next round of early opportunities in crypto may be hidden in AI-screened results

Original Author: mo

Original Translation: TechFlow

Introduction: The biggest winners of the next cycle might be those projects that most people simply cannot understand—bad names, weak narratives, random communities, yet they surge dramatically. This is because AI is changing how retail investors discover projects, attention is becoming increasingly fragmented, and projects are beginning to optimize data performance for algorithms rather than humans. This means the next cycle isn't just about finding the best narrative, but understanding how narratives are discovered.

I've been thinking about one thing:

The next cycle will produce many winners that most people simply cannot understand.

Not the kind of incomprehensible that's common in crypto. I mean: bad names, weak narratives, random communities, coins with almost no presence on CT, yet they surge dramatically. And they might surge very early.

My basic judgment is that many of the big moves in the next cycle won't be detectable simply by watching the timeline and following the crowd, as in the past. The market is changing how attention is discovered, how capital flows, and how retail investors decide what to buy.

This is important because if I'm right, the next cycle isn't just about finding the best narratives.

It's about understanding how narratives are discovered.

I think this process is already changing.

1. Discovery Mechanisms Are Changing

In past cycles, crypto attention flowed mainly through a few obvious channels.

CT, Telegram, Discord, KOLs, group chats, local opinion leaders, a few big accounts, a few noisy communities, a few narratives everyone saw simultaneously.

These are still important. I don't think they will disappear.

But I do think the next cycle will be different because more retail investors are already relying on AI to help them make decisions. People are asking AI what's trending, what has momentum, what's undervalued, which sectors are heating up, which coins have attention.

This is likely to keep growing.

Once this becomes the norm, the rules of the game change. Projects are no longer just competing for human attention. They also have to compete to appear in the systems people use to filter the market.

This is a different game.

The question is no longer just "who has the best promoters", but becomes "which projects look best at the machine level that people use to simplify the market".

This is important.

2. Distribution Mechanisms Are Changing

I also think attention in the next cycle will be more fragmented than before.

CT is still important, but I don't think it will dominate like before, at least not relatively.

My point is simple. X's absolute user count might still be growing, but if retail investors start spending more time elsewhere, its market influence share might be shrinking.

It could be social trading apps. It could be AI-assisted discovery tools. It could be people spending more time in local Telegram groups, WeChat circles, or app-based trading communities instead of being immersed in CT all day.

If apps like FOMO continue to grow, more retail capital flows could form within these ecosystems, long before they become obvious on the timeline.

This makes the market harder to read based on social sentiment alone.

In the last cycle, many traders felt that being online enough, connected enough, and following the right people was enough to stay close to the flow of attention.

The next cycle might be less forgiving.

You could be very online and still miss what's actually moving.

3. Performance Is Changing

I think this part is more interesting.

If discovery becomes more fragmented and more reliant on AI, if more assets are competing for the same pool of speculative attention, then the market starts rewarding different things.

You might have to be willing to trade or invest in things that feel dumber than the successful ideas of the last cycle.

Not because the market is broken. Not because fundamentals will never matter again. But because in crypto, attention remains one of the purest drivers of price, especially in the early stages of a market move.

Attention doesn't always flow to the smartest thing.

Sometimes it flows to the easiest to understand, the easiest to repeat, the easiest to meme, or the easiest to appear in feeds, scanners, or AI responses.

This means some of the highest-returning coins in the next cycle might look absurd.

Bad names. Bad ideas. Bad narratives. Huge returns.

This sounds stupid, but I think it's true.

The AI Layer Creates a New Game

This is the part I think most people underestimate.

If more retail investors use AI to help find opportunities, then teams will eventually try to optimize for this.

Not just for CT share of voice. Not just for KOL influence. Not just for on-chain heat.

They might start trying to look attractive in the data layer that AI tools and scanners rely on.

This could mean better-looking surface metrics, cleaner momentum, more obvious capital flows, better engagement signals, better-looking volume, better-looking traction.

Yes, in some cases, this could also mean teams trying to fabricate momentum that isn't easily detectable by the average trader.

The average trader sees the surface and assumes the surface is real.

That's the risk.

Something looks healthy from a distance, but its actual quality is much worse than it appears.

This is why I think the next cycle will reward those who can distinguish between genuine traction and machine-readable traction.

These two are not always the same.

Why I Think Traders Need Better Tools Next Cycle

If this argument is correct, then the edge in the next cycle might not just be "following the right accounts earlier".

It's more about:

Tracking where attention is actually flowing

Tracking where capital is actually moving

Distinguishing genuine engagement from fake strength

Understanding whether a move is supported by real demand or just good-looking metrics

In other words, the market surface might become more deceptive.

If more discovery happens through AI, social trading apps, fragmented communities, and machine-filtered interfaces, then simple opinion becomes less useful. You need better systems.

This is where having your own tools might start to become more important.

Not because tools magically make you smarter, but because the next cycle might reward traders who can measure attention and capital flows better than the average person—the average person who relies on timelines, feelings, and KOL posts.

Meme Coins Might Still Grow, But Diminishing Marginal Returns

I still think meme coins will continue to be important in the next cycle.

I don't think this sector will disappear.

But I do think the shape of upside is changing.

The simplest way to put it is:

The overall meme coin sector can grow, while the upside for individual winners becomes smaller.

That's the key point.

In 2021, there were far fewer meme coins competing for attention and liquidity. Winners had more room to dominate the market. Doge and Shiba reached absurd market caps because speculative energy was more concentrated.

By 2024 and 2025, the number of meme coins exploded. Supply increased dramatically. New launches are non-stop. Attention is diluted over a much larger base. Even so, we still saw major performers like Pepe, but the broader pattern already feels more fragmented.

This might be the direction things continue to evolve.

In the next cycle, we might have even more meme coins than in 2024 and 2025. The total market cap of the sector can still grow. There can still be huge trades. There can still be major winners.

But expecting a single meme coin to dominate the market like Doge or Shiba did in 2021 seems unlikely to me.

More supply. More fragmentation. Faster rotation. More competition for the same attention.

This usually means the sector can continue to grow, while fewer individual winners achieve those monster rallies.

What This Means for Traders

If I had to boil all this down to one piece of practical advice, it would be:

The next cycle might reward adaptability over taste.

Many traders will struggle if they continue trying to force the market to operate the way they want it to.

You might need to adapt to several things.

First, you might have to trade things that feel stupid.

Second, you might need to rely less on obvious CT consensus and more on tools, capital flows, and attention tracking.

Third, you might need to become better at judging whether a move is real or just looks real on the surface.

Fourth, you might need to accept that some of the biggest winners won't come from the cleanest narratives.

They might come from what's easiest for retail to pile into once the attention loop becomes self-reinforcing.

This isn't a moral judgment. It's just how these markets operate.

What Could Prove This Wrong

I don't think this is inevitable.

Several ways this view could be wrong.

First, CT might be more resilient than I expect, because even if AI helps with discovery, narratives might still need human amplification to truly spread.

Second, AI tools might ultimately just reflect the same public information everyone already sees, meaning the discovery layer doesn't change as much as I think.

Third, even in a more crowded meme market, a super winner could still emerge if a coin captures the culture strongly enough and becomes the obvious protagonist of the cycle.

Fourth, if overall retail participation is weaker than expected, then fragmentation might matter less simply because there isn't as much widespread speculative energy to disperse.

So I'm not saying this is guaranteed.

I'm saying the setup is there, and I think the market is moving in that direction.

Final Thoughts

My core point is simple:

The surface of the next bull market might feel more random, but the underlying reality is more competitive.

AI-assisted discovery will likely become more important. Retail attention will likely become more fragmented. Projects will increasingly compete not just for human mindshare, but for machine-readable relevance. Meme coins might still thrive, but with more dilution and less concentrated upside per winner.

If this happens, then the edge in the next cycle might not come from having the loudest opinions.

It comes from understanding how attention is routed, where capital is actually moving, and which moves are real versus just well-packaged.

The traders who do best might not be the ones with the best opinions.

They might be the ones with the best systems for tracking when attention converts into actual capital flows.