2026-01-18 13:21:32

Looking at the recent funding overview announced by the WAL Ecosystem Fund, over two quarters, approximately 2.8 million tokens have been allocated. The distribution structure is quite balanced: DeFi projects received 45% (mainly focused on liquidity incentives), infrastructure development accounts for 30%, and community building and bounties together make up 25%.

I tracked several supported DeFi protocols, and the data is quite interesting. Two projects saw their TVL double within a month after receiving funding, which sounds impressive, right? But later, it dropped back to about half. This indicates a problem—relying solely on subsidies to attract liquidity results in weak user stickiness; once the hype fades, users disperse.

On the other hand, a data indexer project performed quite well. Although it’s not a product directly felt by users, it completes the developer toolchain, which is more beneficial for the long-term health of the entire ecosystem.

Honestly, every dollar from the ecosystem fund needs to produce results. Currently, the funding reports are just a pile of numbers. Could they include a "fund utilization effectiveness assessment" next time? For example, how much has the actual trading volume increased, how many new independent developers have entered? Such quantitative indicators are much more convincing than simply publishing the funding amount.

WAL-1,82%

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.

8 Likes

Reward
8
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

OnchainGossiper

· 01-18 13:47

Subsidies can't retain liquidity at all, who doesn't know that? --- The case with the data indexer really hit the point; infrastructure is the key. --- Spending 2.8 million tokens on DeFi incentives is a bit outrageous, isn't it? --- I totally agree. We need to look at real data, not just throw around numbers. --- TVL doubles and then drops back, a typical case of running after profits after a quick gain. --- Effectiveness evaluation really should be added; otherwise, who knows if the money is being used effectively? --- I feel like the WAL fund is a bit of a waste; we should support projects that can sustain themselves. --- I really admire the idea behind the indexer; long-term ecological value is much more important than short-term prosperity.

View OriginalReply0

WalletWhisperer

· 01-18 13:32

The subsidy vampires are back again, TVL doubled then dropped back, hilarious. Turns out the toolchain is still the most real.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropAnxiety

· 01-18 13:29

Subsidy liquidity is ultimately just a smoke screen. This analysis hits the nail on the head. TVL doubles and then halves—I've seen this script too many times. Just want to see real data, not asking for much, right? Building infrastructure quietly is much more reliable than those riding the hype. Throwing 2.8 million tokens into the mix still depends on the story, which is a bit speechless. The developers who truly stay are the future of the ecosystem. Small subsidies can't buy this.

View OriginalReply0

NotFinancialAdvice

· 01-18 13:22

Subsidies attract liquidity that is just smoke before harvesting the gains, dispersing very quickly. --- Infrastructure is the key, and I totally agree with that. --- Investing 2.8 million tokens still resulted in a rollercoaster TVL, which is a bit outrageous. --- No effectiveness assessment in the funding report? It’s the same as not publishing it at all. --- That 45% in DeFi probably mostly went down the drain... --- The builder behind the indexer may be invisible, but they are the most useful. --- Really want to see how those projects turned out later. Is there any tracking data? --- That’s why many ecosystem funds end up losing money. Subsidy economics simply doesn’t work. --- Projects with zero user stickiness deserve to fail; once subsidies are withdrawn, everyone leaves. --- Can you reveal which two projects doubled and then fell back? I’m a bit curious.

View OriginalReply0