I am now observing whether the project team is "serious" or not. How the treasury funds are spent can tell a better story than the roadmap they outline, but it's not something you can judge at a glance. To put it simply, I focus on two things: whether the money spent corresponds to milestone deliveries, and whether there is a slight upward trend in on-chain/product data after delivery.

Many teams like to write their treasury expenditures as a lump sum of "ecosystem incentives/market collaborations," which makes me feel uneasy... I prefer to see a more detailed breakdown: how much is allocated to development, audits, bug bounties, infrastructure, operations, and what can be verified at certain points in time. If the milestones are always vague like "Qx launch v2," or if delays are never reviewed and they just keep requesting budgets, then it's basically just a story being told.

Recently, the unlocking of staked tokens and the unlocking calendar are being brought up every day. I understand everyone's anxiety about the selling pressure, but I tend to look at whether the treasury is wasting money or increasing risk before and after unlocks—are they just chasing data, or are they investing in areas that can reduce risk (like security, audits, fee structures). Projects that can match their accounts with progress are at least not just wasting time; as for the rest... I can only be cautious and watch slowly.