The trend has changed! Gold & oil trading volume has actually surpassed $SOL, and on-chain derivatives are undergoing a brutal reshuffle from “virtual to real.”

The trend in the crypto market is indeed undergoing some fundamental shifts. Market observers have revealed this change with a set of data: on a decentralized perpetual contract trading platform, the trading volume of gold and oil has steadily entered the top five, even surpassing mainstream crypto assets like $SOL or $XRP. This was hard to imagine in the past.

The core driver of this shift is the realignment of user demand. As the myth of wealth creation fades, traders are now paying only for actual trading experiences. Currently, leading decentralized perpetual contract platforms can match centralized exchanges in matching speed, order book depth, and fee costs, and in some aspects, even surpass them.

A frequently mentioned view is that “decentralizing for decentralization” is the biggest false demand in this industry. Users won’t pay simply for these four words. Only when the underlying experience matches or exceeds that of centralized competitors will decentralized platforms and self-custody of funds become truly dominant advantages.

Regarding market hot spots, volatility is key. Recent geopolitical events have caused enough fluctuations in gold and oil, which traders are chasing. For a long-term platform, the focus isn’t on predicting the next hot spot but on building robust underlying liquidity and matching infrastructure to ensure the platform can quickly respond to demand regardless of which asset cycle shifts to.

The user structure is also changing. In volatile markets, the proportion of institutional users has increased. On one hand, retail traders’ active funds decrease in a bear market; on the other hand, the platform’s “private trading” feature has become a necessity for institutions and quant funds that require high confidentiality for their trading strategies. Meanwhile, retail traders’ demand for “interest-bearing assets” has significantly increased. In environments where trading becomes more difficult, they prefer assets that can provide guaranteed returns and can be used as collateral for opening positions at any time.

Looking ahead to the next cycle, a clear trend is that projects will become more aligned with commercial realities. Relying solely on grand narratives has become ineffective. The market now values real users, real revenue, and healthy cash flow. The “fundamentals” of projects will be scrutinized like traditional finance.

For navigating a bear market, positive cash flow is seen as a lifeline. A product that can operate a viable business model, generate revenue, and reward holders is the foundation for long-term development. The noise of the bear market diminishes, making it the best time to focus on product iteration and team building.

Currently, trading fees account for over 80% of platform revenue, making it highly dependent on genuine, high-quality trading activity. The underlying logic of platform success boils down to two points: extreme risk control and a mechanism that allows rapid trial and error. In crypto, survival is more important than anything else. Only by surviving until the next boom can there be a chance to take off.

Since markets are unpredictable, it’s better to deliver products quickly rather than chase perfect timing. Under the premise of maintaining cash flow, multiple small-scale experiments should be conducted, accepting failures. As long as the hit rate reaches 10%-20%, it can be considered successful in the field of innovation.

The platform’s focus has also shifted. The early stage of pursuing total locked-in volume and trading volume is over. Now, more attention is paid to open interest, aiming to identify the highest quality traders in the user funnel and provide them with an optimal experience, so they are willing to stay and pay fees even without airdrop expectations.

Market makers play a core role as liquidity providers within the system. While their importance on mainstream tokens may decline, in on-chain stocks, commodities, and other long-tail real-world assets, market makers are crucial. Platforms require market makers not only to place orders but also to have cross-border hedging capabilities—being able to quickly hedge in traditional financial markets after receiving on-chain orders.

Regarding discussions of industry false demands, the view again points to “decentralizing for decentralization.” Users ultimately pay for product experience. Perpetual contracts have proven to be a real demand because they strip away the complexity of traditional derivatives, offering simple and efficient trading tools.

In terms of technical routes, users don’t care whether the underlying is L1 or L2; they care about seamless transaction costs and smooth experiences. Developing an application-specific chain offers advantages such as greater customization and system resilience, enabling all performance to be dedicated to trading experience—such as implementing privacy features and ultra-efficient order book matching, while mechanically preventing sandwich attacks.

Here, privacy does not mean complete anonymity or black-boxing. The logic is to return data disclosure rights to users. Transactions are encrypted by default to prevent tracking, but when facing audit or regulatory needs, users can generate viewing keys themselves and selectively share all transaction records with specific parties, balancing privacy and compliance.

On the differences within the industry, market analysis indicates that different platforms are heading toward different customization paths. One platform may favor a permissionless, ecosystem-oriented approach, while another focuses more on breaking through trading experience and product innovation—such as providing warmer retail services, more aggressive early high-volatility asset listings, and privacy trading as a core barrier.

The common and larger competitor for both platforms is always centralized exchanges. The most overestimated aspect of the current decentralized perpetual contract track may be the “number one” title itself. The market is still in early stages, with frequent changes in the landscape. Stage-leading position does not guarantee a moat. The real goal is to create products that attract ten times more users, migrating users from centralized exchanges.

The first principle for capturing real demand is to communicate more with users and communities to develop market intuition. Returning to first principles: users seek to make money, save money, and ensure fund security. Based on this, identify pain points that most people overlook or have yet to find the right solution for.

The fundamental difference between protocol-level order books and automated market maker mechanisms lies not only in performance but also in the diversity of trading strategies they can support. Order books support more complex order types and quantitative models, which are necessary to attract professional traders and institutions from traditional finance.

As teams grow, maintaining execution capability depends on systematized goal quantification and decision decentralization. Keeping a flat structure allows frontline executors to make decisions based on business metrics, avoiding the loss of market responsiveness due to scale expansion.

Looking back at the development history, three pivotal moments are crucial: decisively launching privacy features, successfully completing token generation events and validating business models, and launching the independent mainnet. The mainnet signifies realizing the vision in core code and gaining the highest authority for bottom-layer customization to achieve optimal trading experiences.

After the mainnet launch, platform tokens, through staking mechanisms, enable users to capture system value and participate in future ecosystem governance, such as permissionless infrastructure development, evolving the platform toward a truly decentralized network.

If given a choice again, the answer remains to fully commit to the decentralized perpetual contract track. This judgment is based on two harsh standards: first, whether the track creates real value, solves genuine needs, and has a self-consistent business model; second, whether the team has the capability to be in the top 5% of entrants. The derivatives track has a high ceiling but fierce competition, with obvious head effects. Only if one’s core capabilities and genes align with this can it be worth betting on.

Follow me: for more real-time analysis and insights into the crypto market! $BTC $ETH $SOL

#Gate上线Pre-IPOs #Crypto market recovery #Crude oil slightly up