The explanation shows that the project has not undergone sufficient operational testing, but ultimately, data does not lie. Today, we will use hard data to conduct a comprehensive check-up for Hemi.
First, let’s look at the core TVL data. According to DeFiLlama's statistics, the DeFi locked value on the Hemi chain is $296 million. This figure ranks second in Bitcoin L2, only behind Core's $230 million. However, it is important to note that the officially claimed total TVL of $1.2 billion has a huge discrepancy with the DeFi data. Where is this $900 million difference? It mainly lies in the assets locked in cross-chain bridges, as well as some funds in non-DeFi scenarios, such as PoP mining staking.
This data discrepancy is actually quite common; different statistical standards can lead to different results. But for us, we should pay more attention to DeFi TVL, as this is the true reflection of on-chain ecosystem activity. $296 million of DeFi locked assets is considered below average among L2 projects.
Next, let's look at the number of protocols. Hemi's ecosystem claims to have over 90 protocols under construction, but only 10 to 15 have actual TVL data. The top three are River ($163 million), BitFi ($85 million), and Hemi Staking. This highly concentrated TVL distribution indicates that the ecosystem is not diverse enough. Most funds are in a few protocols, while more than 70 other projects are either still in development or have not attracted users.
Transaction volume data can also illustrate the issue. The 24-hour DEX trading volume is $14.94 million, and $77.35 million over 7 days. This figure is about 5% of Hemi's TVL. In comparison, Arbitrum's average daily DEX trading volume can reach $1.2 billion, with a TVL of $15 billion and a turnover rate of 8%. From this perspective, Hemi's on-chain trading activity seems reasonable, with no obvious signs of wash trading.
But there is a problem: the 7-day trading volume has decreased by 13.42%. This downward trend began at the end of September, coinciding with the price correction of the HEMI token. This indicates that user trading enthusiasm is cooling down, and speculative funds are withdrawing.
The number of active addresses is another key indicator. There are a total of 800,000 wallet addresses on the Hemi chain, which seems like a lot. But what about daily active addresses? According to the on-chain browser data, there are about 10,000 to 20,000 active addresses every day. This ratio indicates that most wallets are zombie accounts, with very few actually in use.
By comparison: Arbitrum has hundreds of thousands of daily active addresses, and Optimism has over 100,000. Hemi's 10,000 to 20,000 daily active users places it at the bottom among L2 projects. Of course, considering Hemi has only been online for a little over six months, this number is also understandable. But if the number of daily active addresses cannot break 50,000 in the coming months, then we should be concerned about whether the ecosystem can be sustained.
Gas fee data is quite impressive. The average Gas fee on the Hemi chain is only $0.01, which is a bargain compared to Ethereum L1's fees that often reach dozens of dollars. The total on-chain fees in 24 hours are only $736, with an average transaction cost of less than 1 cent. This low-cost advantage is very attractive to high-frequency traders and DeFi protocols.
But low gas fees also have a downside. On one hand, they indicate low network load and no congestion; on the other hand, they also suggest insufficient usage and low protocol revenue. Hemi is still in the stage of subsidizing users, relying on token incentives to attract traffic. Once the subsidies end, and if there isn't enough trading volume to support it, the protocol may fall into a situation where its expenses exceed its income.
Let's also look at the usage of cross-chain bridges. Hemi's Tunnels are a core feature, claiming to enable seamless transfers between Bitcoin and Ethereum. But what do the actual data show? L2Beat indicates that Hemi's canonical bridged value is only $10.48 million. Among this, ETH and derivatives account for $8.35 million, and BTC only $1.85 million.
This figure is a bit awkward. As a Layer 2 focused on Bitcoin interoperability, the amount of BTC locked on-chain is only $1.85 million. To put this into context, the total amount of BTC locked in the entire Bitcoin L2 ecosystem exceeds $2 billion. Hemi's share is less than 0.1%. This indicates that while the technology supports the Bitcoin Tunnel, very few people are actually using it. Most users still prefer to use traditional wrapped BTC or simply don't cross-chain.
The low activity of the Bitcoin Tunnel may have several reasons. One is that users are distrustful of new technology and concerned about security; two is that the operational threshold is high, so ordinary users won't use it; three is that the application scenarios are not rich enough—what can you do with BTC on Hemi? Besides lending and liquidity mining, there isn't much appeal.
Transaction data can also reveal issues. Hemi has processed a total of 8.1 million transactions, with an average of 145,000 transactions per day. This number seems considerable, but we must consider that most transactions may be tests or volume manipulation. What percentage of truly economically valuable transactions, such as DEX swaps, lending operations, or NFT minting, is there? Backing out from DEX trading volume, the average daily swap transactions range from 10,000 to 20,000. This number aligns with daily active addresses, indicating that most active users are making only one or two transactions each day.
From a technical indicator perspective, Hemi's TPS (transactions per second) is about 5 to 8. This number is considered very low among L2 projects. Arbitrum can achieve tens of thousands of TPS, and Base has several thousand TPS. Hemi's low TPS isn't due to technical limitations but insufficient demand. The network has the capacity to handle more transactions, but no one is using it.
UOPS (User Operations per Second) is also very interesting. L2Beat shows that Hemi's UOPS in the past 24 hours is 1.6, with a historical high of 1.94. UOPS measures the number of user operations per second, and a UOPS of 1.6 means that there are less than 2 users operating on-chain per second. This number is pitifully low, indicating that on-chain activity is very sparse.
But from a different perspective, low TPS and low UOPS also mean a significant growth potential. If the number of users can increase tenfold in the future, and on-chain activity can grow a hundredfold, Hemi's network capacity will be more than sufficient. It won't be like Ethereum L1, where gas fees surge as soon as there is congestion.
Finally, let's look at the data growth trend. In the past 30 days, Hemi's TVL grew by 12%, from 265 million to 296 million. This growth rate is not fast, but at least it is positive growth, with no capital outflow. The number of active addresses increased by 18.86%, indicating that new users are still coming in. Although the transaction volume decreased by 13% in the short term, the long-term trend is still upward.
Considering all on-chain data, my conclusion is: Hemi is still in a very early stage and has not yet reached the level of a mature L2. TVL, daily active users, transaction volume, and cross-chain usage are all hovering at the bottom of L2 projects. However, because the starting point is low, there is also great growth potential. If the ecosystem can thrive, these indicators have the potential to grow tenfold or even a hundredfold.
The key is to see the development in the next six months to a year. If TVL can exceed $500 million, daily active addresses can reach 50,000, and the usage of Bitcoin Tunnel can account for 10% of total cross-chain volume, then Hemi can be considered to have established a foothold. If these indicators remain stagnant, then caution is warranted; the project may not have found product-market fit.
Investment advice? If you value on-chain data, the current Hemi is not yet up to par. But if you're willing to bet on its future growth, the current undervaluation may be an opportunity. The key is to continuously track data changes, let facts speak, and not be swayed by narratives.
