Bitcoin Forum

Apart from real use case do coins and tokens max supply counts as well? for example lets look at doge coin,its max supply is 280 billion and the circulating supply is 120billion which is presently trading at 0.0026$ what would have happened if its max supply is in millions ?

i think some coins have way to much max supply which actually affects the coin or token performance as well,coins with low supply will always have better value than having gigantic supply.

Good point,coins and tokens with low supplies results in scarcity real quick and scarcity plays a major role in crypto space today,i bet thats why some new devs are creating deflationary tokens instead,they appreciate in price in short period of time even without no real use case just because of SCARCITY.

Then the value of each DOGE will rise. But since the supply is also reduced, the overall market cap of DOGE will remain the same.


A certain token is designed in such a way that it could efficiently support its performance, I mean its use case. DOGE has that in mind for sure. No wonder why it became one of the most convenient options used for tipping or even gambling.

A limited supply does not automatically mean a rise in value. There are so many shitcoins out there burning millions and millions of their supply and yet remain worthless. 

I think you are wrong,can you compare ETH with BOMB token?of cos not,the difference is marginal,shitcoins will always be shitcoins no matter how low their supply is,i even have few tokens i earned from bounties that implements burning,after all the burned token bias the project token is still useless so coins and tokens supply doesnt have major role to play at all.

Well even if you didn't take away real use cases, which coins actually can claim that, with or without gigantic max supply? For me it's quite meaningless. I remember in 2017 especially people created SUPER low supply coins like those who only had a few thousand max cap.

But if you can divide by 12 decimals then it's lost its scarcity value anyway to me.

There are two sides of the same coin. If you look at stellar or ripple, they have very big total supplies and are doing pretty well, if you compare their prices with all time lows. But on the other hand, I agree with you and believe that projects with small total supplies are more perspective.

Use case is a thing and max supply is another,merely doing research on some old projects i did noticed that they can do better if they have small max supply e.g electronuem coin which has 21billion max supply,investors are already complaining of its lately devalue since January 2019 and even after several good news they project still failed to add more value to the coin,to me large max supply is not always everything

Its value also depends on the capitalization. If the supply is large, then the capitalization value must be increased to balance.

So you don't need to worry about supply. All are decided by the market.

people dont need to care about max supply,it benefits some projects and it doesnt for others,its better to pick projects based on how good they are,if projects are very good enough they will do very well in market no matter how big their max supply is,either billions or trillions it really shouldnt matter

Logically, greater supply means the value of a single token will be lower. However, in the other hand, many BTC are basically lost forever. It does not sound like an asset you would like to use on a daily basis as its value might grow significantly in the future. Doge does not have max cap and while a single is quite worthless, you know it is more likely going to be used in a form of transactions (fees are very small as well). Finding a perfect balance is essential for a cryptospace. Otherwise, no one would like to trade their precious coins and we will be doomed.

basically true, but to find tokens with large supply that have a lot of enthusiasts or classified as a good project, I used to find a pretty good project and have a supply of billions (more than 5 b) but it seems like today's tokens like that have a time because many also competitor projects that have similar and much better supplies

As far as i know, doge coin is not having maximum supply and the hardcap supply is not created by the developer and it will always fully inflated. If the doge has a maximum supply in millions and less coin means less inflation and this will bring more price for doge coin. Remember the economic theory about that. It's so difficult to control the gigantic supply and you can see that how NPXS was feeling so difficult to do that and this company always do a token swap anytime.

Yes gigantic token cap is a problem. Tokens with low supply in millions have a very high price when compared to those with gigantic caps. If dogecoin had a smaller cap, it's price could've been far more than it currently is. Most times projects create coins with excuse that the world population is in billions they're making plans for mass adoption.

Tokens with low supply will always have higher value than tokens with huge max supply,i used to get carried away when i started mining coins back in 2016,i was so drawn to coins with billion supply so i started mining them,coins like
Turtle coin with 1 trillion max supply
Qwerty coin
Intense coin e.t.c
But they never have better value even when altcoin season was around in 2017,the only coin i earned good profit from was electroneum,it has 21billion supply as well but it surge up to 0.18$ at January 2018

Bomb token is a good example of how good low max supply coins are,bomb has 1million max supply and since its a deflationary token its already on its way down to 900,000 and its trading at 4$ per token ,just imagine if the token has billion max supply it wont be able to keep up at 4$ price per one, i think its good to always pick coins with small supply over the large supply coins

In this case, DOGE are a bad example. This is an old unique cryptocurrency; it can be compared only with BTC, LTC, XMR and other "first".
With a huge number of coins, the value of one coin tends to 0. That is, it may be thought that it is very simple pump, while forgetting about the huge number of coins.
I also do not understand why release billions of coins when you can release millions.

Maximum supply is an issue that need to be attended to in the crypto market if we want things to improve in the crypto market, huge maximum supply is not helping the price of coin, i guess some dev are too greedy.

Supply is one issue but it's not the main issue why the coin is losing its value in the market, coins/tokens are losing its value in the market, because the concept is not enough for a long term, investors have a very short attention span, they jump from one coin to another because the coin is not performing and developing well and it's not about the supply.
There are coins being burned to lessen the supply but it still not helping the price to move.

I think that the price not depends on volume of coin. We can observe huge amounts of ETH and LTC the price of these coins can grow exponentially. Sometimes cryptocurrency developers intentionally burn large amounts of coins in order to artificially raise its price. So it was with many cryptocurrencies, and later they disappeared. The same is waiting for a large number of altcoins. And there's nothing you can do about it.

wo, 120 billion in circulations and 280 billion as the total supply,, thats really huge
and in my opinion the law of supply and demands is always affected the price of any cryptocurrency
a good project with low supply will always create huge demands mate, and a huge demands will make the price growing

I dont think doge have max supply. You need to check your sources and learn about it more.  

To answer you main question the answer is it dont matter. What matters more is who hold those coins and how they got them. If developers does or someone that got them for free with some airdrop or holding some other coins that is really bad, since those coins are worth nothing to them.

Of course, we should choose coins with a limited supply. a project that can endlessly print their tokens is a useless project

I don't know why a cryptocurrency project will decide to endlessly print their own token when it is not affiliated with any state's financial legal backing. They will just be wasting their time as the coin value will be limited exponentially

The supply or total supply of coin doesn't really define it's potential value, a larger supply whichever is meant serve a purpose entirely different purpose from a coin with small supply, what should define the supply of a coin is its usage.

In my opinion only the curculating supply is of importance..The real problem is in the inability of developers to create value for this tokens.. If their is active usecase, demand will grow and a growth in demand will impact price and guarantee the success of such currencies in the crypto market

i think coins with maximum supply in billions has an effect in the price and value of the coins. when coins are in their millions they are termed more valuable than coins that have supply in their billions. it erduces the value of the coin and also reduces the pace at which it is appreciated by investors.

all depends on how the development team works, because the effect of a token is not seen in the amount of supply, but on the concept and usefulness of the token. I've seen a project called INMAX, with a total supply of 6.5 million, but the price is only half a dollar.

It's bad for investors only. But the team has decided billions of supply because the project they created purposely to be used by billions of users in the future and not by only a couple of traders. It means they are going for the top while those small supply projects are like short term projects that are much more dedicated to give returns to their supporters and investors.

INMAX max supply of 6.5 million ain't bad at all infact watching the history of last bullrun coins and tokens with low max supply have better All Time High over all,limited supply means better scarcity apart from the concept of every projects

maximum inventory will not influence many people to buy it, people will be interested in the price of the coin. if you want to invest with coins, make sure that the coins have good price growth.

Max Supply is not bad if they decide something like annually burning of their coins it will help the price increase at some point or any better idea than that. Aside from burning, they can just simply make their max supply as small as possible when they first create those coins or tokens because we saw today having huge max supply is not good and the consequences the price of the coins are having a hard time to increase the price.

Do not care about the total supply, you should watch about the market cappitalization (it is calculated from token supply * price). For example Ethereum and Ripple has almost same market cappitalization, but Ethereum is 1000x more expensive than Ripple because Ripple circulating supply is 1000times higher than Ethereum. As you can see it is not an important information. But when you choose coins by market cap, you can find some that are undervalued. (Highly used but low market cap = potential high return).

If dogecoin maximum supply is in millions/billions, the price will still be determined by demand and supply. What counts in this case is the percentage price gains/loses in a given period of time. Value (= inflow and out flow of financial & non-financial investments (or both) into a coin) will largely determine percentage price gains/loses of the coin in a period of time.


Guess you mean (at the bolded part) "higher price" and not better value. Value is quite different from price.

I agree that huge number of supply is bad that is why some of the coins like Binance Coin are doing halving where they will halve the maximum supply of the coin. This helps to the increase of the price since the supply is decreasing. Higher demand and Lower supply means price increase. I don't want to invest into coins that have huge number of supply unless it is on the top 10 like ADA or XLM like that.

I am more likely to choose a coin with a small amount of supply, because the value will be better than the large supply, but not just holding, we will also see their project. For the security of our assets

When I started crypto trading I think like you but by the experience my opinion has been changed. I believe supply does not matter in this market even you can see some high supply coins in Top 50 of CMC on the other hand there are some less supply coins also worth of just pennies. The important thing is how dev promote its project or how actively he/she is working on his/her project from backend. Supporting community also plays major role in success of a project. Worthless coins will remain worthless whether it has huge supply or less supply.

IMHO! I think your right, Huge circulation can affect the price of the coin/token compare to some millions only.Specially when the platform has no established use case to create demand. While comparing Dogecoin we all know that this coin was almost 5 years old already and because of that many cryptocurrency enthusiast or holders/investors are often using it.

I am really not a fan of gigantic supply. But some project with heavy supply and with regular usage is not really a bad idea since everything is not always about price and going to the moon. But I have issues with project creating heavy supply and later carrying out monthly burn in other to keep the community hope alive without any clear innovation.

I love coins with large max supplies, I definitely prefer it to those with little max supplies especially in a bear market, when those with max supply wants to.dip, they do not go too far because their price is low to begin with but those with little supply whose price are high tend to disappoint so.much in the long run, anyways that's my personal opinion.

Maximum supply is not the problem but the fixed coin supply inflation. I believe a 10% annual increase in coin supply is already too big to absorb very few adopters. For example, 1,000,000 coins getting additional 100,000 a year or 8,333 coins a month - that is too much IMO.

Maybe 1% per year is better.

In my opinion, this is due to how much the project covers the Earth’s population, that is, how grandiose the project itself is. The more often a coin or token is used, the more they are needed. If there are not so many coins or tokens, perhaps this will cause them to rise in price, however, at the same time it will cause inconvenience in their practical use. Nevertheless, an optimal balance is needed here.

Lol, who would wanted to see huge max supply? It doesn't make sense for a project to see billion coins in circulation. It goes against the basic tenant of crypto, specially what bitcoin has established, fixed 21 million supply only. So this billion max supply is a recipe for disaster, as the price won't go that high and it going to be used for pump-and-dump scheme. Low supply cap has the potential to go high in the future, just saying.

These are the projects that claim to have a better solution to bitcoin, and they don’t know the main reason why bitcoin created a limited supply and this limited supply of bitcoin is what has been helping it till date. Look at ripple, with all their position on the 3rd place in the market, their value is still not growing, and this is because they have such unlimited supply.

Take a look at binance, binance also applied this method, to burn tokens, and we can see its working with the real products that they have. So all this gigantic supply is really not worth it. What majority of these people needs is actually to burn those tokens and see how the coin will start to appreciate seriously and how stable the coin will also be on a very high price. When I see some project which such big supply, what I do is just to ignore them immediately.

A good point, But people have no need to be care about the max supply It will give benefit about few of projects not for the all. Doge does not have the maximum cap and while the single is quite worthless. Basically it is true the gigantic cap is a problem.

I do not see the difference between the maximum supply of coins and how much it is expressed. The main thing here is how much the price of this coin is growing. For example, you bought 1 million coins of XXX for 1000 dollars, and for the same thousand dollars you bought 1 thousand coins of UUU. Coin XXX over time has grown by 100 percent and you can sell your one million for $ 2,000, and the UUU coin stands still and you can sell it at the same price you bought.

More important thing is a trading volume. If the trading volume is low, then you may not be able to sell your coin and that is probably the most woest thing what could happen.  ;)

I don't think gigantic maximum supply is bad considering the fact that there could be a need for enormous supply. Some projects needs the high supply volume to meet with the demand of the market, even though the reduced supply is best to have a increased tokens value

Having billions of supply with eventually affect the performance of the market trading, for example Doge, which has billions of supply, but the case is, its really hard to achieve 1usd in value each coin because of the supply, its just a matter of supply and demand i think, the lower the supply the better the chances of price surge.

The supply of a coin has a huge impact on the value. This is because the value of the tokens is a division of the market capitalisation and the total number of tokens. This explains why projects with low supply tend to have a better chance for increased value as compared with projects with high supply.