Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Recently, I tried using AI analysis tools to evaluate some ZK projects, which was quite interesting. For Brevis, the reasonable FDV valuation produced by this trap is about 50 million. But thinking carefully, this number does seem a bit conservative.
Similarly, in the ZK track, Succinct has reached an FDV of 200 million, while Brevis's technical solutions and application prospects are actually comparable. The market positioning of the two projects differs, but in terms of technical depth and ecological potential, Brevis's current valuation does seem to be undervalued. This may reflect the market's ongoing adjustment in understanding different ZK projects.
Is this AI valuation tool reliable? It feels like right now, ZK is just a game of information asymmetry—whoever tells the best story gets the higher valuation.
Being conservative is the right approach. Underestimating these things, by the time the market reacts, it might need to be re-priced. It's still a bit early to get on board now.
Brevis is indeed undervalued, but honestly, I'm not very interested in ZK projects. I still see more opportunities in MEV.
I just want to know how they calculated the base valuation of 50 million. It seems like the valuation methodology itself has issues.
That being said, the ZK track now has a significant information gap and the understanding is still quite chaotic.
Brevis's technology is not bad, but the hype is lacking, and that's the real problem.
Wait, is AI valuation calculated this way? I feel like it's a bit unreliable...
The market is still in the pricing stage, nobody can clearly say how much each is worth, it's all a gamble anyway.
Succinct does have a hype advantage, but Brevis's stuff is really underestimated, I agree with that.
The key will be to see who produces results first; no matter how good the technology is, it's useless without application.
I actually think it's too early to go all in on any of them right now; the ZK story isn't finished yet.
The Brevis technology is indeed not bad; it feels like the market is still exploring the ZK space, and the understanding hasn't quite caught up yet.
However, speaking of which, FDV is inherently a kind of metaphysics; can we really trust the tools?
Wait, can the estimates from AI tools really be trusted? This logic feels a bit forced.
The market expectations for the ZK track are so divided right now, it feels like night and day.
Why does Succinct have such a high premium? Is the technology really that strong? Or is it just pure speculation?
To be honest, the ecological potential of Brevis really hasn't been fully tapped, it might not be too late to enter a position now.