So, the altcoin market has gotten pretty intriguing lately because of their role as alternatives to Bitcoin. They really help boost the scalability and everyday usability of crypto for regular business deals. That's why a lot of these altcoins have held strong, thanks to their real-world utility rather than just trendy hype.
But with all the memecoin madness happening right now, it's hard not to compare how both types of coins are pulling in attention. Which one really matters more for long-term success?
Utility is straightforward. It’s about how the coin is actually used for something practical in the real world, like BNB for instance.
On the flip side, you’ve got hype, which is more about those meme coins. There’s been a lot of buzz lately, mostly driven by aggressive promotion on social media, with little to no real use cases or solid projects backing them up.
What utility BNB serves in the real world that others don't? From what i gather, BNB has only meta utility inside the crypto ecosystem.
All possible "real world" utility with BNB happens via 3rd party services, which can be accomplished with any other altcoin accepted by those 3rd party services. And that includes ton of those hyped tokens with "zero use case". Imho there are better arguments against meme tokens then lack of utility. Because that doesn't really mean anything.
The coins that normally last longer in this space are those with real and actual utilities or feasible use cases not all those ones that are only capitalizing on hypes for their survival, so coins like BNB & ETH are built on strong and measurable ecosystem that fuels their relevance and existence in the crypto space, but so many memecoins sorely depend on social media buzz from paid influencers in order to caomouflage to be a good coin to invest in, Hype can surely result in quick and painless profits but technically, investing in utility backed coin is much safer for a long term value.
Let not narrow this argument down to only BNB despite that it may lack real world utilities and limited to the binance ecosystem alone for it usage, we have a lot of other coin that give both real world usage e.g XRP and staller, btw BNB also fall into that category as it provides both high utilities in the exchange and blockchain bsc BNB is used for the two.
Well despite the altcoins offer utility and use cases, there's no guarantee they will be successful, many of the coins are surviving, but their price keep declines. ARKM was the example, the project has a use case to track blockchain transaction and ownership, but now the price is just $0.2, the ATH was $3.
Although Stellar might be the cheapest network for dApps, but most people aren't interested to use Stellar, which I think the project is failed.
Any native tokens are supposed to give discount/benefit for the users to use their exchanges, no need to mention this one.
I'd like to say that utility is important. But so far I can only see hyped coin going up. $ASTER is an example. $ASTER as a token have minimum utility beside governance and there's nothing going on yet the price rose up so high from the TGE because it was hyped.
Even the token basically have no utility within the perp app beside being used to reward traders which means more emission that should be deemed to be bad because more coin in circulation means more selling pressure.
Frankly the only real utility for a coin is being used for gas but majority of L1 besides the popular one tanked so hard such as $ATOM and many more. This kinda make me realize that hype is what drives traffic and value and not necessarily can considered to be below utility.
$Aster is one coin that have made a lot of news lately, and to that effect we have put in a lot of work to unravel what may possibly be the future reality of that coin and how long it can hold on to the current hypes around it market, but note hype can provide long term liqudities which is why majority of the memecoins never last for long in the market no matter how high their started with.
Hype is good for traders, utility is better for investors most memecoins are driven by narratives and influencers not by demand for the product itself once early buyers exit, late buyers are stuck.
Yeah, when the hype is over, anyone that haven't sold is forced to remain a bagholder for life. That's the thing with projects that are built ultimately on hype. There is almost no reason to continue holding when the hype has died down. And given the fact that there's no utility or any use case for the token, the only way to go is down. It's just the rules of supply and demand. Hype is temporary boost that doesn't last.
There will never be a time when a coin stays on top of the market because of hype; utility is everything for a coin to gain investor support.
All the top coins in the market have utility; a coin cannot sustain its existence solely on hype. They may pump, but once the price drops, the price will eventually go to zero.
It's attractive to invest in coins that are gaining hype, but if you want a sure, long-term profit, go for a coin with usability. Just take the example of Ethereum and BNB.
I've been with the hypes for meme coins and AI coins, they're all a mistake of mine. Wasted money but good thing that I've got my stash filled with Bitcoin and that had saved my losses. I think people who are into altcoins need to think a lot of times before they proceed in it. That's because they will not know which is good and which is not, which are those who are driven by hype and with the real narratives.
Here is a good comparison that I've seen.
From the image above you can clearly tell the mechanism behind both coin developments, while utility tokens are dependent on their existing ecosystem to provide security of liqudities through fees and other trading activities that exist within their chain, is quite clear to say that memecions lack that feature and that is why their die when the hypes is off.
Ok, then elaborate please, as you brought up BNB.
Because i don't see XRP or Stellar giving any more "real world use cases" then BNB. And bear in mind, i don't see "real world use cases" as attributes of most coins, that just are accepted by 3rd party middle man who sells that crypto and gives money to who you were supposed to pay with crypto.
And i am aware of the pilot programs, but i am unwilling to count them as real before they benefit anyone so much that they actually get adopted.
Neither i would count synthetics as "(RW)A", like some people like to represent them. They are nothing new and just represents the value of RWA. And i would even debate if there are any benefit in tokenization of them.
I will rather choose hype over utility because I know that hype is what is controlling the market and when a project does not have the hype to maintain their liquidity, that is when holders might be thinking to sell part of their holdings because they are afraid that the project could crash and the value of their holdings might depreciate at any time. Utility is not what many holders are looking for.
I think i wouldn't surprise you to tell that many think it's major cryptocurrencies, their real value calculated by its price in the market are measured by hype. I can't mention even one or two of these few mentioned valued by utility. Who ever talk about utility in an growthing market of investment with high risk return in short to medium terms.
What validates any coin is it's utility hypes without validation is equal to nothing, the camouflaging we see all time are marketing strategies to get public attention and as well getting enough of what will be liquidated over selfish reasons and in most circumstances it is the newbies that falls prey to this because majority becomes ignorant of what is meant to be the concept of doing proper personal research and it's important even though it doesn't give a 100 percent guarantee but it reduces chances of falling of victim of had I know.
However, a sharp drop in the price of an altcoin doesn't necessarily mean the project has failed. If it remains listed on top exchanges, has good trading volume, and especially if the development team is still actively working and striving to improve it. It's too early to conclude that this is a failed project. Furthermore, as we all know, the cryptocurrency market is cyclical, and many altcoins have fallen 90-95% in bear markets before surging 10-100 times in subsequent bull cycles.
Similar to ARKM, it's too early to say that it has failed.
Imo utility without hype is low and similarly Hype without Utility is obviously bad. So if a crypto proejct is able to show promising utility and is fueled with the latest narrative hype then that's much better. That's why instead of choosing between Utility and Hype I prefer both in one project because it has more injections from big investors.
Most of the altcoins are the same and has no special utility. It's same with the tokens too. That's why you see that the dev always hype them to lure investors into investing and later scam the investors. A real coin with utility will speak for itself even with the hype. Look at bitcoin speaking for itself because it has a special and uncommon utility purposes.
most altcoins that have utilities and use cases have dropped more than 70% in price so no one guarantees this is a success even though the utility is still used by many people, the price still doesn't go back up to where it was when the price was high?
Altcoins are like that now --- it's just that utility and use cases mean that altcoins can stay in the market longer even if the price remains low, whereas memecoins that rely on hype after that the coin is not valuable at all.