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
More
Recently, the wallet platform launched a new exclusive Booster event and token issuance—Unitas ($UP). I’ve compiled data on all current Booster projects to see if the trend patterns from previous projects can provide some reference for tokens that haven't launched yet.
As of mid-January, this Booster project database has already shown some results:
**The 13 launched projects show clear differentiation** — 9 projects are typical of "peak at launch," followed by a continuous decline. From their historical highs to now, the average drop ranges between 80% and 95%, with most projects having already fallen below their initial opening prices.
Compared to the opening price, only BAS and PIEVERSE remain above their launch prices; the rest have been halved or worse.
**The number of task periods is an interesting indicator.** Projects with only 1 task period almost all follow the "peak at launch" fate—entering a long decline after closing. Conversely, projects with more task periods, especially those with lower initial market caps, tend to reach new highs more easily.
Based on this pattern, the speculation is: if REVA drops below its opening price at launch, it might be a good opportunity to buy and hold the spot long-term. However, for tokens like UP and BTW, issuing tokens at launch could very likely repeat the "peak at launch" scenario.
Honestly, it's impressive enough that BAS and PIVERSE are still alive; the others are definitely just cut-and-run templates.
The idea of a task period is pretty good; the logic of directly sentencing a project to death after a single period is quite ruthless.
If UP and BTW really follow this pattern, I'll wait and see before taking action. REVA, on the other hand, is worth paying attention to.
---
Another new coin is coming to cut the leeks, UP's name is quite good, but it didn't really go up much when it rose, and when it fell, it dropped to the sky.
---
More task periods = longer life = more times to cut, learned that.
---
BAS and PIEVERSE are two active projects, can you also reveal some secrets so that we, the leeks, can survive too?
---
A decline of 80%-95%, this data made me feel like I was sleepwalking to the vegetable market.
---
REVA breaking below the opening price is actually an opportunity? Hearing you say that, I dare not buy even more, afraid of becoming the last one to hold the bag.
---
Data speaks for itself, this time it really spoke loudly, so loud that I can't even hear my own crying.
---
All projects in one phase of tasks are "peak at launch," in other words, they cut and run right after.
---
Studying patterns every day, and in the end, the pattern is just a pattern of losing money, hilarious.
It's the same old story of hitting the peak right after launch. It seems only projects with more task periods have a chance.
I bet $5 that UP and BTW will meet the same fate. If REVA really drops below the opening price, I might try to buy the dip.
Out of 13 projects, only 2 are still alive—it's really quite ironic. This platform is a bit outrageous.
Only projects with many task periods can survive. In plain terms, if there's no hype, it dies. These numbers don't lie.