Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Uniswap Labs is rolling out a suite of developer resources designed to make building on Uniswap v4 hooks considerably less painful. The package includes dedicated API access, a public hook registry, security review partnerships, and direct integration into the Uniswap interface, collectively representing the most comprehensive support infrastructure the protocol has offered to third-party builders.

Think of hooks as modular plug-ins for Uniswap’s liquidity pools. They’re external smart contracts that can inject custom logic before or after key pool actions like swaps or liquidity additions. Want dynamic fees that adjust based on volatility? A custom pricing curve? Hooks make that possible without touching the core protocol code.

What’s in the toolkit The centerpiece for discovery is a public hooklist repository, essentially a registry of deployed v4 hooks complete with metadata and audit links. Developers can submit their hooks via GitHub issues, giving the ecosystem a centralized place to find, evaluate, and integrate third-party hook implementations.

On the security front, Uniswap launched an AI-assisted plugin called uniswap-hooks on July 14, 2026. The tool provides security guidance and threat modeling specifically tailored to developers working with v4 hooks.

That plugin arrived roughly six weeks after the Uniswap Foundation published its Self-Directed Security Framework around June 1, 2026. The framework outlines four core principles centered on developer ownership and risk management, bundled with risk-scoring worksheets designed to help builders evaluate their own code before shipping it to mainnet.

Uniswap has also lined up audit subsidies through partnerships with OpenZeppelin and Trail of Bits, two of the most respected smart contract auditing firms in the industry.

Perhaps the most practically significant change: hooks are now integrated directly into the Uniswap interface. That means hook-compatible pools show up in liquidity provision flows and automatic swap routing. Developers don’t have to build their own frontend or convince users to visit a separate site. If a hook-enabled pool offers a better rate, Uniswap’s router can find it.

Why hooks matter for v4 Uniswap v4 was architected around the idea that the protocol should be a platform, not just a product. Hooks are the mechanism that makes that vision tangible. Instead of Uniswap Labs building every possible feature into the core contract, they built the infrastructure for anyone to extend pool functionality.

The approach enables things like limit orders, time-weighted average price execution, MEV redistribution, and oracle integrations, all without protocol upgrades.

The public hooklist repository with its audit links serves a curation function. The AI plugin and security framework serve a prevention function. And the audit subsidies serve an accessibility function.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Iranian officials announced that Iran will escalate its crackdown operations in response to U.S. attacks.

Iranian officials have stated that Iran will escalate its retaliatory strikes in response to the U.S. attack. (Jinshi)

8 minutes ago

US Treasuries extended their decline after the repurchase announcement, with the market viewing the $6 billion cap as insufficient.

The U.S. Treasury Department said it will purchase between $40 billion and $60 billion in long-term government debt in the first operation of its expanded repurchase program, demonstrating Secretary Bessent’s resolve to curb the recent rise in borrowing costs. U.S. Treasuries extended their earlier decline following the announcement, indicating the program’s size fell short of some investors’ expectations. The success of the expanded purchase program remains to be seen. After the program was first announced last month, yields fell before rebounding later. The benchmark 10-year yield hit its highest level since 2023 last week. Economist Guha, a former staffer at the New York Fed, noted: “The challenge always lies in whether the impact of these interventions can persist without larger fundamental changes.” Moreover, the maximum size of the repurchase operation does not mean the Treasury will necessarily purchase that amount of Treasuries. However, in repurchases targeting long-term nominal debt, the department typically buys the full amount; since the program was relaunched in 2024, it has only failed to do so in two of 52 such operations. (Jinshi)

8 minutes ago

Eric Trump mocks Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden over the botched launch of the LAPTOP token, saying he should go back to painting.

US President Donald Trump’s second son Eric Trump reposted a post about the meme coin LAPTOP’s sharp price crash after its launch, commenting: “Hunter should go back to painting.” His remarks target Hunter Biden, son of former US President Joe Biden, who launched the meme coin LAPTOP. The reposted post notes that LAPTOP plummeted 98% within minutes of going live, adding that the project had originally planned to allocate a portion of its tokens to users who incurred losses from TRUMP-related transactions.

8 minutes ago

Solana ecosystem prediction market World officially launches, opening to over 1 million waitlist users.

Solana ecosystem full on-chain prediction market World announced that its independent platform World.xyz has officially launched, with over 1 million users on its waitlist. The platform offers thousands of markets spanning sports, cryptocurrency, politics, finance, economics, and culture, covering all NFL regular seasons, 7 soccer leagues, F1 races, the 2026 U.S. midterm elections, and Federal Reserve interest rate decisions. Since integrating Phantom in July, World has launched more than 150,000 markets. Each market on the platform consists of "Yes" and "No" contracts, priced between $0 and $1, and settled using Phantom’s U.S. dollar stablecoin CASH. Technically, World leverages Chainlink Data Streams and Chainlink Runtime Environment to provide market data and automated settlements, reducing manual intervention and dispute resolution wait times. Prediction markets for stock price movements, gold, silver, oil, natural gas, computing power, and weather will be rolled out sequentially.

8 minutes ago

Bubblemaps: 80% of LAPTOP traders are losing money, with two traders suffering losses ranging from $100,000 to $1 million.

Bubblemaps posted that profit and loss data for LAPTOP traders shows roughly 80% of participants are in the red, describing the token’s market performance as a "bloodbath". Specifically, two traders lost between $100,000 and $1 million, 100 lost over $10,000, 700 lost more than $1,000, and around 11,000 traders posted small losses. Bubblemaps did not further disclose the statistics’ time frame or the scope of the wallet sample used.

8 minutes ago

a16z Crypto releases open-source zkVM Lattice Jolt, with quantum-resistant capabilities.

a16z Crypto has announced the release of a new version of its open-source zero-knowledge virtual machine (zkVM), Lattice Jolt. The update switches the underlying cryptography from elliptic curves to lattice cryptography, making the system quantum-resistant, and boosts both prover and verifier speeds by 2 to 3 times. Its proof size currently stands at under 100KB, which a16z Crypto claims is the smallest proof of any post-quantum zkVM. Lattice Jolt uses a novel polynomial commitment scheme called Akita, built on the Module-SIS lattice hardness assumption, with a target 128-bit security level. Akita was developed by LayerZero’s research and engineering team in collaboration with teams from Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Southern California, and a16z Crypto. Performance-wise, Lattice Jolt can prove over 2 million RISC-V cycles per second on a CPU-only device; with Apple Metal GPU acceleration, it exceeds 10 million cycles on a MacBook. The prover’s memory footprint has also dropped from roughly 300 bytes per cycle to 200 bytes, supporting proof generation for millions of compute cycles on mobile phones. The project will add additional zero-knowledge functionality via an upcoming academic paper.

8 minutes ago

Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.

Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

Kripto para piyasasında kullanıcı aktivitesiyle öne çıkan blockchain ağları ve protokollerin güncel sıralaması açıklandı. Paylaşılan veriler, büyük Layer-1 ve Layer-2 ağlarının yanı sıra merkeziyetsiz borsalar, altyapı projeleri ve RWA odaklı platformlardaki kullanıcı hareketliliğini de gözler önüne serdi. TRON 3,7 milyon aktif kullanıcıyla listenin zirvesine yerleşirken, World Mobile Chain ve BNB Chain ilk üç sırayı tamamladı. Solana ise 2,3 milyon aktif kullanıcıya ulaşmasının yanı sıra kullanıcı aktivitesindeki yüzde 13,2’lik artışla listenin dikkat çeken projelerinden biri oldu.

TRON Zirvede, BNB Chain İlk Üçte Güncel verilere göre TRON, 3,7 milyon aktif kullanıcıyla listenin zirvesinde yer alarak güçlü kullanıcı tabanını korudu. Buna rağmen ağdaki kullanıcı aktivitesinde önceki döneme kıyasla yüzde 2,2 oranında sınırlı bir düşüş kaydedildi. World Mobile Chain ise 3,2 milyon aktif kullanıcı ve yüzde 12,1’lik artışla ikinci sıraya yükselerek dikkat çekici bir performans sergiledi. BNB Chain, 2,7 milyon aktif kullanıcıyla üçüncü sırada yer alırken, ağdaki kullanıcı aktivitesinin yüzde 21,8 gerilemesi öne çıkan negatif gelişmelerden biri oldu.

İlginizi Çekebilir: Dört Altcoinde Alarm Zilleri: Yatırımcılar Tetikte!

Solana 2,3 milyon aktif kullanıcıyla dördüncü sırada yer aldı. SOL ekosistemindeki kullanıcı aktivitesinin yüzde 13,2 yükselmesi, büyük blockchain ağları arasında Solana’yı pozitif ayrıştırdı.

İlk dört projenin sıralaması şöyle gerçekleşti:

TRON: 3,7 milyon World Mobile Chain: 3,2 milyon BNB Chain: 2,7 milyon Solana: 2,3 milyon Ethereum, Uniswap ve Robinhood da Listede opBNB yaklaşık 765,8 bin kullanıcıyla beşinci sırada yer alırken, kullanıcı aktivitesinde yüzde 42,9 düşüş yaşandı. Ethereum ise 542,7 bin aktif kullanıcıyla altıncı sıraya yerleşti. Listenin devamında Uniswap 509,8 bin, Robinhood 493,1 bin ve Polygon 476,3 bin kullanıcıyla öne çıktı. Özellikle Uniswap’taki yüzde 44,4 ve Robinhood’daki yüzde 80,1 oranındaki artış dikkat çekti.

Paylaşılan verilere göre sıralama şu şekilde oluştu:

TRON: 3,7 milyon World Mobile Chain: 3,2 milyon BNB Chain: 2,7 milyon Solana: 2,3 milyon opBNB: 765,8 bin Ethereum: 542,7 bin Uniswap: 509,8 bin Robinhood: 493,1 bin Polygon: 476,3 bin Celo Veriler yalnızca blockchain ağlarını değil, merkeziyetsiz borsalar, altyapı projeleri ve RWA odaklı platformları da kapsıyor. Bu nedenle aktif kullanıcı sayıları, farklı proje kategorilerindeki zincir üstü kullanımın genel görünümünü ortaya koyuyor.

Değerlendirme Güncel veriler TRON’un kullanıcı sayısında liderliğini koruduğunu gösterirken, Solana’daki artış da dikkat çekiyor. BNB Chain ve opBNB tarafındaki düşüşler ise kullanıcı aktivitesindeki zayıflamayı ortaya koyuyor. Uniswap ve Robinhood gibi projelerde görülen güçlü artışlar, kullanıcı ilgisinin yalnızca büyük Layer-1 ağlarıyla sınırlı kalmadığını gösteriyor. Önümüzdeki dönemde bu eğilimin devam edip etmemesi, ilgili altcoinlerin ve ekosistemlerin performansı açısından önemli bir gösterge olabilir.

Son Dakika kripto para haberleri için hemen tıkla.

Konu ile ilgili yorumlarınızı bize yazabilirsiniz. Ayrıca, bu tarz bilgilendirici içeriklerin devamının gelmesini isterseniz, bizleri Telegram, Youtube ve Twitter kanallarımızdan takip edebilirsiniz.

Table of contents

Anchored said its tokenized stocks went live through Uniswap on Arbitrum on Sept. 7, opening a new onchain route to public-market exposure. The company’s launch announcement identified Anchored as the issuer infrastructure, Arbitrum as the deployment network and Uniswap as the trading venue.

The announcement confirms availability but does not say that the tokens are shares themselves or that access is universal. Anchored’s product disclosures set narrower terms around backing, eligibility and legal rights, making the launch an infrastructure expansion rather than a replacement for conventional brokerage ownership.

According to Anchored’s official stock-product page, its tokenized stocks and exchange-traded funds are backed one-for-one by underlying assets held in regulated custody. The page says reserves are independently verified through a public proof-of-reserves process.

Anchored’s legal terms add an important distinction: the tokens are not the underlying shares or securities. Instead, the rights attached to each token are defined in the applicable governing documents. Offers are made through a gated application operated by Anchored Capital Ltd after onboarding and verification, not through the informational website itself.

Uniswap provides the onchain trading route By placing the products on Uniswap through Arbitrum, Anchored is connecting its issuance structure to decentralized liquidity and blockchain settlement. The company says its broader infrastructure is intended to connect assets, compliance, distribution and settlement, while integrating traditional financial platforms with decentralized protocols.

The launch fits a wider push by crypto platforms to package equity exposure for blockchain users, though structures differ materially between providers. BlockchainReporter has examined how crypto platforms approach U.S. stock exposure, including the distinction between products backed by securities and derivatives that only track their prices.

Eligibility and token-holder rights remain central Anchored says its products are intended for professional, accredited, sophisticated or otherwise qualified investors where applicable. They may not be available in every jurisdiction and are not directed at U.S. persons or people in mainland China. Prospective users therefore cannot infer eligibility simply because a pool is visible through an onchain interface.

The company also lists market, liquidity, counterparty and technology risks, including possible loss of capital. For readers assessing the Sept. 7 rollout, the key facts are that Uniswap access is live on Arbitrum and that Anchored claims one-for-one share backing; the exact holder rights, transfer conditions and availability still depend on governing documents and jurisdiction-specific checks.

AUTHOR

Tokoni Uti is a Lagos-based writer with several years of experience. Her work has appeared in the Huffington Post, the Los Angeles Free Press and the San Diego Free press among others. She is a graduate of Bowen University.

Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.

Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

Anchored Finance has launched tokenized versions of traditional stocks on Uniswap’s decentralized exchange, using the Arbitrum Layer-2 network as its primary venue. The deployment, which went live on August 24, brings 10 tokenized equities onto one of DeFi’s most liquid trading platforms, each backed 1:1 by shares held through US regulated brokers and custodians.

What Anchored built and how it works Anchored Finance first announced its plans on August 20, targeting a launch window of August 21 to 24. The team met that timeline, with tokens going live on the later end of the window after completing technical and liquidity preparations.

The tokenized stocks are issued as ERC-20 tokens. Liquidity routing runs through UniswapX, an order-routing protocol that aggregates liquidity sources to find optimal execution for traders. Settlements happen in USDC, and Anchored has also built on-chain issuance workflows, meaning the creation and redemption of tokenized shares follows a transparent, verifiable process.

The deployment isn’t limited to Arbitrum. Anchored simultaneously launched on Ethereum mainnet, Base, and Monad, spreading its tokenized equities across four networks.

The tokenized RWA wave keeps building Anchored’s approach leans on US custodial services to hold the underlying shares, creating a compliance framework where each on-chain token corresponds to a real share sitting in a regulated brokerage account.

What this means for tokenized equities Post-launch trading volume data for Anchored’s tokens hasn’t surfaced yet. A 1:1 backing model with regulated custody addresses the trust problem. USDC settlements remove friction. Multi-chain deployment across four networks increases surface area for discovery, and Uniswap integration means these tokens don’t need to build their own trading ecosystem from scratch.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Altcoins have posted significant gains over the past month, fueled by a strong rally in major cryptocurrencies outside Bitcoin and stablecoins. Market data showed that the TOTAL2ES index, which tracks the market capitalization of all crypto assets except Bitcoin and stablecoins, climbed by nearly 32% during this period.

Large cap altcoins among top performersOver the past week, several established altcoins have recorded double-digit returns. Zcash and Dash, both legacy projects in the crypto sector, experienced notable rallies. Within the top 100 cryptocurrencies by market cap, Uniswap’s UNI token rose 39.1%, while Arbitrum’s ARB token surged 107.4%. Uniswap last traded at its current price levels in November of the previous year, while Arbitrum reached its highest value since early January.

Robinhood Chain, a blockchain network that launched approximately two months ago, emerged as a major catalyst behind this surge. Robinhood Markets, a publicly listed financial brokerage, operates the Robinhood Chain, which quickly became the top fee-generating network in the crypto sector. Uniswap and Arbitrum are closely tied to this ecosystem, with cumulative decentralized exchange (DEX) volume on Robinhood Chain surpassing $40 billion. The chain’s daily revenue reached more than $4 million, outpacing Ethereum, BNB Chain, Hyperliquid, and Base.

Mini dictionary: Robinhood Chain, a blockchain launched by Robinhood Markets, enables decentralized trading and has quickly become a leading source of protocol revenue with unique integration for tokenized financial assets.

Uniswap dominates Robinhood Chain tradingUniswap serves as the primary decentralized exchange within the Robinhood Chain ecosystem, handling the vast majority of trading activity. On Robinhood’s network, Uniswap captures 0.465% of every dollar traded, a higher rate than the 0.214% earned across its other deployments. This premium is partly due to tokenized stock pairs using Uniswap’s highest fee tiers, which recently grew to 4.1% of the chain’s volume from nearly zero in August.

Uniswap’s fee income has been rising sharply as “almost all of the trading happens there” and the exchange “earns more per dollar traded on that chain than it does elsewhere” due to higher fee tiers and increasing activity in tokenized asset pairs.

Fee switch accelerates UNI token burnsPreviously, UNI tokens played a limited role in the value capture from exchange activity. That changed with the introduction of the UNIfication upgrade, which activated Uniswap’s fee switch. Now, fees generated on the network are used to purchase and burn UNI, permanently reducing the token supply. As Robinhood Chain activity grows, additional fees drive up the rate of UNI token burns.

With the fee switch live, revenue from Robinhood’s surge “is now used to buy and burn UNI, permanently removing it from circulation.”

As more Robinhood users interact with the chain, Uniswap’s volume and corresponding fee income increase, directly boosting UNI burns.

Arbitrum earns revenue by designArbitrum’s relationship with Robinhood Chain is contractually defined. Robinhood Chain uses Arbitrum’s technology, and under the Arbitrum Expansion Program, the chain must send 10% of its net protocol revenue back to Arbitrum. This breakdown allocates 8% to the Arbitrum DAO treasury and 2% to the developer guild.

Mini dictionary: The Arbitrum Expansion Program is an initiative where blockchain networks built on Arbitrum technology share a portion of their protocol revenue with the Arbitrum DAO and its developer community.

Over a recent 30-day period, this arrangement generated about $1.32 million for Arbitrum, compared to $78.73 million that Uniswap has collected in trading fees from Robinhood Chain over the same timeframe. Notably, these funds are controlled by Arbitrum’s decentralized autonomous organization treasury rather than going directly to ARB token holders.

MetricUniswap (UNI)Arbitrum (ARB)30-day revenue from Robinhood Chain$78.73 million$1.32 millionRevenue destinationToken buy-and-burnDAO and developer treasuryMethod of accrualTrading fees collected and burned10% net protocol revenue shareFee concentration raises new exposure risksMost of Uniswap’s current fee revenue now depends on Robinhood Chain, a network operated by a regulated financial brokerage accountable to the US Securities and Exchange Commission and public shareholders. This marks a significant change for Uniswap, which historically spread its operations across many networks as a strategy to reduce risk.

If Robinhood were to adjust its swap routing, alter fee structures, or encounter regulatory challenges, Uniswap’s burn rate and, consequently, UNI’s market support could be immediately affected. This degree of reliance on a single network is unprecedented for Uniswap.

For now, however, Robinhood Chain’s record trading volume and rising network fees continue to drive upward price action in both UNI and ARB.

Tokenized-stock liquidity is flowing into Uniswap [UNI] V4 just as the sector builds its DeFi footprint. V4 holds $59.1 million as of writing, giving it roughly 31% of the $192.6 million market and deeper liquidity than its rivals.

This increased liquidity helps make V4 more appealing as a source of greater trading volume, which translates into more investor activity.

Trailing behind is Kamino at $41.7 million, while Uniswap V3 comes in third, holding $20.9 million. This clearly shows liquidity is already shifting toward newer infrastructure.

Source: Token Terminal Together, the three control 63% of TVL. In turn, this leaves smaller venues competing for limited deposits. With sector TVL up 2,218.8%, further inflows into V4 could reinforce its liquidity advantage.

Sustained growth would strengthen Uniswap’s position as tokenized-stock trading expands.

Uniswap’s fee switch puts UNI burns in focus Meanwhile, growing usage is starting to feed directly into UNI’s economics. As Uniswap V4 pulls more tokenized-stock activity, its daily revenue recently surged toward $600,000. This pushed the annualized run rate near $220 million.

Still, higher revenues will provide more capital for UNI burns when the fee swap occurs, which reduces supply as activity on the protocol continues to expand.

Recent spikes over $400,000 also show this value capture strengthens with heavier trading periods.

Source: Token terminal Furthermore, v3 reportedly supports daily burns of roughly $598,000, while v4 already generates over $10 million in daily fees. That gap leaves considerable revenue between the current burn loop and a significant portion of revenue generated by v4.

Therefore, as the mechanism is extended to v4, it could accelerate removals of UNI. All in all, growing V4 activity would then translate more directly into scarcity and stronger token value capture.

Arthur Hayes adds to UNI demand With UNI’s economics improving, large holders are beginning to position around the same supply narrative. BitMEX cofounder Arthur Hayes received 244,406 UNI worth $1.73 million through Flowdesk. This materially expanded his exposure.

Source: X Using an over-the-counter (OTC) route also limited immediate market disruption, allowing accumulation without chasing UNI higher on exchanges.

Source: X Meanwhile, fresh wallets added another $2.9 million, while exchange balances fell by more than 350,000 UNI. Together, these movements point toward net absorption rather than distribution. Hayes also transferred $250,000 USDC to FalconX.

This move leaves additional purchasing capacity for future purchases. Ultimately, further accumulation would tighten liquid supply as protocol burns remove UNI.

Final Summary Uniswap [UNI] is gaining tokenized-stock liquidity as rising revenue strengthens UNI burns. Whale accumulation and falling exchange balances could tighten UNI supply further.

Uniswap (UNI) is showing renewed bullish momentum, with buyers successfully defending key support levels while pushing UNI toward significant resistance zones. Technical indicators are strengthening as on-chain activity, protocol earnings, and token burns continue to rise, indicating a strong recovery phase for the decentralized exchange’s native token.

Bullish Recovery Gathers PaceAt the latest market check, UNI is valued at $7.08, supported by a 24-hour trading volume of $519.31 million and a total market capitalization of $4.42 billion. The token’s price has jumped 3.36% in the past day, reflecting increased buying interest as it rebounds from recent lows.

Crypto analyst Rekt Capital observed that UNI has surged about 57% after retesting a key support area, reinforcing a shift in short-term market structure. The move higher has positioned UNI near a descending trendline, a crucial resistance where sellers may attempt to slow further gains.

Rekt Capital highlighted that this successful support retest is a significant technical indicator underpinning UNI’s ongoing recovery, noting a clear change in sentiment among market participants.

This momentum follows earlier signals from August, when UNI reclaimed a crucial level, setting up expectations for an advance toward its long-term descending trendline.

A decisive breakout above this resistance could pave the way for acceleration toward the $10 price target, with $15 becoming a longer-term possibility if bullish trends persist.

Technical Analysis Signals Robust MomentumChart data from TradingView illustrates a decisive bullish breakout for UNI on September 5, 2026. UNI climbed 13.82% to reach $7.04190, after opening at $6.18470 and peaking at $7.06010.

The rally propelled UNI far above the upper Bollinger Band, which stood at $6.78402, revealing heightened volatility and buyer dominance beyond its baseline of $4.76600.

Indicators confirm this trend, as the MACD line surged to 0.68579, well above its signal line value of 0.44679, with expanding green histogram bars at 0.23900 supporting the strong upward move. Despite robust bullishness, UNI’s price trading outside the upper Bollinger Band may signal a period of near-term consolidation as the market digests gains.

Protocol Earnings and TokenomicsData from Token Terminal shows Uniswap generated $2.4 million in earnings over the last week, giving it an annualized run rate close to $125 million. This growth indicates expanding economic activity across multiple versions of the protocol, a variety of liquidity pools, and several blockchain networks.

Since December 2025, Uniswap has enhanced its fee collection mechanisms in five stages, increasing value generation by leveraging higher user participation and expanding protocol features.

Uniquely, all collected fees are automatically converted into UNI tokens before being permanently burned, which, over time, reduces the circulating supply and may benefit token economics—provided the current pace of fee generation remains stable.

Recent data from Wu Blockchain revealed that Uniswap’s daily UNI token burn exceeded $1 million for the first time on September 4, with 184,000 UNI burned, reflecting a value of $1.15 million.

This record burn coincided with surging activity on Robinhood Chain, which accounted for 150,000 UNI burned in a single day. Robinhood Chain also saw decentralized exchange trading volumes surge past $3 billion, with Uniswap commanding 98% of the DEX market share on the network.

“This model can become more efficient in token economics if fees continue to be generated at a high level, as fees gathered are automatically turned into UNI tokens, which get burned forever.”

If UNI manages to break above its current trendline resistance, bullish sentiment could propel its price toward $10 and possibly $15. Failure to breach resistance could see the token enter a period of consolidation, making support levels critical to maintaining the uptrend.

In a highly volatile market where unexpected events like a Federal Reserve decision or a new altcoin listing can trigger instant price swings, efficient market monitoring has become vital for traders. Many are moving toward privacy-focused tools such as CryptoAppsy that offer real-time charts, instant price alerts, specialized news, and crucial macroeconomic data—all in one platform and without the need for an account—saving time and potentially protecting profits.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Robinhood Chain has recorded rapid growth, and Uniswap has become its largest direct beneficiary.

As AMBCrypto reported, tokenized-stock holders increased from nearly zero to 863,800 within two months.

Daily Trading Volume also averaged between $100 million and $130 million. That participation substantially increased Robinhood Chain’s Fees and Revenue.

Source: DeFiLlama On the 4th of September, daily Fees reached $6 million, while Revenue climbed to $5.4 million. That activity also pushed daily UNI burns to a record value.

Why did UNI burns cross $1M? Uniswap recorded higher activity alongside rising Fees and Revenue. DeFiLlama data showed that daily Fees reached $12.5 million, while Revenue exceeded $1 million.

Source: DeFiLlama As network activity accelerated, the value of burned UNI also climbed sharply.

According to the Wu Blockchain Data Center, daily UNI burns reached $1.15 million. That marked the first time their daily value surpassed $1 million.

Source: Wu Blockchain Data Center Around 184,000 UNI were burned, marking the second-highest daily total on record. Robinhood Chain generated approximately 150,000 UNI of that amount.

On the same day, Robinhood DEX Volume surpassed $3 billion for the first time.

Uniswap accounted for 98% of that activity, making it the primary engine behind the burn. Token burns reduce circulating supply. However, their price impact still depends on demand and the size of remaining supply.

Can UNI price follow the burn? Despite record burns, Uniswap [UNI] continued facing selling pressure from Spot traders. Spot Netflow rose to $2.1 million after recording -$6.6 million during the previous session.

Source: CoinGlass That reversal indicated renewed exchange inflows and potential profit-taking.

Even so, UNI’s market structure retained a bullish bias. The Positive Directional Indicator [+DI] remained above the Negative Directional Indicator [-DI], showing that buyers maintained directional control.

Source: TradingView Meanwhile, the Average Directional Index [ADX] remained above its SMA, supporting the trend’s strength. The Advance Decline Ratio also held above 1, confirming broader bullish participation.

Therefore, stronger demand alongside continued burns could help Uniswap [UNI] clear $6.50 and target $7.

However, UNI must defend $6. Losing that level could expose the $5.60 support. Uniswap’s burn mechanism is working. The unanswered question is when the market will price that value accrual.

Final Summary Robinhood Chain reached 863,800 tokenized-stock holders within two months. Its daily Trading Volume averaged between $100 million and $130 million. Uniswap [UNI] could target $7 if demand strengthens and $6 remains support.

Uniswap’s v4 architecture has now seen more than 90,000 unique hooks initialized and attached to at least one deployed pool. That number, tracked via on-chain data dashboards including Dune Analytics, represents a roughly fourfold increase from the approximately 22,600 hooks recorded earlier this year.

For a feature that didn’t exist before January 2025, that’s a steep adoption curve.

What hooks actually do Think of hooks as plug-ins for liquidity pools. In Uniswap v4, developers can write custom smart contract logic that executes at specific points in a pool’s lifecycle: before a swap, after a swap, when liquidity is added, when it’s removed, and so on.

Before v4, if you wanted a pool to behave differently, say with dynamic fees that adjust based on volatility, you essentially needed to fork the protocol or build on top of it. Hooks let developers modify pool behavior without touching the core protocol code.

Advertisement

The system is also designed for gas efficiency. Hook addresses encode permission details directly in their bits, meaning the protocol can check what a hook is allowed to do without expensive storage lookups.

Uniswap v4 introduced a singleton PoolManager architecture alongside the hooks system. Instead of deploying a separate smart contract for every new pool (as in v3), all pools now live inside a single contract. This reduces deployment costs and makes it cheaper for hooks to interact with multiple pools simultaneously.

From 22K to 90K in months The growth trajectory is notable. Early in 2026, on-chain dashboards recorded roughly 22,609 unique hook addresses that had been initialized. By mid-January 2026, that figure had climbed to approximately 89,955.

To be precise about what’s being counted: these are unique hook addresses, not total pools or total deployments. A single hook contract can theoretically be linked to multiple pools. So the 90K figure represents 90,000 distinct pieces of custom logic that developers have written, deployed, and connected to at least one live pool.

Community-maintained Dune dashboards, supported by both Uniswap Labs and independent contributors, have made this data publicly accessible.

Notable hooks in the wild Not all hooks are created equal, and a few stand out. DualPool, developed in partnership with Spark, is an audited and open-sourced hook designed to generate yield on idle liquidity sitting in pools. The core insight is straightforward: most liquidity in a concentrated liquidity pool isn’t being actively used at any given moment. DualPool routes that dormant capital into yield-generating strategies until it’s needed for swaps.

Other hooks have targeted dynamic fee structures, where swap fees adjust automatically based on market conditions like volatility or trading volume. Some developers have built hooks focused on MEV-related attributes, attempting to either capture or redistribute the value that searchers and block builders typically extract from on-chain trades.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Trader Loracle’s unrealized losses from shorting PONS and CASHCAT have widened to $6.3 million.

Per TradingBeats monitoring, trader Loracle has shorted CASHCAT and PONS with 3x leverage, holding total short positions worth roughly $20.79 million. Their unrealized loss has since widened to over $6.3 million: the CASHCAT short is valued at ~$5.7 million, with an average entry price of $0.23, incurring an unrealized loss of ~$496,000; the PONS short is worth ~$15.09 million, with an average entry price of $0.54, and an unrealized loss of ~$5.839 million. On-chain Perpetual (Perp) and address analysis tool TradingBeats is now live, supporting real-time Hyperliquid data access, tracing whale operations via address tracking, and delivering comprehensive in-depth analysis.

12 minutes ago

Fueled by the Meme craze, Uniswap’s daily transaction count has hit successive new highs, topping 9 million for four straight days.

According to Blockworks data, the Meme coin boom has driven Uniswap to hit all-time highs in daily transaction counts across multiple consecutive trading days. Over the past four days, Uniswap has recorded more than 9 million trades each day, far exceeding its previous levels.

12 minutes ago

Qwerty’s holdings of the token "Niu Lai" have posted over $2.1 million in unrealized profit, delivering a 10x paper return.

According to GMGN monitoring, crypto KOL Qwerty (@Quanterty) has an unrealized profit of approximately $2.16 million from his Bull Run-related holdings, with a paper return of around 10x. As previously reported, crypto executive He Yi follows Qwerty's account, and the KOL today called for the Bull Run to sweep across the globe.

12 minutes ago

Bonk Guy: PONS remains severely undervalued

Well-known trader Bonk Guy posted that PONS remains the most worthy trade to participate in this cycle. Based on its circulating market cap, it is still severely undervalued, which is truly incredible.

12 minutes ago

PONS market cap hits a new record high of $850 million, surging over 26% in 24 hours.

Per GMGN market data, the market capitalization of PONS, the token launch platform on Robinhood Chain, has hit $850 million, marking a new all-time high. The token rallied 26.23% over the past 24 hours, with a 24-hour trading volume of $108 million. PONS is the native platform token of Pons, the token launch platform built for Robinhood Chain. The platform supports the creation and issuance of fixed-supply tokens, and allocates collected WETH fees to repurchase PONS, while PONS fees are directly burned. Some members of the crypto community have referred to Pons as the Robinhood Chain equivalent of Pump.fun. BlockBeats warns users that such tokens are subject to high price volatility, and investment should be approached with caution.

12 minutes ago

If agents are already operating on the public internet, isn’t that a security incident? OpenAI plans to revise its disclosure rules.

Insight Beating AI Flash News: OpenAI has responded to the Wiki incident exposed yesterday. The AI agents in question began writing content on public wikis back in May, and later even shared answers and discussed methods to bypass restrictions—though the incident was not previously disclosed separately. OpenAI explained that in the past, it had categorized such model "deviations" as research issues, typically including them in research materials like system cards rather than releasing them as standalone security incidents. The company also drew a comparison to the July Hugging Face incident: that event impacted the cybersecurity of both OpenAI and third parties, so it was handled as a traditional security incident; the Wiki incident was classified as model behavior deviating from expectations, hence no separate incident report was issued. Now OpenAI admits this approach is no longer adequate. A new development this year: model "deviations" are no longer just experimental anomalies, but have started affecting real websites and third parties. However, there is currently no unified industry standard to define at what severity such incidents require public disclosure. OpenAI said it will release a new disclosure framework in the coming weeks, specifically outlining how to communicate externally about agent out-of-control or boundary-crossing incidents, and is currently discussing these rules with dozens of regulators globally.

12 minutes ago

A memecoin launchpad on Robinhood Chain is quietly outearning Solana’s biggest token factory. The fees are real, the volume is accelerating, and the gap is widening every day.

Summary

Pons has outearned Pump.fun in daily fees every day since Aug. 29, hitting $4.89M on Aug. 31 alone against a chain where gas costs users nothing. The platform has processed $4B in cumulative volume with more than 10,000 token deployments per day, a pace that took Pump.fun months longer to reach. Creators on Pons have earned over $25M in cumulative fees through a 1% trading fee split that sends roughly 70% back to token deployers. The PONS token surged from $0.078 on Aug. 24 to $0.43 by Sept. 1, an 18,000% gain since July that pushed its market cap past $307M. Uniswap Labs purchased PONS tokens “for long-term alignment” and launched pools.trade on Robinhood Chain on Aug. 5, adding direct competition on the same network. A memecoin launchpad nobody outside of onchain circles talks about is printing more revenue than the protocol that defined the category. Pons, the dominant token factory on Robinhood Chain, has beaten Pump.fun in daily fees every single day since Aug. 29. On Aug. 31, it pulled in $4.89M. Pump.fun, running on Solana where gas is already near free, did not come close.

This is not a fluke day or a cherry-picked metric. Pons is processing $4B in cumulative platform volume. It is launching more than 10,000 tokens per day. And the economics are structured so that the people deploying tokens keep most of the money, which is exactly why they keep coming back.

The question is no longer whether Pons can compete with Pump.fun. It already is. The question is what happens when Robinhood Chain’s 90-day gas waiver expires on Sept. 29 and users have to start paying for transactions again.

The fee machine behind Pons Pons charges a flat 1% fee on every trade that happens on tokens launched through its platform. That fee splits roughly 70/30: creators take the larger share, the protocol keeps the rest. In a market where most launchpads extract value and give nothing back, Pons runs in the opposite direction. Creators have earned more than $25M in cumulative fees.

That split matters because it creates a flywheel. A creator launches a token, promotes it, drives volume, and earns fees from the trading activity their promotion generates. The incentive to launch another token the next day is obvious. So is the incentive to launch five.

Ten thousand token deployments per day is a staggering number. Most of those tokens will go to zero. That is the nature of memecoins and everyone involved knows it. But the volume those tokens generate while they are alive feeds the fee machine, and the fee machine feeds the creators, and the creators feed the volume. It is a loop that sustains itself as long as attention stays on the chain.

Pump.fun built this model first. Pons copied the playbook and dropped it onto a chain where gas costs nothing, which turned out to be the only variable that mattered.

Why zero gas changes everything Robinhood Chain is an Arbitrum Orbit L2 that launched a 90-day gas waiver on July 1. Every transaction on the network is free until roughly Sept. 29. That single decision rewired the economics of memecoin trading.

On Solana, gas fees are close to zero but not actually zero. A fraction of a cent per transaction adds up when a degenerate trader is executing hundreds of swaps a day across dozens of tokens. On Robinhood Chain during the waiver period, that cost is literally nothing. The only fee a trader pays is the 1% Pons trading fee, and 70% of that goes to the person who created the token they are trading.

This is why Pons volume exploded. The friction that exists on every other chain, even low-fee chains like Solana, vanishes entirely. A user can launch a token, trade into it, trade out of it, and repeat the cycle without ever thinking about network costs. The behavioral difference between “almost free” and “actually free” is enormous.

Robinhood Chain generated $4.01M in daily revenue on Sept. 2. Solana, by comparison, earned $78,000 that same day. The L2 that most of crypto Twitter ignores is generating 50 times the daily revenue of the chain that dominates the conversation.

The PONS token rally and what it signals PONS traded at $0.078 on Aug. 24. By Sept. 1, it hit $0.43. That is not a typo. The token is up 18,000% since July, and the rally accelerated as fee revenue numbers started circulating on social media.

The market cap sits around $307M with roughly 710M tokens in circulation. Twenty-nine percent of the supply has been burned, which tightens the float and amplifies price moves in both directions. Daily trading volume regularly exceeds $100M, which means the token is liquid enough for institutional-sized positions but volatile enough to lose half its value in a bad week.

What makes the PONS rally different from a typical memecoin pump is that it is backed by real revenue. The protocol is generating millions in daily fees. That does not mean the token is fairly valued at $307M or that it cannot crash 80% tomorrow. It means the speculation has a foundation, which is more than most tokens at this market cap can say.

The burn mechanism also creates an interesting dynamic. As more tokens are burned and supply shrinks, the remaining tokens represent a larger share of protocol fees if the team ever implements a fee-sharing mechanism. That is a big “if,” but the market is pricing in the possibility.

Uniswap enters the ring Uniswap Labs did two things that signal where institutional money sees the opportunity. First, the team bought PONS tokens and publicly stated the purchase was “for long-term alignment.” Second, Uniswap Labs launched pools.trade on Robinhood Chain on Aug. 5 with lower fees than Pons.

The pools.trade launch is direct competition. Uniswap is not partnering with Pons or building on top of it. The team is building a competing product on the same chain with a fee structure designed to undercut the incumbent. That is a vote of confidence in Robinhood Chain and a declaration of war against Pons in the same move.

The PONS token purchase complicates that narrative. If Uniswap Labs is building a competitor, why buy the competitor’s token? The most likely answer is hedging. If Pons wins, the token appreciates and Uniswap profits from the position. If pools.trade wins, Uniswap captures the fee revenue directly. Either way, Uniswap has exposure to the growth of memecoin trading on Robinhood Chain.

For Pons, the Uniswap entry is both validation and threat. Validation because one of DeFi’s most respected teams is building on the same chain. Threat because Uniswap has brand recognition, engineering talent, and existing liquidity network effects that Pons cannot match. The next 60 days will determine whether Pons can defend its market share or whether the Uniswap brand pulls volume away.

The case against Pons The bull case writes itself. The bear case deserves equal weight.

The entire Pons economy runs on a gas subsidy that expires on Sept. 29. When users start paying for transactions, the “actually free” advantage disappears. Volume could drop sharply. If the gas waiver was the primary driver of adoption rather than the product itself, the revenue numbers collapse the moment the subsidy ends.

Ten thousand token deployments per day sounds impressive until you consider what those tokens actually are. The vast majority are low-effort memecoins created to extract fees from the first wave of buyers. The security risks in DeFi are well documented, and memecoin launchpads concentrate those risks. Rug pulls, coordinated dumps, and wash trading are features of this market, not bugs.

The 70/30 creator fee split incentivizes volume at any cost. A creator who earns fees from trading activity has every reason to manufacture that activity artificially. Without serious wash trading detection, the $4B cumulative volume number could include a significant amount of recycled capital that inflates the real economic activity.

The PONS token itself has no formal claim on protocol revenue. Holding it does not entitle you to a share of fees. The 18,000% gain is driven by speculation about future utility that may never materialize. If the team announces a fee-sharing mechanism, the token could surge further. If they do not, holders are sitting on an expensive bet with no yield.

Robinhood Chain is also a single L2 controlled by a centralized sequencer. The regulatory environment for crypto assets is evolving, and a centralized chain running a memecoin factory is exactly the kind of thing that attracts attention from enforcement agencies. The Clarity Act vote on Sept. 15 could reshape the legal ground rules for tokens launched on platforms like Pons.

Pump.fun is not standing still Pump.fun still processes enormous volume on Solana. The protocol has brand recognition, a larger user base, and a proven track record that spans multiple market cycles. Writing it off because Pons had a strong week would be premature.

Solana’s ecosystem is deeper. The chain has more wallets, more DEXs, more infrastructure, and more developer tooling than Robinhood Chain. A token launched on Pump.fun can immediately trade on Raydium, Jupiter, and dozens of other venues. A token launched on Pons trades on Pons and pools.trade. The liquidity surface area is not comparable.

Pump.fun also charges real fees on a chain where users already accept gas costs as part of the transaction. When Robinhood Chain’s gas waiver expires, Pump.fun’s cost structure will look relatively more competitive than it does today. The gap that Pons exploited narrows significantly once both platforms operate on chains where gas is cheap but not free.

The counter-argument is that user habits formed during a free gas period may stick. Traders who built their workflow around Robinhood Chain over the past 90 days might not leave even when gas costs return. But behavioral economics suggests that free-to-paid transitions always cause churn. The question is how much.

What to watch Daily fee comparison after Sept. 29. The gas waiver expiration is the single most important variable. If Pons maintains its fee lead over Pump.fun after users start paying gas, the bull case strengthens dramatically. Wash trading analysis. Independent researchers need to quantify how much of the $4B cumulative volume is organic versus recycled. If organic volume is even 50% of reported numbers, the economics still work. If it is lower, the story changes. Uniswap Labs pools.trade market share. Track whether pools.trade is taking volume from Pons or growing the total pie. If Pons volume stays flat while pools.trade grows, the chain is winning but the protocol is losing. PONS token utility announcements. Any fee-sharing, staking, or governance mechanism changes the valuation framework entirely. Without it, the $307M market cap is purely speculative. Regulatory signals from the Sept. 15 Clarity Act vote. A restrictive outcome could affect every memecoin launchpad, but centralized L2 platforms with identifiable operators face the most direct exposure. What is Pons? Pons is a memecoin launchpad on Robinhood Chain. You deploy a token, other people trade it, and you earn a cut of every trade. Think Pump.fun but on a chain where gas is free right now.

How does Pons make money? It takes a 1% fee on every trade. About 30% goes to the protocol and 70% goes to the person who created the token. That creator split is why so many people keep launching tokens on it.

Why is Pons outearning Pump.fun? Zero gas fees on Robinhood Chain. When every transaction is free except the trading fee, people trade more. A lot more. Pump.fun charges fees on Solana where gas is cheap but still real money if you are doing hundreds of trades a day.

What happens when the gas waiver expires? Nobody knows for sure. The 90-day gas waiver on Robinhood Chain ends around Sept. 29. If volume holds up after users start paying gas, Pons proves the product works without the subsidy. If volume drops off a cliff, the whole thesis was really about free gas and not about the platform.

Is the PONS token a good investment? It is up 18,000% since July and has a $307M market cap. The protocol generates real revenue, which is more than most tokens can say. But the token has no formal claim on that revenue, and an 18,000% gain means a lot of holders are sitting on profits they might take at any moment. Do your own research.

How does Pons compare to pools.trade? Pools.trade is Uniswap Labs’ competing product on the same chain, launched Aug. 5 with lower fees. It is newer and smaller but backed by one of DeFi’s strongest brands. They are fighting for the same users on the same network.

Is memecoin trading on Pons safe? Most tokens launched on any memecoin launchpad go to zero. Rug pulls and coordinated dumps happen constantly. The 70/30 fee split means creators are financially rewarded for generating volume, which can incentivize manipulation. Treat every trade as money you can afford to lose entirely.

Will Pons keep outearning Pump.fun? That depends on what happens after the gas waiver expires, whether Uniswap Labs takes market share, and whether regulators start looking at memecoin launchpads on centralized L2 chains. The current numbers are real. Whether they persist is a completely open question. This is educational analysis, not investment advice. —

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Cryptocurrency markets are volatile and speculative. Always conduct your own research before making investment decisions. Published Sept. 4, 2026.

DefiLlama and Forgd have introduced an AAA-to-CCC rating system covering 128 of 149 listed tokens, with Uniswap currently holding the dashboard’s only AAA grade at a composite score of 60.80.

Summary

Universal Token Rating multiplies disclosure and performance scores instead of averaging them. Projects lose points for missing disclosures, weak liquidity arrangements and insider-friendly tokenomics. Submitted project information is checked against exchange, on-chain, and market-maker data. AAA signals strong current conditions but does not predict returns or eliminate investment risks. DefiLlama’s live Universal Token Rating dashboard places Uniswap first with disclosure and performance scores of 7.87 and 7.72, respectively. Meteora follows with an AA grade and a composite score of 58.48, while Curve DAO ranks third at 53.32.

Developed with token advisory platform Forgd, the system grades assets by combining what a project discloses with what trading data shows. Its disclosure assessment covers areas such as tokenomics, insider wallets and commercial arrangements, while the performance side examines liquidity, spreads, venue coverage and market-maker conduct.

DefiLlama Head of Research Ryan Celaj told crypto.news that both components are required because averaging them could allow strength in one area to conceal serious problems in another.

“We’re multiplying a project’s disclosure and performance scores deliberately, because they are both necessary conditions for credibility. And ‘necessary’ is the key word. It’s not that performance and disclosures both factor in. They’re required.”

Under the formula, a project with a disclosure score of 10 and a performance score of 2 receives a composite score of 20. Celaj said an average would give the same project a much less critical score despite its weak market performance.

DefiLlama token grades require strength on both axes The two scores range from zero to 10 and are multiplied to produce a result out of 100. AAA begins at 60, meaning a token cannot reach the top category if either component falls below six, even with a perfect score on the other axis.

AA starts at 40, with narrower bands separating A, BBB, BB, and B as weaknesses increase. Celaj said the thresholds make the highest grades difficult to obtain while creating distinctions among assets further down the table.

Although the letters resemble grades used in conventional finance, Celaj said they do not estimate default probabilities and should not be treated as equivalents to ratings issued by a traditional credit-rating agency. The format was selected because institutional traders already understand the AAA-to-CCC scale.

The approach also links stated policies to observable results. A project may publish detailed market-making terms or token-distribution plans, but the performance score tests whether liquidity, trading activity and wallet behavior match those claims.

Uniswap founder Hayden Adams drew attention to the results after UNI received the only AAA grade. Referring to the ranking in an Aug. 27 X post, Adams called it “the result of a neutral, unbiased ratings system” and referred to past criticism of Uniswap as “crypto Twitter psyops and fud.”

Market-maker conduct can lower a token’s grade Forgd founder and CEO Shane Molidor said private contracts do not prevent the platform from assessing whether a market-making arrangement has produced durable liquidity.

Forgd monitors more than 500 market-maker engagements through reports and application programming interface data, according to Molidor. Its system measures contributions to volume and depth, uptime, compliance with agreed targets, and each provider’s record across other mandates.

“We do not determine sustainability from the disclosed contract alone,” Molidor said. “Forgd already monitors market-maker performance through its platform, giving us access to market-maker reporting and API data for the over 500 engagements we track.”

According to the executive, Forgd compares first-party information with exchange and on-chain data, including spreads, two-sided depth, venue coverage, and organic trading activity. Analysts also examine how liquidity behaves during volatile periods, token unlocks, and the period after launch incentives end.

Such checks are designed to separate persistent liquidity from volume temporarily supported by token loans, options, or other incentives, Molidor said. A project does not have to publish every commercial term, but it must provide enough verifiable evidence for Forgd to understand the arrangement and the commitments being measured.

Acceptable evidence may include relevant contract provisions, amendments, token-loan terms, options, wallet identifiers, liquidity targets, uptime requirements, incentive structures, market-maker reports and API records. Forgd also offers its market-maker monitoring software free of charge, allowing a poorly rated project to submit more data for review.

Market quality has become an important issue as institutions increase their exposure to tokenized assets. On Aug. 27, Stellar’s RWA value was reported to have increased from about $785 million in January to more than $3 billion in July, yet slightly more than $2 million had entered Blend pools that accept RWAs. The figures showed a large difference between assets issued on-chain and the amount actively used in decentralized lending.

Project claims cannot directly determine the score Claiming a profile gives a token issuer an opportunity to submit evidence, but Molidor and Celaj said the process does not allow the issuer to assign or control its rating.

Missing information counts against the disclosure score. A project that supplies favorable details while withholding weak areas cannot obtain full disclosure credit, according to Molidor.

“The downside is that some ratings will appear artificially low until a project provides the necessary disclosures,” Molidor said. “But the upside is that for projects, there is no downside to being transparent, and no upside to selective disclosure.”

The performance score adds a separate check by using exchange records, on-chain events, and Forgd’s monitoring tools. Its inputs include depth, spreads, volume, exchange coverage, derivatives conditions, tokenomics, and adherence to market-making targets.

Exceptionally strong performance in one category is capped, Celaj said, preventing one metric from cancelling persistent weakness elsewhere. The methodology also excludes venues regarded as unreliable from relevant calculations.

Ratings update continuously rather than relying on a single audit. Material disclosures that remain outdated for more than 60 days receive a penalty, while verifiable events such as token unlocks and exchange listings enter the performance assessment automatically.

Even with those controls, both executives acknowledged limits. Molidor said the system cannot prove that an undisclosed commercial relationship does not exist. It can identify missing information, inconsistent claims, and activity that does not match a project’s account, but its grade cannot guarantee that every relationship has been found.

Celaj similarly said that no grading model can be considered impossible to manipulate. DefiLlama has made its methodology and category-level results available so users can trace grades and challenge disputed information, while the team plans to adjust the system if projects find ways to exploit it.

An AAA token grade does not predict returns Neither DefiLlama nor Forgd has gathered enough long-term evidence to claim that highly rated tokens suffer smaller drawdowns or fewer market failures.

Molidor said a high performance score necessarily corresponds with stronger measured depth, tighter spreads, and more extensive liquidity because the system uses those conditions as inputs. Price declines can still result from security breaches, governance failures, or market conditions that the rating does not assess.

“An AAA grade means that, at this point in time, a token demonstrates a strong combination of disclosure quality and observable market performance under the UTR methodology,” Molidor said.

“It does not mean the token is risk-free, that its price will appreciate, or that an institution can replace its own legal, technical and financial due diligence.”

A CCC grade identifies substantial problems in disclosure, performance, or both, according to Molidor. It does not establish that a project is fraudulent or certain to fail, but it points institutions toward areas requiring additional review.

Celaj described the rating as a screening and monitoring tool rather than an investment recommendation. In his view, the system creates a dataset that researchers can eventually use to test whether combining disclosures with market data produces a better predictive signal than assessing each category separately.

Institutional interest gives that test practical relevance, especially for tokens linked to real-world assets. On July 31, an article on Ondo Finance reported that tokenized securities exceeded $36 billion in 2026, including approximately $12.88 billion in tokenized U.S. Treasuries.

For American institutions, token grades may help organize preliminary market-structure reviews, but regulated tokenized products remain subject to separate custody, eligibility, and securities requirements. On Aug. 3, BlackRock launched two tokenized money-market products backed by cash, short-term U.S. Treasuries and Treasury-backed repurchase agreements, with transfers restricted to approved investors and compliant wallets.

UTR does not assess every risk attached to such assets. Celaj specifically said its methodology does not measure cybersecurity risk, which has caused some of crypto’s largest historical drawdowns.

After momentarily hitting the $725–$730 range, Binance Coin is currently trading around $713 in an effort to maintain one of its biggest upward trends in recent months. The structural shift that underlies the rally is just as significant as the event itself. BNB has clearly surpassed its major moving averages. 

The longer-term averages are still grouped around $623–$651, but the 20-day EMA has accelerated to about $668. Most notably, after falling below the 200-day EMA for several months, the price has now recovered it around $651. As a result, the current bullish structure's primary support range is now $650–$670.

BNB/USDT Chart by TradingView HOT Stories

Momentum is the problem right now. After a dramatic increase from roughly $605, BNB is now in overbought territory with an RSI of about 73. Buyers are facing significant opposition, as evidenced by the most recent rejection at $730. Therefore, a short-term correction or sideways consolidation would be typical instead of the breakout being immediately invalidated. $730 is the initial level that bulls must clear. 

You Might Also Like

The path toward $750–$760, where BNB traded prior to its significant June correction, could be opened by a daily close above it. On the other hand, losing $690 would make a retracement toward the 20-day EMA at $668 more likely. But the overall technical structure is still bullish as long as BNB stays above the $650–$670 range.

Uniswap's TroubleAfter rising from about $3.20 in mid-August to about $6.25, Uniswap has entered a far more aggressive phase of its recovery. In less than three weeks, UNI has essentially doubled and surpassed all of the daily chart's major moving averages. Particularly significant was the breakout above the $4.00–$4.20 cluster. 

UNI/USDT Chart by TradingViewUNI then showed exceptionally strong buying pressure as it cleared $4.70, $5.20, and $5.80 with little consolidation. The other major averages are still between $3.91 and $4.12, but the 20-day EMA has already increased to roughly $4.70. The main short-term risk is also generated by that separation. 

You Might Also Like

The daily RSI has reached about 80, and UNI is currently about 33% above its 20-day EMA. As a result, the market is significantly overbought, and the most recent candles between $6.25 and $6.50 show the first indications of hesitation. Price discovery would continue to move toward $6.80 and possibly $7.00 with a clear breakout above $6.50. 

Instead, a cooldown toward $5.80–$6.00 could result from failing to clear that area. The deeper support is located between $5.20 and $4.70. Although UNI is still technically bullish, there is a significantly higher short-term correction risk when following a vertical advance. 

Gram Misses the MemoDespite multiple attempts to create a bottom between $1.30 and $1.35, Gram is still stuck in a bearish market structure. GRAM is trading below all of the major moving averages visible on the daily chart at around $1.36, so buyers are unable to confirm a sustainable reversal. 

GRAM/USDT Chart by TradingViewThe closest technical barrier is the 20-day EMA at $1.39, which is closely followed by another moving average at $1.40. In late August, GRAM made a brief comeback toward $1.50, but sellers rejected the move and drove the asset back toward its known support level. The August recovery appears to have been more of a relief rally than a broader trend reversal, based on the inability to sustain that breakout. 

You Might Also Like

Momentum remains in a neutral to bearish position. The daily RSI is at about 47, which gives buyers plenty of room to move in either direction but indicates that they are not strong enough to take the lead right now. Additionally, volume has significantly decreased in comparison to the explosive activity during GRAM's May rally. 

GRAM must first recover $1.40 and then break the $1.49–$1.50 resistance area in order to make a significant comeback. The 200-day EMA at $1.60 becomes the main technical target after that. On the downside, a further loss of $1.30 would reveal about $1.25 and possibly set new local lows. 

Chainlink's Short PauseAfter its explosive August breakout, Chainlink is continuing to maintain a much stronger technical structure. After rising from about $8.20 to over $12 in just two weeks, LINK is currently trading at about $11.58. LINK passed its major moving averages, including the 200-day EMA at $9.83, thanks to the rally. Instead of giving up the breakout right away, the price has since consolidated between roughly $11.00 and $12.00, which is positive after such a rapid expansion. 

GRAM/USDT Chart by TradingViewThe price is still comfortably above the rising 20-day EMA at roughly $10.69, while the daily RSI has dropped from overbought territory toward 63. This maintains the bullish structure while mitigating some of the overheating produced during the initial breakout. Right now, the primary resistance is between $12.00 and $12.20. 

You Might Also Like

With upper wicks reaching as high as roughly $12.60, LINK has frequently struggled in this area. Therefore, the path toward $12.60 and $13.00 could be reopened by a confirmed close above $12.20. $11.00 is the significant downside level. A retest of the 20-day EMA around $10.70 would become more probable if it were lost. 

Below that, the stronger structural support zone around the reclaimed 200-day EMA is represented by $9.80–$10.00. The August breakout is still technically intact unless LINK drops back below that area.

Uniswap Labs (@Uniswap) has purchased $PONS, the native token of Robinhood Chain launchpad Pons (@ponsdotfamily), sending the token to a fresh all-time high.

$PONS surged 28% over 24 hours and briefly reached $0.7391 following the announcement.

How Pons and Uniswap Are Connected The structural link between the two platforms makes the token purchase a natural extension of their on-chain relationship.

Token Mechanics and Supply

The deal signals a notable shift in the competitive dynamic between the two launchpads. Rather than remaining purely rivals on Robinhood Chain, Uniswap Labs now holds a financial stake in the platform it had been competing against, raising questions about how the relationship between the two products evolves from here.

Sources:
The Defiant: Uniswap Labs Bought Pons Token for Long-Term Alignment
FXStreet: Uniswap Purchases Rival PONS Token for Long-Term Alignment
Messari: Pons Launchpad Project Profile

Today, besides the meme token on the Robinhood chain that surpassed $100 million in market cap in a single day, other hot projects are also gaining traction. Among them, the new token launch platform pair.fund stands out. According to its official documentation, the platform allows users to issue ERC-20 tokens with a fixed total supply of 1 billion, select 1 to 5 listed Robinhood Stock Tokens (such as AAPL, TSLA, NVDA, SPY, etc.) as quote assets, and permanently lock liquidity on Uniswap V4. As of press time, data from GMGN shows that the platform’s native token PAIR has a market cap of $8.53 million, with a 24-hour increase of 91.37%. The largest token by market cap issued on the platform is CINEMA, which currently has a market cap of $3.52 million.

Relevant content

US stocks have maintained low volatility for 25 consecutive days, marking the longest such stretch since May 1992.

According to market data, the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), the benchmark gauge for U.S. stock market volatility tied to the S&P 500, has closed in the 14 to 17 point range for 25 consecutive trading days — the longest such stretch since May 1992. Over the past 34 years, the only comparable period occurred in 2025, with the streak lasting 24 trading days. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 has not posted a decline of at least -1.0% across 26 consecutive trading days, leaving the market in an unusually calm phase.

21 minutes ago

Hyperliquid will cut the minimum order notional amount for its prediction markets from $10 to $1.

Hyperliquid announced that in its upcoming network upgrade, it will lower the minimum notional amount for outcome orders (prediction market result token orders) from $10 to $1. Meanwhile, deployers will be able to query their remaining quota via the outcomeDeployerLimits information request interface.

21 minutes ago

Anthropic’s strategic deployment of in-house payment technology could erode Stripe’s market share.

Beating AI Express (from Dongcha) reports: Recent job postings reveal that Anthropic is planning to develop more in-house billing, fraud detection, and other financial infrastructure, while evaluating which payment-related services can be built internally instead of relying on external service providers. The postings show Anthropic has not yet finalized decisions on whether to further develop its own tools in areas including payments, billing, and tax processing, or continue procuring solutions from external providers. One senior software engineer position focused on billing requires assisting the company with technical selection: determining which business lines will continue development on external provider platforms, and which scenarios necessitate building their own underlying foundational modules around those external platforms.

21 minutes ago

Analyst: Bitcoin successfully retested the long-term descending trend line, and its monthly chart needs to hold above $76,000.

Prominent crypto analyst Rekt Capital notes that Bitcoin has successfully retested its macro downtrend line as support, with this line aligning closely with the highs from April-May 2026. Current price levels indicate the retest is initially valid. Rekt Capital also states that to avoid a shift into a downtrend, BTC must prevent its monthly closing price from falling below the downtrend line (approximately $761.87 million), as this could form an upper wick and weaken its breakout potential.

21 minutes ago

Tesla’s intraday price fell more than 6% as its Cybercab launch failed to meet expectations.

According to market data from BIT (bit.com), Tesla’s intraday price dropped as much as 6.3%. The highly anticipated Cybercab event held Thursday evening delivered far less substance than Wall Street had expected. Tesla’s stock had risen 5.4% ahead of the Thursday event, with analysts noting that a strong presentation could have reversed the stock’s upward momentum. The electric vehicle maker has staked its future on a shift toward physical AI, including autonomous driving and robotics.

21 minutes ago

Balancer extends a white hat invitation to the hacker, setting a deadline of 5:00 on September 9 for the return of approximately $234,000 in funds.

Balancer announced that its team has sent on-chain messages to wallets linked to the August 31 Balancer V1 exploit attack, proposing a deal: return of stolen funds in exchange for a bounty, with a commitment not to pursue legal liability for the return itself once conditions are met. If the attacker does not respond by 5:00 on September 9, Balancer will take technical, on-chain, and legal measures to track them. The incident resulted in approximately $234,000 in losses.

21 minutes ago

Pons (PONS) climbed to a record high of $0.73 on Friday after Uniswap Labs disclosed a purchase of the token, lifting the price roughly 41% in a day.

The milestone adds to a rally, which has lifted the meme coin 2534.7% in the past month and divided traders sharply.

Uniswap Purchase Follows Weeks of Launchpad RivalryPons said the purchase deepens an existing relationship between the two teams. Neither side disclosed the size of the buy or the price paid.

The purchase carries weight because the two products compete directly. Uniswap Labs launched its own launchpad, Pools, on the Robinhood Chain in early August, positioning it against Pons on the same chain.

PONS had already set a record high a day earlier after a Binance Alpha listing. The token has now extended that run.

The token has added 407.70% in seven days, per CoinGecko. Other launchpad tokens rose 5.70% in that window, against 0.80% for the broader crypto market as a whole.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

Traders Post Sharply Different ResultsThe meme coin’s rally rewarded holders and punished sellers. Lookonchain data shows that trader Unipcs spent $67,700 on 10.9 million PONS and never sold them. That stake is now worth $7.52 million, a 110x return.

Trader 0xbb94 exited early instead. The wallet bought 7.82 million PONS for $302,600, then sold them for $231,300 after a 20% drop, missing out on $5.3 million in later gains.

Supply mechanics also support the price. Pons says 29.34% of the total PONS supply has been burned. 80% of protocol fees fund programmatic accumulation of the token.

Similar buybacks have supported prices elsewhere in the market. Still, the price impact of a buyback-and-burn program depends on both the mechanism’s existence and its scale. A relatively small buyback may have little effect on a deeply liquid market.

Meanwhile, a larger program that removes a meaningful share of circulating supply can create stronger upward pressure, particularly if demand remains steady. This makes sustained launchpad activity the variable to watch.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

TLDR Uniswap Labs bought PONS, the token of a Robinhood Chain launchpad, calling it a move for long term alignment. Neither side revealed the price, size, or structure of the deal. PONS jumped 17.5% and hit an all-time high above $0.52 after the news. Pons has out-earned Solana’s pump.fun in daily fees every day since August 29. Robinhood Chain made up more than half of all Uniswap V4 trading volume across every network it supports. Uniswap Labs has bought PONS, the token tied to a crypto launchpad running on Robinhood Chain. Pons said the purchase was made for long term alignment between the two projects.

Neither company shared how many tokens changed hands. The price paid and the exact date of the deal were also not made public.

It is not clear if Uniswap Labs bought the tokens on the open market or received them through an allocation. Some users raised this question after the announcement went out.

PONS jumped 17.5% following the news and traded at $0.5013. The token touched an all-time high of $0.5242 earlier the same day.

The token’s market value reached $357.1 million. That places PONS around 118th among all cryptocurrencies by size.

How Pons Works With Uniswap Pons launched on July 13. It rolled out new contracts on August 3 that link its tokens directly with Uniswap liquidity pools.

Under this setup, new tokens start trading on Pons through a bonding curve. Once a token graduates, its liquidity moves over to Uniswap.

Some trading pairs on Pons include tokenized versions of shares linked to companies like Nvidia and Apple. These are crypto tokens built to track stock prices, not the actual shares.

Uniswap has become a main venue for this kind of trading on Robinhood Chain. The chain made up $901.5 million, or 56.3%, of Uniswap’s $1.6 billion in trading volume across every network it supports.

Pons Fees Outpace Rivals Pons brought in $5.95 million in fees over one day. It has earned more daily fees than the Solana launchpad pump.fun every day since August 29.

Over the past week, Pons collected $28.83 million in fees. Over the past month, that figure reached $40.84 million, according to DefiLlama.

Pons uses about 80% of its fees to buy back its own token. The project said Thursday that it has burned 29.34% of its total token supply.

Circulating supply now sits at 712.1 million PONS. The maximum supply is capped at 1 billion tokens.

Uniswap also runs its own launch platform on Robinhood Chain called Pools.trade. That platform started on August 5, just two days after Pons released its new contracts.

Pools.trade charges no fee to launch a token but does charge 0.25% on trades. It saw more launches than Pons on its first day, but Pons has since pulled far ahead in fees.

By August 31, Pools.trade was earning $38,553 a day. Pons was earning $4.89 million a day at the same time.

Robinhood Chain launched its mainnet on July 1. It runs on Ethereum layer two technology built with Arbitrum.

The network settled $1.35 billion in trading volume over the most recent 24 hour period. Total value locked on the chain stood at $818.6 million.

Uniswap’s own token also rose this week, trading at $6.28. That marked a 7.9% gain over one day and a 36.1% gain over seven days.

Pons added new stock-linked token pairs on Thursday. These included tokens tied to UPS, Snap, Lululemon, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson.

Pons said Uniswap Labs purchased its token "for long-term alignment" four weeks after Uniswap Labs put a rival launchpad on Robinhood Chain. Neither company disclosed the size of the purchase, the price paid, or the wallet holding it.

Uniswap Labs has bought PONS, the token of the memecoin launchpad that takes most of the launchpad fees paid on Robinhood Chain, the launchpad said on Thursday.

The purchase gives Uniswap Labs a stake in the application feeding the chain that now carries most of Uniswap V4's trading. Pons V2 routes tokens that graduate off its bonding curve into Uniswap V4 pools, and Robinhood Chain accounts for 56.3% of Uniswap V4 volume across all networks.

Pons announced the purchase at 5:24 p.m. ET, writing that Uniswap Labs "has purchased $PONS for long-term alignment" and calling it a deepening of its partnership with Uniswap. The post drew more than 200,000 views in under two hours. The Uniswap account quote-posted it with the emoji.

Acquisition Or AllocationNeither party disclosed how many tokens changed hands, what was paid, when the buying happened, or which address holds the position. Pons did not say whether Uniswap Labs bought on the open market or received an allocation, a distinction its followers raised repeatedly in the replies. Uniswap Labs has published no statement of its own.

Pons launched on July 13 and shipped its V2 contracts on Aug. 3. Its token trades on Robinhood Chain at contract 0x39dbed3a2bd333467115de45665cc57f813c4571, according to CoinGecko.

Rivals On The Same ChainUniswap Labs launched Pools.trade on Robinhood Chain on Aug. 5, charging 0.25% per trade and nothing to launch a token. It out-launched Pons on its first day. By Aug. 31, Pools.trade was collecting $38,553 a day in fees against $4.89 million for Pons V2.

Pons has since pulled ahead of every launchpad in crypto. It earned $5.95 million in fees over the past 24 hours, $28.83 million over seven days and $40.84 million over 30 days, DefiLlama data shows, keeping $1.11 million of the daily total as protocol revenue. It has out-earned Solana's pump.fun on daily fees every day since Aug. 29, after leading for six days in late July and then falling behind for a month.

Where Uniswap V4 TradesUniswap V4 handled $1.6 billion in volume over 24 hours across all chains. Robinhood Chain accounted for $901.5 million of that, against $465.5 million on Ethereum, $93.9 million on BNB Chain and $52.5 million on Base, according to DefiLlama. Uniswap's deployment on Robinhood Chain holds $207 million in total value locked and took $7.72 million in fees over the past day.

The chain itself settled $1.35 billion in DEX volume over 24 hours, with total value locked at $818.6 million, up 9.1% on the day, and stablecoins at $868.5 million. It earned $4.45 million in gas fees and $4.01 million in revenue, net of Ethereum settlement costs and the 10% share owed to Arbitrum.

PONS At A RecordPONS traded at $0.5013, up 17.5% over 24 hours, for a market capitalization of $357.1 million and a rank of 118, according to CoinGecko. The token set an all-time high of $0.5242 earlier Thursday, a day after Binance added it to Binance Alpha 1.0 alongside FLORK, and traded as low as $0.3476 in the same window. Turnover was $135.2 million.

UNI traded at $6.28, up 7.9% over 24 hours and 36.1% over seven days, for a market capitalization of $3.92 billion.

Burning Its Own SupplyPons directs about 80% of protocol fees toward buying PONS, according to the protocol and DefiLlama's accounting of its revenue. Pons said on Thursday that 29.34% of the total supply has been burned to date. Circulating supply stands at 712.1 million against a 1 billion maximum, CoinGecko data shows.

Stock Tokens And MemesRobinhood built the chain to trade tokenized equities and launched mainnet on July 1. Memecoin issuance arrived in week one, launch platforms began pairing memecoins with tokenized equities, and the network passed Ethereum on daily application revenue on Aug. 29. Pons listed a new set of stock-token pairs on Thursday, including UPS, SNAP, LULU, PFE and JNJ.

Onchain figures via DefiLlama and prices via CoinGecko as of 23:10 UTC on Sept. 3.

6 hours ago

Pons official announced in a statement that Uniswap Labs has acquired PONS tokens to align the long-term interests of both parties and deepen its collaboration with Uniswap. Fueled by this positive development, PONS rallied earlier this morning to a new all-time high of over $752 million, before pulling back to $686 million; the token’s 24-hour gain stands at 42.59%.

Source

Scan the QR code

Download APP

Uniswap Labs has purchased PONS, the token of a Robinhood Chain launchpad generating $5.95 million in daily fees, as PONS climbed to a new all-time high above $0.52.

Summary

Uniswap Labs purchased PONS for what the launchpad called long term alignment, but neither party disclosed the size, price or structure of the transaction. Pons generated $5.95 million in fees over 24 hours and has earned more in daily fees than Solana based pump.fun every day since Aug. 29. Robinhood Chain accounted for $901.5 million, or 56.3%, of Uniswap V4’s $1.6 billion in trading volume across supported networks. PONS rose 17.5% to $0.5013 and reached an all time high of $0.5242, while its market capitalization climbed to $357.1 million. Pons said Thursday that Uniswap Labs had “purchased $PONS for long-term alignment,” describing the transaction as a deepening of the relationship between the two projects.

The parties did not disclose how many tokens changed hands, the amount Uniswap Labs paid, when the purchase occurred or the address holding the position. Pons did not specify whether Uniswap Labs acquired PONS on the open market or received an allocation, a distinction raised by several users responding to the announcement.

Uniswap Labs had not issued its own statement detailing the transaction at the time of the disclosure.

PONS traded at $0.5013, up 17.5% over the previous 24 hours, according to CoinGecko. The token reached an all-time high of $0.5242 earlier Thursday after trading as low as $0.3476 during the same period, while turnover stood at $135.2 million.

Its market capitalization reached $357.1 million, placing PONS 118th among cryptocurrencies by market value.

The move came one day after Binance added PONS and FLORK to Binance Alpha 1.0. Crypto.news previously reported that Pons was generating $5.95 million in daily fees when the exchange announced the additions.

Uniswap Labs takes PONS position as V4 activity expands Pons launched on July 13 and deployed its V2 contracts on Aug. 3, linking tokens that graduate from its bonding curve directly with Uniswap V4 liquidity pools.

Before the deployment, Pons had detailed an ETH bonding curve alongside Uniswap V4 integration, creator payouts in ETH and support for custom trading pairs involving tokenized assets.

Under the model, tokens begin trading through the launchpad’s bonding curve before liquidity moves into Uniswap V4 once a token graduates. The V2 plan included pairs using assets such as USDG and tokenized versions of NVDA, AAPL and HOOD.

Robinhood Chain has since become the largest network for Uniswap V4 trading by volume.

Uniswap V4 processed $1.6 billion across supported chains over the latest 24-hour period, according to DefiLlama. Robinhood Chain contributed $901.5 million, or 56.3% of that total.

Ethereum followed with $465.5 million, while BNB Chain recorded $93.9 million and Base handled $52.5 million.

Uniswap’s deployment on Robinhood Chain held $207 million in total value locked and generated $7.72 million in fees over the past day.

The PONS purchase consequently puts Uniswap Labs on the token holder side of an application that sends graduated assets into its V4 pools, although the size and structure of the company’s position remain undisclosed.

Pons competes with Uniswap’s own Robinhood Chain launchpad Uniswap Labs operates another token launch platform on the same network.

The company launched Pools.trade on Aug. 5, two days after Pons shipped its V2 contracts. The platform allows users to create tokens through crowd or instant launches and routes completed launches into permanently locked Uniswap V4 liquidity.

Pools.trade charges no fee to launch a token, while trades carry a standard 0.25% liquidity provider fee.

The platform recorded more launches than Pons during its first day, but Pons subsequently pulled well ahead in fee generation.

By Aug. 31, Pools.trade was collecting $38,553 in daily fees compared with $4.89 million for Pons V2.

Pons has since generated $5.95 million in fees over 24 hours, $28.83 million over seven days and $40.84 million over 30 days, DefiLlama data showed. Approximately $1.11 million of the latest daily total was retained as protocol revenue.

The launchpad has out-earned Solana’s pump.fun in daily fees every day since Aug. 29. Pons had previously led pump.fun for six days in late July before falling behind for approximately a month.

Its revenue has become a large component of activity generated by applications on Robinhood Chain. A recent DefiLlama snapshot showed Robinhood Chain application revenue reaching $2.66 million over 24 hours, temporarily placing the network ahead of Hyperliquid, Ethereum and Base under the same metric.

GMGN, Pons and Uniswap together accounted for approximately 93% of the measured application revenue in that snapshot. Pons generated roughly $1.03 million, compared with around $1.11 million for GMGN and $327,707 for Uniswap.

Robinhood Chain carries most Uniswap V4 trading Robinhood launched its chain mainnet on July 1 as an Ethereum Layer 2 built using Arbitrum technology, with tokenized equities forming a central part of its trading offering.

Memecoin issuance began during the network’s first week. Launchpads later started combining memecoins with tokenized equities in the same trading markets, giving users pairs denominated in assets linked to publicly traded companies.

Uniswap has become one of the main liquidity venues for that activity. Combined tokenized stock volume through Uniswap on Robinhood Chain passed $1 billion in August.

The figure covered cumulative swaps involving several stock tokens and did not represent the amount of tokenized equities held on the network. Markets have included tokens tracking companies such as Nvidia, Apple and Alphabet.

Across decentralized exchanges, Robinhood Chain settled $1.35 billion in volume over the latest 24 hours. Total value locked stood at $818.6 million after rising 9.1% on the day, while stablecoins on the network were valued at $868.5 million.

The chain collected $4.45 million in gas fees and retained $4.01 million in revenue after Ethereum settlement expenses and the 10% share owed to Arbitrum.

Trading activity has remained concentrated among a smaller number of applications and assets. On Aug. 30, Pons alone generated $445 million of Robinhood Chain’s $874.8 million in DEX volume, according to a subsequent analysis of the network’s trading activity.

PONS buybacks have removed more than 29% of supply Pons uses a large portion of its protocol fees to buy its native token.

Approximately 80% of protocol fees are directed toward PONS purchases, according to Pons and DefiLlama’s accounting of protocol revenue.

Pons said Thursday that 29.34% of the total token supply had been burned. CoinGecko put circulating supply at 712.1 million PONS against a maximum supply of 1 billion.

To date, 29.34% of the total ethereum:0x07f5b6823751c2e2cd4560f28af75ff887102241 supply has been burned.

80% of protocol fees go towards programmatically accumulating ethereum:0x07f5b6823751c2e2cd4560f28af75ff887102241

/always_be_burning pic.twitter.com/6K1E0f6GEX

— Pons (@ponsdotfamily) September 3, 2026 The token’s record price came as UNI recorded its own weekly gains. Uniswap’s native token traded at $6.28, up 7.9% over 24 hours and 36.1% over seven days, giving it a market capitalization of $3.92 billion.

Pons has continued adding markets tied to Robinhood Chain’s tokenized-equity ecosystem. The launchpad listed another group of stock-token pairs Thursday, including UPS, SNAP, LULU, PFE and JNJ.

A two-month-old Layer 2 built by a stock brokerage is now processing more daily decentralized exchange volume than chains that have existed for years, and the market is only beginning to pay attention.

Summary

Robinhood Chain recorded roughly $945 million in daily decentralized exchange volume on Aug. 25, 2026, a new all-time high for the network and nearly double its previous record of $563 million set on July 8. The chain, which launched its public mainnet on July 1, has processed more than $47 billion in cumulative DEX volume in under two months, placing it fifth among all chains by 30-day volume at $15 billion. Uniswap serves as the dominant trading venue on the chain, and cumulative tokenized stock volume through Uniswap surpassed $1 billion by Aug. 21. Total value locked on Robinhood Chain surged from $4 million in June to roughly $1.4 billion by late August, a trajectory that no Ethereum Layer 2 has matched at this stage of its lifecycle. The 90-day gas subsidy that covers transaction fees through the end of September 2026 raises a central question: whether volume holds once users start paying for their own trades. Robinhood Chain processed roughly $945 million in decentralized exchange volume on Aug. 25, 2026. On the same day, the network handled 5.5 million transactions, tokenized stock volume hit a record $85 million, and a leveraged perpetual token product called pTokens went live on Arcus, the dYdX-built DEX backed by Robinhood Crypto. By any standard metric for a new blockchain, the day was historic.

Crypto Twitter, for its part, was busy arguing about memecoins and parsing Federal Reserve minutes. The chain that a publicly traded brokerage had quietly built into one of the most active networks in all of decentralized finance received roughly the same attention as a midcap altcoin listing on a second-tier exchange.

That disconnect between activity and attention says something about how the market prices narratives over infrastructure. Robinhood Chain is not a new token to trade. It does not have a native coin to speculate on. It is not the product of a pseudonymous team or a viral whitepaper. It is a piece of financial plumbing, built by a company that most of crypto still views with suspicion from the GameStop saga, and it is processing more daily volume than networks that raised hundreds of millions of dollars in venture capital.

The question is no longer whether Robinhood Chain can generate activity. It already has. The question is whether the activity is real, whether it lasts, and whether it changes anything about how traditional finance and decentralized finance relate to each other.

How Robinhood built a top-five chain in 56 days Robinhood Chain is an Ethereum Layer 2 built on Arbitrum Orbit, the chains-as-a-service framework that runs on the Nitro stack. It settles directly to Ethereum and uses Ethereum blobs for data availability. Block times run at 100 milliseconds, faster than Arbitrum One at 250 milliseconds and Monad at 300 milliseconds. The gas token is ETH.

The mainnet went live on July 1 at Robinhood’s “The World is Flat” keynote at the Old Royal Naval College in London. Within eight days, Uniswap swap volume on the chain had reached $500 million. By July 11, the chain was processing 7.6 million daily transactions and had recorded $3.1 billion in DEX volume in its first week alone.

By the end of July, Robinhood Chain had topped Ethereum in 24-hour application revenue. It had briefly surpassed Base in daily active users, logging 324,000 wallets against Base’s 275,000 on July 21. And it had placed itself in the top five chains globally by 30-day DEX volume, sitting behind Solana, BNB Chain, Ethereum, and Base with roughly $15 billion in monthly throughput.

For context, Arbitrum One’s 30-day DEX volume during the same period was roughly one-quarter of that figure. Robinhood Chain, using the same underlying technology, was running four times the volume of the chain it forked from.

The volume breakdown: what is actually trading The Aug. 25 record was not driven by a single asset class. Three distinct categories of activity converged on the same day.

The first was memecoin speculation. Pons, a token launched through the chain’s launchpad ecosystem, accounted for roughly half of all DEX volume at its peak. CASHCAT, Robinhood Chain’s first breakout memecoin, had previously hit a $156 million market cap before Pons overtook it in late July. On Aug. 30, Pons alone contributed $445 million of the chain’s $874.8 million in volume that day, demonstrating the degree to which a single venue can dominate chain-level metrics.

The second was tokenized equities. Robinhood launched Stock Tokens as a flagship product at mainnet, offering ERC-20 representations of stocks like NVIDIA, Apple, GameStop, and SpaceX that trade around the clock in more than 120 countries. These tokens give holders economic exposure to the underlying stock rather than legal ownership of shares. By Aug. 21, cumulative tokenized stock volume through Uniswap had surpassed $1 billion. A tokenized Nasdaq-100 tracker called QQQB drove 288 percent of July’s tokenized equity volume, suggesting heavy concentration in index products.

The third was leveraged derivatives. Arcus launched pTokens on Aug. 25, wrapping leveraged perpetual accounts into transferable ERC-20 tokens including pBTC3x and pHOOD3x. The platform also began accepting tokenized stock collateral at a 50 percent loan-to-value ratio, creating a direct bridge between equity exposure and leveraged crypto trading that has no equivalent on any other chain.

The timing of the Aug. 25 spike also mattered. Bitcoin had rallied sharply since Aug. 17 on what Bloomberg called a record $2.7 billion wave of short liquidations, the largest since records began in 2021. A White House crypto meeting and a U.S. Treasury move to double long-dated bond buybacks added fuel. Bitcoin reached near $81,500 and Ether gained nearly 29 percent in a single week. That macro tailwind lifted activity across every chain, but Robinhood Chain captured a disproportionate share because its zero-fee environment made it the path of least resistance for traders looking to rotate quickly between assets.

The stablecoin layer underneath the trading activity tells its own story. Stablecoin market capitalization on Robinhood Chain reached $640 million by late August, with USDe from Ethena accounting for the bulk of inflows. Robinhood Earn, a decentralized lending product launched alongside the mainnet, offers an estimated 7 percent yield on USDG, the stablecoin developed in partnership with Paxos. The yield product serves as an anchor for capital that might otherwise leave the chain between trading sessions, giving the ecosystem a retention mechanism that pure trading chains typically lack.

The infrastructure advantage Robinhood brought to the table Most Layer 2 networks launch with a technical thesis and then spend months or years trying to attract users. Robinhood reversed the sequence. The company brought 27 million funded brokerage accounts, an existing mobile wallet, a compliance infrastructure built over a decade of regulatory engagement, and a brand that, whatever crypto natives think of it, is synonymous with retail trading for an entire generation of investors.

CEO Vlad Tenev framed the ambition in a recent interview: “Crypto is becoming the infrastructure that powers financial markets.” On Aug. 7, he described Robinhood Chain as the fastest-growing chain in history, noting that it reached 100 million cumulative transactions faster than any other network. Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee separately called the launch “one of the biggest crypto success stories” of 2026.

The revenue model also differs from most Layer 2 networks. Under the Arbitrum Expansion Program, 8 percent of chain revenue goes to a treasury controlled by governance token holders and 2 percent funds a developer guild. Robinhood keeps the rest. In July alone, the chain generated roughly $3.6 million in transaction fees, making it the top revenue-producing Layer 2 across the entire Ethereum ecosystem at 38 percent of the estimated $6.3 million in total L2 fees collected that month.

The company’s Q2 2026 earnings, reported on July 29, showed total revenue of $1.31 billion, beating Wall Street estimates. Net income rose 48 percent year over year to $573 million. Robinhood is not a startup hoping its chain will subsidize losses. It is a profitable company with a stock trading above $100 that can afford to invest in chain infrastructure without needing the chain itself to be immediately profitable.

The gas subsidy question The single most important variable in Robinhood Chain’s near-term trajectory is the 90-day gas fee subsidy that covers all transaction costs through the Robinhood Wallet. The promotional period, which began at mainnet launch on July 1, runs through approximately Sept. 29, 2026.

In mid-August, Robinhood reduced the subsidy threshold from $5 per transaction to $0.50, a 90 percent cut that suggests the company is already tapering the benefit rather than cutting it off all at once. The move signals a gradual transition rather than a cliff.

But the subsidy has clearly inflated activity metrics. When transactions cost nothing, the friction that normally separates casual browsing from actual trading disappears. The 16,000 new tokens created daily at peak memecoin activity in July were possible in part because launching a token was free. The 5.5 million daily transactions on Aug. 25 included activity that would not have occurred at even minimal gas costs.

The precedent from other chains is mixed. Base launched with heavily subsidized gas and retained strong activity after costs normalized, in part because Coinbase’s distribution kept funneling users to the network. Blast, by contrast, saw activity crater after its incentive programs wound down. The question for Robinhood Chain is whether the brokerage’s 27 million accounts provide a durable demand floor that subsidies merely accelerated, or whether the subsidy itself created demand that will not survive its removal.

There is a middle scenario that the binary framing obscures. Volume could fall significantly from the Aug. 25 peak and still leave Robinhood Chain as a top-ten chain by DEX activity. A 60 percent drop from $945 million would still produce roughly $380 million in daily volume, which would place it ahead of most Layer 2 networks even without subsidies. The relevant question is not whether volume declines after the subsidy ends, because it almost certainly will, but whether the floor is high enough to sustain the ecosystem’s economic model.

The corporate chain land grab Robinhood Chain did not launch into a vacuum. It entered a market where every major financial technology company appears to be building its own chain. Coinbase has Base. Stripe acquired Bridge and is building payment infrastructure on it. Circle launched a new standard for stablecoin interoperability. Robinhood followed with its own Arbitrum-based rollup.

The pattern is clear: consumer fintech companies have concluded that owning the execution layer is more valuable than renting space on someone else’s chain. The economics are straightforward. A chain operator captures sequencer revenue, controls the fee schedule, and can subsidize specific types of activity to drive adoption. A tenant on another chain pays whatever fees the market demands and has no control over the user experience at the infrastructure level.

The comparison to Base is instructive. Base launched in August 2023 and has had three years to build its ecosystem. Its total value locked stands at roughly $5.47 billion as of late August 2026, compared to Robinhood Chain’s roughly $1.4 billion. Base processes more daily transactions on average. But Robinhood Chain closed the gap on several metrics in weeks rather than years, briefly surpassing Base in daily active users and consistently ranking within striking distance on DEX volume.

The difference is maturity versus momentum. Base has accumulated three years of liquidity, developer tooling, and protocol deployments. Robinhood Chain has a brokerage with 27 million accounts and a product, tokenized equities, that no other chain offers at the same scale.

The DEX-to-CEX ratio and what it means Robinhood Chain’s volume spike arrived during a broader structural shift in crypto trading. In July 2026, decentralized exchanges handled spot volume equal to 24.14 percent of centralized exchange volume, the highest ratio since The Block began tracking the metric in 2019. The ratio has roughly tripled in under three years, rising from below 10 percent for most of 2024 to its current level.

The irony is that the shift is being driven in part by centralized companies. Robinhood, a centralized brokerage, is routing volume through a decentralized exchange layer. Coinbase, a centralized exchange, is doing the same through Base. The line between centralized and decentralized finance is blurring in ways that do not fit neatly into the narratives that either side prefers.

For Robinhood specifically, the chain creates a flywheel that its centralized app cannot replicate. Stock Tokens traded on Uniswap generate fees that flow back to the Robinhood Chain ecosystem. Users who start with tokenized equities discover memecoin trading, lending protocols, and leveraged products. The chain becomes a surface area for financial experimentation that a regulated brokerage app cannot legally offer through its primary interface.

This is the strategic logic that the market has largely missed. Robinhood Chain is not a marketing exercise. It is a mechanism for Robinhood to offer products and services that its regulated brokerage cannot provide directly, while still capturing economic value from the activity.

The concentration risk The bull case for Robinhood Chain is compelling, but the data also reveals structural vulnerabilities that the headline volume numbers obscure.

On Aug. 30, a single protocol, Pons, generated 51 percent of the chain’s $874.8 million in daily volume. When one venue does half of all throughput, the chain’s activity metrics become a proxy for that venue’s performance rather than a measure of ecosystem health. If Pons loses momentum, the chain’s volume numbers could drop by half overnight without any change to the underlying infrastructure.

The tokenized equity market, while growing, remains concentrated as well. QQQB, a single Nasdaq-100 tracker, drove the majority of July’s tokenized stock volume. A dozen stocks clear at least $500,000 in daily volume, but the breadth of adoption is still narrow relative to the potential market.

Total value locked tells a similar story. Robinhood Chain’s TVL has surged to $1.4 billion, but this remains roughly one-quarter of Base’s $5.47 billion. The chain’s TVL-to-volume ratio is unusually high, meaning it generates more trading activity per dollar locked than most chains. That can be read as capital efficiency or as evidence that volume is being amplified by zero-cost transactions and speculative turnover rather than deep, sticky liquidity.

Stock Tokens also remain unavailable to U.S. residents, which excludes the majority of Robinhood’s 27 million funded accounts from the chain’s flagship product. The addressable market for tokenized equities is currently limited to users outside the United States, a significant constraint on growth.

The reflexive fee structure on Pons adds another layer of fragility. Eighty percent of the protocol’s fees fund automated token buybacks and burns. By Aug. 29, 29 percent of the original one billion token supply had been retired. That mechanism creates a self-reinforcing loop in rising markets: higher volume generates more fees, which fund more burns, which reduce supply, which pushes prices higher, which attracts more volume. In falling markets, the same loop works in reverse. Volume drops, burns slow, the supply compression narrative weakens, and traders move to the next opportunity. Chains built on reflexive tokenomics tend to experience sharp drawdowns when sentiment shifts.

What Robinhood Chain means for Ethereum Robinhood Chain settles to Ethereum. Every transaction on the chain ultimately posts data to the Ethereum mainnet through blobs. This means that Robinhood Chain’s activity, all $47 billion of it, contributes to Ethereum’s security budget and reinforces the network’s role as a settlement layer.

For Ethereum, the emergence of corporate-backed Layer 2 networks is a double-edged development. On one side, chains like Robinhood and Base bring millions of users into the Ethereum ecosystem who would never interact with the mainnet directly. They generate blob fees, consume blockspace, and create economic gravity around ETH as a gas token.

On the other side, these chains capture most of the value at the execution layer. Robinhood keeps the bulk of sequencer revenue, sharing only 10 percent with the Arbitrum ecosystem. The users on Robinhood Chain may never know or care that Ethereum exists underneath. The settlement layer becomes invisible infrastructure, essential but unrewarded relative to the activity it supports.

This dynamic is already visible in the fee data. Robinhood Chain surpassed both Ethereum and Base in 24-hour application revenue on Aug. 31, recording $2.66 million. The chain built on Ethereum is generating more application-level revenue than Ethereum itself on certain days.

The tension between Layer 2 growth and Layer 1 value capture is not unique to Robinhood Chain, but the scale makes it unusually visible. Ethereum’s blob fee revenue from all Layer 2 networks remains a small fraction of what those networks generate in sequencer revenue. The argument that Layer 2 activity is inherently good for Ethereum depends on the assumption that demand for blob space will eventually drive meaningful fee revenue back to the mainnet. At current utilization levels, that assumption remains unproven. Robinhood Chain’s success makes the question more urgent without answering it.

The September test The gas subsidy expires at the end of September. Between now and then, several developments will clarify whether Robinhood Chain’s trajectory is sustainable.

Arcus is expanding its leveraged product suite, adding new pToken pairs and increasing collateral types. If leveraged trading generates durable volume independent of the gas subsidy, it would suggest that the chain has found a product-market fit that goes beyond free transactions.

The DTCC is scheduled to launch tokenized securities infrastructure in October, which could either validate or undermine Robinhood’s first-mover advantage in tokenized equities. If institutional players enter the market with competing infrastructure, the value proposition of Stock Tokens may shift.

And Robinhood itself will face a decision about whether to extend, modify, or eliminate the gas subsidy. The company’s financial position gives it the flexibility to continue subsidizing transactions if it believes the long-term economics justify the cost. With $573 million in quarterly net income, a few million dollars in gas subsidies is a rounding error on the income statement.

What to watch Daily DEX volume after the gas subsidy expires on Sept. 29: a drop below $200 million would signal that free transactions, not organic demand, drove the majority of activity. Tokenized equity volume breadth: whether trading expands beyond QQQB and a handful of large-cap stocks to include a wider range of securities and index products. Protocol diversity: whether the chain develops multiple high-volume venues or remains dependent on one or two protocols for the majority of throughput. U.S. regulatory clarity on Stock Tokens: any indication that tokenized equities could become available to U.S. residents would dramatically expand the addressable market. TVL retention through Q4 2026: whether the $1.4 billion in locked value stays on the chain as incentives taper or migrates to competing networks. What is Robinhood Chain? Robinhood Chain is an Ethereum Layer 2 blockchain built on Arbitrum Orbit technology. It launched its public mainnet on July 1, 2026, and uses ETH as its native gas token. The chain settles directly to Ethereum and features 100-millisecond block times. Its flagship products include tokenized Stock Tokens, decentralized exchange trading through Uniswap, and lending through protocols like Morpho.

How much DEX volume does Robinhood Chain process? On Aug. 25, 2026, Robinhood Chain recorded roughly $945 million in daily decentralized exchange volume, a new all-time high. The chain has processed more than $47 billion in cumulative DEX volume since launching on July 1. Its 30-day volume of approximately $15 billion places it fifth among all blockchain networks, behind Solana, BNB Chain, Ethereum, and Base.

What are Stock Tokens on Robinhood Chain? Stock Tokens are ERC-20 tokens that track the price of publicly traded equities like NVIDIA, Apple, GameStop, and SpaceX. They give holders economic exposure to the underlying stock rather than legal ownership of shares. Stock Tokens trade around the clock in more than 120 countries through decentralized exchanges like Uniswap on Robinhood Chain. They are currently unavailable to U.S. residents.

Is there a Robinhood Chain token? No. Robinhood has not issued a native governance or utility token for Robinhood Chain. The network uses ETH for gas fees. While several community-created tokens like CASHCAT and PONS trade on the chain, none of these are officially affiliated with Robinhood.

How does Robinhood Chain compare to Base? Base, built by Coinbase, launched in August 2023 and has roughly $5.47 billion in total value locked compared to Robinhood Chain’s $1.4 billion. Base processes more daily transactions on average and has a more mature ecosystem of developer tools and protocols. However, Robinhood Chain closed the gap on several metrics within weeks, briefly surpassing Base in daily active users and ranking within striking distance on daily DEX volume.

What is the gas subsidy on Robinhood Chain? Robinhood covers transaction fees for users trading through the Robinhood Wallet on Robinhood Chain. This 90-day promotional period began at mainnet launch on July 1 and runs through approximately Sept. 29, 2026. In mid-August, Robinhood reduced the subsidy threshold from $5 to $0.50 per transaction, signaling a gradual taper rather than an abrupt cutoff.

Who can use Robinhood Chain? Robinhood Chain is a permissionless Ethereum Layer 2, meaning anyone with a compatible wallet can interact with it. However, the tokenized Stock Tokens product is available in more than 120 countries but is not available to U.S. residents. Other DeFi products on the chain, including decentralized exchange trading and lending, are accessible to users globally through wallets like Robinhood Wallet, MetaMask, and others.

How does Robinhood make money from the chain? Robinhood captures sequencer revenue from transactions processed on the chain. Under the Arbitrum Expansion Program, 8 percent of chain revenue goes to a treasury controlled by Arbitrum governance token holders and 2 percent funds a developer guild. Robinhood retains the remaining 90 percent. In July 2026, the chain generated roughly $3.6 million in transaction fees, making it the top revenue-producing Layer 2 in the Ethereum ecosystem.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Always do your own research before making investment decisions. Information is accurate as of Aug. 31, 2026.

Barely two months after Robinhood Chain went live, a new class of DeFi strategies is emerging around Uniswap v4’s hook system, and the target market isn’t memecoins or stablecoins. It’s tokenized versions of Apple, Nvidia, and other blue-chip equities trading as ERC-20 tokens around the clock.

The Ethereum-compatible Layer 2 network launched on July 1, and Uniswap deployed its full protocol suite, including v2, v3, v4, and UniswapX, on the same day. Since then, cumulative trading volume for tokenized stocks on Uniswap has surpassed $1 billion, with daily peaks crossing $130 million shortly after launch.

How v4 hooks are reshaping liquidity provision Uniswap v4 introduced a feature called “hooks,” which are essentially programmable modules that execute custom logic at key points during a swap. They can adjust fees dynamically, enforce anti-snipe protections, or trigger entirely new behaviors without requiring separate smart contracts or trusted third parties.

Advertisement

On Robinhood Chain, these hooks have become the foundation for a fresh wave of liquidity strategies. Projects like Uniliquid and Hookify are building tools that leverage hooks to give liquidity providers more control over how their capital is deployed and protected.

A pool trading tokenized AAPL stock, for instance, could increase fees during periods of high volatility or cap the size of trades that execute in the same block as a liquidity deposit, reducing the impact of sandwich attacks. All of this logic runs on-chain, eliminating reliance on off-chain oracles or centralized intermediaries to enforce the rules.

Uniswap’s dominance on Robinhood Chain Uniswap v4 alone accounts for roughly 73% of all DEX liquidity tied to tokenized stocks on Robinhood Chain. When you add in v2, v3, and UniswapX volumes, Uniswap’s total market share climbs to approximately 99%.

Tokenized representations of major US equities like AAPL and NVDA are trading as standard ERC-20 tokens, meaning they can be composed with the rest of the DeFi stack. Users can supply them as liquidity, borrow against them, or bundle them into on-chain index products, all without waiting for the NYSE to open.

The 24/7 equity market is getting real A tokenized equity pool on Uniswap v4 can generate fees at 3 AM on a Sunday, and hooks can adjust those fees based on how thin the order book gets during off-peak hours.

Independent developers, not Robinhood or Uniswap Labs, are the ones building most of these hook-based strategies. The fact that those applications now involve tokenized versions of the world’s most-traded stocks, rather than obscure governance tokens, signals a shift in what DeFi is actually being used for.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.