BTC returns to 94,000, but the spring for first-tier investors cannot come back.

Written by: Shenchao TechFlow

On April 23, as Trump announced a reduction in tariffs on China, this news reignited market sentiment.

Investor confidence in risk assets has rapidly rebounded, with BTC quietly rising by 7%, bringing the price back to $94,000.

Everything seems to have returned in one night.

BTC is one step closer to breaking the historical high of 100,000 USD since the beginning of the year, and Twitter is filled with expectations for a new bull market. Traders in the secondary market are busy chasing highs and cutting losses, and the market seems to have returned to the frenzied spring of 2021.

However, this return of emotions does not belong to everyone.

It is lively for them, while the primary investors may remain silent in the face of signs of a bull return.

Niu Hui died due to locking up coins

The news of BTC returning to 94,000 USD has made secondary market investors cheer with joy, but for primary market investors, this celebration feels like a distant dream.

Most of their tokens are in a locked state and cannot be traded freely, and the market performance over the past year has caused them significant losses.

A chart from STIX (@stix_co) reveals this harsh reality.

@stix_co is a platform focused on cryptocurrency OTC (over-the-counter) trading, providing liquidity support for locked tokens.

The above figure compares the valuation changes of multiple tokens in May 2024 and April 2025: May 2024 represents the valuation of these tokens during over-the-counter trading (which is the price at which primary investors can sell when locked), while April 2025 reflects the actual valuation of these tokens in the public market (i.e., the current market price).

The results show that, on average, the valuations of these tokens have dropped by 50% within a year.

Let's take a look at a few specific examples.

The off-exchange valuation of BLAST last year was $250 million, and the current market valuation has dropped to $30 million, a decline of 88%; EIGEN fell from $600 million to $150 million, a drop of 75%; SCR fared worse, decreasing from $170 million to $25.5 million, with a decline of up to 85%.

Almost all tokens have fallen sharply, with only JTO being an exception, rising from 100 million to 175 million, an increase of 75%.

But this is just an exception and cannot mask the overall bleak situation.

In simple terms, the tokens held by these primary investors, if they were not sold through OTC trading last year, have seen their average value cut in half, with some even remaining at only 10 to 20 percent.

For some background knowledge, over-the-counter trading refers to the ability for primary investors to sell tokens privately before they are unlocked, usually at a discount.

In the post mentioned by Taran in the picture above, it was noted that last year these tokens were traded off-exchange at a price roughly around 80% to 90% of their valuation.

In other words, if they had sold last year, they might have only lost 10%-20%, or even not lost at all. However, some investors chose to hold for a year, waiting for the unlock, and as a result, the average value of the tokens dropped by 50%, with some even falling by 70-80%, leading to a significant decrease in wealth.

You might say that their investment cost is low, and even after such a drop, there is still profit to be made.

But the problem is that there is something called opportunity cost in economics. As an investor, what feels worse than earning less (or possibly even losing) is the theoretical loss of opportunity cost.

Under optimal theoretical conditions, Bitcoin (BTC) has increased by 45% over the past 12 months.

If first-level investors sold their tokens last year and exchanged them for BTC, their money may have increased to 1.45 times the original amount.

But now, their token value is only 0.5 times, and it may even have to be sold at a 50% discount after unlocking in the future, ultimately worth only 0.25 times.

In other words, compared to the rise of BTC, their actual losses amounted to 82.8%; even when calculated in USD, they lost 75%.

It's like watching others making a fortune while the assets in your hands keep shrinking.

"Niu Hui" may have already died out for them due to lock-up.

Locked for a year, losing half, the most frustrating part of this matter is that:

After researching, comparing, identifying, and investing in projects, it is more cost-effective to simply hold BTC.

In the classic investment book "A Random Walk Down Wall Street," there is a famous "monkey throwing darts theory."

Author Burton Malkiel suggested that if a blindfolded gorilla randomly throws darts to select a stock portfolio, its long-term returns may not be worse than those carefully chosen by professional investors.

This theory was originally used to satirize the ineffectiveness of excessive analysis in the stock market, but now applied to the cryptocurrency market, it feels particularly ironic.

Tier 1 investors spend a lot of time and effort researching white papers, analyzing project prospects, and even locking up funds for a year to seek high returns, but the result may be: it might be better to just throw a dart at Bitcoin.

BTC has risen by 45% in the past year, while their locked tokens have averaged a decline of 50%, or even more.

The valuation and investment logic of the entire altcoin market may need to be reshaped.

Spring will not come back.

Is the next wave of crypto altcoin play still about locking up?

VCs enter at low prices, and the locking mechanism was originally designed to protect the project in its early stages, preventing early investors from selling off in large quantities and causing a price crash. However, data from the past year shows that this mechanism has also placed significant risks on primary investors.

The original post mentioned in the text above also states that over $40 billion worth of locked tokens will be gradually unlocked in the future, which means the market may face greater selling pressure. If new tokens continue to be locked at overvalued prices, investors may fall into a vicious cycle of "locking for a year, losing half."

Clearly, the practice of locking up assets is no longer suitable for the current market environment.

Will primary investment in the crypto market still be hot? Can the spring of primary investment return? Based on the current situation, the answer may not be optimistic.

In recent years, the high valuations of altcoins have often been based on market frenzy and liquidity premiums, but as the market matures, investors are beginning to pay more attention to the actual value and liquidity of projects.

The high risks of locked tokens deter first-level investors, and more and more people may choose projects that are more transparent and liquid.

Some emerging trends have become apparent: for instance, shorter lock-up periods, lower valuation multiples, and even directly issuing memes to reduce the bubble in primary investments.

Of course, it is also possible that it's just old wine in a new bottle. Beneath the more equitable appearance of Meme coins, the first-level logic still exists; they create a setup to make you unaware of the existence of the first level.

For the entire cryptocurrency market, a more transparent mechanism has become particularly important. The lock-up mechanism also needs to find a better balance, both to protect the project in its early stages and to avoid exposing investors to excessive risks.

But the question arises, if the first level doesn't lose, the second level doesn't lose, and the retail investors don't lose, then who will lose?

Cryptocurrencies do not create value, but rather transfer value; when someone profits, someone else must incur a loss.

The spring of one wave of people is bound to be the winter of another wave of people.