One of the leading decentralized exchanges received words of encouragement from a prominent figure in the crypto room.
Although the results of the project are considerable, it does not seem to return to the earlier performance and there are growing concerns about governance.
More space to grow
Matt Hougan, Chief Investment Officer In Bitwise, the largest supplier of cryptocurrency index funds with more than $ 1.5 billion in assets under management (AUM) has one Bold statement about X earlier today.
“Uniswap for $ 6 billion feels too small. If it were a company, it would be the 400th largest financial service business in the world – about the same size as Storebrand, a savings and insurance activities in Norway.”
Members of the crypto room commented on a combination of agreement and disagree, with the majority of input with regard to the income of the protocol. Another point was that the native governance, uni, does not inherently offer value to investors.
However, since a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) rules how the protocol will work, a market capitalization of $ 6.15 billion, according to the most recent data from Coinmarketcap, is impressive. Native token has also risen more than 30% for the month and more than 100% years to date (YTD).
The trade volume on the decentralized exchange is also remarkable, with only the last three months that yields more than $ 280 billion, according to data from Token Terminal at the time of printing.
Still struggle
Despite the impressive figures, the price of Uniswap seems to be around $ 10, without an important movement for some time. In July the resistance level seemed to be around $ 11, while the support was between $ 6 and $ 8.
After token with a highlight of $ 19 on December 8 last year, Analysis Company Lookonchain detected an enormous move of 989,520 Uni ($ 16.73 m) of Handelsbedrijf Cumberland in various exchanges. Shortly thereafter, the price fell and since then it was no longer able to regain its strength.
A platform for sharing research, Arxiv, has placed an interesting article about the network of Uniswap and the findings about the management model are worrying.
Although they are promoted as a decentralized promotion, a small group of large Uni -Token holders (including early investors and the Uniswap Foundation) masters most of the voting authority, and users with small balances of the token have a minimum influence on important decisions.
In addition, essential proposals are delayed or are they based on the interests of larger holders. There are even reports about a lack of transparency, whereby a number of off-chain coordination is noticed.
