The Predicament of Aptos: From Capital Darling to Ecological Stagnation

"The chain is fast, the heart is pained, and the money is limited." This saying reflects the helpless feelings of many early supporters of Aptos. While another Move language public chain is thriving, Aptos finds itself in a completely different situation. Despite entering the market with high TPS, the Move language, and strong capital support, the power of capital can only give birth to a public chain, but cannot endow it with lasting vitality.

What kind of predicament has Aptos fallen into? Let's take a closer look.

The halo fades, and ecological growth stagnates

Aptos was launched in 2022, backed by a team from a certain social media giant, emerging with the halo of "next-generation L1." With the support of several well-known investment institutions, Aptos initially enjoyed a fervent pursuit from the capital market. However, as market enthusiasm cooled down, 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 between 3 to 4 million. In contrast, another public chain that also uses the Move language has daily transaction counts exceeding 10 million, and the trading volume on decentralized exchanges as well as application revenue far surpasses that of Aptos.

So, what exactly went wrong with Aptos's ecological development?

The false prosperity created by resource accumulation

Aptos's previous ecological expansion heavily relied on a "resource-driven" model, rather than true market demand. Some analyses point out that Aptos distributed a large number of tokens to partners, introduced well-known DeFi projects to enrich its infrastructure, and brought top exchanges into ecological construction through over-the-counter refinancing. However, this "crash strategy" did not lead to real user migration, but instead resembled a "resource arbitrage game":

• After the leading DeFi project landed on Aptos, the growth of real users was limited, and the tokens were quickly sold off after being unlocked;
• The total locked value appears to be increasing, but most of the funds may just be for earning subsidies through "wash trading" and have not formed real liquidity;
• Ecological resources are tilted towards "airdrop" projects, rather than supporting native developers, resulting in limited development of Aptos native projects and making it difficult for the ecosystem to form self-sustaining capabilities.

Aptos's "Ecological Support": Form over Substance

In mid-March, Aptos launched a program aimed at helping ecological projects prepare for token generation events. However, one of the first members, which attracted significant community attention, became controversial due to airdrop "failure."

Community members pointed out that the airdrop distribution of the project is highly centralized: out of 440,000 addresses, only 10,000 people received the airdrop, leaving many real users with nothing. This "ecological support" airdrop farce has instead exposed Aptos's shortcomings in project review and community governance.

Aptos's "ecological support" resembles more of a nominal collaboration rather than genuine ecological co-construction. Despite providing substantial resource support, including token rewards, the entire process is more about form than substance, ultimately resulting in not ecological growth, but a failed public relations effort:

• No synergy has been formed with the core ecosystem.
• There were no reasonable suggestions or community guidance on the airdrop logic before distribution.

Some community members expressed that when controversies arose, Aptos chose to remain silent and withdraw, repeating a series of past inactions.

Core executives frequently resign

In the past year, Aptos has experienced constant turmoil at the executive level, with multiple executives resigning one after another, raising concerns in the market about its internal governance chaos.

There are reports that Aptos conducted over-the-counter token transactions at prices significantly below the market rate last year. At that time, the market price of the token was in the range of $10-13, but some investors were able to participate in transactions at about 40% of that price. Coincidentally, shortly after this matter came to light, the co-founder and CEO, along with several employees with venture capital backgrounds, gradually left the company.

Some speculate that the direct reason for the personnel changes may involve the transfer of benefits in over-the-counter trading, and the fundamental reason is that Aptos's overall performance after the token issuance did not meet expectations.

Disappointment spreads in the community, is the future of Aptos concerning?

Aptos was once highly anticipated, but now it is deeply mired in community doubts and disappointments. "Lack of market sensitivity, unclear strategic direction, chaotic internal management..." Many community members feel "frustrated" that it has not lived up to expectations, and the once bright prospects are being gradually eroded by reality.

Some community members bluntly pointed out 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 aligning with the Web3 development path in terms of market intuition, strategic layout, user retention, and ecological co-construction. Instead, it is obsessed with boasting about its high TPS, and its style of operation increasingly resembles that of a rigid Web2 traditional enterprise. He further pointed out that the Aptos ecosystem is filled with parasitic projects, overly reliant on financial injections, and the entire system lacks vitality, feeling lifeless.

Another community member reviewed the changes of the past year, stating: "Last year, the two major Move public chains were still at the same starting line, and at that time, Aptos had even higher expectations, with the whole community confidently preparing for the feast of the Aptos ecosystem. However, a year has passed, and things have changed; one has become a hero, and the other has become a loser. The price of the other public chain's token has risen steadily, while the Aptos team has been busy selling tokens at low prices, internal corruption, and profit transfer, ultimately leaving behind a mess after the CEO's departure."

Some community members pointed out that Aptos internal employees are bureaucratic and extremely inefficient. Others echoed that Aptos uses "compliance" as a shield, causing processes to be delayed for up to three months.

The capital halo may bring temporary prosperity, but what truly determines whether a public chain can stand the test of time is always the accumulation of users and the sustainable development of the ecosystem.

The competition on the L1 track remains intense; only time will tell if Aptos can break through.