Have you ever thought about what would happen if you completely ignore market cap comparisons when trading cryptocurrencies—like driving with your eyes wide open but never checking the dashboard—inevitably leading to trouble.

Recently, I looked at the market cap landscape of the storage sector and was hit hard by a phenomenon. The same storage star projects in the same track have valuation gaps that are downright absurd.

Here are the numbers: Filecoin’s market cap is in the tens of billions of dollars, with a mature technical framework but lacking innovation; Arweave’s market cap is in the billions, its ecosystem stable but with limited room for imagination; then there’s Walrus, with a market cap of only a few tens of millions, yet this is the officially endorsed underlying storage solution for Sui, and AI applications are now experiencing a surge in storage demand.

Do you feel that something is off here? As the only underlying storage protocol in the Sui ecosystem, Walrus’s market cap is not even a fraction of its competitors. It’s like an iPhone chip supplier whose market cap is actually lower than battery manufacturers from the Nokia era—that clearly indicates a pricing logic problem.

So why are we optimistic about this direction? First, the technology is genuinely new, with storage speeds far surpassing older architectures; second, ecosystem stickiness is strong—being the “child” of Sui, all projects within the ecosystem are naturally integrated; third, it’s riding the AI wave—efficient storage is now becoming a necessity; fourth, the market cap potential is huge—even just reaching Arweave’s size implies at least a tenfold growth potential.

Let’s do a simple calculation: if Arweave’s current market cap is 1.5 billion, and Walrus’s is about 50 million, catching up would mean a 30x increase. Being conservative, even if we only consider a tenfold increase, the entry point now is not too late.