The current crypto market cycle has earned a fitting nickname: PvP, or "player versus player." It’s a term popularized by meme coin traders to describe an environment where gains are made not through innovation or utility, but by exploiting others. In this brutal arena, success often comes at someone else’s loss — a far cry from the original vision laid out by Satoshi Nakamoto and later expanded by Vitalik Buterin with Ethereum’s landmark ICO.
While Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana have seen strong performance in this bull run, newly launched tokens — defined here as those issued in 2024 — have largely underperformed for retail investors. Venture capital (VC) firms, on the other hand, have reaped substantial returns. This imbalance has fueled the PvP narrative: high fully diluted valuations (FDV), low circulating supply, and post-listing price collapses.
But what does the data actually say?
The Myth of Exchange Listings Driving Price
A common refrain from founders during advisory calls is: “Can you help us get listed on a CEX? That’ll pump our token.” While emotionally compelling, this belief doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.
Data from Maelstrom’s analysis of 103 new tokens listed across major exchanges in 2024 reveals a sobering truth: listing on a centralized exchange (CEX) does not lead to sustained price appreciation. In fact, most tokens declined in value after launch — regardless of which exchange they debuted on.
👉 Discover how top-performing projects are bypassing traditional listings and winning with real users.
VCs, however, tell a different story. The median token increased by 31% from its last private round FDV, allowing early investors to extract value before retail even got access. This “VC extraction” is enabled by a misaligned incentive structure: VCs profit from rising paper valuations during private rounds, not long-term product success.
Founders are often pressured to delay liquidity events — like public token launches — so VCs can continue marking up their portfolios. When the inevitable listing finally occurs, gravity takes over. Prices crash, and retail holders absorb the losses.
Why High FDVs Hurt Everyone
New projects frequently launch at inflated valuations, often 40–50% above fair market value. This harms both retail investors and the ecosystem at large.
Consider this: if you’d bought any of these newly listed tokens at launch price, you’d likely have underperformed Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana — the core assets that define crypto’s foundational value layer. Given these results, retail should avoid buying newly listed tokens entirely unless they’re priced for realistic adoption curves.
High FDVs persist due to psychological anchoring. If a project launches at a $1B FDV — even if its real value is closer to $100M — the market perception becomes skewed. VCs can still report strong paper gains relative to their entry price, even after a 90% drop.
Centralized exchanges also benefit from inflated metrics:
- Higher nominal trading volume means more fee revenue.
- Low circulating supply (median: 18.6%) allows exchanges to demand large portions of unallocated tokens for listing incentives.
This creates a vicious cycle: projects overvalue themselves to attract VC funding, exchanges profit from hype-driven trading, and retail gets left holding the bag.
The True Cost of CEX Listings
Listing on a top-tier exchange isn’t just risky — it’s expensive. Projects pay in three primary ways:
- Direct listing fees
- Security deposits
- Mandatory marketing spend
For example:
- Binance charges up to 8% of total token supply as a listing fee.
- Projects must also purchase up to $5 million worth of BNB as collateral.
- An additional 8% of supply may be required for user incentives (e.g., Binance Launchpool).
That totals up to 16% of the entire token supply plus $5M in BNB — just to appear on one exchange.
Smaller CEXs charge between $250K–$500K in stablecoins or equivalent token allocations. Even mid-tier platforms demand 2–3% of supply for marketing campaigns.
These costs represent massive dilution. Tokens given to exchanges could instead reward users, fund development, or bootstrap liquidity in a fair-launch model.
A Better Path: DEX-First, User-First
There’s a growing alternative: launch on a decentralized exchange (DEX) first.
Projects like Auki Labs are proving this model works. Instead of paying millions to list on Binance, they launched on Uniswap V3 via Coinbase’s Base network, creating an initial liquidity pool with $1M and 10% of their token supply.
Result? Their token price rose 78% above the last private round FDV — all without paying a single listing fee.
By choosing a DEX-first approach:
- Founders retain control over token distribution.
- Early adopters are rewarded fairly.
- Community growth drives organic demand.
- No gatekeepers decide who gets access.
👉 See how innovative teams are using decentralized liquidity to outperform traditional launches.
Key Takeaways for Founders
If you're building a Web3 project, here’s how to win in today’s PvP market:
- Keep FDV low at launch – Signal that you’re building for long-term users, not short-term speculators.
- Prioritize product-market fit over exchange listings – Real growth comes from daily active users, not CEX logos on your website.
- Launch on DEX first – Save millions in fees and distribute tokens fairly.
- Align incentives across teams and investors – Use gradual vesting (e.g., 1–4 years) to prevent dumps.
- Focus on utility – Build something people want to use, not just trade.
FAQ: Common Questions About Token Listings
Q: Is it ever worth paying for a CEX listing?
A: Only if the exchange brings genuine traffic and your community is already active. If you're paying just for exposure, you're likely wasting resources.
Q: Why do so many projects still choose CEX listings?
A: Because VCs and advisors often demand them as proof of credibility — even though data shows they don’t drive sustainable price growth.
Q: Can a DEX launch go viral without CEX support?
A: Absolutely. With strong product traction and community engagement, organic momentum can surpass paid listings.
Q: What’s wrong with high FDVs at launch?
A: They misalign incentives, discourage long-term holding, and set unrealistic expectations that lead to post-launch crashes.
Q: Should retail investors avoid all new tokens?
A: Not necessarily — but only consider those with low FDVs, transparent teams, real product usage, and fair distribution models.
Q: How can projects measure success without exchange listings?
A: Track metrics like daily active users, transaction volume, revenue (if applicable), and community sentiment — not just price.
Final Thoughts
The current system favors insiders — VCs and exchanges — while leaving retail and builders behind. But change is possible.
Projects that launch with humility, fairness, and user-centric values can outperform those chasing expensive listings. The tools exist: DEXs, fair launches, community governance.
It’s time to stop playing PvP and start building real value.