World Liberty Financial投资组合 板块

综合强度 6.8实时

DEFI · L2

板块DEFIL2

世界自由金融投资组合包括世界自由金融项目所进行的购买。世界自由金融是一个与美国总统候选人唐纳德·特朗普及其家人有关的去中心化金融(DeFi)项目。

市值$618.76B7D +1.75%
7D 涨幅+1.75%超 BTC +0pp
代币数16活跃流通中
24H 交易量$77.40B占大盘 106.3%
平均涨幅-0.03%24H 中位数
龙头项目ETH权重 49.2%
涨幅最高B+8.70%
板块强度6.8/10sector
01

板块表现 · 与大盘对比

板块指数(基期:2024-10-01 = 100)
94.81+17.05% (30D)
同期 BTC 涨幅
+21.72% · 跑赢 -4.7pp
加载中...
World Liberty Financial投资组合+17.05%
BTC+21.72%
ETH+29.97%
SOL+36.32%
智能合约平台+25.00%
一层公链+24.88%
工作量证明+22.67%
权益证明+30.45%
美国制造+19.32%
02

龙头分析 · Top 3 深度

板块占比 90.8%
RANK 01

Ethereum

ETH · 基础设施 · Layer1 · 板块占比 49.2%

$2,493.03+0.06% · 24H
市值$304.22B
FDV$304.22B
换手率0%
板块占比49.2%

为什么领先:以太坊是该组合中最核心的底层资产,具备最强的智能合约生态、开发者网络和资产沉淀,仍是DeFi与链上应用的主要结算层,流动性与共识最稳。

RANK 02

Tether

USDT · CeFi · 稳定币发行商 · 板块占比 29.6%

$0.9999-0.00% · 24H
市值$183.39B
FDV$183.39B
换手率27%
板块占比29.6%

为什么领先:USDT是全球使用最广的稳定币,承担交易媒介、避险和链上资金周转功能,在高波动环境下资金需求最直接,属于组合里的现金流与流动性核心。

RANK 03

USDC

USDC · 上市公司 · CeFi · 板块占比 12.0%

$1.00+0.01% · 24H
市值$74.45B
FDV$74.45B
换手率3%
板块占比12.0%

为什么领先:USDC依托合规与透明度优势,在机构和美元链上支付场景中占据重要位置,和USDT共同构成稳定币双核心,增强组合的防守与结算能力。

03

板块成分代币

16 个项目
#代币评级
1
$0.1820
+8.70%
+100.00%
$181.96M
$7.31M
C
2
$8.14
+6.82%
-4.55%
$3.52B
$35.95M
B+
3
$12.94
+5.11%
+1.00%
$9.68B
$75.97M
B+
4
$0.6247
+4.19%
+0.88%
$2.06B
$44.24M
B+
5
$0.04928
+2.69%
-2.51%
$331.99M
$49.21M
B+
6
$0.3880
+2.27%
+7.94%
$1.89B
$19.92M
B+
7
$0.009046
+0.61%
-1.24%
$39.19M
$5.35M
B
8
$0.0805
+0.25%
-10.40%
$134.02M
$266.06K
C
9
$2,493.03
+0.06%
+0.46%
$304.22B
$675.35M
B+
10
$1.00
+0.01%
-0.17%
$74.45B
$2.45B
B+
04

投资论点 · AI 综合

基于 WOOFUN AI 分析

看多论点 · 4

  • 以太坊仍是DeFi、RWA和链上应用的基础设施核心,生态粘性强。

  • USDT与USDC合计代表稳定币主线,资金避险和链上结算需求长期存在。

  • 组合整体偏防守,适合在市场波动加大时承接资金轮动。

  • 若风险偏好回升,ETH通常先于多数资产受益。

看空论点 · 3

  • 组合高度集中于大市值与稳定币,进攻性不足,超额弹性有限。

  • 当前市场热度与资金流呈偏弱状态,短线更容易受风险偏好压制。

  • ETH近期表现承压,若大盘继续回撤,组合难以独立走强。

AI 综合结论:偏防守配置,核心看ETH修复与稳定币资金回流,适合等待市场风险偏好改善后再加仓。
05

情绪 & KOL 立场

看多占比 66%
AI 综合情绪(最近 7D)看多 66% · 中性 13% · 看空 21%
看多 66%中性 13%看空 21%

vitalik.eth · @VitalikButerin

@VitalikButerin · 6.0M 粉丝

看多

A lot of important progress on Frames (EIP-8141) has been quietly happening over the last few months. Highly recommend reading this, also the updated EIP https://t.co/jYqeS55j6P https://t.co/CPYONKnWZc

1693147

vitalik.eth · @VitalikButerin

@VitalikButerin · 6.0M 粉丝

看多

One optimistic and still very-non-consensus belief I have about the far future of cryptography: I think that there is a 33% chance that, for average real-world computation, there exist ways to implement all three of what I call the Egyptian God Protocols (SNARK, FHE, iO) with 1+ε factor overhead (meaning, for large enough instances, the added overhead of cryptographizing a computation becomes arbitrarily small compared to the base cost of doing the computation itself) And a 60% chance that all three can be done with single-digit overhead (ie. <10x, measured in total cost of energy plus amortized compute) I think there's a good chance we'll get one of these (probably SNARKs with single-digit overhead) by the end of this decade. After all, we're already there for specialized hash functions and for some LLM inference.

1768292

vitalik.eth · @VitalikButerin

@VitalikButerin · 6.0M 粉丝

看多

One positive consequence of all the recent detailed thinking about transaction formats - not just 8141, also "future of state" discussions eg. UTXOs, PBT, keyed nonces, and also recursive STARK mempool - is that we have a much more explicit understanding of how transactions have "actions" and "dependencies", and we can engineer around optimizing the two separately. An action is an effect that a transaction has. A dependency is a fact about the transaction and/or the state that must be true for the transaction to be valid. eg. a signature is a dependency, a Merkle proof of a UTXO is a dependency, a ZK-SNARK (or STARK) is a dependency, a call that sends ETH is an action Dependencies can be processed in parallel. Dependencies that involve state can be reasoned about by a mempool, especially if the specific state accessed is statically declared. Dependencies that are pure (no state calling allowed) can be processed once at the mempool layer and never need to be processed again - and potentially even replaced with a STARK verifying them, allowing not just execution but also data to be elided. In principle, dependencies and actions can all be expressed as calls (if needed, calls to precompiles). This would make the transaction format itself very bare-bones and minimalist (a list of calls, flags for the type of each call eg. dependencies would be static or pure calls, and origin, nonce, etc) and allows maximum cross-compatibility even if different EVM chains have different features. In 2015-era Ethereum, thinking explicitly about these differences was not very important: execution was execution, there were few enough transactions that we could process them all serially, and single-key ECDSA accounts were good enough for everyone. Ethereum's current scaling strategy, however, requires moving beyond that paradigm. Ethereum is beloved by many developers because the execution and state model is so dynamic and flexible. But dynamic and flexible is not friendly to scaling. Fortunately, >90% of Ethereum's activity by volume does not require anything dynamic and flexible. So, we require contracts, accounts and transactions to more explicitly specify what is dynamic and flexible and what is more statically-analyzable but more restrictive, and more statically-analyzable things get the lowest gas cost and thus scale the most. Effectively, learning from the best of both the 2015-era Ethereum model and a more Bitcoin-like model (reminder: Bitcoin has had what I call account abstraction since the beginning), and making a mixture of both (really, the full spectrum between both) available, with gas costs appropriate for the level of scale involved. New state types, the recursive STARK mempool, keyed nonces, etc all go in this direction. This all relates to transaction types, because a general-purpose transaction type is a very natural interface layer on top of which all of this can be implemented, and the current thinking around the EIP-8141 transaction type is going in this exact direction that is friendly to these kinds of future generalizations. So in that sense, 8141 done well is not just a culmination of 10 years of account abstraction work, it's also preparation for the next few years of responsible decentralization-friendly hyper-scaling.

1651279

vitalik.eth · @VitalikButerin

@VitalikButerin · 6.0M 粉丝

看多

Many years of hard work went into the Poseidon family of hashes, and they have provided great real-world value on Ethereum and elsewhere and will continue to do so for several years. They are the reason why it's fast to generate a client-side SNARK for a modern privacy-protocol. The fact that we have ultra-fast general-purpose STARKs (mid-three-digit overhead for basically any batched computation) and may well soon drop to double-digit or even lower is more amazing than anything that we had been hoping for in the early 2020s. Big congratulations to all involved in Poseidon, and all involved in STARKs. https://t.co/cdERDYkj6n

1046146

H.E. Justin Sun 👨‍🚀 🌞 · @justinsuntron

@justinsuntron · 4.0M 粉丝

看多

技术普及,个人货币主权至关重要

168106

H.E. Justin Sun 👨‍🚀 🌞 · @justinsuntron

@justinsuntron · 4.0M 粉丝

看多

波场抗量子路线图公布!

15192
06

关键事件时间线 · 板块兴起到当前

8 个节点
2026-08估值修复

板块维持高关注但资金分化

截至当前,WLFI投资组合仍具话题性,但资金流入更趋选择性,板块表现呈现分化。

2025-10生态扩张

投资组合持仓成为核心交易线索

WLFI投资组合中的核心持仓成为市场追踪重点,资金更偏向高流动性与高叙事弹性的标的。

2025-07风险点

政治关联与合规争议升温

围绕政治关联、治理透明度和合规风险的讨论增加,市场对该板块的分歧明显扩大。

2025-04估值修复

风险偏好回升推动估值修复

在加密市场风险偏好改善后,WLFI相关资产出现估值修复,板块热度阶段性抬升。

2025-01机构入场

大额配置预期提升关注度

市场对WLFI相关配置的关注度上升,主题从单点叙事转向更广泛的组合交易。

2024-11生态扩张

相关资产轮动带动板块扩散

围绕WLFI投资组合的资产轮动增强,资金开始向更多DeFi与基础设施标的扩散。

2024-09协议发布

项目与投资组合概念逐步清晰

市场开始将WLFI项目本身与其潜在投资组合联系起来,相关资产的主题交易逐步成形。

2024-06板块兴起

WLFI叙事开始进入市场视野

与World Liberty Financial相关的DeFi叙事开始被交易者关注,围绕特朗普家族关联项目的预期升温。

07

新闻动态

实时同步
加载中...

评论

回复 @用户
0/800

暂无评论

消息提醒

登录后查看消息
查看全部消息管理订阅