Jun 24, 2025
Research
TL;DR Launching a token is a major milestone for any project, but it’s famously hard to get right. In this feature, we look at the biggest 10 TGEs from the first half of 2025 to identify the winners, the losers, and the most notable trends across each of them. We unpack them here to offer key takeaways and insights for any project preparing to launch a token in the second half of the year and beyond.
The TGE is one of the biggest events any crypto project will go through. Every major project that’s planning to launch a token spends months preparing for their TGE and they usually have the same two questions in front of mind: When should we launch? And how can we make sure it’s a success?
Much ink has been spilled over the challenges of TGEing in 2025. But while shipping a successful token launch has never been more difficult, token issuers have never had more data to learn from.
To help token issuers preparing to launch, we studied 10 of the biggest TGEs from the first half of the year. We analyzed metrics like exchange listings, airdrop allocations, circulating supply, private-to-public valuations, trading volumes, and price performance to get a view of how each launch went down and build a picture of why it either flourished or failed.
Table of Contents
1. Our evaluation metrics and key results
2. How each asset performed in dollar terms
3. How early BTC outperformance predicts continued outperformance (and early underperformance predicts continued underperformance)
4. How the launch time and market conditions impact performance (and why waiting for BTC rallies is risky)
5. Why large declines in trading volume are a bad omen for price performance
6. How airdrops can impact a project’s performance (and public sentiment)
7. The risk of launching at a heavy private-to-public valuation premium
8. Kaito
9. Berachain
10. Solayer
11. Story Protocol
12. Redstone
13. Nillion
14. WalletConnect Token
15. Zora
16. Initia
17. Space and Time
18. Final reflections for token issuers
1. Our evaluation metrics and key results
The first thing to mention is that there’s no secret formula that guarantees a successful TGE. It’s not possible to hack your way to a successful launch by securing A-tier exchange listings, timing things perfectly, or setting a conservative launch price.
However, we uncovered several patterns that suggest taking certain decisions with important variables can increase failure risk. As such, there are steps projects can take to improve their chances of success. After our study, we arrived at a few notable conclusions:
While there’s no perfect time to launch a token, launching after BTC has surged creates more space for downside.
Airdrop allocation size is not a reliable predictor of price performance. Nonetheless, airdrops require careful consideration.
Volume is not a reliable predictor of price performance. But projects that see big declines in volume frequently see big price declines.
Early outperformance against BTC often leads to continued outperformance, while underperformance leads to continued underperformance.
While most projects seek a higher valuation than their last funding round, those that launch at a significant premium often struggle to maintain momentum.
For our analysis, we looked at 10 projects that launched their token between January and May 2025 and pulled together the numbers with a May 31 cutoff. We chose 10 of the highest profile, highest valued, and most widely discussed governance and utility token launches (we excluded memecoins).
In order of their launch dates, we selected Kaito, Berachain, Solayer, Story Protocol, Redstone, Nillion, WalletConnect Token, Zora, Initia, and Space and Time. From January to May 2025, BTC ranged between $76,272 and $111,673. The below chart highlights when each token dropped against BTC’s price performance.
In some respects, Kaito and Story Protocol were outliers in our analysis. Both projects defied clear trends and ranked among the strongest outperformers—we offer reasons for why throughout this piece.
For each token, we looked at a variety of other metrics, including:
CEX and DEX listings
Airdrop allocation
Initial circulating supply
Onchain liquidity (calculating by totalling the amount of liquidity across the top five DEX pools, or the top handful of pools if there were fewer than five)
Private-to-Public valuation change (calculated by measuring the difference between the last known funding round valuation and FDV at TGE)
Volume since TGE (calculated by measuring the difference between the average volume in the first month after the TGE and the average monthly volume in May 2025)
Price since TGE (calculated by measuring the difference between the USD price at TGE and the price on May 31, 2025)
We also looked at BTC’s pre-TGE and post-TGE performance (over a 30-day period on either side) to give an indication of the market conditions at TGE and each asset’s relative performance. Additionally, we calculated each asset’s performance in BTC terms from the TGE date on a 30-day timeframe and until May 31, 2025.
Although our sample size was small and there were some edge cases, our results offer valuable insights for projects preparing to bring their tokens to market. In many cases, we found a weak relationship between each variable, which underscores the point that launching a token is difficult because the outcome is unpredictable. However, even in these instances, we identified several clear trends that should be useful for prospective token issuers.
2. How each asset performed in dollar terms
This chart tracks the difference in the USD price between each project’s TGE date and May 31. It shows us that four assets increased in value and six assets declined over our sample period.
Unsurprisingly, the strongest performers on our list also performed best against BTC. Story Protocol, WalletConnect Token, Kaito, and Initia all rose in dollar terms between their TGE and May 31, with the former three outperforming BTC. Initia declined 8% against BTC while every other token underperformed by a significant margin.
We can also track each project’s token performance against their launch date. Of the 10 TGEs we studied, BTC traded lowest on the day WalletConnect Token went live. WalletConnect Token was one of the strongest performers, but other assets that launched when BTC was trading at the lower end of the range underperformed. We’ll explore launch timing in more detail below.
Key takeaway: It’s difficult for new tokens to achieve sustained price appreciation in 2025.
3. How early BTC outperformance predicts continued outperformance (and early underperformance predicts continued underperformance)
In this chart, we can see how each token performed in BTC and dollar terms from their launch through May 31. We see a clear trend here, with tokens that outperform BTC also performing best against the dollar.
Similarly, as the table below indicates, the assets that outpace BTC soon after their launch tend to see continued price strength. Conversely, early market underperformers usually underperform on longer timeframes.
These two data sets show us that tokens that perform well against BTC early on tend to continue to outperform, while those that underperform generally struggle to gain momentum.
The biggest outlier here was Kaito, whose token declined against BTC then went on to rally (Initia also surged in BTC terms early on but later erased its gains after BTC rose while it declined). However, it’s rare to see poor post-TGE performance followed by sustained outperformance. Early underperformance is generally a predictor of continued underperformance.
Key takeaway: While most assets do not outperform BTC, those that do early on generally continue to outperform. Early underperformers usually suffer on shorter and longer timeframes.
4. How the launch time and market conditions impact performance (and why waiting for BTC rallies is risky)
This chart maps each token’s price performance against BTC’s performance in the 30 days leading up to the TGE. The aim is to ascertain whether the market conditions leading up to the launch impact the price.
While the results are fairly scattered, they offer some useful insights. Between the four tokens that increased in price between their TGE and May 31, two of them launched into a flat market. The other two launched after BTC had either declined or rose in value by about 7%.
On the other hand, Space and Time launched after BTC had posted a 35% rally and declined by 29% in a few weeks. Zora also launched when the market was showing strength and posted a sharp decline soon after. These results suggest that launching in market euphoria is risky. While timing alone isn’t deterministic, launching into hype can inflate expectations. BTC is also highly volatile—it often spurs market-wide corrections after rallying.
The weakest performer on our list was Berachain, which launched into a flat market on March 6, 2025. This also meant it captured significant mindshare and volume. Berachain’s case reinforces the point that there is no optimal time to launch.
Key takeaway: There’s no perfect moment to launch, so it doesn’t make sense to focus solely on the TGE date. However, there is a considerable risk to launching after BTC has posted a significant rally.
5. Why large declines in trading volume are a bad omen for price performance
Some of the biggest tokens on our list saw daily trading volumes of over $2 billion on the TGE before experiencing a sharp decline in volume. For many assets, trading volume peaks on the launch day, so we looked at the difference between the average daily volume in the token’s first month against May 2025.
We found that the assets that experienced the biggest dropoffs in volume were also some of the biggest projects, namely Story Protocol, Berachain, and Redstone. In our analysis, we compared the change in volume to the change in price for each asset.
In general, there is a stronger connection between volume and price on the downside, insofar as big losers in volume generally experience big declines in price. Redstone and Berachain both saw dropoffs of over 70% and major price declines.
The outlier here was Story Protocol, which saw the biggest drop in volume and performed best. But this project also secured funding from a16z, launched at a conservative price relative to its funding round, and established a strong narrative around IP, which may have helped establish market confidence. These factors may explain its ability to sustain price momentum despite the huge volume dropoff.
Key takeaway: Strong volumes at launch do not guarantee strong price action. But aside from cases where the project has particularly strong fundamentals and trust from the market, major dropoffs in volume often predict significant price declines.
6. How airdrops can impact a project’s performance (and public sentiment)
Every project on our list conducted an airdrop with allocations ranging from 5% to 28% of the supply. Although it’s a popularly held view that rewarding the community over insiders is a winning strategy, our results did not find any conclusive outcome of the optimal airdrop allocation to use.
WalletConnect Token conducted one of the largest airdrops on our list, distributing 18.5% of the supply. It was also one of the strongest performers. Zora allocated a more conservative 10% for its airdrop and performed poorly.
Airdrops can have a profound impact on a project at either extreme but our study did not include any particularly significant ones. For example, Hyperliquid launched a hugely successful $1.8 billion HYPE airdrop but it went live before our study window in late 2024 (Hyperliquid was also a popular perp DEX before the token dropped). But many airdrops negatively impact the project, causing lasting damage to project sentiment and token valuations.
In our results, we found no clear link between the airdrop allocation size and price performance. Still, it is clear that airdrops can impact how a project is perceived. As such, while they do not predict success or failure in isolation, they must be carefully considered.
Key takeaway: The airdrop allocation is not a reliable predictor of success or failure. But as airdrops can make or break a project, they require serious thought.
7. The risk of launching at a heavy private-to-public valuation premium
We calculated the Private-to-Public valuation change to identify the premium (or discount) each project launched at versus their last known funding round valuation.
WalletConnect Token and Redstone did not publicly disclose their last valuations, having both raised funding in the last year. Zora launched at a sharp discount to its $600 million valuation and still performed poorly. Among the outperformers, Story Protocol and Initia both opened at conservative valuations before closing our study period in the green.
Besides these cases, most projects launched at a significant premium, often with poor results. Solayer, for example, opened 1,230% above its last raise and went on to decline in value. Perhaps the most notable example here is Berachain, one of the cycle’s most hyped L1s that opened at $4.3 billion after landing a 10-figure valuation in April 2024. Berachain was the worst performer on our list in both USD and BTC terms.
Kaito’s case proves that there is no prescriptive formula to TGEing and no “rule” is a hard-and-fast rule. The AI-powered analytics platform launched at a staggering 1,843% mark-up to its last raise and still ranked among the top performers. However, it should be noted that it raised funds in adverse market conditions when securing big valuations was harder. The project has also found exceptional product-market fit, becoming a frontrunner in the AI boom.
Key takeaway: Most projects seek a higher valuation than their last funding round, but charging a heavy premium is risky. Still, with product-market fit and a strong narrative, it is possible for teams to overcome their valuation premium.
8. Kaito
Kaito’s token launch was one of the most anticipated of the year after a prolonged points-based “yaps” campaign went viral on CT. The launch itself was seamless with support across Binance (including the HODLer Airdrop program), OKX, and other CEXs, as well as onchain pools on UniV3 and PancakeSwap.
Despite an early drawdown against BTC, KAITO went on to outperform. When our study concluded on May 31, it had posted a 16% rise against the dollar and 9% rise against BTC. It’s the only project on our list that initially underperformed BTC then rose against it.
Kaito launched at a significant mark-up to its last known funding round valuation but its last raise was a small one in mid-2023, a period when market confidence was much weaker and Kaito had far fewer users.
Kaito’s TGE was one of the most hyped on our list and its price has only recovered as momentum has returned to the market. But Kaito is also one of the most used crypto products to hit the market in recent years and its recent performance could be a sign of the team finding PMF. Given its early underperformance and launch premium, Kaito is a lesson for other projects in the power of shipping a useful product at the right time.
9. Berachain
Berachain’s BERA launch was the most anticipated TGE of H1 2025 by some distance. Following an extended marketing campaign from Berachain, the BERA token went live on tier 1 CEXs like Coinbase and Binance (it was also distributed to Binance HODLers) and attracted significant hype in the lead-up. This helps explain why its daily volume topped $2 billion around the launch—far outpacing most other TGEs from this year in launch day volume. In its first 30 days, daily volumes averaged $442.4 million, topping most other projects on our list.
After raising at a $1 billion valuation, Berachain set a substantial premium for the public on launch, opening at a $4.3 billion FDV. BERA posted a sharp decline soon after, suggesting that the initial price and expectations for the project exceeded the market’s demand. The chart has looked weak since.
With an average monthly volume of $91.9 million in May, BERA is attracting significantly less trading activity than it did at its TGE, down about 95%. Over this period, Berachain DeFi TVLs have plummeted and BERA has bled while BTC has risen.
While BERA’s pools have strong depths on DEXs like Kodiak, the ecosystem has struggled to maintain the initial buzz it achieved around BERA’s launch. As other L1s prepare to enter the market, Berachain has a challenge ahead if it wants to become a dominant ecosystem. Projects would do well to take note of its price performance following its 331% mark-up on launch.
10. Solayer
Solana has had a slow 2025 so far as the ecosystem recovers from the 2023-24 memecoin frenzy. Solayer is one of a few new “fundamentals” tokens to natively launch on Solana this year, going live on Raydium and Meteora alongside Binance (and the HODLer Airdrops program), Upbit, and a host of other CEXs.
Solayer was valued at $80 million in its August 2024 seed funding round then raised additional funding via Binance’s Buidlpad, launching at $0.35. At the TGE, the FDV was over $1 billion with a $1.03 opening price.
With over $4 million in onchain liquidity, LAYER is more liquid than most other new tokens onchain. However, almost all of its onchain liquidity sits in one Raydium pool. LAYER posted a rally in early Q2 and sat over 70% down from its peak on May 31, yet it was still trading relatively close to its launch price and had maintained healthy volumes.
Solayer declined against BTC in its opening weeks and closed May 2025 down from its TGE price despite a rally in late April. In a period where the Solana trenches have become known for one of crypto’s more divisive niches and other tokens have fallen out of focus, Solayer and other fundamentals-based projects are struggling to assert dominance.
11. Story Protocol
Story Protocol captured significant mindshare when it announced IP’s TGE in February, following a high-profile raise led by a16z last year. The project was also one of only two to open at a lower valuation than its last raise at the TGE.
When the token dropped into a flat market, the daily trading volume topped $280 million and the price briefly tumbled, likely due to an influx of airdrop sellers.
But volumes spiked to $2 billion later in the month, coinciding with an all-time high $1.8 billion market cap. The token’s trading activity has mostly happened on Asian CEXs across both spot and perps. Unlike many projects on our list, it’s not supported on Binance.
IP’s circulating supply has increased by about 3% since the TGE and volumes have plummeted 86%, from the opening month to May. Nonetheless, IP ranks as one of the strongest performers of the year, up almost 100% since its TGE.
IP surged against BTC more than any project on our list, outpacing it by over 250% post-TGE. While its outperformance relative to BTC has declined, it was still 83% up on May 31.
As other tokens struggle to hold momentum in the post-TGE phase, Story Protocol is proving that a comeback from TGE hype and intense airdrop dumping is possible. The a16z connection is worth mentioning; most projects don’t have the luxury of funding from one of Silicon Valley’s top VCs and its backing likely instilled confidence in the project. Story Protocol also “owns” the IP narrative as the niche’s leading project, which has doubtless helped its case.
12. Redstone
Redstone launched RED with a loud marketing campaign, drawing focus to its Binance listing despite major CEX listings lacking the effect they once had in prior cycles. Still, the team got a lot of things right from a trading venue perspective: RED was one of the few projects on our list to launch on Binance Launchpool but it was also available on Coinbase and other CEXs soon after. Onchain traders could also find RED on UniV3 and Aerodrome, which had strong liquidity depths courtesy of Arrakis Pro.
Although the launch went smoothly, RED is yet to reclaim its launch price. It’s one of the weakest performers on our list against both the dollar and BTC.
After the hype around the launch, Redstone’s decline in mindshare could be a key factor here; the project took a lead in the oracle niche around the TGE date but has since dropped off.
Overall, while Redstone had a smooth TGE, RED’s H1 2025 performance shows that CEX listings and strong onchain depths do not always equate to sustained momentum.
13. Nillion
Nillion launched on Binance Launchpool and several other leading CEXs. It was also one of the highest-valued projects on our list, having secured a $400 million valuation in June 2024 before raising another $25 million in October 2024. Nillion’s FDV at TGE was around $721 million.
Since the late Q1 launch, Nillion’s volume and price have declined by about 50%. BTC has risen since then, making Nillion one of the weakest performers on our list when factoring for the overall market performance.
Like many other tokens on our list, Nillion launched at a premium to its last valuation then performed poorly in the market. It has also captured less attention than several other projects on our list, which may explain its weaker continued performance.
14. WalletConnect Token
WalletConnect Token has been one of the strongest performing assets of the year so far. WCT’s launch landed in late April after tariff war FUD had subsided. It was available via Binance Launchpool and OKX Trade & Earn and had early support from other major CEXs.
For onchain traders, pools launched on UniV3, UniV4, and Velodrome; WCT has since expanded to Solana via Raydium. WCT’s onchain pools are relatively healthy with over $2 million in liquidity across the top five pools. The most liquid pool, UniV3 on Optimism, holds over $1 million.
WCT had a hyped launch leading to a brief price spike in late May. Despite the initial hype, its average trading volume increased between April and May. However, its price dropped by 40% in 24 hours on May 31. The cause of this sharp decline is unclear.
While most tokens suffer after the TGE, WCT outperformed BTC following its launch and has offered better returns since the TGE despite the sharp drop on May 31.
WCT’s recent expansion to Solana has brought renewed attention to the project but it should be noted that it took all the right steps in the first place. WalletConnect is also a leader in a relatively untapped vertical, so it has less competition than many other projects do.
15. Zora
Zora’s token was announced to the market’s surprise in April and went live on Base shortly after. It was also supported by Binance Alpha, Coinbase, and other CEXs. Compared to other projects on our list that launched with long lead times, this one felt rushed, but Zora had listings in place all the same.
The token dropped off the back of Base’s “creator coin” controversy and critics drew attention to its $600 million valuation, which it secured in a 2022 funding round. Interestingly, Zora launched at a significant discount to this raise, opening at a $350 million FDV.
Despite this discount, and the significant volume it attracted at launch (peaking at $128.3 million), ZORA has been one of the weakest performers on our list. In its first 30 days, it posted a sharp decline of over 60% while BTC rose. By the end of May, ZORA was down 69% against BTC, marking the worst return on our list aside from Berachain.
L2 tokens have had a rough couple of years and Zora could have picked a better time than to launch after memecoin season had died. However, in this case there was a clear disconnect between the private and public market. This case study proves that a working product and support from major players is not enough to guarantee a token will successfully galvanize a community of supporters.
16. Initia
Initia is not as widely known as other projects on this list but its TGE was among the most successful. Initia allocated a smaller portion of INIT’s supply towards its airdrop and invited retail to get in at the ground floor via Echo. Crucially, it sold only 15.25% of the INIT Supply to investors on a vesting schedule (many major projects including Solana and Avalanche allocated over 35% of their token supplies to VCs and other insiders). Initia also used Binance Launchpool, allocating 6% of the total supply to Binance for Launchpool and other initiatives.
Many projects launch at bloated valuations but Initia took a conservative approach. INIT performed particularly well in its opening few weeks, outpacing BTC’s rise before cooling in May. INIT was slightly up on its launch price on May 31 and down against BTC, albeit by less of a margin than most other assets on our list.
In a world where projects often treat the TGE as the destination rather than the starting blocks, Initia stands out for its fairly inclusive, considered approach.
17. Space and Time
Space and Time’s TGE was the most recent on our list and trading volumes have sustained strength as the broader market regains momentum, averaging $140.1 million over the last month (SXT saw $214 million in trading volume on launch).
With launches across Binance Alpha, Binance Launchpool, Bitget, Bybit, Coinbase, UniV3, and UniV4, SXT was widely supported at launch. For onchain liquidity, SXT is mostly traded in one USDT-paired pool on UniV3—there’s almost no liquidity in its WETH-paired pools.
Space and Time scored a $300 million valuation when it raised $20 million in the 2022 crypto winter but it has since raised $50 million in an August 2024 Series A. With an opening valuation of $830 million, SXT opened at one of the highest valuations on our list.
Despite the widespread support across leading trading venues at the TGE, SXT has suffered. The token launched off the back of a period of sustained BTC momentum but has struggled to capture any of the market’s momentum itself, declining by 32% against the top crypto since its launch only weeks earlier.
18. Final reflections for token issuers
In summary, our study of H1 2025’s top 10 TGEs provides us with several useful insights. Story Protocol and Kaito’s results notwithstanding, we identified a number of clear trends based on our data set.
Perhaps most notably, it is clear that shipping a “successful” TGE is difficult. Many assets decline post-launch and there are many variables that can influence an asset’s price performance. But while there’s no path to guaranteed success, there are steps projects can take to avoid probable failure.
Though our study shows that there’s no perfect time to launch, waiting for BTC to rally to drop a token is risky. Moreover, opening at a heavy premium often leads to weak price performance. We also found that there is a link between large declines in volume and price. Similarly, underperformance against BTC almost always leads to continued underperformance.
While bringing a token to market is difficult in 2025 and the outcome is not easy to control, there are ways to improve the likelihood of success. As the strongest performers in our analysis prove, finding product-market fit and establishing a strong narrative is invaluable. Regardless of other variables, in today’s ultra-competitive market, new tokens need a product and idea the market can get behind if they are to see long-term success.
