Search the Community

#Solana #Sol Solana can be considered a miracle. You will find that there are very few public blockchains like Solana that rose rapidly, then experienced extreme moments of brilliance, and also endured collective doubt. It was once called an “Ethereum killer,” and it was once sentenced to “death” because of outages and the collapse of FTX. But in 2024–2025, it once again stood at the center of the stage, becoming one of the most active main battlefields for Meme, DePIN, NFT, PayFi, and AI Agent ecosystems. What exactly is Solana? Why can it be outrageously fast? And why can it never escape the controversies around “centralization” and “stability”? In this article, we will explain everything clearly in one go. Solana Explained Clearly in One Sentence Solana is a Layer 1 public blockchain whose core design goal is “extreme performance first.” To put it in even more straightforward terms: what Solana wants to be is a Layer 1 public blockchain that is as fast as Web2, but still runs on blockchain infrastructure. It was not born for “store of value.” From the very beginning, it targeted heavy scenarios such as high-frequency trading, payments, and large-scale on-chain application execution. Solana’s “Speed” Is Not About TPS, but About the “Extremeness” of Its Architectural Choices When many people talk about Solana, they always end up focusing on one number: TPS is very high, at the level of hundreds of thousands or even millions. But if you only stare at TPS, you are actually underestimating Solana’s real value, and also misunderstanding the source of its controversies. The essence of Solana is not “slightly optimizing performance,” but making a complete set of architectural trade-offs at the blockchain base layer that are entirely different from Ethereum. What it pursues is not “finding a balance between decentralization, performance, and security,” but making a clear choice: performance first, and then using engineering methods to backstop the other issues. 1. Proof of History: Taking “Time” Out of Consensus In most blockchains, “time” itself is an extremely costly thing, because nodes do not know who saw a transaction first. They can only rely on: continuous communication repeated reconciliation multiple rounds of voting to confirm transaction ordering. Solana’s Proof of History does something very counterintuitive: it no longer lets the entire network negotiate time. Instead, it generates an unfalsifiable timeline in advance. Through a Verifiable Delay Function (VDF), it continuously produces a hash chain, where each hash naturally represents that a certain amount of time has already passed. What does this mean? Once a transaction enters the network, it can be “pinned” to a specific point in time. Validators only need to verify whether the order is correct, rather than renegotiating the order. This dramatically reduces the communication complexity at the consensus layer. This step is not “speeding up consensus,” but reducing the amount of work that consensus itself needs to do. So Solana is fast not because nodes are more diligent, but because it makes nodes do much less work. 2. Sealevel Parallel Execution: Not a Faster EVM, but “Not EVM” Solana’s second core component is the Sealevel parallel execution engine. In the EVM world, most transaction logic is implicit: contracts decide by themselves which state they read and write, and nodes can only execute transactions sequentially to avoid state conflicts. This leads to one result: even if two transactions are completely unrelated, they still have to queue. Solana instead requires transactions to “declare first, then execute.” Transactions must declare in advance which accounts they will read and which accounts they will write. Validators can determine conflicts ahead of time, and if there is no conflict, transactions can be executed in parallel. This allows Solana to truly utilize modern servers’ multi-core CPUs, instead of only using a small portion of computing power like traditional blockchains. This is also why Solana is particularly suitable for: high-frequency DEXs order books on-chain matching real-time games and payments It does not treat the blockchain as merely a “settlement layer,” but attempts to treat it as a high-performance state machine. 3. Trading Hardware for Performance: This Is a Design Choice, Not a Technical Flaw Solana’s biggest point of controversy is actually very simple: high node requirements — high bandwidth, high memory, high IO, and high compute power. This directly leads to: slower growth in the number of validator nodes difficulty for ordinary users to run nodes themselves it being more easily questioned as “centralized” But one thing must be distinguished clearly: is this an “unavoidable compromise,” or an “active choice”? The Solana team’s logic has always been very clear: hardware will continue to improve, while software bottlenecks are extremely difficult to break. Rather than limiting the upper bound in order to accommodate low-performance devices, it is better to raise the upper bound directly and run the network at the real-world limits of hardware. You may disagree with this path, but it is not laziness. It is an extremely aggressive engineering decision. 4. In Summary, Solana’s Speed Comes From Three Things Using PoH to reduce consensus communication costs Using Sealevel to achieve true parallel execution Using hardware specifications in exchange for system throughput The costs are equally obvious: higher operational complexity stricter engineering stability requirements extreme sensitivity to clients, networks, and synchronization mechanisms This is also why Solana experienced multiple outages in its early stages. This was not a design failure, but rather problems being exposed earlier under extreme conditions. Solana’s True Positioning: Not Ethereum 2.0, but On-Chain Web2 If Solana must be given an accurate positioning, it is more like a “high-performance application platform” in the blockchain world, rather than a financial settlement layer. What does this mean? it is more suitable for large user bases and high-frequency interaction it is more suitable for Meme, NFT, payments, and DePIN it does not pursue extreme decentralization it accepts a certain degree of engineering compromise This is completely different from Ethereum’s philosophy, but it does not conflict with it. Solana’s Explosion Was Not Driven by VC, but by “Real Usage” Some people ask why the Solana ecosystem was able to explode again in 2024–2025. In fact, many people overlook one point: Solana’s explosion was not driven by VC, but by real usage. 1. Memes Brought Real Transaction Volume low gas fees second-level confirmation retail-user friendly These factors made Solana the most natural breeding ground for Memes. Many Memes are not “high-end,” but they brought real on-chain transaction volume, fees, and active addresses. 2. NFTs Shifted From “Art” to “Consumer-Grade Applications” The advantages of Solana NFTs lie in: extremely low minting costs user experience close to Web2 better suitability for large-scale issuance This allows NFTs to no longer remain mere collectibles, but begin evolving toward consumer-grade applications such as: tickets memberships in-game assets 3. PayFi and Stablecoin Transfer Scenarios USDC and USDT transfers on Solana are: almost imperceptible extremely low cost excellent in user experience In emerging markets, Solana has in practice already taken on part of the role of payment infrastructure. Unavoidable Controversies: Talking About Solana Cannot Only Focus on the Positive Side ❌ Outage history Solana has repeatedly experienced: network congestion block production halts validator restarts For “financial-grade infrastructure,” these are serious flaws. ❌ High validator threshold high hardware costs high degree of specialization relatively concentrated validator distribution This has long caused Solana to be questioned in terms of its degree of decentralization. ❌ Strong engineering orientation rather than extreme security orientation Solana’s choice is essentially: get applications running first, then talk about perfect security. This is an engineering philosophy, not a mistake, but it is not something everyone can accept. Conclusion: Solana’s Value Lies in the Fact That It Is Truly Being “Used” In the crypto industry, many narratives exist only in PPT slides, while Solana’s value is reflected more in on-chain data. It is not perfect, but it is real, aggressive, and efficient. For developers, it is a tool; for users, it is an experience; for the market, it is a choice. And choice itself is the most important meaning of the crypto world.

#Solana #Saga #Web3Phone Since the iPhone ushered in the smartphone era, mobile ecosystems have grown ever richer — gradually folding in the wallet, browser, calculator, computer, and payments — becoming a compendium of functions from many domains. The convenience phones bring to daily life is obvious to all. At this point, many started to wonder whether crypto and blockchains could enter everyday hardware ecosystems. From wallets, browsers, and smart contracts to embedding crypto elements directly into the phone, an impatient yet ambitious experiment emerged: the Web3 phone. These devices carry the vision of “bringing blockchain into daily life” — with built-in crypto wallets, preloaded token airdrops, dApp entry points, and freedom from traditional app-store gatekeeping. Yet when ideals meet reality, deeper issues in technology, markets, governance, and security are exposed. Recently, the end of support for Solana Saga became a landmark event in Web3 phone history. Just two years after launch, the device has “reached its end,” and the reasons and lessons behind that deserve serious reflection. This article starts from the development arc of Web3 phones, analyzes Saga’s rise and fall, and then examines from an industry perspective: why has this track repeatedly been “brimming with ambition” yet “delivering modest returns”? Can Web3 phones reboot? And what does this mean for brands, developers, and users? The Vision of Web3 Phones and Three Development Stages As we noted at the outset, “the phone” is an indispensable portal for modern life. Images, finance, social, gaming, payments — nearly all digital life gathers in a pocket-sized device. The blockchain community recognized early on: if decentralized asset management, secure wallets, identity, and cross-chain interactions could be built into phones, then Web3 could reach ordinary users and move from “within the circle” to “within daily life.” Thus, the Web3 phone vision can be summarized in three points: Native wallet and self-custody — users own their private keys, without intermediaries. dApp ecosystem entry — the phone is not just a browser, but an on-chain application portal. Escape from traditional app-store constraints — remove potential risks of fees, review, and de-listing by platforms. Against this backdrop, Saga and more than a dozen so-called “crypto phones” followed. From hardware partnerships, preinstalled wallets, and airdrop incentives to on-chain identity binding, they shone brightly. But beyond the vision lurked layered challenges in ecosystems, business models, technology, and regulation. Phase One: Exploration (Web3 Phone 1.0 Representatives) — HTC Exodus and Sirin Labs Finney To talk about Web3 phone 1.0, we have to go back to around 2018, when a crypto wave was just beginning and some hardware makers were first to spot the opportunity. Two of the most representative: 1) HTC Exodus (2018) From the former Android heavyweight HTC came a bold attempt. Built-in cold wallet “Zion Vault,” supporting BTC, ETH, and other majors. The main selling point was “blockchain security,” emphasizing user-held private keys. Sales weren’t hot; according to HTC execs, first-year volume was under 100,000. Core failure reason: immature on-chain app ecosystems and high user education costs. 2) Sirin Labs Finney (2018) Raised over $100M to build, running SIRIN OS with direct dApp support. Likewise featured a hardware wallet and token payment functions. Ultimately couldn’t escape “cash-grab” doubts — after a brief spike, it faded quickly. Summary: This stage was more like “proof-of-concept” devices, proving “phone + blockchain” could be built and used. Unfortunately, the market wasn’t ready and users didn’t quite get it. Phase Two: Practical Transition (Web3 Phone 2.0 Representatives) — Solana Saga, Binance Mini Phone, etc. By 2022–2023, the landscape began to change. The crypto ecosystem had matured far beyond five years prior — NFT booms, DeFi’s move toward mainstream, USDT’s global circulation — making Web3 phones look less like “niche toys.” 1) Solana Saga Officially launched by Solana Labs, aiming to be “Solana’s mobile gateway.” Shipped with Solana Mobile Stack (SMS), letting developers run dApps on the phone more easily. Built-in Seed Vault secure module for OS-level key management. Priced at $999, initial reception was lukewarm, but later, thanks to BONK giveaways, NFT airdrops, and other “benefit strategies,” it unexpectedly took off; secondary prices once climbed above $3,000. It clearly boosted the ecosystem and energized a wave of “mobile-first” crypto projects. Phase Three: Modularization, AI Integration, and Strong DID — Toward a 3.0 Web3 Phone In 2025, Web3 phones finally reached a 3.0 stage. The focus is no longer “bundling crypto tools,” but building a composite platform that serves as a decentralized identity terminal + an autonomously running node + an AI strategy module, truly fusing on-chain identity + on-chain assets + on-chain compute. Users aren’t merely “visitors” to the crypto world; they become part of the ecosystem — potentially even the primary beneficiaries. Three Structural Factors Behind Web3 Phone Failures or Bottlenecks From the Saga case, we can see these devices face multiple constraints: 1）Hardware and Supply-Chain Cost Challenges Creating a phone entails heavy costs in design, manufacturing, certification, logistics, and after-sales. Web3-specific needs (wallet security, preinstalled cold storage, chain compatibility) raise the bar further. If sales volume is insufficient, costs can’t be amortized. Saga’s price cuts and speculative resale signal a mismatch between demand and cost. 2） Ecosystem Entry Still Isn’t Mainstream Even with preinstalled wallets and crypto connectivity, mainstream users’ awareness and usage of crypto assets remain marginal. Without mainstream apps or convenient scenarios, the phone itself struggles to become a “must-have.” Moreover, traditional ecosystems are dominated by App Store/Google Play; if Web3 devices can’t offer a superior alternative experience, user migration willingness is limited. 3）Lifecycle and Security Trust Issues Phones are a long-term hardware commitment. Users expect years of updates, security patches, and ecosystem support. If Web3 phones have very short support cycles, lightweight ecosystems, and thin after-sales, users will perceive them as “experimental gear,” making broad trust hard to earn. Saga’s two-year support cycle directly broke that promise. Despite Current Bottlenecks, the Track Still Holds Potential Value Future Paths and Optimizations 1）Focus on Real User Scenarios, Not Just Airdrop Lures Next-gen devices should place more emphasis on blending “crypto + everyday phone”: on-chain identity login, NFTs as contacts, the wallet as payments, and a portal for on-chain gaming. If users can switch seamlessly and with strong convenience, then mass appeal becomes possible. 2）Extend Support Cycles and Strengthen Security Guarantees Hardware lifespans, system updates, and ecosystem compatibility must at least keep pace with mainstream Android devices (5+ years). Otherwise, switching costs are too high for users. 3）Open Ecosystems with Multi-Chain Support They shouldn’t be limited to a single chain. Devices that support multiple chains, cross-chain assets, and decentralized app stores will reach a broader audience. 4）Partner with Mainstream Phone Brands/Carriers If Web3 phones can launch in partnership with major brands/carriers, distribution, after-sales, and trust improve. Make crypto functions part of flagship phones instead of “starting from scratch.” 5）Innovate Hardware Cost Recovery Models Preinstalled wallets, airdrops, co-issued tokens, and on-chain identity rewards can subsidize hardware costs — but the key is long-term ecosystem value, not one-off hype. Conclusion: Web3 Phones Aren’t a Scam, but Hype Can’t Be the Strategy While Saga’s end-of-support looks like a “failure,” we shouldn’t view it as the definitive failure of Web3 phones. It’s more of a dress rehearsal — a reminder that stacking hardware with blockchain isn’t a shortcut to success. For Web3 phones to succeed, they must plant their feet firmly on generality, entry-point value, and ecosystem continuity. If they can achieve daily user willingness to use, continuous on-chain value accrual, and a healthy hardware cost model, then “Web3 phones” will have the right to become the next-generation computing portal — and not just a passing crypto fad.

#Solana #TreasuryRevolution #Bitcoin Remember back in 2020, when Michael Saylor led MicroStrategy (then Strategy) to boldly put Bitcoin onto its balance sheet? At that time, many people were whispering: “Are they crazy?” And the result? Reality slapped the doubters in the face. Bitcoin skyrocketed, MicroStrategy’s market cap soared to $100 billion, and it became the flagship name of the “Bitcoin corporate play.” Soon, more and more companies followed suit, and a brand-new term appeared — “Treasury Company.” Today, it’s Solana’s turn to step onto the stage. Solana treasury companies are rising with unstoppable momentum. Some even say this is the new round of “Treasury Revolution” after Bitcoin. What Is a Treasury Company, and Why Is It Becoming Popular? Let’s clarify the concept first. A “treasury company” refers to a publicly listed enterprise or large institution directly holding cryptocurrencies (such as BTC, ETH, SOL) on its balance sheet as strategic reserve assets. The logic behind it is actually very straightforward: 1. Hedging against inflation Fiat money keeps depreciating — cash left idle just evaporates. Instead of holding fiat, why not replace it with digital gold or high-growth crypto assets? Traditionally, corporate treasuries relied on U.S. bonds or gold for hedging. But increasingly, companies now regard BTC and ETH as the “gold of the 21st century,” capable of resisting inflation over the long term. 2. Valuation premium from capital markets MicroStrategy has already proven the point: once your financial report says “we hold Bitcoin,” the stock market instantly assigns a valuation premium. Investors see you as forward-looking and reward you with higher multiples. That’s why “treasury companies” once became such a hot capital market narrative. 3. Brand endorsement Being a treasury company is essentially telling the market: “We stand with crypto natives.” This not only attracts younger crypto investors but also adds brand hype. Especially for tech firms, it’s a way of declaring: “We don’t just understand future trends, we’re willing to bet on future assets.” 4. Liquidity management Many listed companies have huge cash piles — think Apple, Tesla. In the past, this money went into buybacks or dividends. Crypto assets now offer a brand-new option. Compared with the low interest rates of traditional financial markets, holding BTC or other crypto assets provides high-risk, high-reward alternative allocation. So when Bitcoin treasury companies went viral back then, it wasn’t without reason. It was both a financial innovation and a capital markets marketing play. For enterprises, this was a way to turn cold cash into a strategic lever that could boost valuation and tell a better story. The Precedent of Bitcoin Treasuries Real-world cases are always more convincing than theory. Let’s quickly review the timeline of Bitcoin treasury adoption: 2020: MicroStrategy was the first mover, stuffing Bitcoin into its treasury. Traders immediately treated MicroStrategy as a proxy for Bitcoin: when Bitcoin rose, its stock price followed. At one point, MicroStrategy’s market cap soared to $100 billion, even though its revenue was only $115 million. In comparison, Starbucks had $7.8 billion in revenue at the time, but the market didn’t care about revenue — it cared about the narrative. Soon after, other companies began imitating. In 2024, even a Japanese budget hotel chain announced support for Bitcoin payments. According to Architect Partners’ data, just this year, 184 listed companies announced they had purchased cryptocurrencies, with a combined value close to $132 billion. In one sentence: Bitcoin treasuries = turning enterprises into amplifiers of cryptocurrency. The Rise of Solana Treasury Companies So here’s the key question: why is everyone’s attention now shifting to Solana (SOL)? 1. SOL breaks above $200 Just yesterday, SOL broke through the $200 mark, now trading at $200.02, with a 24-hour gain of 6.49%. This kind of momentum undoubtedly gave treasury companies a major boost of confidence. 2. SOL treasury holdings surpass $820 million According to Sentora data, the total funds held in SOL-related treasuries have surpassed $820 million. For comparison, Ethereum treasuries were at a similar level back in April this year, but have since soared to $20 billion. This means SOL treasuries are currently at the stage Ethereum was just months ago — with massive room to grow. 3. Backed by capital giants The newly established “Solana Co” was jointly launched by Pantera Capital, Summer Capital, and Avenir Group. Pantera Capital: a veteran crypto fund managing tens of billions. Summer Capital: involved in digital assets since 2017, invested in Hashkey, Immutable, Upbit, Animoca, and other leading projects. Avenir Group: founded by Li Lin, with a focus on financial innovation and global reach. What’s even more explosive is that Pantera is raising $1.25 billion to acquire listed companies and convert them into SOL treasury companies. In other words, capital giants are directly stepping in to expand Solana’s footprint. Market Impact: A New Wealth Effect? Let’s imagine the potential future scenario: as more listed companies announce “we bought SOL”, investors may begin to treat these companies as proxies for Solana stock — just like they once viewed MicroStrategy as a proxy for Bitcoin. This could push SOL’s price to new highs. Picture this: when today’s $820 million treasury holdings swell to $20 billion, what kind of astronomical market cap could SOL achieve? Secondary market FOMO in full swing: Retail investors seeing institutions pile in will naturally follow, triggering a self-reinforcing cycle. In short, Solana treasury companies are not just about asset allocation — they could become the next catalyst for a massive wealth effect.But don’t forget, wealth effects don’t appear out of thin air. They’re amplified by several factors: 1. Information spillover effect When a leading company publicly announces “we bought SOL”, peer companies will face pressure from shareholders and the market: “Why haven’t you?” This creates a chain reaction, driving more firms to follow suit. 2. Capital markets’ magnifying lens In secondary markets, corporate treasury size isn’t valued at face value — it’s amplified. For example, if a company holds $500M worth of SOL, investors might grant it a $5B valuation premium. What they’re buying isn’t just assets, but the narrative and growth potential. 3. Retail investors’ wealth fantasy When corporations openly accumulate, retail investors naturally think: “Maybe SOL is the next Bitcoin.” This accelerates SOL’s journey from being seen as a tech token to a reserve asset in the public imagination. In other words, the Solana treasury company model isn’t just asset strategy — it’s a narrative-driven wealth amplifier. It creates a closed loop between capital markets and crypto markets: Companies buy → Market hype → Price surges → Corporate valuations rise → More companies follow → Price rises further. This spiral of positive feedback, once set in motion, could trigger a “fast-forward effect” similar to Bitcoin’s 2020 bull run. And the Solana treasury story might just be the core engine of the next wealth boom. Potential Risks: Don’t Only See the Glamour Of course, every new trend comes with risks, and Solana treasuries are no exception. 1. High Price Volatility SOL is far more volatile than Bitcoin. For treasury companies holding SOL, a sudden price crash could wreak havoc on their balance sheets. 2. Regulatory Risks While Bitcoin can still be framed as “digital gold,” SOL is positioned much closer to securities in nature. Whether it will face regulatory crackdowns in the future remains unknown. 3. Ecosystem Stability Solana has suffered multiple outages in the past — this remains its Achilles’ heel. For treasury companies, the question isn’t just short-term price swings, but whether Solana can sustain long-term strategic reserves without critical failures. Conclusion: Will Solana Treasuries Become the Next Bitcoin Treasuries? Looking back at history, the rise of Bitcoin treasuries created the legendary story of MicroStrategy. Today, Solana treasuries are retracing a similar path — but with some fresh elements: backing from capital giants and the acceleration of a fast-growing ecosystem. Can Solana evolve into the next $20 billion-class treasury phenomenon? At this stage, no one can say for certain.What is clear, however, is that Solana treasury companies have already ignited both market curiosity and capital appetite.

#DAT #Ethereum #Solana What is DAT? In short, DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) means an enterprise or institution adds digital assets (such as BTC, ETH, SOL) to its balance sheet as part of its strategic reserves. Unlike ETFs — passive investment vehicles — DAT emphasizes active management, boosting returns via staking, financing, derivatives trading, and more. This model was pioneered by Bitcoin. Since MicroStrategy announced in 2020 that it would hold BTC in its treasury, the logic of corporates buying crypto as reserves has gained market acceptance. With Bitcoin ETFs approved in 2024, institutional allocation demand has been fully unleashed. However, the Bitcoin treasury playbook is relatively simple — buy and hold — leaving less room for advanced asset engineering. Ethereum’s DAT builds on that and layers in richer “yield generation.” Ethereum DAT: From “Storage” to “Value-Add” Ethereum’s advantages are clear — higher volatility and staking capability — making it the top DAT pick after BTC. Data shows over 4.1 million ETH have been placed in various institutional treasuries, with a market value above $17.6 billion, accounting for 3.39% of ETH’s total supply. BitMine, SharpLink Gaming, and The Ether Machine together hold positions worth over $10 billion, effectively dominating the top end of institutional ETH treasuries. Why has Ethereum’s DAT moved faster? 1）Volatility creates financing room ETH’s historical volatility exceeds BTC’s, opening the door for arbitrage and derivatives strategies. ETH treasury companies often collateralize assets to issue convertible notes on better terms, lowering financing costs. 2）Staking generates steady cash flow Unlike Bitcoin, post-Merge Ethereum (PoS) lets ETH holders earn staking yield. Institutional DAT operators aren’t just hoarding — they can lock in recurring on-chain cash flows, turning ETH into a bond-like asset. 3）Ecosystem depth DeFi, NFTs, and RWA rely heavily on Ethereum, making ETH not just a reserve asset but also the fuel of a financial ecosystem. This network effect gives ETH DAT outsized strategic value. In essence, ETH DAT has evolved from “simple reserves” to “financial engineering,” offering listed companies a new capital-markets playbook. Solana DAT: The Rise of a New Force 1) From follower to breakout Even as ETH DAT boomed, Solana began catching Wall Street’s eye. Latest figures show 17 entities have established SOL treasuries, totaling 11.739 million SOL — about $2.84 billion — or 2.04% of total supply. This means Solana has moved from “edge chain” to the third major institutional allocation target, after BTC and ETH. Forward Industries, Helius Medical Technologies (HSDT), and Upexi have all named Solana a strategic asset. Capital heavyweight Galaxy Digital has doubled down as well, adding $400 million of SOL for Forward Industries. 2) DAT 2.0: The appeal of staking yield Another highlight of Solana DAT is attractive staking yields. So far, around 585,000 SOL — worth over $100 million — have been staked at an average yield of 6.86%. Upexi raised holdings from 73,500 SOL to 1.8 million SOL and staked nearly all of it, expecting ~$26 million in annual cash flow. In other words, Solana DAT is shifting from pure “reserve” to active value-add, akin to an interest-bearing asset in TradFi. 3) Wall Street logic: Smaller market cap, bigger elasticity Compared with BTC and ETH, SOL’s market cap is smaller (~$116 billion, roughly 1/20 of BTC). That means the same dollar inflow can move SOL’s price far more than BTC/ETH. For example, Forward Industries’ $1.6 billion injection into SOL would be equivalent to ~$33 billion of buying pressure in BTC terms. Given supply-demand dynamics, SOL’s price elasticity is greater — appealing to institutions seeking higher upside. Solana’s Distinct Appeal 1) High-performance network: TradFi-grade speed and cost Solana uses a monolithic design — unlike Ethereum’s modular route (splitting execution and data layers via L2s). By integrating functions on a single L1, Solana delivers very high throughput — tens of thousands of TPS — and ultra-low fees (often <$0.01 per transaction). For Wall Street, this is critical. Institutional settlement is highly sensitive to speed and cost. With recent upgrades, Solana cut transaction confirmation to ~150 ms, approaching Web2-grade UX. For the first time, a blockchain’s settlement layer starts to look compatible with financial back-office systems. 2) Broad use cases: Multiple tracks, parallel momentum If Bitcoin is a reserve asset and Ethereum is financial Lego, Solana’s edge is multi-vertical applications. It has solid traction across payments, DeFi, NFTs, GameFi, SocialFi, and DePIN (decentralized physical infrastructure). In stablecoins and tokenized assets, Solana is emerging as a mainstream settlement network. USDC circulation on Solana is climbing fast; some cross-border payment firms already use Solana for clearing. In DePIN, Helium fully migrated to Solana — proof of its capacity for large-scale IoT workloads. This “horizontal bloom” means institutions aren’t betting on a single narrative, but on a consumer-grade super-platform potential. 3) Early institutional adoption: Huge upside ahead Currently, institutional SOL ownership is below 1%, far lower than ETH (~7%) and BTC (~16%). That doesn’t imply lack of recognition — rather, it shows massive runway. With Solana ETPs advancing and more corporates adding SOL to DAT, institutional penetration could rise quickly. Unlike BTC and ETH — already deeply held — Solana is a low-penetration “white canvas.” Each incremental institutional buy can have an outsized impact on price and market cap. Part of Wall Street’s interest is precisely this market-cap elasticity. At ~$116B, SOL is ~1/20 of BTC and 1/5 of ETH. The marginal price impact of equal-sized inflows is therefore much larger for SOL. In short, Solana enjoys a late-mover advantage with substantial incremental potential in the DAT lane. Net-net: Financial-grade performance, multi-track demand, and low starting institutional penetration combine to make Solana one of the most commercially compelling blockchains in Wall Street’s eyes. Conclusion From Bitcoin to Ethereum, and now to Solana, Digital Asset Treasuries (DAT) are reshaping the institutional crypto map. BTC brings the certainty of a reserve asset. ETH showcases the value-add of a financial asset. SOL represents the high-growth potential of a next-gen L1. As Forward Industries, Helius, Upexi and others keep adding, and a potential Solana ETF gathers momentum, Wall Street capital is flowing into Solana at unprecedented speed. This is not just an investment trend — it’s a vote by global capital on how the crypto market structure is evolving. Whether Solana can truly cement its place as Wall Street’s new favorite will depend on its ability to balance hyper-growth with long-term resilience.