Bitcoin is once again hovering around the 90,000 mark, with many people already calling for a price of 100,000 USD. Every time the market warms up, the scene blooms with various new projects launching in clusters, raising hundreds of millions in funding, and whitepapers being hyped beyond the sky. But the reality is cruel: a bull market is not a gold rush, but a sieve.



I have seen too many cases, and the ones that suffer the worst are not those who miss out, but those who buy in the wrong direction. As an industry saying goes: whether an asset is valuable depends on whether the market has truly validated it. Why can Bitcoin withstand repeated bull and bear cycles? Because over more than a decade, countless cycles have proven its value logic to be self-consistent. In contrast, many new tokens, at the moment of launch, are at their brightest, only to face endless declines afterward. The founding teams may not even have a clear long-term plan for these assets.

So instead of staring at K-line charts and dreaming of overnight riches, it’s better to focus on identifying assets with real fundamentals, the ability to cross cycles, and even generate continuous cash flow during market conditions. This is what long-term thinking is about. That’s also why more and more people are paying attention to underlying infrastructure like liquidity staking.

Think about it: no matter how the market moves, there are always two unchanging demands. One is the pursuit of asset appreciation, and the other is risk mitigation. Clever design can address both at the same time.

Take liquidity staking and decentralized stablecoin protocols as examples. Their core logic is essentially building high-end financial instruments in the crypto space. You deposit assets like BNB, ETH, which are more volatile, participate in staking to earn yields, and simultaneously generate stablecoins to improve capital efficiency. Double gains, hitting two birds with one stone.

What makes this design clever is that it doesn’t force users to choose between "yield" and "stability," but finds a balance point where both needs can coexist. For conservative investors, the stablecoin portion provides a safe harbor; for aggressive investors, the staking yields are attractive enough.

Opportunities in a bull market often hide in these seemingly ordinary foundational protocols because they address real, existing needs rather than being sustained by stories and hype. My simple advice: when choosing tokens, ask yourself whether this project has been truly tested by the market, and whether its logic can stand through multiple cycles. Do this well, and the rest is just patience.
BTC-1.12%
BNB-1.01%
ETH-1.69%
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 6
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
pvt_key_collectorvip
· 5h ago
Same old rhetoric, but it really hits the mark. Not afraid of missing out, but afraid of chasing highs and getting crushed. Why do I feel like the white papers of new coins nowadays read like novels? Many have raised tens of millions but then disappeared without a trace. Infrastructure projects are indeed underestimated; they are just too boring, no one dares to go all in, yet they tend to last the longest. The logic of staking and minting stablecoins sounds reliable, but the problem is where the risk has shifted to—it's just a different trick. BTC has survived over ten years, but what about new coins? Can they really survive three bull and bear cycles?
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHuntervip
· 5h ago
That's so true. Every bull market is just a bunch of meme coins scamming retail investors. The ones that truly survive are those with real applications. Bitcoin's decade-long validation is indeed different. I'm tired of the joke that new coins hit their peak immediately after launch. Liquidity staking is really interesting. Achieving both yield and stability is indeed difficult, but this design approach is worth paying attention to. Those who blindly chase the high are the biggest losers. It still depends on whether the project itself has truly been tested. Honestly, hovering around 90,000 for so long—either push to 100,000 or turn back—this position is the most torturous. The combination of staking + stablecoins really solves problems. It has more substance than projects that rely solely on narratives. No more dreams of getting rich overnight. It's better to find assets that can generate cash flow genuinely.
View OriginalReply0
MrRightClickvip
· 5h ago
Basically, it's the same old story. New coins are just air; BTC is the real deal. Don't be fooled by those who raise hundreds of millions in funding; most of them go to zero within a few months. I've seen too many cases like that. Missing out isn't scary; buying in the wrong direction is the real disaster. Someone's probably going all-in on a new project again this time. Let's wait and see what happens next. Liquidity staking does seem interesting, but don't be fooled by annualized returns; the risks are always there. A bull market is like this—some people get rich, some buy the dip, and most end up just watching from the sidelines. Wow, now they're starting to hype stablecoin protocols again. It feels like every bull market has these so-called "innovations." Instead of researching these, it's more practical to make a regular investment in BTC—really. This article sounds like a soft promotion, but it really hits the pain points of human nature—wanting to make money but also wanting safety. It's tough.
View OriginalReply0
ArbitrageBotvip
· 5h ago
Basically, the 90,000 level is where repeated retail investors get chopped up; those calling for 100,000 are just gambling. Another batch of worthless coins is about to die; the more aggressively they hype their whitepapers, the faster they die. Staking is indeed comfortable; it offers both returns and stability. Finally, a product that considers users' real needs. Bitcoin has been around for ten years, while new coins go to zero in three months—that's the big difference. Instead of chasing the latest trends, it's better to look for projects that can survive cycles; cash flow is the real key.
View OriginalReply0
MoonBoi42vip
· 5h ago
Here we go again with this routine, sounding nice but few can really follow through. I just want to know who can truly withstand two consecutive months of decline without selling off.
View OriginalReply0
GhostWalletSleuthvip
· 5h ago
Here we go again with this set, hearing it until my ears are calloused. Honestly, it's just a hint towards certain coins. Missing out isn't scary; what's scary is getting cut. I'm that unlucky guy. Infrastructure sounds high-end, but how many are truly profitable? First, check if there's a rug risk. Ten years of verification is a joke. I just want to ask how much longer this round can still rise. No matter how aggressively new coins are hyped, they can't withstand a black swan. The lessons from last year are still fresh. Staking stablecoins sounds wonderful, but risks are never written in the white paper. Wait a minute, this set of words seems familiar. Which big V has said something similar? Long-term thinking is fine, but whether the principal can survive until then is the real key.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)