Rather than engaging in direct competition over low-quality tokens, consider reallocating focus toward quality projects that demonstrate genuine liquidity depth and strong founder commitment. The distinction matters: projects backed by their teams show greater conviction and stability compared to speculative plays. When evaluating opportunities, prioritize those with sustainable liquidity foundations and meaningful owner skin-in-the-game. This approach shifts strategy from zero-sum competition to value-driven selection, ultimately offering better risk-adjusted outcomes for portfolio positioning.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
11 Likes
Reward
11
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MetaverseLandlord
· 3h ago
To be honest, this set of theories sounds good, but it's not that easy to really tell who the genuine builders are and who is just bragging.
Looking at liquidity depth alone isn't enough; you need to actually track the team's historical records and holdings to be reliable.
View OriginalReply0
SeasonedInvestor
· 3h ago
That's right. These days, chasing trash coins is just a way of betting against yourself... Instead of constantly watching those air projects, it's better to focus on studying truly deep and liquid assets. Only then can you survive longer.
View OriginalReply0
OnlyUpOnly
· 3h ago
Basically, don't chase trash coins; finding projects with real liquidity is the way to go.
View OriginalReply0
0xLuckbox
· 3h ago
That's right. Instead of scavenging through trash heaps, it's better to carefully examine projects backed by real money. Liquidity is the key.
View OriginalReply0
Deconstructionist
· 3h ago
That's right, there are too many trash projects in the crypto space now. When evaluating projects, you still need to look at whether the team is reliable.
Rather than engaging in direct competition over low-quality tokens, consider reallocating focus toward quality projects that demonstrate genuine liquidity depth and strong founder commitment. The distinction matters: projects backed by their teams show greater conviction and stability compared to speculative plays. When evaluating opportunities, prioritize those with sustainable liquidity foundations and meaningful owner skin-in-the-game. This approach shifts strategy from zero-sum competition to value-driven selection, ultimately offering better risk-adjusted outcomes for portfolio positioning.