The storage protocol Walrus in the Sui ecosystem has recently gained popularity. Many compare it to Filecoin, even calling it a "killer app." However, after a month of data digging, I feel that this optimism is premature.

Let's start with costs. Walrus's claim of "20 USD/1TB per year" is indeed attractive, 80% cheaper than Filecoin, and at first glance, it seems like a technological breakthrough. But after actual testing, I found that this cost advantage comes at a price—the decentralization level of the node network is far below expectations. Currently, there are only about 200 active nodes, while comparable storage protocols have over 3,000. I tested storing a 1GB file; when three nodes went offline, I couldn't read the data directly, and it took two hours to recover.

Next, let's look at the real situation of the ecosystem applications. I analyzed a month of storage data and found that 70% of Walrus's storage demand comes from Sui ecosystem NFT projects—mainly storing images. These projects are small-scale applications with a weak user base. Even more concerning is the incremental data: in the past month, only 2TB of new storage was added, a volume that even some storage protocols can't match in a single day.

Finally, let's examine the token design. WAL has a circulating supply of only 1.25 billion. It sounds scarce, but the problem is that 43% of the community reserve will remain locked until 2033—effectively giving the project team a "key to unlimited release." I know several Sui community users who received airdrops and sold them immediately—no one wants to gamble for 8 years.

Honestly, Walrus feels more like a tool within the Sui ecosystem rather than a necessary Web3 storage solution. The real demand for ecosystem applications is limited, the robustness of the node network still needs verification, and the long-term pressure on the token is obvious. If Sui's popularity wanes, this project could easily become a "forgotten player."