Near Protocol (NEAR) has seen a lot of buzz recently, with headlines touting a surge in trading volume on its "Intent layer." The claim? Nearly $4 billion in on-chain swaps, supposedly a sign of fundamental strength. As a former hedge fund data analyst, I'm trained to look past the hype and see what the numbers actually say. And what they say in this case is… complicated.
The initial reports are undeniably eye-catching. A 38% jump in price, fueled by this Intent layer activity—it's the kind of thing that triggers FOMO, or fear of missing out, in less discerning investors. AI Blockchain Project Near Protocol Surges 38% Friday, but Not for the Reason You May Think But let's break this down. The Intent layer, for those not steeped in crypto jargon, is a transaction system designed to automate on-chain swaps across different blockchains. The idea is to make things seamless, letting users trade without getting bogged down in the technical details.
The core argument is that this increased trading volume signals real adoption and usage of the Near Protocol. Tem, a crypto analyst on X, highlighted the surge, noting a massive increase from $24 million in March to $1.7 billion in October. (That’s a 6,983% increase, if you are counting.) And that’s hard to ignore. But let's dig a little deeper into that seemingly impressive number.
Here's where the narrative starts to fray. While the total trading volume on the Intent layer is approaching $4 billion, the actual demand for NEAR tokens themselves seems limited. This is because the Intent layer offers "gas abstraction," meaning fees can be paid in stablecoins like USDT and USDC. In other words, people are using the infrastructure of Near Protocol, but not necessarily using—or needing—the NEAR token itself.
This is a crucial distinction. It's like building a highway and then measuring its success by the number of cars that drive on it, without checking if they stopped to buy gas at your gas station. Sure, the highway is busy, but are you making money?
And this is the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling. The high trading volume should, theoretically, translate to increased demand for NEAR, driving up its price. But the price action hasn’t been as explosive as one might expect. The VentureBurn analysis points to a trading range between $1.80 and $3.20 over the past six months. That’s hardly a moonshot.
This raises a fundamental question: What are we really measuring with this Intent layer volume? Is it genuine organic demand for the Near Protocol, or is it simply a reflection of sophisticated traders exploiting arbitrage opportunities across different chains? The data doesn’t tell us. It is simply impossible to know.
Furthermore, what about the "active users" metric, which has supposedly skyrocketed to 42.3 million? It's a massive number, no doubt, but how is "active user" defined? Is it someone making a single transaction, or someone actively engaged in the NEAR ecosystem? Without a clear definition, the number is, frankly, meaningless. (And this is a common problem in crypto metrics—vague definitions inflate numbers).
Even the claimed transaction speed of 47.1 TPS (transactions per second) is suspect. The source, Token Terminal, ranks NEAR among the top 10 blockchains by TPS. But how is TPS measured? Is it sustained throughput under real-world conditions, or a theoretical maximum achieved in a lab? Again, the devil is in the details, and those details are often conveniently absent.
Ultimately, the key metric is revenue. The reports highlight that total accumulated fees have reached $22.7 million, with October 2025 hitting a single-month high of $3.641 million. While this sounds impressive, let's put it in perspective. $3.641 million in revenue for a project with a $3 billion market cap? That translates to a price-to-sales ratio of over 800. For comparison, even high-growth tech companies rarely exceed a P/S ratio of 20.
The NEAR Protocol Price Prediction 2025 anticipates that NEAR may continue to suffer from the current downturn for a short while before staging a strong comeback, potentially as powerful as 40%-50%. But I remain unconvinced.
The question isn't whether Near Protocol has potential—it clearly does. The question is whether that potential is already baked into the current price. And, based on my analysis, the answer is a resounding yes. The Intent layer volume is a mirage, a vanity metric that masks the underlying weakness in NEAR token demand.
The NEAR Protocol’s potential is overstated. The numbers have been analyzed, and the conclusion is that the surge in trading volume on its Intent layer is not a reliable indicator of NEAR’s value.
ONON Stock: Unpacking the Future Potential
2025-11-13