#USELESS交易量接近DOGE
Is a new star rising among meme coins?

In my view, it is an interesting signal that USELESS exhibits trading activity comparable to DOGE, despite having a market cap that is a tiny fraction of DOGE's; however, this does not automatically mean USELESS is undervalued.

The key distinction here is that while trading volume measures activity, market cap measures the total value of all circulating tokens. These metrics tell us different things.

Highlights

USELESS market cap

$186 million

DOGE market cap

$13.4 billion

Market cap difference

~72x

Reported volume signal

Strong

Compared to DOGE on selected exchanges

According to initial reports from Gate News, USELESS surpassed DOGE's trading volume on one exchange and approached similar levels on another.

Why does this matter? If the volume comparison is accurate and sustainable, it implies that USELESS is attracting significant trading interest relative to its size.

However, the crucial question is whether this activity reflects lasting demand or short-term speculation.

Three key points to consider

1. Volume can be an early signal

If USELESS maintains similar volume levels on exchanges over several weeks, it indicates significant investor interest in the project. Exchange listings and community momentum may be contributing to this interest.

2. High volume can be misleading

Volume; ...may experience sudden spikes due to speculation, rapid day-trading, or leveraged positions. Market data also reveals significant disparities in USELESS's trading activity and liquidity across different exchanges. Raw volume data alone does not prove the existence of sustained buying pressure.

3. The 72-fold gap is not a price target

For USELESS to reach DOGE's current market capitalization—assuming figures and circulating supply remain constant—its valuation would need to increase roughly 72-fold. This is a mathematical scenario; it is not evidence that the gap *must* close.

What would convince me?

I would monitor the following four points over the coming weeks:

* Sustainable volume: Can USELESS maintain volume levels comparable to DOGE after the initial wave of excitement subsides?

* Price confirmation: Is the price rising alongside volume, or is there intense trading activity while the price remains flat?

* Liquidity depth: Can larger investors sell without triggering a sharp price drop?

* Investor concentration: Are the tokens widely distributed, or could a few large wallets create significant selling pressure?

For context, based on the latest data, USELESS has a market capitalization of approximately $204 million and a 24-hour trading volume of around $20.5 million; this illustrates how quickly these figures can shift from the initial $186 million claim. In conclusion: USELESS might be an intriguing new memecoin, but I would view the trading volume comparison not as a standalone reason to buy, but rather as a signal warranting further research. The strongest confirmation would be sustainable trading activity, healthy liquidity, and price strength—independent of purely influencer-driven hype.

The question I will focus on is this: Is USELESS attracting new long-term investors, or are the same investors simply turning over their capital more rapidly? This distinction is far more important than the headline-grabbing trading volume comparison.

My Assessment

A high trading volume relative to market capitalization indicates that USELESS is already attracting significant interest from short-term investors and liquidity providers ; however, volume alone does not equate to long-term growth in market capitalization.

To meaningfully bridge this 72-fold gap, USELESS must transition from high-speed speculative trading to a broad-based "buy-and-hold" accumulation model that persists across market cycles. Until this occurs, the discrepancy essentially reflects the distinction between fast-moving speculative capital and **established market liquidity.

$USELESS

‌
$DOGE