2026-01-20 04:21:39

Many investors are chasing narratives and trading opportunities, but they often overlook a key question—what truly determines a project's ceiling.

Looking at the decentralized storage sector, the core contradiction has never been technical difficulty, but whether "usability and cost" can be truly connected. Projects like Walrus Protocol are tackling this tough problem—making storage affordable and efficient.

When data begins to be regarded as an asset, the entire game changes. This means the value of the infrastructure layer will be continuously re-priced.

From a technical perspective, WAL's recent candlestick performance is also interesting. On the 15-minute chart, the price has already retested the low zone for accumulation, appearing to be gathering momentum. Based on the current trend, the next upward target could focus on the 0.2 level. The opportunity for bottom-range positioning is worth paying attention to.

WAL3,6%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SchroedingerGas

· 01-23 03:21

At the end of the day, it still depends on who can truly reduce costs. No matter how advanced the technology is, if it's not practical, it's useless. Can WAL break through the 0.2 level this time? The key still depends on whether practical applications can keep up.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoCross-TalkClub

· 01-22 08:02

Laughing to death, it's again "bottom layout" and "gathering strength to launch." I bet five bucks it will break below the low next week, and then this article will become a "classic trapped-in" textbook haha. I'm optimistic about the storage track, but do people really dare to store movies on-chain... the costs still need to wait a bit longer. 0.2? Just looking at this K-line makes me think of the coin I went all-in on last time, which has long since become worthless paper. Honestly, compared to watching K-lines, I care more about whether Walrus can really bring down the cost, or else it’s just another PPT project. Hey, isn’t this just disguised crypto trading, packaged as "repricing of infrastructure value"?

View OriginalReply0

GweiTooHigh

· 01-21 07:54

Honestly, cost is king. No matter how advanced the technology is, if you can't afford it, it's useless. --- 0.2? Let's see if it can stabilize at 0.15 first, stop hyping the next wave. --- After so many years in the storage sector, only a few projects have truly been implemented. Don't just hype the narrative. --- Data is an asset, I've heard it a hundred times. When will infrastructure truly become valuable? --- WAL is quite enthusiastic about absorbing funds, but the question is, when will the bagholders come? --- The low-level accumulation theory has numbed me; it's better to watch market sentiment. --- Usability + cost integration? Wake up, these two have never been integrated; it's just a dream. --- You believe in 15-minute level stuff? It's more realistic to look at the weekly chart.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropATM

· 01-20 04:50

The point about usability and cost bottlenecks is spot on. Technology is not the bottleneck—it's truly an overlooked truth.

View OriginalReply0

SeeYouInFourYears

· 01-20 04:50

Honestly, usability and cost are really the ceiling issues. I don't care about the technology anymore. Position 0.2? Hmm... it looks a bit uncertain. Has such a prediction ever been accurate in history?

View OriginalReply0

BlockTalk

· 01-20 04:49

That's right, usability and cost are the real bottlenecks, not technology. Hmm, I agree with the bottom-up approach, but is breaking through 0.2 for WAL this time really critical... Storage narratives are so popular, but only a few have truly implemented them. Data assetization indeed changes the game, but it's still too idealistic right now. To those who only chase hot topics, infrastructure is the key. K-line retesting for accumulation? I’m optimistic, but don’t go all in, everyone.

View OriginalReply0

ContractExplorer

· 01-20 04:41

To be honest, most people are just betting on narratives. The true ceiling has actually been set long ago. 0.2 is still a bit optimistic; how much do those trapped at high levels need to recover their costs? Usability and cost are incompatible; even the best infrastructure is just a toy. Let's see how Walrus performs. Bottom layout? First, see if there are real users using this thing. Don't just focus on K-line charts, brother. Data assetization sounds great, but who will pay for it? That’s the real issue. Accumulating funds, always saying the same thing. Let’s wait and see if it can truly stabilize before bragging.

View OriginalReply0

SignatureDenied

· 01-20 04:36

To be honest, usability is the real bottleneck, not some black technology. WAL's recent bottom accumulation indeed looks comfortable, but it depends on whether it can truly break through the cost barrier. The logic of data assetization has been established, and only then can the value of infrastructure have a ceiling. The 0.2 level is worth paying attention to, but the prerequisite is whether the application side can keep up. No matter how good the narrative is, there must be actual users; this is the standard for validation.

View OriginalReply0

EntryPositionAnalyst

· 01-20 04:21

Well said, usability and cost are the key factors. That's what can truly be implemented. It's easiest to get caught during the bottom accumulation phase, but indeed, keep an eye on the 0.2 level. Instead of chasing narratives, it's better to wait for infrastructure to be fully operational. That's when the real growth potential appears. Infrastructure projects are indeed often underestimated, while those storytelling coins keep rising every day. Listening to a 15-minute chart is fine, but the key is whether anyone is actually using this protocol. I think the storage sector should have exploded long ago, but as long as the cost issue isn't resolved, users won't truly come. This bottom-positioning opportunity looks simple, but in reality, it depends on whether the market's perception shifts.

View OriginalReply0