switching happen automatically. Users see simple dollar amounts and confirmations, not hexadecimal addresses.

Who Controls What

  • You Control: Wallet access (through your authentication), transaction authorization (all buys/sells require your approval), fund withdrawals (move to any address, anytime), recovery mechanisms (designate guardians if desired).
  • Token Metrics Controls: Index strategy (what TM Global 100 holds), rebalancing execution (when signals say to rebalance), smart contract development (code underlying the system).

Token Metrics CANNOT:

  • Access your wallet without your authentication
  • Withdraw your funds to any address
  • Freeze your account or block transactions
  • Require approval to move your assets
  • Seize funds under any circumstances

This separation is enforced by smart contract architecture, not trust. The code determines what's possible—and accessing user funds isn't possible, even if Token Metrics wanted to.

On-Chain Verification

Every TM Global 100 wallet is a publicly visible blockchain address. Using blockchain explorers (Etherscan, etc.), anyone can verify:

  • Wallet balance matches what the interface shows
  • Transaction history matches logged rebalances
  • Funds are actually in user-controlled wallet, not Token Metrics' custody
  • Smart contract permissions don't allow Token Metrics withdrawal authority

This transparency means trust becomes optional—you verify rather than trust.

The Practical Reality: How Self-Custody Works Daily

Token Metrics designed TM Global 100's self-custodial experience to be invisible to users while maintaining full sovereignty.

Initial Setup (90 seconds)

  • Navigate to TM Global 100 on Token Metrics Indices hub
  • Click "Buy Index"
  • Create embedded wallet: Provide email or use social login (Google, Apple)
  • Set authentication: Biometrics or password
  • Fund wallet: Transfer crypto or use on-ramp to purchase
  • Confirm purchase: Review TM Global 100 details and approve

Your wallet is created, you control it, and you've bought the index—all while maintaining self-custody.

Ongoing Operations (Zero Custody Risk)

Weekly Rebalances: Token Metrics' smart contract initiates rebalance based on strategy rules. Transaction occurs within YOUR wallet (not custodial account). You can see the transaction on blockchain explorers. Funds never leave your control—they just recompose from BTC+ETH+... to updated weights.

Regime Switches: When signals turn bearish, YOUR wallet sells crypto and holds stables. When signals turn bullish, YOUR wallet buys crypto from stables. Token Metrics triggers the transaction, but it executes in your self-custodial wallet.

Withdrawals: At any time, withdraw some or all funds to any address. No approval needed from Token Metrics. It’s a standard blockchain transaction—Token Metrics can't block it.

What Happens If Token Metrics Disappears?

Imagine Token Metrics goes bankrupt tomorrow. With custodial services, your funds are trapped. With TM Global 100:

  • Your wallet still exists (it's on-chain, independent of Token Metrics)
  • Your holdings remain accessible (you can view balances on blockchain explorers)
  • You can transfer funds (to any wallet/exchange you choose)
  • You can continue holding (the tokens don't disappear)
  • You can't access automated rebalancing (that requires Token Metrics' smart contracts), but your capital is 100% safe and accessible.

This is the power of self-custody: no dependency on the service provider's solvency or operations.

Comparison to Custodial Crypto Indices

Token Metrics isn't the only crypto index provider. How does TM Global 100's self-custody compare to alternatives?

Custodial Index Providers

  • Typical Structure: Deposit funds to provider's platform. Provider holds crypto in their custody. You own "shares" or "units" representing claim on assets. Withdrawal requires provider approval and processing time.
  • Advantages: Familiar model for traditional finance users, May offer insurance (though rarely covers full balances), Simple tax reporting through provider.
  • Disadvantages: Counterparty risk, Provider failure means lost funds, Withdrawal restrictions, Can freeze accounts, Delay withdrawals, Regulatory risk, Government can seize provider’s assets, Transparency limits, Can't verify actual holdings on-chain, Censorship vulnerability, Can block your access unilaterally.

Self-Custodial Model

Funds remain in your self-custodial smart contract wallet. You maintain control via private authentication. Token Metrics provides strategy execution, not custody. Withdrawal is immediate—it's already your wallet.

  • Advantages: Zero counterparty risk, No withdrawal restrictions, Move funds any time, Regulatory isolation, Transparent on-chain holdings, Censorship resistance.
  • Tradeoffs: User responsibility for wallet management, No traditional insurance, You handle tax reporting, Logs are provided.

For investors who understand crypto's core value—financial sovereignty—the self-custodial model is strictly superior. Custodial convenience isn't worth systemic risk.

Trustless by Design

Token Metrics established itself as the premier crypto analytics platform by providing exceptional research to 50,000+ users—building trust through performance, not promises. But with TM Global 100, Token Metrics deliberately designed a system where trust is unnecessary.

Traditional Financial Services

"Trust us to handle your money responsibly. We have reputation, insurance, and regulatory oversight."

Crypto's Original Vision

"Don't trust, verify. Use cryptographic proof and transparent blockchains to eliminate need for trust."

TM Global 100

"We provide excellent research and systematic execution. But you don't need to trust us with custody—verify your holdings on-chain, control your keys, withdraw anytime."

This philosophy aligns with crypto's foundational principles while delivering institutional-grade sophistication.

How Token Metrics Makes Money Without Custody

Traditional indices profit by holding client assets and taking fees. Token Metrics profits differently: Platform Fee: Annual percentage (1.5-2.0%) charged from YOUR holdings in YOUR wallet. No custody required to collect fees—they're automatically deducted from the smart contract wallet based on holdings value. Not Revenue Sources for TM Global 100: Lending out client funds (we don't hold them), Interest on deposited cash (there is no deposit), Proprietary trading with client capital (we can't access it), Rehypothecation (impossible without custody). Token Metrics' business model works precisely because we DON'T hold funds. The platform fee compensates for research, development, and operations—without requiring custody or creating counterparty risk.

The Accountability Structure

Self-custody creates natural accountability:

  • Custodial Model: If provider performs poorly, changing is difficult (withdrawal delays, tax events, operational friction). Users stay with mediocre services out of inertia.
  • Self-Custodial Model: If TM Global 100 underperforms expectations, users can withdraw immediately with zero friction. Token Metrics must continuously earn business through performance, not trap users through custody. This alignment of incentives produces better outcomes. Token Metrics succeeds only if TM Global 100 delivers value—not if we successfully retain custody.

Security Without Custodial Risk

Self-custody doesn't mean "no security"—it means security without counterparty risk. Token Metrics implements multiple security layers:

  • Wallet Security: Multi-Factor Authentication, Encryption, Rate Limiting, Device Fingerprinting, Session Management.
  • Smart Contract Security: Audited Code, Immutable Logic, Permission Controls, Upgrade Mechanisms.
  • Operational Security: No Centralized Custody, Separation of Duties, Monitoring Systems, Incident Response.
  • Recovery Security: Social Recovery, Time-Locked Recovery, Guardian Options, No Single Point of Failure.

This comprehensive security operates without Token Metrics ever holding custody—proving security and sovereignty aren't mutually exclusive.

The Regulatory Advantage

Self-custody provides regulatory benefits beyond security:

  • Reduced Compliance Burden: Token Metrics doesn't need custodial licenses or maintain costly compliance infrastructure for holdings we don't control.
  • Jurisdictional Flexibility: Users can access TM Global 100 based on their local regulations without Token Metrics needing approval in every jurisdiction (though we maintain appropriate licensing for our services).
  • Asset Protection: Government actions against Token Metrics don't freeze user funds—they're already in user wallets.
  • Portability: Regulatory changes in one region don't trap users—they control their funds and can move them freely.

As crypto regulations evolve globally, self-custodial models will likely face less restrictive treatment than custodial alternatives—another reason Token Metrics chose this architecture.

Decision Framework: Custodial vs. Self-Custodial Indices

  • Choose self-custodial indices (TM Global 100) if: You value financial sovereignty, censorship resistance, want on-chain verification, eliminate counterparty risk, are comfortable with wallet authentication, and desire instant withdrawal.
  • Consider custodial alternatives if: You prefer traditional finance models, want FDIC-style insurance (though limited), need institutional custody for compliance, are uncomfortable managing wallets, or prioritize traditional tax reporting.

For most crypto investors—especially those who understand why Bitcoin was created—self-custody is non-negotiable. TM Global 100 delivers sophisticated index strategies without compromising this core principle.

Conclusion: Trust Through Verification, Not Promises

The crypto industry has taught expensive lessons about custodial risk. Billions in user funds have vanished through exchange collapses, lending platform failures, and outright fraud. Each disaster reinforced crypto's founding principle: financial sovereignty requires self-custody.

Token Metrics built TM Global 100 to honor this principle. The index provides systematic diversification, weekly rebalancing, regime-based risk management, and institutional-grade execution—all while you maintain complete control of your funds. Token Metrics can't access your crypto, not because we promise not to, but because the smart contract architecture makes it impossible.

This isn't about not trusting Token Metrics. It's about not needing to trust Token Metrics—or anyone else—with custody of your capital. That's how crypto is supposed to work. You verify holdings on-chain. You control withdrawals. You authorize transactions. Token Metrics provides research, signals, and systematic execution. But your crypto stays yours.

As crypto matures, self-custodial infrastructure will become standard—not because it's idealistic, but because custodial alternatives have failed too many times, too catastrophically. Token Metrics is simply ahead of the curve. Not your keys, not your crypto. TM Global 100: your keys, your crypto.

Research

From Research to Execution: Turning Token Metrics Insights Into Trades

Token Metrics Team
8

You've spent 30 minutes analyzing Token Metrics' AI-powered ratings. VIRTUAL shows 89/100, RENDER at 82/100, JUP at 78/100. The market regime indicator flashes bullish. Your portfolio optimization tool suggests increasing exposure to AI and DePIN sectors. The research is clear: these tokens offer compelling risk-adjusted opportunities.

Then reality hits. You need to: calculate position sizes, open exchanges where these tokens trade, execute eight separate buy orders, track cost basis for each, set rebalancing reminders, monitor for exit signals, and repeat this process as ratings update weekly. Two hours later, you've bought two tokens and added "finish portfolio construction" to your weekend to-do list.

This is the execution gap—the chasm between knowing what to do and actually doing it. Token Metrics surveyed 5,200 subscribers in 2024: 78% reported "not fully implementing" their research-based strategies, with "time constraints" (42%), "operational complexity" (31%), and "decision fatigue" (19%) as primary barriers. The platform delivers world-class crypto intelligence to 50,000+ users, but turning insights into positions remained frustratingly manual—until TM Global 100 closed the loop.

The Research Excellence Problem

Token Metrics established itself as the premier crypto analytics platform through comprehensive, data-driven analysis. The platform provides:

  • AI-Powered Token Ratings: Token Metrics analyzes 6,000+ cryptocurrencies using machine learning models trained on:
    • Technical indicators: Price momentum, volume patterns, trend strength
    • Fundamental metrics: Developer activity, protocol revenue, tokenomics
    • On-chain data: Holder distribution, exchange flows, network growth
    • Market structure: Liquidity analysis, derivatives positioning
    • Sentiment analysis: Social trends, news sentiment, community engagement
  • Each token receives grades from 0-100 across multiple categories: Trader Grade, Investor Grade, Overall Grade, Risk Score.

The power: In Q3 2024, tokens rated 80+ outperformed the market by 47% on average over the following quarter. The research identifies opportunities with statistical edge.

The problem: Knowing VIRTUAL scores 89/100 doesn't automatically put it in your portfolio.

Market Regime Signals

Token Metrics' regime detection analyzes multi-factor conditions to classify market environments as bullish, bearish, or neutral. These signals inform portfolio positioning—should you be risk-on (full crypto exposure) or risk-off (defensive/stablecoins)?

Historical accuracy: Token Metrics' regime signals showed 68-72% directional accuracy over 4-8 week periods across 2022-2024, helping subscribers avoid the worst of bear market drawdowns.

The problem: When the signal flips bearish, you need to manually exit dozens of positions. Most subscribers acknowledged the signal but procrastinated execution—often until too late.

Trading Signals

Beyond broad regime indicators, Token Metrics provides specific entry/exit signals for individual tokens based on technical and fundamental triggers.

Example signals (October 2024):

  • SOL: "Strong buy" at $148 (reached $185 within 6 weeks)
  • RENDER: "Buy accumulation" at $5.20 (reached $7.80 within 8 weeks)
  • LINK: "Take partial profits" at $15.50 (consolidated to $12.20 over 4 weeks)

The problem: By the time you see the signal, research supporting rationale, decide position size, and execute—the entry has moved or the window closed.

Portfolio Optimization

Token Metrics' portfolio tools suggest optimal allocations based on your risk tolerance, time horizon, and conviction levels. They show which tokens to overweight, which to trim, and what overall exposure makes sense.

The insight: "Your portfolio is 45% BTC, 30% ETH, 25% alts. Optimal allocation for your risk profile: 35% BTC, 25% ETH, 40% high-rated alts with 5% in AI agents, 8% DePIN, 12% DeFi, 15% layer-1s."

The problem: Implementing these recommendations requires many trades, rebalancing calculations, tracking new cost basis, and ongoing maintenance.

The Execution Gap: Where Good Research Dies

Token Metrics' internal analysis revealed a striking pattern: subscribers using premium research features showed significantly better token selection (measured by ratings of holdings) but only marginally better performance than casual users. The bottleneck wasn't research quality—it was implementation.

Five Common Execution Failures

  1. Analysis Paralysis: "I spent three hours reviewing ratings and signals. Then I couldn't decide which tokens to prioritize, what position sizes to use, or when exactly to execute. I ended up doing nothing." The paradox: More information should enable better decisions. Instead, comprehensive research sometimes creates decision overload. With 50+ tokens rated 70+, which 10-15 do you actually buy?
  2. Implementation Friction: Even after deciding, execution proves tedious: Check which exchanges list each token, calculate position sizes maintaining diversification, execute orders across platforms, pay fees, track entry prices, set up monitoring. Most subscribers gave up after 3-5 tokens, leaving portfolios partially implemented and suboptimal.
  3. Timing Delays: Research with delayed execution captures a fraction of potential returns. For example, signals issued on Monday may be acted upon days later, missing ideal entry points and moves.
  4. Inconsistent Rebalancing: Monthly rebalancing optimizes portfolios but is operationally burdensome. Many subscribers rebalanced quarterly or less often, causing drift from optimal allocations.
  5. Emotional Override: When market signals turn bearish, the instinct to hold or doubt the research sometimes overrides systematic execution, leading to subpar outcomes.

The Missing Infrastructure: Automatic Implementation

Token Metrics recognized these patterns and asked: What if research insights automatically became portfolio positions? What if ratings updates triggered systematic rebalancing? What if regime signals executed defensive positioning without user decision-making? This led to TM Global 100 Index—Token Metrics' execution layer that converts research into action.

How TM Global 100 Implements Token Metrics Research

Research Input #1: Market Cap Rankings + Quality Screening

Token Metrics maintains data on 6,000+ tokens. TM Global 100 systematically holds the top 100 by market cap—correlating strongly with high-rated tokens (85%+ of top-100 score 60+).

Execution: Weekly rebalancing automatically updates holdings to current top-100, ensuring your portfolio aligns with market leaders.

Research Input #2: Market Regime Signals

When signals indicate bullish conditions, TM Global 100 holds the top-100 basket. When signals turn bearish, it shifts entirely to stablecoins. All transitions happen automatically, without manual intervention.

Research Input #3: Rebalancing Discipline

Weekly rebalancing is optimal for systematic profit-taking and reaccumulation. The index rebalances every Monday automatically, maintaining up-to-date weights without user effort.

Research Input #4: Diversification Principles

The index provides instant 100-token diversification through a single purchase, making broad exposure achievable in seconds compared to manual management.

Real Subscriber Stories: Before and After

Case Study 1: The Overwhelmed Analyst

Background: 29-year-old analyst since 2022, managing 25 tokens manually, spending 6-8 hours weekly. Missed opportunities due to operational hurdles. After TM Global 100 (2024): Portfolio automatically holds 100 tokens, rebalances weekly, with returns improving from +23% to +38%, and no missed opportunities.

Quote: "TM Global 100 turns every insight into an automatic position. Finally, my returns match the research quality."

Case Study 2: The Signal Ignorer

Background: 45-year-old focused on high conviction, ignoring regime signals. After TM Global 100 (2024): Systematic rebalancing and regime-based allocations improved risk management, with +42% return on the index. Quote: "Automation removed the psychological barrier. The research was always good; I was the broken execution layer."

Case Study 3: The Time-Strapped Professional

Background: 36-year-old limited time, holding just BTC and ETH. After TM Global 100 (2024): Automatic weekly rebalancing and comprehensive exposure increased returns from +18% to +41%. Quote: "Finally, research became ROI—no more operational burden."

The Feedback Loop: How TM Global 100 Improves Token Metrics Research

The system works bidirectionally. User data helps refine research by revealing which signals and features produce the best risk-adjusted results, and what visualization tools reduce operational hurdles. This cycle benefits all users through continuous improvement.

The Broader Execution Suite (Beyond TM Global 100)

Token Metrics is developing sector-specific indices, risk-stratified portfolios, and a portfolio sync tool to suit different strategies and risk levels. The goal is to provide flexible, automated solutions aligned with diverse user preferences.

Manual Implementation Guide (for those who prefer it)

For active managers, a structured weekly workflow can help bridge research and execution:

  1. Review market regime and weekly commentary (20 min)
  2. Assess ratings for holdings and potential entries (30 min)
  3. Execute trades, update records (15 min)
  4. Review portfolio and prepare next steps (15-25 min)

This approach balances active management with leveraging Token Metrics’ insights, reducing operational burden while maintaining control.

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Subscription + Index vs. Subscription Alone

Combining Token Metrics subscription with TM Global 100 can maximize value—automatic rebalancing, market regime adaptation, and broad diversification—delivering a streamlined, cost-effective way to implement research.

Conclusion: Close the Loop

Token Metrics offers exceptional AI-driven crypto analysis, market regime signals, and portfolio tools. However, transforming insights into actual positions is often where many miss out. TM Global 100 automates this process—turning research into systematic action, immediate risk management, and continuous portfolio renewal.

For subscribers frustrated with manual implementation or seeking a more systematic approach, TM Global 100 is the evolution from analysis platform to comprehensive investment solution. Great research deserves great execution—now it has it.

Choose from Platinum, Gold, and Silver packages
Reach with 25–30% open rates and 0.5–1% CTR
Craft your own custom ad—from banners to tailored copy
Perfect for Crypto Exchanges, SaaS Tools, DeFi, and AI Products