Called $BTC bullish on Apr 10, 2025: $BTC rose 55% in 6 months.
View call →
I help busy people cut through the noise in DeFi. Systems driven research without the hype or bs.
accuracy score 50.5 on ETH over 41 ETH calls · 671 days of data · rank 58 of 65 ETH analysts (top 89.2% of the pool) · top 6.11% of an estimated 950 ETH analysts worldwide · v20r-multi-sparsepen-strong-ss12m-20261012, computed Nov 11, 2026 · Methodology →
Cite asCryptoQuant has tracked 41 directional calls on ETH by @thedefiedge on X since Jan 2022: ranked #58 of 65 analysts scored on ETH by accuracy — in the Top 10% of an estimated 950 ETH analysts worldwide (as of Nov 11, 2026).
Other assets covered (16)
Relative view by default: The DeFi Edge’s calls are mostly nuanced, so each day is read against their usual tone.
Sentiment timeline shows relative sentiment within this analyst's history. A perma-bull showing 8 bullish : 2 bearish in a bear market sets that as their baseline. If you notice any errors, claim @thedefiedge to submit corrections.
Called $BTC bullish on Apr 10, 2025: $BTC rose 55% in 6 months.
View call →Hover the chart to read the thesis of that period · click a day to pin it
You don't have to sit on 0% while you wait for an entry. There are 3 places paying around 8% on stablecoins right now, with no leverage. The best one isn't the highest rate. 1. USD1 on Dolomite (Ethereum), ~8% APR The simplest one. Deposit $USD1 into @Dolomite_io's lending market and earn interest from borrowers. The 8% is about 3.8% lending interest plus 4.3% in rewards. ~$319M supplied and ~$51M sitting available, so getting out shouldn't be a problem. The catch is over half the yield is rewards, claimed separately through Merkl. Without them you're closer to 3.8%. 2. Plume x Re7 vault on Kamino (Solana), ~8.2% APY Deposit $USDC into the Plume x Re7 USDC vault in @kamino's Earn section. About 3.8% is borrower interest and 4.4% is incentives. ~$7.8M in it. Heads up, the 90-day average is 6%. Treat 8.2% as lasting about as long as the incentives do. 3. ONyc on Loopscale (Solana), ~8.3% APY @onrefinance's $ONyc earns yield from reinsurance, basically the premiums insurance companies pay to protect themselves. On @Loopscale you deposit $USDC, borrowers put up ONyc as collateral, and the interest they pay is your yield. Almost all of it is real lending interest, not rewards. The catch is it's 98% lent out, so only ~$390K of $24M can come out right now. Size it small. If you want more and can wait, @Rockaway_X's OnRe Core Vault has averaged ~11% over the past month, with a 7-day wait to redeem. Which would you use? If you're parking cash for a better entry, getting it back fast matters more than squeezing out another 2-3%. That's Dolomite or Kamino. None of this is risk-free. Smart contract bugs, depegs, falling yields, and thin withdrawal liquidity can all bite. Where are you parking your stables right now?
View original →Papertrade went live on Oct 10. Over the past week, it ranked #3 on DefiLlama's revenue rankings, behind only Tether and Circle. Hyperliquid and https://t.co/xR4HP5oUFB sit below it, and Lighter, the next perp exchange on the list, is way down at #33. Together they lost about $18.7M. Even after $11.6M in USDC rewards, most are still in the red. TL;DR - Most of Papertrade's $62.5M in revenue is traders' own losses. - Early farmers got 100 $PAPER per $1 lost. Today it's under 10. - You can't sell PAPER, so do the payback math before you farm. So who's making money here? On @papertrade_xyz you can trade $BTC and $ETH with up to 1,000x leverage. There's no order book. You trade against the platform's own pool, which people call the House. When you win, the House pays you. When you lose, your money goes to the House and you get $PAPER, which you can stake to earn $USDC. Winning isn't free either. Profitable traders pay a variable cut of their gains plus a 2% fee. And if the House runs short of cash, your profit waits in a queue. Where does the revenue come from? $57.6M of its $62.5M in revenue (about 92%) has already gone out to PAPER stakers. Only about $10M came from fees. The rest is the House's trading profit, which means users' own losses. I'd bet plenty of that is people losing on purpose to farm $PAPER. Losing money on purpose is a wild strategy, but hey, it's crypto. The attention is real though. About 5,000 daily active addresses and $40M in TVL is a lot this early. Who's getting paid back? At launch, you got 100 PAPER for every $1 of eligible losses. Now it's under 10. The top 25 losers look to have minted mostly near that early rate, and they've claimed about 62% of their losses back in USDC. They're not whole yet, but they got a far better deal than anyone starting now. Someone losing $1,000 today gets about a tenth of the PAPER for the same hit. And a lot of what they lose pays the people who got in first. Can you sell PAPER to get out? And the funny part is you can't. $PAPER can't be sold or sent to another wallet. You can only stake and unstake it. It's basically a Hotel California token. You can check in, but you can never leave. The team said this week they have no plans to change that. Their reason is security. If PAPER traded freely, attackers could short it while moving the prices the House uses, so attacks would pay a lot better. Makes sense to me. But it means the USDC stream is the only way PAPER pays you back. They're also changing how PAPER gets minted, which the team says will slowly dilute older holders. So the math is still moving. What would I check before farming? If I were looking at $PAPER now, I'd want these answered first. 1. How much money do I have to lose to get PAPER? 2. How much USDC am I earning per token after dilution? 3. How long would those rewards take to pay back my losses? Since you can't sell, number 3 is basically the whole trade. One unofficial tracker, paperdashboard app, puts payback on new PAPER at about 244 days at today's payouts. More dilution stretches that. So what's my take? Personally I like the experiment. Letting traders share in an exchange's economics is a fun idea, and I'm kinda curious where it goes. But I wouldn't rush to farm PAPER because of its revenue numbers. What am I watching next? The real test is how much revenue the product makes once farming slows. It's already being tested. Daily revenue fell from $7.49M on Oct 15 to $1.45M on Oct 20. On Oct 21 it made just $0.18M. I'm not sure yet whether it holds up without the farmers. I'd also watch whether the House keeps paying winners on time. Would you rather farm PAPER today or wait until its economics become clearer?
Papertrade beat Hyperliquid on revenue this week. But the 25 traders who lost the most are still down $7M. Papertrade went live on Oct 10. Over the past week, it ranked #3 on DefiLlama's revenue rankings, behind only Tether and Circle. Hyperliquid and https://t.co/xR4HP5oUFB sit below it, and Lighter, the next perp exchange on the list, is way down at #33. Together they lost about $18.7M. Even after $11.6M in USDC rewards, most are still in the red. TL;DR - Most of Papertrade's $62.5M in revenue is traders' own losses. - Early farmers got 100 $PAPER per $1 lost. Today it's under 10. - You can't sell PAPER, so do the payback math before you farm. So who's making money here? On @papertrade_xyz you can trade $BTC and $ETH with up to 1,000x leverage. There's no order book. You trade against the platform's own pool, which people call the House. When you win, the House pays you. When you lose, your money goes to the House and you get $PAPER, which you can stake to earn $USDC. Winning isn't free either. Profitable traders pay a variable cut of their gains plus a 2% fee. And if the House runs short of cash, your profit waits in a queue. Where does the revenue come from? $57.6M of its $62.5M in revenue (about 92%) has already gone out to PAPER stakers. Only about $10M came from fees. The rest is the House's trading profit, which means users' own losses. I'd bet plenty of that is people losing on purpose to farm $PAPER. Losing money on purpose is a wild strategy, but hey, it's crypto. The attention is real though. About 5,000 daily active addresses and $40M in TVL is a lot this early. Who's getting paid back? At launch, you got 100 PAPER for every $1 of eligible losses. Now it's under 10. The top 25 losers look to have minted mostly near that early rate, and they've claimed about 62% of their losses back in USDC. They're not whole yet, but they got a far better deal than anyone starting now. Someone losing $1,000 today gets about a tenth of the PAPER for the same hit. And a lot of what they lose pays the people who got in first. Can you sell PAPER to get out? And the funny part is you can't. $PAPER can't be sold or sent to another wallet. You can only stake and unstake it. It's basically a Hotel California token. You can check in, but you can never leave. The team said this week they have no plans to change that. Their reason is security. If PAPER traded freely, attackers could short it while moving the prices the House uses, so attacks would pay a lot better. Makes sense to me. But it means the USDC stream is the only way PAPER pays you back. They're also changing how PAPER gets minted, which the team says will slowly dilute older holders. So the math is still moving. What would I check before farming? If I were looking at $PAPER now, I'd want these answered first. 1. How much money do I have to lose to get PAPER? 2. How much USDC am I earning per token after dilution? 3. How long would those rewards take to pay back my losses? Since you can't sell, number 3 is basically the whole trade. One unofficial tracker, paperdashboard app, puts payback on new PAPER at about 244 days at today's payouts. More dilution stretches that. So what's my take? Personally I like the experiment. Letting traders share in an exchange's economics is a fun idea, and I'm kinda curious where it goes. But I wouldn't rush to farm PAPER because of its revenue numbers. What am I watching next? The real test is how much revenue the product makes once farming slows. It's already being tested. Daily revenue fell from $7.49M on Oct 15 to $1.45M on Oct 20. On Oct 21 it made just $0.18M. I'm not sure yet whether it holds up without the farmers. I'd also watch whether the House keeps paying winners on time. Would you rather farm PAPER today or wait until its economics become clearer?
View original →@solana halved its block time, @Starknet wants to break up with Ethereum, and @papertrade_xyz launched 1000x perps where losing is how you earn the token. 7 updates worth catching up on: • @anza_xyz took @solana's 200ms slots live on October 9, halving its block time. An epoch now takes about a day instead of two, and Alpenglow with ~150ms finality is coming next week. • @Starknet is actively considering becoming an L1 to remove its dependence on Ethereum. The goal is to be the first fully quantum-resistant network, with 2027 as the target. • @chainlink launched CCIP Vault Adapters, letting a DeFi vault on one chain take deposits from 80+ chains in one click. @aave, @Lombard_Finance, @veda_labs, and @VenusProtocol have already signed on. • @RobinhoodCrypto is exploring a Stock Token tied to an actively managed ETF on Robinhood Chain, with @TRowePrice ($1.9T AUM). It says it'd be the first Stock Token of its kind if it works. • @raincards launched Rain wallets, a single stablecoin balance you can get paid into, earn rewards on, spend at 175M merchants, and send in 50+ currencies. • @papertrade_xyz went live on @HyperliquidX on October 10, a perps exchange offering 1000x leverage with no orderbook and no funding fees. Every trade settles against a self-funding LP, and $PAPER can only be minted from traders' losses. • @longdotxyz is turning hedged trades into tokens you can buy in one click. Its first basket, AI Nexus, is long AI names and short QQQ, and holders are set to get a say in its composition once community management goes live. @papertrade_xyz was the most interesting launch for me. The "lose-to-earn" mechanic took me back to DeFi's old mechanism-design era, including the part where degens gamed it on day one. I'll always be a sucker for crazy designs that only work onchain.
🗡️ What DeFi Shipped 🚢 (Oct 16): @solana halved its block time, @Starknet wants to break up with Ethereum, and @papertrade_xyz launched 1000x perps where losing is how you earn the token. 7 updates worth catching up on: • @anza_xyz took @solana's 200ms slots live on October 9, halving its block time. An epoch now takes about a day instead of two, and Alpenglow with ~150ms finality is coming next week. • @Starknet is actively considering becoming an L1 to remove its dependence on Ethereum. The goal is to be the first fully quantum-resistant network, with 2027 as the target. • @chainlink launched CCIP Vault Adapters, letting a DeFi vault on one chain take deposits from 80+ chains in one click. @aave, @Lombard_Finance, @veda_labs, and @VenusProtocol have already signed on. • @RobinhoodCrypto is exploring a Stock Token tied to an actively managed ETF on Robinhood Chain, with @TRowePrice ($1.9T AUM). It says it'd be the first Stock Token of its kind if it works. • @raincards launched Rain wallets, a single stablecoin balance you can get paid into, earn rewards on, spend at 175M merchants, and send in 50+ currencies. • @papertrade_xyz went live on @HyperliquidX on October 10, a perps exchange offering 1000x leverage with no orderbook and no funding fees. Every trade settles against a self-funding LP, and $PAPER can only be minted from traders' losses. • @longdotxyz is turning hedged trades into tokens you can buy in one click. Its first basket, AI Nexus, is long AI names and short QQQ, and holders are set to get a say in its composition once community management goes live. @papertrade_xyz was the most interesting launch for me. The "lose-to-earn" mechanic took me back to DeFi's old mechanism-design era, including the part where degens gamed it on day one. I'll always be a sucker for crazy designs that only work onchain.
View original →It could one day drain wallets by cracking the keys that protect them. Ethereum has a 2029 deadline, but Starknet might leave Ethereum to move faster. Here's where 9 of the biggest names in crypto stand: 1. $ETH: Targeting full quantum resistance by the end of 2029, covering wallets, validators, and the data layer the whole network runs on. It's also building a way for existing wallets to switch to quantum-safe signatures on their own schedule, so nobody gets forced to move funds all at once. 2. $BTC: Developers are working on proposals like BIP-360 to cut the risk from quantum attacks. The harder problem is lost coins. Millions of BTC sit in old wallets whose owners will never come back to upgrade, and deciding what happens to them is gonna be ugly. 3. $NEAR: Already supports quantum-resistant signatures through ML-DSA. You can upgrade your wallet's security without changing your address or moving your assets, which is a big deal if you've got money spread across DeFi. 4. $STRK: Wants to be fully quantum-resistant by 2027. Starknet wallets can already switch to new signature types on their own, but upgrading the network itself still means waiting on Ethereum. That's mainly why the team is considering becoming its own L1. Nothing's decided yet. 5. $QTC: Quantus went the other way. Instead of upgrading an existing chain, it launched in September with quantum-resistant signatures built in from day one, plus Bitcoin-style proof of work and a 21M supply. The tech is interesting, but it's a very young network that still has to prove it can attract real users. 6. $TRX: TRON has quantum-resistant signatures running on its testnet. @justinsuntron says they're ready to bring them to mainnet at any time. I'd watch for when regular users can actually use them. 7. $SUI: Just completed its first native quantum-safe transaction on devnet, using a signature system called ML-DSA-65. Mainnet support is targeted for early 2027. 8. $ZEC: Zcash is working toward quantum resistance through its Tachyon roadmap, and it has a harder job than most. It has to protect funds without breaking the privacy features people use it for, so swapping out wallet signatures won't cut it. 9. $COIN: Coinbase could matter just as much. They're working with Bitcoin developers and researchers on how to move existing BTC wallets to quantum-resistant security, and they've said the lost-coins question needs its own debate alongside that work. So how serious is the quantum threat? Today's computers can't realistically break the cryptography protecting Bitcoin and Ethereum wallets. A future quantum computer might by working backwards from a wallet's public key to its private key and draining the funds. Nobody knows when that becomes possible. And upgrading billions of dollars of crypto isn't something you do overnight. I think the most interesting opportunity here could be the infrastructure that helps existing chains upgrade. • NEAR users can change their security keys without moving their assets. • Starknet wallets can adopt new signature systems without waiting for a major network upgrade. • Then there are the teams doing migration work for existing chains, like Coinbase on the Bitcoin side. Personally, I'd check three things: 1. Is it live? A working mainnet and a roadmap promising 2027 are very different things. 2. Can people upgrade easily? Nobody wants to unwind their DeFi positions just to secure a wallet. 3. Does the token benefit? A chain getting more secure doesn't automatically make its token worth more. Run the list through the first two and $NEAR is the one name that clearly passes both right now. Everyone else is still on a roadmap or, in QTC's case, too new to be tested. Which project do you think is best positioned for the quantum era?
Quantum computing might be crypto's biggest threat. It could one day drain wallets by cracking the keys that protect them. Ethereum has a 2029 deadline, but Starknet might leave Ethereum to move faster. Here's where 9 of the biggest names in crypto stand: 1. $ETH: Targeting full quantum resistance by the end of 2029, covering wallets, validators, and the data layer the whole network runs on. It's also building a way for existing wallets to switch to quantum-safe signatures on their own schedule, so nobody gets forced to move funds all at once. 2. $BTC: Developers are working on proposals like BIP-360 to cut the risk from quantum attacks. The harder problem is lost coins. Millions of BTC sit in old wallets whose owners will never come back to upgrade, and deciding what happens to them is gonna be ugly. 3. $NEAR: Already supports quantum-resistant signatures through ML-DSA. You can upgrade your wallet's security without changing your address or moving your assets, which is a big deal if you've got money spread across DeFi. 4. $STRK: Wants to be fully quantum-resistant by 2027. Starknet wallets can already switch to new signature types on their own, but upgrading the network itself still means waiting on Ethereum. That's mainly why the team is considering becoming its own L1. Nothing's decided yet. 5. $QTC: Quantus went the other way. Instead of upgrading an existing chain, it launched in September with quantum-resistant signatures built in from day one, plus Bitcoin-style proof of work and a 21M supply. The tech is interesting, but it's a very young network that still has to prove it can attract real users. 6. $TRX: TRON has quantum-resistant signatures running on its testnet. @justinsuntron says they're ready to bring them to mainnet at any time. I'd watch for when regular users can actually use them. 7. $SUI: Just completed its first native quantum-safe transaction on devnet, using a signature system called ML-DSA-65. Mainnet support is targeted for early 2027. 8. $ZEC: Zcash is working toward quantum resistance through its Tachyon roadmap, and it has a harder job than most. It has to protect funds without breaking the privacy features people use it for, so swapping out wallet signatures won't cut it. 9. $COIN: Coinbase could matter just as much. They're working with Bitcoin developers and researchers on how to move existing BTC wallets to quantum-resistant security, and they've said the lost-coins question needs its own debate alongside that work. So how serious is the quantum threat? Today's computers can't realistically break the cryptography protecting Bitcoin and Ethereum wallets. A future quantum computer might by working backwards from a wallet's public key to its private key and draining the funds. Nobody knows when that becomes possible. And upgrading billions of dollars of crypto isn't something you do overnight. I think the most interesting opportunity here could be the infrastructure that helps existing chains upgrade. • NEAR users can change their security keys without moving their assets. • Starknet wallets can adopt new signature systems without waiting for a major network upgrade. • Then there are the teams doing migration work for existing chains, like Coinbase on the Bitcoin side. Personally, I'd check three things: 1. Is it live? A working mainnet and a roadmap promising 2027 are very different things. 2. Can people upgrade easily? Nobody wants to unwind their DeFi positions just to secure a wallet. 3. Does the token benefit? A chain getting more secure doesn't automatically make its token worth more. Run the list through the first two and $NEAR is the one name that clearly passes both right now. Everyone else is still on a roadmap or, in QTC's case, too new to be tested. Which project do you think is best positioned for the quantum era?
View original →Spot ETH ETFs have now had 10 straight days of outflows including $201.9M on Oct 6 alone. The steady ETF buyer that helped ETH earlier isn't showing up right now, so I wouldn't expect a quick rebound. Good time to go shopping for solid tokens. https://t.co/U3uZJ6s6XT
View original →
