Many people when evaluating tokens always use the same set of standards to measure all projects. This is like assessing the value of an electrical network by examining the transaction volume of individual items — essentially the wrong approach.

The positioning of AT within the APRO ecosystem is a classic case of being misunderstood. Many compare it to application-layer tokens and conclude that it is "not sexy enough." But in fact, the operational logic of these two types of tokens is fundamentally different.

Application tokens have a very obvious characteristic: they are tightly bound to specific actions. Each use consumes a token — transactions, minting, voting, unlocking content — these operations produce immediate feedback. Users can directly perceive where the token's value lies. This design is very popular for consumer-facing products, but using it to support the underlying operation of a system? That’s not suitable.

Infrastructure tokens follow a completely different logic. They are not designed for a specific action but serve the stable operation of the entire system. Their main roles are maintaining order, distributing rights and responsibilities, and coordinating various participants. Usually, you don’t notice their presence, but when data traffic surges, risks increase, or system load changes, their regulatory function becomes apparent.

To put it simply: if you think of APRO as a long-running data pipeline, then AT is like the pressure valve and flow regulator within the pipeline. Most of the time, you don’t see what it’s doing, but without it, the system would have problems. The value of such tokens isn’t visible in short-term charts; their true potential can only be realized when the system scales up.