The hottest discussion in the crypto circle recently is about asset issuance strategies. Have you noticed that a leading exchange launches different versions of the same IP on spot and derivatives, and some even on a DEX? What’s the result of this approach? The once dominant IP with concentrated liquidity has been completely scattered.

For example, the same asset is listed on spot here, derivatives there, and some even have synthetic versions—liquidity is forcibly divided into several parts. How are participants supposed to choose? They will definitely watch around, and no real momentum will form anywhere. Instead, it causes the market’s defensive orders to be dispersed in four directions, and the heat and funds that should belong to the leading asset are fragmented into pieces.

This is the core issue: multi-round, multi-channel issuance strategies may seem to increase coverage in the short term, but in reality, they weaken the market’s focus effect. Truly viable assets should be able to concentrate all liquidity within a certain time window, creating sufficient market depth and attractiveness, rather than being scattered in all directions.

So, what truly defines a leading asset? It should be the only confirmed version—single listing channel, clear token identity, and sufficient trading depth. Only then can participants truly gather in one place and jointly drive market enthusiasm. Unfortunately, the current situation is that many assets are launched with multiple versions, and in the end, no one is clear about which one is genuine.