Blind Dev article

4K+ without myths: why a good project is not always a good investment

The dYdX example: a high overall 4K+ score does not cancel weak tokenomics or token-price risk.

Archived post dated 2026-02-09. Service features, prices and market data describe the original publication period; their current status has not been verified.

Not investment advice. This article describes methodology and risks.

Translated from the original Telegram post, published on 2026-02-09. This is an archived account, not a current verification of services or markets.

Project quality and token price can diverge

I revisited my ratings and saw a gap between a project’s quality and its token’s price.

In June of the previous year, I analysed dYdX, one of the oldest perpetual DEXs—decentralised derivatives exchanges. Its overall 4K+ rating was 8.4 out of 10.

But there is an important qualification: other sections drove that high score. The coin section scored 3 out of 5. I considered tokenomics a weak point.

Yesterday, I opened @price_informerBot and saw that DYDX had fallen about 40% over the month and was only about 10% above its all-time low.

That is why I wrote this post: to prevent illusions when using 4K+ analysis, especially if you look only at the overall score.

Yes, the project was a quality product. It continued developing, and its TVL—the funds held in the protocol—was roughly stable. From a user’s or trader’s perspective, it was a functioning product.

But that did not make DYDX a good investment, unless perhaps you were a DAO supporter who never intended to sell the asset.

The takeaway

4K+ can show that a project is good. It does not mean that its token will be a good investment. If you focus on the overall rating rather than tokenomics, you can easily lose money after investing.

At the same time, you can use the application for trading. Many people do exactly that.

Which would you choose: use the product without buying the token, or avoid the project altogether?