114/4/25「Garbage Coin Analysis」

OM, empty to zero!

［OM］

⸻

1. Project narrative overly relies on speculation, lacking substantial progress

MANTRA focuses on RWA (Real World Asset Tokenization) narrative, but still lacks representative landing applications or actual usage, leaning towards speculative themes, and the market doubts its technical implementation capabilities.

⸻

2. Team has faced skepticism and has a poor reputation

Early on, OM coin was classified as a 'meme project', having experienced issues with opaque token distribution and high selling pressure from early investors, resulting in a collapse of community trust. Even though it has recently shifted towards RWA, it cannot completely escape the impact of its past reputation.

⸻

3. Severe inflation structure, potential sell pressure is high

The total token supply reaches 888,888,888 coins, with a significant proportion allocated to early mining, the team, and ecological funds. Although some have been unlocked, there are still future unlocking schedules, which could trigger large sell-offs if prices rise.

⸻

4. High market competition pressure

The RWA track currently has several mature projects (such as Ondo Finance, Maple, Centrifuge), and MANTRA lacks significant technological advantages and compliance cooperation foundation, facing marginalization risks.

⸻

5. Market sentiment is sensitive, small and medium coins are sold off first

When the overall market weakens (such as during the major market correction in April 2025), low liquidity and highly speculative coins like OM are the first to be discarded by investors, leading to declines often exceeding those of mainstream coins.

⸻

6. Lack of a clear financial return model

The project party has not explained how RWA asset returns will flow back to token holders, leading investors to question the actual value of long-term holding, further weakening support.