FOMOing on WLD people are still confused about what FDV is?

Recently, many have been discussing the fully diluted valuation issue of WLD, which actually reflects a changing understanding of valuation logic across the market.

Last year's WLD rally was indeed impressive, soaring from lows to highs in a short period, fueled by the AI narrative that set the entire sector ablaze. But the ensuing controversy is quite interesting—some say WLD's FDV is ridiculous, the valuation has become unbelievable; others believe looking at FDV is complete nonsense because the circulating supply is too small, and market makers can manipulate the price as they wish.

To understand this disagreement, first, you need to clarify what FDV means. Simply put, FDV (Fully Diluted Valuation) is the current token price multiplied by the total supply of tokens, as opposed to market cap (circulating supply times token price). At that time, WLD had only about 130 million tokens in circulation, but the total supply was as high as 10 billion, which made the FDV artificially inflated to surpass the market cap of top blockchains like SOL and BNB, even exceeding OpenAI. At first glance, it’s indeed shocking.

But here’s a key issue: WLD’s circulating supply at that time was only about 1.3% of the total, with most of it held by market makers. According to Worldcoin’s white paper, the subsidies users can claim from the app are limited, and in places like France and Hong Kong, regulatory restrictions prevent users from freely withdrawing. This means that the actual supply of WLD controlled by Orb devices is very limited, and in the short term, FDV has no real reference value.

My observation is that the market is gradually abandoning obsession with a single indicator. Previously, investors might have fixated on FDV, but now they should pay more attention to supply and demand dynamics. As more participants enter the crypto industry, factors like funding rounds, airdrop scales, market maker strategies, and CEX listing timing—these influence token prices far more than the number game of FDV.

Take unlock schedules as an example; they are the real variables affecting token prices. Last year, Starknet adjusted its STRK unlock plan from a one-time release to a linear release, and the market immediately digested this positive news, causing the token price to rise. In comparison, the level of FDV has become less important.

The logic for short-term trading is actually quite simple: narrative is king. The recent surge in WLD was driven by the AI hype and Sam Altman’s halo, combined with market maker activity, with supply artificially restricted—this is the real reason for the price spike. There’s a saying that captures this well: “Invest in tokens with narratives in the viral growth stage rather than projects where the narrative has become common sense.”

More importantly, focus on real liquidity. Looking at BTC’s performance, the inflows and outflows of spot ETF funds accurately reflect market sentiment. Meanwhile, ETH’s staking craze has absorbed a lot of liquidity, reducing the available supply. These are the key factors that determine prices.

So, is FDV still useful? For institutions and long-term holders, it has some reference value, but for retail traders in the short term, rather than obsessing over FDV numbers, it’s better to watch market supply and demand, narrative heat, and capital flows. The price differences between OP and ARB were once influenced by FDV, but as competition intensifies and demand shifts, this correlation is gradually weakening.

The logic of the crypto market is constantly evolving; relying solely on indicators like FDV is outdated. What’s needed is a multi-angle approach—considering supply and demand, narratives, liquidity, unlock schedules—to make comprehensive judgments and grasp market trends.