According to public DeFi data (DefiLlama's protocol snapshot), Aster has recently seen multiple peaks in daily revenue: at different points in time, Aster's 24h trading fees / protocol revenue reports have shown ranges of approximately $7M, $9.9M to $12M–$16M (different daily snapshots), propelling its daily revenue ranking to the forefront of all protocols, second only to long-term stable income providers like Tether. During the same period, Hyperliquid's 24h protocol revenue most snapshots showed around $2.7M–$3.1M, thus on the days when Aster is at its peak, Aster's daily revenue significantly exceeds Hyperliquid (the multiple relationship depends on the specific snapshot timing).

Such short-term high income is often caused by extremely high perpetual contract nominal trading volume and higher fee rate/cost distribution mechanisms (DefiLlama shows that Aster's nominal perpetual trading volume can reach billions to tens of billions of dollars on peak days). However, high daily income does not equate to long-term stable cash flow: if trading volume falls or aggressive subsidies (airdrop, incentives)/arbitrage mechanisms change, income will quickly decline.

Key analysis of ASTER's token economics (Tokenomics)


I have listed verifiable public parameters (market cap, circulating supply, total supply) and explained how they affect token value.

Common tokenomics components (points frequently reported regarding the Aster platform)

  1. Total/Max Supply and Circulating Supply

    • If the total supply is very large (e.g., 8B), the probability of the price being amplified in the short term is higher (dilution risk). Reports indicate that ASTER's max supply is in the range of hundreds of millions to billions.

  2. Airdrop / Lock-up / Distribution Structure

    • Reports mention launch airdrop and early distribution (e.g., some media refer to airdrop ratios and incentive distributions). If airdrop blocks are released in large quantities in the short term, it will create strong selling pressure (temporarily lowering prices); conversely, if the lock-up period is long and the release is slow, it is more friendly to prices. Some analytical articles point out that Aster has a considerable amount of airdrop and incentive distribution.

  3. Token Use (Utility)

    • Common use cases of ASTER in the protocol: Empowering governance, staking for fee distribution or staking rewards, protocol incentives (liquidity mining), or as insurance fund subsidies, etc. The actual value of the token largely depends on whether 'the token can steadily capture the income generated by the protocol' and whether these mechanisms are rigorously enforced (e.g., buyback, burn, or direct dividends).

  4. Deflationary/Inflationary Mechanism (burn / mint / emissions)

    • If the protocol commits to using income for buybacks and burns, then the protocol's income directly becomes a driving force for supply reduction; if most of the income is used for subsidies or rewards to users, the direct positive impact on the token price will be weakened. There are differing reports on whether Aster adopts significant buyback/burn mechanisms, which depend on official governance proposals/contract implementations.

Risk Summary (Token Economics)

  • Release rhythm (vesting/airdrop) is key: large-scale/short-term releases will dilute the price.

  • Income distribution policy determines whether protocol revenue can be converted into token demand (e.g., buyback and burn, dividends to token holders vs. direct liquidity incentives).

  • Market sentiment and leveraged perpetual trading volume will amplify short-term price volatility, even if protocol revenue peaks in the short term, it may be offset by speculative selling pressure or arbitrage trading.

The relationship between protocol revenue and token price: Mechanistic and practical observations

Mechanistic Path (How to convert income into token value)

  1. Direct buyback & burn: The protocol uses income to buy back tokens and burn them → reduces circulating supply → (theoretically) supports the price.

  2. Dividends / Fee-to-stakers (Income distributed to token holders): The protocol directly distributes a portion of revenue to stakers or those who lock their tokens → creates holding incentives and reduces selling pressure.

  3. Reinvesting in ecological incentives (liquidity mining): Using revenue for user/market maker rewards → can expand users/liquidity, but if rewards are distributed in token form, it will increase short-term supply pressure.

  4. As risk reserves or insurance funds: Enhances protocol stability and user confidence, indirectly supporting valuation.

Practical observations (why high income does not necessarily lead to an immediate increase in token price)

  • If a significant portion of the protocol's income is used to subsidize users (in tokens or LP rewards), then the income will be released back into the market, limiting the stimulation of the token price.

  • Investors are more concerned about long-term sustainable income distribution mechanisms and the supply-demand structure of the token, rather than short-term income peaks. One-time or short-term bursts of trading volume (especially from arbitrage/liquidation/leverage) may generate unsustainable income.