This is just sloppy analysis from Jonah. Let’s unpack shall we.
1. Inconsistent metrics
Jonah compares Aerodrome’s ~$1B market cap to Ethena’s $11B FDV. That’s not apples-to-apples. ENS mc is closer to ~$4.5B. Either compare the same metric — or don’t compare at all.
2. “Inconsistent revenue”
Sure, it’s not fixed — but Ethena has already generated ~$480M in cumulative revenue. That’s real. And with growth accelerating + the fee switch likely coming in Q4, the upside is only getting stronger.
3. “Narrow use case”? Not even close
Stablecoin meta is one of the biggest themes in both crypto and tradfi. Ethena gives users access to high-yield stablecoins via a delta-neutral carry trade. Demand for $USDe has been insatiable. USDe supply is up nearly 300% recently — thanks to integrations with AAVE, Pendle, and more. It’s expanding across Ethereum and beyond. HIP3 will likely bring USDe to Hyperliquid, letting traders hold a yielding stablecoin to offset fees. That’s sticky demand and network effects compounding.
5. The Luna comparison is just lazy
Ethena is nothing like Luna. No reflexive mint-burn loop here. And “Wall Street won’t touch it”? They already have — Stablecoinx raised $260M from private investors to gain ENA exposure. This is just getting started — and it’s the most obvious stablecoin trade after Circle.
As rates fall, Circle’s revenue model weakens, and CRCL’s market cap has already dropped from $60B to $27B. Meanwhile, demand for $USDe keeps climbing. As crypto liquidity and leverage come back, Ethena’s delta-neutral model shines: more capital into USDe, more yield, more protocol revenue. $ENA isn’t just an alternative — it’s the CRCL trade 2.0.
6. “No big vision”? Seriously?
Ethena is building a synthetic dollar that isn’t constrained by traditional banking rails. That unlocks global, permissionless, programmable money. The TAM is enormous. If that’s not a “big vision,” I don’t know what is.
