FoxyToxy
Крипто-новостной аналитик, подкастер и интервьюер. Web3 enthusiast; HODLer. Ведущая на BoobaTV_crypto и NonFiction Crypto (TG)
7 Following
42 Followers
5 Liked
0 Shared
TL;DR — Token Identity Crisis in DeFi
Token identity is the answer to the question: what exactly do you hold when you hold a token.
In 2020-2021, tokens were sold as participation in the success of protocols (like if you bought in, huh);
by 2024–2025, most only retained formal governance.
The token identity crisis is a situation when a token:
governs the protocol but does not own the business, does not control the brand and interface, and does not receive cash flows.
The real value in DeFi has shifted:
• from protocols → to interfaces,
• from DAOs → to private companies,
• from tokens → to off-chain and product layers.
Governance tokens increasingly mean the right to vote without the right to value capture.
This leads to:
• dilution of the economic meaning of tokens,
• inflation of governance tokens,
• rising skepticism from the market.
Aave is a case in point: v4 enhances the role of UX as a point of control over cash flows, making the question "who owns Aave?" central.
The market's response to the crisis:
• increased interest in RWA,
• tokenization of stocks and income instruments,
• search for legally formalized rights instead of abstract governance.
As a result: a token without ownership rights is not an asset but an interface for voting.
Token identity is the answer to the question: what exactly do you hold when you hold a token.
In 2020-2021, tokens were sold as participation in the success of protocols (like if you bought in, huh);
by 2024–2025, most only retained formal governance.
The token identity crisis is a situation when a token:
governs the protocol but does not own the business, does not control the brand and interface, and does not receive cash flows.
The real value in DeFi has shifted:
• from protocols → to interfaces,
• from DAOs → to private companies,
• from tokens → to off-chain and product layers.
Governance tokens increasingly mean the right to vote without the right to value capture.
This leads to:
• dilution of the economic meaning of tokens,
• inflation of governance tokens,
• rising skepticism from the market.
Aave is a case in point: v4 enhances the role of UX as a point of control over cash flows, making the question "who owns Aave?" central.
The market's response to the crisis:
• increased interest in RWA,
• tokenization of stocks and income instruments,
• search for legally formalized rights instead of abstract governance.
As a result: a token without ownership rights is not an asset but an interface for voting.
Login to explore more contents