Original title: What are the conditions for a project to go from Binance Alpha to Binance spot?
A month ago, we sorted out the projects that carried out points airdrops on Binance Alpha, and tried to analyze the markets preference for different concept tokens based on the price performance of these projects after the points airdrops.
(Related reading: What project concepts on Binance Alpha can make retail investors make money? )
This time, we switched to a new angle - the projects listed on Binance Alpha. Will there be any effective information and interesting conclusions from observing these projects from multiple data angles?
Is Binance Alpha still a “frontier” for listing on Binance spot?
The original Binance Alpha was the outpost for listing on Binance spot, but after Binance announced the upgrade to Binance Alpha 2.0 in March of this year, the correlation between a project being listed on Binance Alpha and being listed on spot has become much weaker.
After Binance Alpha 2.0 was updated, there were 88 projects listed and 71 projects that had carried out points airdrop. In the end, only 15 projects were listed on Binance spot, accounting for about 17% of all listed projects and about 21% of projects that had carried out points airdrop.
Are all the stocks listed on the spot market “brand new regular troops”?
After Binance Alpha 2.0 was updated, 13 of the 15 projects listed on Binance spot received financing. According to the data disclosed by each project party, the highest financing was obtained by the blockchain game MapleStory Universe Adventure Island $NXPC, with a financing amount of US$100 million, and the lowest financing was obtained by Defi App $HOME, with a financing amount of US$6 million. Excluding the financing amount of Haedal, the remaining 12 projects have a total financing amount of US$356 million.
The two exceptions without financing information are not small at all. Spark $SPK is from MakerDAO, and Newton $NEWT is from Polygon Labs.
So does Binance have a favoritism for projects invested by Binance Labs/Yzi Labs? Actually, no. Among these projects, only 4 projects, StakeStone, Sign, Sophon and Sahara AI, received investment from Binance Labs/Yzi Labs.
From the perspective of project types, Binance does not show any particular preference, covering a wide range of types. There are modular blockchains, chain abstraction, Payfi, chain games, full-chain liquidity protocols, zero-knowledge proofs, etc. These types basically require a large amount of financing for research and development.
It can be said that in the Binance Alpha 2.0 era, the road to Binance spot is full of regular troops, and it is difficult for us to see on-chain projects like $AIXBT.
These projects are not only regulars, but also brand new regulars - they all held TGE, opened airdrop applications, and were listed on Binance spot at about the same time. The exception is Lagrange, which was listed on Binance spot more than a month after Binance Alpha and TGE. Judging from the relationship between these projects and Binance Alphas airdrop activities, 10 projects have done points airdrops. The token shares given to Binance Wallet by these 10 projects are also different. The largest one is Haedal, which has a token share of 3% of its total, and the smallest one is Sign and Lagrange, which have a token share of 0.5% of their total.
Compared with the amount of financing, are the performances of these new coins considered successful?
Taking the maximum diluted market value corresponding to the closing price on the first day of opening, among the 12 projects that disclosed the specific amount of financing, only 4 projects had a maximum diluted market value of less than 15 times the amount of financing obtained. The lowest among them was StakeStone. Even though it was the lowest, it was still about 8.9 times.
For the remaining 8 projects, the maximum diluted market value corresponding to the closing price on the first day of trading exceeded 20 times the financing amount. Among them, Sophon had the largest increase, reaching about 66.5 times, and Sahara AI had the smallest increase, reaching about 22 times.
This is not directly related to the project type, but is affected by the market environment at the time, the operation of the project itself, and the markets understanding of the project. For example, although the blockchain game track has not received much attention and optimism in the market, MapleStory Universe Adventure Island still reached about 26.52 times, which is related to the projects large game IP and its high expectations in the blockchain game track.
Conclusion
Judging from the overall trend, if the projects listed in Binance Alpha want to successfully advance to Binance spot, they will have to undergo quite strict tests from Binance. Having a narrative and financing has become the standard, but the project types are not limited to hot concepts that are popular in the market.
Among the projects that we were able to collect statistics on, the proportion of projects with the maximum diluted market value corresponding to the closing price on the first day of opening exceeding 20 times the financing amount exceeded 75%, which to a certain extent has become the passing line for new projects.
