In the investment market, I pay more attention to whether the underlying chip control is concentrated. Narratives can work, especially during good market conditions, as most people will buy into the narrative.

However, it is often because of the narrative that more people get deeply involved. I remember when I was mining, there was a user who made his mining machine for the Thor coin, and there was also Odin. He burned Odin to exchange for Thor, increasing its value, and mined Odin. This consumption mechanism is actually quite good and can last for a while, but when they claim to surpass Bitcoin, while Bitcoin is our goal, I find such slogans empty talk. Because on a deeper level, these surpassing claims are related to the capital driving them.

Main text: Where is the feasibility of HUMA's cross-border payments?

First of all, cross-border payments must be the biggest pain point. The demand for cross-border e-commerce is the same everywhere, and the wear and tear of trade in cross-border payments is significant. Therefore, cross-border payments are quite urgent. The loss of fiat currency used in cross-border payments is high, but once the stablecoin legislation is fully implemented, this market will be a massive cake.

The cross-border payment market is worth $194.6 trillion annually and is continuously growing. How much can HUMA capture? I estimate that even a small share can sustain a lifetime. Cross-border payments combined with stablecoins are essentially the future and also a money printing machine.

The project narrative is not a problem, it’s even very strong.

For example, the stablecoin USDC is essentially a no-cost trade, benefiting from the interest of those holding dollars and various channel fees, making it a very profitable company. HUMA has this potential, and it also provides liquidity leverage for payments. This model is somewhat similar to PENDLE, which is quite good and strong.

Issues:

First of all, USDC has a strong background, compliance, and licensing, and it has consensus; does HUMA have that? This question needs to be marked with a big question mark. As I mentioned above, with Odin and Thor, why can't such strong project logic take off, or why am I not optimistic? Because it lacks a background and doesn't have Trump behind it.

Whether in the RWA sector or leading cross-border payment players like USDC, the most crucial aspects are stability and compliance. As a company that links online and offline, the biggest issue with leveraging RWA is insufficient compliance, lack of standards, and vulnerability to collapse. Once leverage is applied, the risk of collapse arises.

Logically speaking: HUMA's narrative is quite good, but the expectations for it to run out are very small unless it can achieve compliance and have strong capital willing to back and support it, such as BlackRock pushing it, similar to an international Alipay. Because once compliant, it will be regulated, and the possibility of achieving leverage will be very small.

Highlights:

Leading the blockchain for cross-border payments, the first PAYFI network is quite innovative and has institutional backing, with real and good returns. Even if it's just a concept, the RWA payment liquidity de-leveraging is really attractive. There will definitely be narrative space in a bull market, but not now.

Technical chip analysis:

The chip situation is really complex. If these people are unified in their operations, I think it’s manageable, but the problem is who plays unified with you? Therefore, I believe the price consensus will be relatively poor.

In May, the airdrop began, raising the price for selling. The market trading volume has been very high, and market makers can continuously sell through this method, with initial profits likely locked in and part of it exited.

There are quite a few exchanges that have gone live, indicating good market acceptance, but the chips are not concentrated enough. In August, there will be more releases, but my enthusiasm for this project is not high. I haven't seen particularly good methods for washing or accumulating chips. The ecological rewards are quite good; a lot of funds are used to maintain these ecological rewards. It gives me the feeling of an ARB-like approach. The ecology will continue to be maintained, but the possibility of a strong performance is low due to the excessive dispersion of chips.

Technical analysis:

From the chip data perspective, there is a full buy order on top, with basically no signs of any market maker wanting to accumulate chips. Basically, as of now, a lot of goods have been sold, and next, as liquidity dries up, others will continuously sell their goods. After the price drops significantly, we can consider entering when the main force's buying sentiment appears. @Huma Finance 🟣 #HumaFinance