Billions in 'Mercenary Volume' Mask Blockchain Valuation Risks—How Solana's War on Starknet Exposes the Industry's Accounting Crisis

A social media feud between Solana and Starknet has laid bare the fragility of blockchain valuations—where billions in 'mercenary volume' now drive metrics that obscure real economic activity.

Solana’s X account recently claimed: “Starknet has 8 daily active users, 10 daily transactions, and still somehow has a 1b MC and 15b FDV… Send it straight to 0.” The data cited appears based on an April 2024 snapshot, while *CryptoSlate* data shows Starknet’s FDV at ~$900 million as of now.

This discrepancy highlights a broader industry tension: networks with high valuations but low on-chain activity amid accusations of 'mercenary volume' inflating metrics.

DeFiLlama defines REV (Real Economic Value) as chain fees plus MEV tips, offering a clearer signal of organic demand versus incentivized activity. Solana’s FDV-to-volume ratio (0.59) shows distributed trading across DEXs and consistent REV above $1 million/day.

By contrast, Arbitrum (0.04, 66% perp volume concentrated in Variational) and Starknet (0.025, ~100% perp volume on Extended with active points program) reveal structural risks in centralized volume concentration.

Variational’s points program (launched Dec. 17) accounts for ~$24.9B of Arbitrum’s perp volume (66%), while Extended dominates Starknet’s perp volume with an ongoing points program (launched April 2025).

Starknet’s 30-day chain fees ($186,293) starkly contrast with $36.4B in notional perp volume, revealing minimal fee pressure relative to incentivized activity. Polkadot and Algorand show FDV-to-volume ratios of ~10x and ~10x, respectively, with minimal on-chain activity.

⚠️ LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice.