Good fundamentals don't ensure a great investment.

[woez]

It's very interesting to see that many people are unable to withstand market corrections, especially if BTC goes down, even though in the past the type of token/coin you mentioned was considered very fundamental. Well, what we see most is that we can only participate in active participation programs in the network, such as staking or other reward programs and one more thing if i see the price increases can occur along with project development or based on other market factors.

[lalabotax]

In essence, even if a project boasts strong fundamentals, a solid team, and real-world value, it doesn't automatically translate into a great investment. This is particularly true for projects with highly inflationary token models. In such cases, reaching previous all-time highs can seem like an even more distant goal.

In summary, a project's fundamentals are only one piece of the investment puzzle, especially when dealing with highly inflationary tokens.

What do you think about this ?

I agree with this.
In fact, not all projects that have good fundamentals will be successful later and get lots of investors and good responses from investors. There are several other factors that will make a project really big. But nowadays, sometimes, most of the new projects want to get their project hype first by any means. And after that, they don't even care about the fundamental side of their project. Meanwhile, projects that are really serious and contain very good fundamentals, are not certain to be truly successful. There are other things that make a project a big success, not only because of the hype but also other factors. And this will really depend on the ability of the developer and their team to make their project truly accepted and able to continue to develop in various markets.

[serjent05]

It was not the sole metric to see if that project/s become successful but having that feature it seems to have a bigger chance.
If I choose a project to invest in, I'm not choosing it because it is popular on social media, it has good fundamentals but also, I consider the most if that project showcases a useful contribution to the crypto space so we can benefit from it. Many projects show great things at first but they don't have sustainable market designs to retain their greatness, they are gradually losing identification and popularity until they lose sight of the investors.

It is also good to consider the potential growth of the project which is affected by the ability of its developer and the marketing department.  I believe @OP failed to include these factors in his fundamental lists.  With the potential growth, the maximum number of coins should be the utmost concern.  With the additional supplies, the growth will be nullified because it will saturate the value of the coins especially when the coin influx is way too much for the market to handle and the marketing team is unable to cope with the increase of supplies.

[TastyChillySauce00]

It's very interesting to see that many people are unable to withstand market corrections, especially if BTC goes down, even though in the past the type of token/coin you mentioned was considered very fundamental. Well, what we see most is that we can only participate in active participation programs in the network, such as staking or other reward programs and one more thing if i see the price increases can occur along with project development or based on other market factors.

The future is still remain unpredictable. I remember the time when people were yelling if luna was the next bitcoin but they were got rekt massively once luna dumped so hard like it was worth nothing again.
People must not be stupid enough to always call anything that has good fundamentals will be suitable for investing. Even though bitcoin was a coin with best fundamental but it can make us get rekt as well. There's also a certain condition when the project was also facing crisis.
This is also making the investors got so much stressed caused by they saw their portfolios dumped so hard.

[martinex]

The future is still remain unpredictable. I remember the time when people were yelling if luna was the next bitcoin but they were got rekt massively once luna dumped so hard like it was worth nothing again.
People must not be stupid enough to always call anything that has good fundamentals will be suitable for investing. Even though bitcoin was a coin with best fundamental but it can make us get rekt as well. There's also a certain condition when the project was also facing crisis.
This is also making the investors got so much stressed caused by they saw their portfolios dumped so hard.

Everyone's views are of course different and I think as you say is correct, there is a saturation point even though coins like BTC are highly recommended. but what he wants to make a profit then move to a more profitable coin is also each person's right even though they know the risks of selling some BTC for example to enter and take a chance on altcoins.

[abel1337]

The future is still remain unpredictable. I remember the time when people were yelling if luna was the next bitcoin but they were got rekt massively once luna dumped so hard like it was worth nothing again.
People must not be stupid enough to always call anything that has good fundamentals will be suitable for investing. Even though bitcoin was a coin with best fundamental but it can make us get rekt as well. There's also a certain condition when the project was also facing crisis.
This is also making the investors got so much stressed caused by they saw their portfolios dumped so hard.

We all have our own perspective on a coin. Luna was has an aggressive price increase when people are telling the public about their opinion about LUNA, saying that it has a great tokenomics and next to bitcoin but yeah, things happened and the tokenomics they have had been exploited and massively crashed along with it's pegged stable coin. Maybe the opinion of people at that time (before the crash) where directed into hyping and for marketing the LUNA, it was effective if it meant to be that way. Fundamentals is important but I agree that sometimes it can bring a danger to us especially if we don't analyze it that much and have the certain precaution that we need to avoid a fundamental disaster just like what happened to LUNA.

[lombok]

Not all projects with good fundamentals are good and become investment targets. However, a project with a decent return on investment has good fundamentals.

This certainly gives us investment activists special attention to carry out further and thorough research in selecting projects.

No wonder the coin mentioned by the OP has a price increase that tends to be insignificant and continues to produce lower lows in the price of the token.

[cheezcarls]

Having good fundamentals of a certain project isn’t gonna guarantee that it’s gonna be a good investment. There are projects who are being well-funded and backed by VCs and partners didn’t really go up to it’s full potential due to the selling pressure.

It might gain a little bit but it’s just temporary as the market we’re in is so uncertain. Although we do not rule out these projects with good fundamentals are going to stay as it is as they are more working on for the long-term results.  

For a project to stand out and has big reasons for us to keep buying and less selling, it must be something out of the box that would definitely attract a lot of users not just in the short term, but in the long run.

[VFalcon]

The foundation doesn't always justify the project, it's still the community that matters. For example, TFS token is quite stable and one of the positive factors is a strong community 

[LogitechMouse]

~
In essence, even if a project boasts strong fundamentals, a solid team, and real-world value, it doesn't automatically translate into a great investment. This is particularly true for projects with highly inflationary token models. In such cases, reaching previous all-time highs can seem like an even more distant goal.

In summary, a project's fundamentals are only one piece of the investment puzzle, especially when dealing with highly inflationary tokens.

What do you think about this ?

You're only pertaining to inflationary tokens here right.

TBH, this isn't only applicable to inflationary tokens alone, but in all of the tokens in general. Fundamentals alone isn't enough for a project to say that it's a good project to invest your money with. A project can have a good update this month, then it will not for the next 3-6 months. I've seen some projects in the past whose been at the top 20 or even in the top 10 a few years ago, but now isn't even in the top 50 now because of lack of updates, or news regarding the project.

As for inflationary tokens in general, I think we already know what's the most popular inflationary token right now, and yes it isn't DOGE, but it's Ethereum.

[shinratensei_]

Having good fundamentals of a certain project isn’t gonna guarantee that it’s gonna be a good investment. There are projects who are being well-funded and backed by VCs and partners didn’t really go up to it’s full potential due to the selling pressure.

It might gain a little bit but it’s just temporary as the market we’re in is so uncertain. Although we do not rule out these projects with good fundamentals are going to stay as it is as they are more working on for the long-term results. 

For a project to stand out and has big reasons for us to keep buying and less selling, it must be something out of the box that would definitely attract a lot of users not just in the short term, but in the long run.

most of the time it doesn't need to be out of the box too, you see arbitrum, sei, and sui quite literally its the same thing with previous project just blockchain that have capability of smart contract and yet
when they are releasing they have massive demands.
its usually what the market really wants, market wants more smart contract blockchain there it is, market wants L2 because ethereum has high gas fee then there it is.
basically you just need riding the trend train and you're set no need to have innovation or out of the box idea you just create what is trendy.

[Blitzboy]

After fully considering this scenario, I agree with your concerns about inflationary tokenomics. Possible manipulation by large holders with many tokens throws a shadow. The 6% dip after freeing a large treasury chunk is more than a warning. It warns about how overproduction and price suppression can kill growth.

Three years of 7% annual gains in the inflationary model is a loaded dice roll, right? Why invest in a project that may increase supply and manipulate prices? a valid worry. The growth and fall of bitcoin prices are typically hidden from investors. These underlying components may be strong, but can they withstand inflation and manipulation?

[Silberman]

The foundation doesn't always justify the project, it's still the community that matters. For example, TFS token is quite stable and one of the positive factors is a strong community 

A strong community is important for the success of a project but it is not everything, the project still needs to be good and the developers need to follow their roadmap as close as possible so the trust of the community does not disappear, and yet there are many projects which despite seemingly doing everything right disappear, because at some point the developers get tired of maintaining the project and they simply want to cash out their coins and live the good life.

[Xal0lex]

After OP made a planned and private decision to unlock 18% of its treasury tokens, there was a noticeable drop in price, approximately around 6%. It's important to keep in mind that for OP to reach its all-time high (ATH), it would need to see a significant price surge. While this isn't impossible, it's not necessarily a bet worth placing.

Projects like OP, ALGO, AVAX, and DOT are all considered popular cryptocurrencies, but they share a common trait: they have inflationary tokenomics. This raises an important question – why invest in a project that steadily increases its supply by 7% each year for the next three years? Or one that releases large numbers of tokens, potentially leading to price manipulation by large holders?

In essence, even if a project boasts strong fundamentals, a solid team, and real-world value, it doesn't automatically translate into a great investment. This is particularly true for projects with highly inflationary token models. In such cases, reaching previous all-time highs can seem like an even more distant goal.

In summary, a project's fundamentals are only one piece of the investment puzzle, especially when dealing with highly inflationary tokens.

What do you think about this ?

Everything depends on the term of your investment. Projects with such tokenomics are not profitable to keep in your wallets for a long time, they should be periodically sold, using instead of BUY&HOLD strategy, the strategy of long-term trading. That is, you should sell tokens in every bullish cycle and then wait for the price to drop. In this way, some risks associated with token depreciation can be avoided. It is impossible to apply to altcoins the investment strategy that is applied to bitcoin, not all altcoins grow in value throughout their life, many die or are traded constantly at the same level.

[fullhdpixel]

The foundation doesn't always justify the project, it's still the community that matters. For example, TFS token is quite stable and one of the positive factors is a strong community 

But, I think the community is still part of a foundation, although yeah you are right that without them there will also be no foundation that will be built, however we are talking about fundamentals here not foundation and I think both of them are not the same. I see that you mentioned TFS token there but I'm sorry because it looks like a shill to me, and I don't think it has a strong community because the coin is rarely being talked about now.

They are many alt-coins out there that has a good fundamental to invest on, which cryptocurrency market is on the Bear market and very cheap to invest in difference top alt-coins that is already established in the ecosystem and more profitable after holding in long term.

But, the OP just said that having a good fundamentals alone is not enough. He got a point there though. We can use the example of weak-hand investors who chose Bitcoin but still ended up as a loser. Apart from the awareness, we also need some personal skills, so that we can carry on successfully on our goals.

[wheelz1200]

There are tons of projects out there for every coin or token to take off due to all of the competition for people's money.  Unfortunately some of the good projects fizzle out because they can't reach the right group of investors and eventually the people working on the project slowly drop off.  And vice versa, some terrible projects are marketed correctly and pump in price.  That's crypto.

[Rengga Jati]

In summary, a project's fundamentals are only one piece of the investment puzzle, especially when dealing with highly inflationary tokens.

What do you think about this ?

Of course, good fundamentals are not the only thing that makes a project truly successful. Maybe we have seen how a project has very good fundamentals and quite good development, but ultimately stops along the way due to various reasons. Factors of progress and project capabilities, especially in this era, are very varied. Moreover, various projects currently put forward hype that can attract various investors. However, only some of them have good fundamentals so they won't last long. On the other hand, if you have good fundamentals but a mediocre team, especially if the project's promotion and financial systems are mediocre or even lacking, then the project will not be able to develop well. This is what makes us need to be more alert and careful when concluding a new project that we will approach or invest in.

[Hypnosis00]

There are tons of projects out there for every coin or token to take off due to all of the competition for people's money.  Unfortunately some of the good projects fizzle out because they can't reach the right group of investors and eventually the people working on the project slowly drop off.  And vice versa, some terrible projects are marketed correctly and pump in price.  That's crypto.

No matter how promising the project looks but if that never suits the needs of the people or traction to the investors, it certainly just dumps and dies. Indeed, the market competition is very tough and those projects that already gain support will continue to grow while the others go down. This is the reason why I choose old projects rather than making a fortune in new projects knowing that it was hard for them to get attention when the trust of the inevstors had already hooked up by these projects.

[el kaka22]

It doesn't ensure it, but what does? People keep saying one thing bad without putting any alternatives which is the biggest issue, I believe that we are going to end up with something that would be a bit different if we are not careful, and that is why I believe that we are going to be having some trouble.

Hopefully it will get  to a point where we could end up with a good return one way or another, and that should be important, we could definitely see it happen one way or another. I believe that we are going to end up with something that would be better than good fundamentals before we give that up, if there is nothing better than that, no matter how it is not great, it is still better than any other alternative to it.