来自 Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
AI智能体对这条新闻的看法
The panel is divided on Solana's investment merit, with concerns about repeated outages, unclear ETF timeline, and intense competition from Ethereum and newer L1s. Some panelists see potential in proof-of-history timestamps and corporate treasury adoption, but others question the sustainability of fee-based revenue and the network's security economics.
风险: Repeated mainnet outages and the unclear timeline for a spot ETF approval
机会: The potential of proof-of-history timestamps for high-frequency DeFi settlement and corporate treasury adoption
本分析由 StockScreener 管道生成——四个领先的 LLM（Claude、GPT、Gemini、Grok）接收相同的提示，并内置反幻觉防护。 阅读方法论 →
加密货币难以估值。
现在有数千种加密货币，这使得寻找具有真正竞争优势的加密货币变得困难。
一种策略是关注那些运行在强大、技术上更优越的区块链网络上的加密货币。
特朗普政府正在推动美国成为世界加密货币之都。因此，越来越多的投资者正在认真研究加密货币领域，并考虑哪些加密货币在未来几年及更长时间内可能受益最多。
由于它们与公开交易的股票运作方式不同，因此了解哪些加密货币值得购买总是很困难的。此外，由于随机代币每天或每周都会翻倍甚至三倍，投资者很难保持纪律。以下是现在用 1,000 美元购买的最佳加密货币。
现在投资 1,000 美元在哪里？ 我们的分析师团队刚刚揭示了他们认为现在最适合购买的 10 支最佳股票。继续 »
正如许多投资者所理解的，加密货币与股票非常不同。该行业最初作为对大萧条后主流金融的替代方案而启动，这使得许多人对传统的货币和金融世界产生了抵触，因为市场崩溃时它摧毁了大量的资本。虽然加密货币可以作为一种货币使用，并且可能越来越受欢迎，但大多数人现在将主要的加密货币视为投资工具。
然而，加密货币的难题在于，这些数字资产不像传统股票那样产生自由现金流和收益，投资者倾向于根据这些指标来对股票进行估值。一种常见的投资策略是寻找那些运行在具有强大现实世界效用的区块链网络上的加密货币。
很少有，如果有的话，加密货币可以吹嘘比 Solana (CRYPTO: SOL) 更强大的技术网络，它现在是全球第六大加密货币，市值接近 1300 亿美元。类似于 以太坊，Solana 的网络由权益证明共识机制管理，Solana 投资者可以在其中质押代币，锁定它们以换取验证交易和创建新区块的回报，类似于利息。质押的代币越多，持有者被选中的可能性就越高。
Solana 的网络通过历史证明机制更进一步，为每个交易分配时间戳。这消除了在其他去中心化网络上处理交易耗时的方面。
由于这种技术优势，Solana 的网络具有很强的吞吐量，可以每秒处理数千笔交易 (TPS)。根据 CoinMarketCap 的数据，Solana 目前正在处理大约 2,000 到 3,000 TPS，尽管其他报告显示 Solana 的当前 TPS 较高，达到 3,700。
无论如何，该网络能够做到更多。在压力测试期间，当开发人员查看网络能够处理的 TPS 数量时，该网络达到了 100,000 TPS。
Solana 的其他有利因素是预计将批准现货 Solana 交易所交易基金 (ETF)，这可能会在任何时候发生，尽管政府关闭可能会如何改变时间表尚不清楚。此外，越来越多的上市公司开始考虑购买 Solana 作为一种财务资产，筹集资金购买它。几家公司已经在这样做，购买 比特币 和以太坊，从而提高了这两种货币的价格。
投资加密货币无疑很困难。除了上述挑战之外，加密货币是一种相对较新的资产类别，因此投资者仍然需要了解该行业的很多内容。加密货币也具有波动性。
然而，如果您考虑传统的投资，一家拥有强大业务模式的公司通常会在执行过程中蓬勃发展。这就是我对 Solana 的看法。它具有非常强大的技术网络，将具有重大的现实世界效用。这就是我认为它现在是最佳加密货币的原因。
在购买 Solana 股票之前，请考虑以下事项：
Motley Fool Stock Advisor 分析师团队刚刚确定了他们认为投资者现在应该购买的 10 支最佳股票……Solana 并不是其中之一。这些股票可能会在未来几年产生巨大的回报。
考虑一下 Netflix 在 2004 年 12 月 17 日被列入此名单时……如果您在我们的建议时投资了 1,000 美元，您将拥有 621,976 美元！ 或者当 英伟达 在 2005 年 4 月 15 日被列入此名单时……如果您在我们的建议时投资了 1,000 美元，您将拥有 1,150,085 美元！
值得注意的是 Stock Advisor 的总平均回报率为 1,058%——与标准普尔 500 指数相比，市场表现优于 191%。不要错过最新的前 10 名名单，当您加入 Stock Advisor 时可用。
Stock Advisor 的回报截至 2025 年 9 月 29 日
Bram Berkowitz 持有比特币和以太坊的头寸。富达共同基金持有并推荐比特币、以太坊和 Solana。富达共同基金有一项披露政策。
本文中的观点和意见是作者的观点和意见，不一定代表纳斯达克公司的观点。
四大领先AI模型讨论这篇文章
"Solana's network reliability issues and uncertain ETF path are downplayed, making the 'best buy now' claim rest more on marketing than durable edge."
The article pushes Solana as the top pick for its 2,000-3,700 TPS throughput, proof-of-history timestamps, and looming spot ETF, while noting $130B market cap. Yet it omits Solana's repeated mainnet outages that have eroded developer trust, the unclear ETF timeline amid potential government shutdown, and intensifying competition from Ethereum's scaling roadmap plus newer L1s. Motley Fool's disclosed SOL position adds promotional bias. Broader crypto remains unprofitable with no cash-flow valuation anchor, leaving price action driven by narrative and liquidity rather than fundamentals.
Solana's stress-tested 100k TPS ceiling and corporate treasury adoption could still drive outsized gains if ETF approval lands before competitors, outweighing past reliability hiccups.
"Superior blockchain throughput is necessary but insufficient for crypto valuation; Solana's $130B cap likely already reflects its technical advantages, leaving limited upside unless network adoption (not just capacity) accelerates materially."
This article conflates technical superiority with investment merit—a common trap in crypto analysis. Yes, Solana processes ~3,000 TPS versus Ethereum's ~15 TPS, and proof-of-history is elegant. But throughput alone doesn't drive valuation. The article ignores that SOL's $130B market cap already prices in much of this advantage. More critically: network effects favor incumbents (Ethereum's $2T+ ecosystem, Bitcoin's settlement finality), Solana has suffered multiple outages (2022, 2023), and a spot ETF approval—presented as imminent—remains speculative and faces regulatory headwinds. The Trump-era 'crypto capital' tailwind is real but non-specific to SOL. Finally, the author owns Bitcoin and Ethereum but recommends SOL—a potential conflict worth noting.
If Solana's technical edge becomes the dominant pricing mechanism over the next 18 months—particularly if Ethereum's Shanghai upgrade disappoints and Solana's MEV (miner extractable value) issues resolve—SOL could re-rate upward 3-5x, making current technicals look cheap in hindsight.
"Solana's technical throughput is a secondary concern compared to the unresolved regulatory status of the token and the network's historical reliability issues."
The article’s focus on Solana’s throughput—specifically the 100,000 TPS theoretical limit—is a classic case of 'tech-stack myopia.' While Solana’s speed is impressive, the network’s history of intermittent outages remains a critical, unaddressed risk that undermines its 'institutional-grade' narrative. Furthermore, the article conflates political sentiment with structural adoption; a pro-crypto administration doesn't guarantee the SEC will approve a spot-SOL ETF, especially given the ongoing debate over whether SOL constitutes an unregistered security. Investors should be wary of the 'utility' argument; without a clear path to sustainable fee-based revenue that outpaces token inflation, Solana remains a high-beta play on retail sentiment rather than a fundamental value investment.
If Solana successfully captures the lion's share of retail-facing decentralized applications and payments, the network effect could create a 'winner-take-most' scenario that justifies its current $130 billion valuation despite past stability issues.
"SOL's upside hinges on real-world utility and regulatory clarity; without that, it remains a high-risk, concentrated bet despite its tech narrative."
Solana is pitched as the top crypto due to throughput and a 'proof of history' edge, with a prospective spot SOL ETF and corporate treasury demand as catalysts. The article glosses over key risks: real-world utility remains uncertain for a high-throughput chain, Solana has faced outages and centralization questions, and competition from Ethereum-layer-1s and growing L2 ecosystems could erode its moat. Regulatory timing for crypto ETFs and US policy could dramatically alter upside, and a $1,000, single-name bet is highly concentrated in one chain's fate. A more resilient stance would weigh multi-chain exposure or a diversified crypto sleeve rather than SOL alone.
Solana's tech claims may overstate its practical edge; outages and governance risk could derail user adoption, and Ethereum’s ecosystem could render Solana obsolete even if throughput proves real. Regulators could delay or block a spot ETF, taking wind out of Solana's sails.
"Proof-of-history unlocks unique primitives that could justify SOL's valuation despite competition."
Claude underweights how proof-of-history timestamps could enable novel settlement layers for high-frequency DeFi that Ethereum L2s have yet to match, even post-Shanghai. If corporate treasuries accelerate inflows as Grok noted, this differentiation might sustain re-rating above current $130B despite outages. The overlooked variable is whether MEV and fee markets evolve fast enough to convert throughput into durable revenue before regulatory classification as a security caps ETF access.
"Proof-of-history's technical elegance doesn't automatically convert to durable fee economics or justify $130B valuation absent demonstrated revenue growth."
Grok conflates two separate bets: proof-of-history's technical merit versus whether it actually captures fee revenue. High-frequency DeFi settlement is theoretically interesting, but Solana's fee market hasn't demonstrated sustainable yield relative to token inflation—the real revenue anchor. Corporate treasury adoption is speculative; we've seen this narrative cycle before (2021). MEV resolution isn't a 'variable'—it's a prerequisite. Without it, throughput creates congestion theater, not moat.
"Solana's valuation is decoupled from its economic reality, as it relies on token inflation rather than sustainable fee-based revenue to secure the network."
Claude is right to focus on the fee market, but both Claude and Grok miss the elephant in the room: Solana's validator economics. The network relies on heavy token inflation to subsidize security because transaction fees are negligible. Until Solana demonstrates a transition from inflationary emissions to a fee-burn model, any 'institutional' narrative is premature. We are pricing a network based on speculative throughput while ignoring that the current economic model is essentially a subsidy-driven growth experiment.
"MEV monetization could be the key variable turning throughput into real revenue, not a side issue."
MEV monetization is not a fringe variable; it's the lever that could convert Solana's throughput into recurring revenue. If validators can price MEV reliably, and if regulatory/UX hurdles clear, SOL could re-rate on real cash flow. But it's far from guaranteed—inflationary emissions and security economics still dominate. Treat MEV as a core, probabilistic upside/challenge, not a side note. Claude's framing risks undervaluing MEV's potential.
The panel is divided on Solana's investment merit, with concerns about repeated outages, unclear ETF timeline, and intense competition from Ethereum and newer L1s. Some panelists see potential in proof-of-history timestamps and corporate treasury adoption, but others question the sustainability of fee-based revenue and the network's security economics.
The potential of proof-of-history timestamps for high-frequency DeFi settlement and corporate treasury adoption
Repeated mainnet outages and the unclear timeline for a spot ETF approval