I’m really trying to see if the project team is actually doing work. The easiest way isn’t to listen to how lively the AMAs are, but to watch how the treasury funds are spent and whether there are corresponding milestones after spending. On-chain transfers look great: money leaving the treasury, going into whose wallet, then whether it turns into “verifiable things” (code submissions, contract deployments, audit reports, more nodes/activity addresses…) — if there’s a long gap in between, or if I only see a circle of wallets bouncing back and forth, I basically assume they’re stalling.

There’s also a small detail: teams that are serious about their work usually have expenditure rhythms that match their delivery pace. They don’t just pre-spend the big chunks upfront, nor do they like to use vague “market cooperation fees.” Honestly, the more specific the spending, the more it looks like they’re actually doing real work.

Recently, everyone’s been talking about interest rate cut expectations, the dollar index, and how risk assets sometimes rise and fall together… I don’t dare pretend to understand macro trends, but in environments like this, project teams are more likely to use “external reasons” as a shield. So I’ll keep watching the fundamentals: money → people → output. If it lines up on-chain, I’ll be patient; if not, no matter how excited the mood, I’ll hold off.