The Predicament of Aptos: The Ecological Dilemma After the Halo Fades

The phrase "Chain Fast Heartache Money Less" reflects the helpless situation of many early supporters of Aptos. While another Move public chain is riding the waves of success, Aptos finds itself in a completely different predicament. Although Aptos has entered the market strongly with high TPS, the Move language, and substantial capital support, the power of capital is ultimately limited and cannot inject true vitality into it.

What kind of predicament is Aptos in? Let's find out.

Ecological growth has stagnated

Aptos was launched in 2022, backed by a team of former tech giants, emerging as a "next-generation L1". With the support of several well-known investment institutions, Aptos initially enjoyed the favor of the capital market. However, as market enthusiasm wanes, its proud technological narrative is gradually losing its appeal.

Data shows that the number of daily active addresses on Aptos has dropped to about 1 million, with daily transaction counts ranging from 3 to 4 million, while another Move public chain has surpassed 10 million daily transactions, and DEX trading volume and application revenue far exceed that of Aptos.

So, what exactly went wrong with the ecological growth of Aptos?

False Prosperity Under Resource Accumulation

Aptos's previous ecological expansion heavily relied on a "resource-driven" model rather than genuine market demand. Analysis indicates that Aptos distributed a large amount of chips to partners, introduced well-known DeFi projects to enrich infrastructure, and brought leading exchanges into ecological construction through OTC refinancing. However, this "quick success approach" has not resulted in genuine user migration, but rather resembles a "resource arbitrage game":

• After the leading DeFi projects have landed, the growth of real users is limited, and tokens are quickly sold off after being unlocked;
• TVL seems to be increasing, but most of the funds may just be for earning subsidies through "showing off" and have not formed real liquidity;
• Ecological resources are tilted towards "airdrop" projects rather than supporting native developers, leading to limited development of Aptos native projects and making it difficult for the ecosystem to form self-sustaining growth.

"Ecological Support" is more about form than substance

Aptos recently launched a program aimed at helping ecological projects prepare for token issuance. However, the airdrop for the first batch of supported members has sparked controversy. A community member pointed out that the airdrop distribution of a certain project is highly centralized: out of 440,000 addresses, only 10,000 received the airdrop, leaving many real users with nothing. This "ecological support" farce exposes Aptos's shortcomings in project review and community governance.

Aptos's "ecosystem support" seems more like a nominal collaboration rather than genuine ecosystem co-construction. Although a large amount of resource support has been provided to the project, including token rewards, the entire process is more about form than substance, ultimately resulting in a failed public relations effort rather than ecosystem growth.

• There is no synergistic effect with the core ecosystem.
• There were no reasonable suggestions or community guidance on the airdrop logic before distribution.

Some comments suggest that in the face of widespread controversy over project airdrops, Aptos has chosen to remain silent and withdraw, repeating a series of past inactions.

Frequent executive departures raise concerns

In the past year, Aptos has experienced continuous turmoil at the executive level, with several core executives leaving one after another, raising concerns in the market about its internal governance chaos.

It has been reported that last year, Aptos conducted over-the-counter trading at prices well below the market rate. At that time, the token market price was in the range of $10-13, but some investors were able to participate in trades at about 40% of that price. Coincidentally, shortly after this incident was exposed, the co-founder and CEO, along with several employees with investment backgrounds, gradually left the company.

There are analyses and speculations that the direct reason for the personnel changes may involve the transfer of benefits, and the fundamental reason is that Aptos's overall performance after the token issuance did not meet expectations.

Disappointment Spreads in the Community

Aptos was once highly anticipated, but now it is deeply mired in doubts and disappointments from the community. Many community members feel a "hate for iron not turning into steel," as the once bright expectations are being gradually worn down by reality.

Some community members bluntly stated that Aptos and the core team of another Move public chain both come from large companies, but their development trajectories are completely different. He criticized Aptos for not being on the Web3 path in terms of market sensitivity, strategic layout, user maintenance, and ecological co-construction, but instead being obsessed with boasting its high TPS, behaving more and more like a rigid Web2 traditional enterprise. He further pointed out that the Aptos ecosystem is filled with parasitic projects that excessively rely on funding blood transfusions, resulting in a lack of vitality in the entire system.

Another community member reviewed: "Last year, the two major Move public chains were still at the same starting line, and at that time, Aptos was even more highly regarded, with the whole community full of confidence. However, a year has passed, and the situation has completely reversed. One public chain is thriving, while the Aptos team has fallen into internal issues, ultimately leaving a mess behind."

Some members also pointed out that Aptos internal staff have low efficiency and delay project progress under the pretext of "compliance."

The halo of capital may bring temporary prosperity, but what truly determines whether a public chain can stand the test of time is the accumulation of users and the sustainable development of the ecosystem. The competition in the L1 track remains fierce, and whether Aptos can break through can only be answered by time.