Crypto Index FundMarket Brief

Name: Trade Leopard weekly crypto market brief
Creator: Trade Leopard

Every Sunday this page screens the hundred largest crypto assets and rates whatever survives on seven measures: what it earns, how much of that reaches holders, whether its supply is growing, how widely it was distributed, whether anyone is still building it, whether it is used for anything, and what people are saying. The thirty that come out best are listed below. Every threshold is published, and every score opens to show the numbers it came from.

2026-W32Week ending 9 August 2026 · 70 screened, 29 rated

This week

Bitcoin opened the week near $62,600 and closed it around $65,100, with Ethereum tracking the same shape from roughly $1,848 to $1,929. The move came late and came from outside crypto: a July jobs report showing 23,000 positions lost against a 4.1% unemployment rate. Prices spent the first half of the week drifting on unresolved geopolitical tension and recovered on the macro print, which is the pattern the measured categories on this page are deliberately blind to.

The clearest thing in this week's numbers is how little of the market earns anything. Of 70 assets screened, six collect fees that reach nobody — Bitcoin's users paid $6.0m over thirty days and Monero's, Dogecoin's, Hedera's, Polkadot's and Cosmos's paid their own share, and in every case it goes to miners, validators or node operators rather than to the protocol or its holders. Tron is the outlier in the other direction, converting $27.1m of stablecoin settlement into protocol revenue, the largest figure on the page. Hyperliquid earned more still at $32.7m, and published a quarterly report on 6 August showing tokenised real-world assets at 32.2% of its trading volume, up from 1.8% three quarters earlier.

Aave illustrates why cash flow and value accrual are separate columns. It earns well — $3.8m of revenue in thirty days on a $1.4bn market cap, one of the better yields here — and none of it reaches token holders, so it scores 6.4 on profit and 0.0 on accrual. Uniswap and Ethereum sit at the opposite end, passing everything they collect through to holders.

Six assets were withheld from the tokenomics score this week because their circulating supply fell by more than 15% over twelve months, which is far more likely to be an exchange or index reclassifying what it counts as circulating than an actual burn. OKB read as -65%. Rather than hand those a top score for a data artifact, the category is left blank and the row says so. Render carries an assessed builder score rather than a counted one: its public repositories are a governance archive and a Cinema4D plugin, not the network software, so commits there would measure proposal writing rather than development.

	Project
19	LINKChainlink	68	$4.6M	Fair75%	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Fair	Excellent
2	ETHEthereum	67	$1.9M	Excellent∞	Excellent	Good	Excellent	Good	Excellent
7	SOLSolana	67	$1.6M	Weak∞	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Good	Excellent
87	RENDERRender	64	$158K	Good81%	Excellent	Fair^*	Good	Fair	Excellent
37	UNIUniswap	63	$5.0M	Fair62%	Good	Fair	Good	Fair	Excellent
8	TRXTRON	62	$27.1M	Good∞	Excellent	Weak	Excellent	Fair	Excellent
1	BTCBitcoin	6093%	$0$6.0M in fees	Excellent96%	Excellent	Good	Excellent	Good	—
60	ICPInternet Computer	59	$78K	Fair∞	Excellent	Good	Fair	Weak	Excellent
52	AAVEAave	55	$3.8M	Excellent96%	Excellent	Poor	Good	Fair	Poor
10	HYPEHyperliquid	5385%	$32.7M	—	Weak	Poor	Good	Excellent	Excellent
32	AVAXAvalanche	53	$61K	Fair60%	Excellent	Good	Fair	Fair	Excellent
40	NEARNEAR Protocol	52	$30K	Fair∞	Excellent	Good	Fair	Fair	Excellent
16	XMRMonero	5293%	$0$85K in fees	Excellent∞	Excellent	Good	Good	Weak	—
29	HBARHedera	5093%	$0$5K in fees	Good88%	Excellent	Excellent	Fair	Fair	—
6	XRPXRP	4893%	$9K	Weak63%	Good	Excellent	Good	Fair	—
77	POLPOL (ex-MATIC)	4893%	$2.3M	Poor∞	Excellent	Weak	Good	Weak	—
79	ALGOAlgorand	48	$344	Good90%	Excellent	Fair	Weak	Fair	Excellent
54	DOTPolkadot	4693%	$0$11 in fees	Fair81%	Excellent	Excellent	Weak	Weak	—
99	APTAptos	46	$96K	Poor40%	Good	Good	Fair	Weak	Excellent
4	BNBBNB	45	$1.1M	Good67%	Excellent	Poor	Good	Fair	Excellent
20	XLMStellar	4593%	$35K	Weak∞	Good	Good	Good	Fair	—
89	JUPJupiter	43	$3.8M	Poor33%	Fair	Poor	Fair	Fair	Fair
11	DOGEDogecoin	4393%	$0$19K in fees	Excellent∞	Excellent	Weak	Weak	Good	—
31	SUISui	43	$25K	Poor41%	Fair	Good	Fair	Fair	Excellent
17	ADACardano	4293%	$7K	Good83%	Excellent	Fair	Fair	Fair	—
91	FILFilecoin	42	$261K	Poor∞	Fair	Weak	Fair	Weak	Excellent
97	ARBArbitrum	3793%	$337K	Weak66%	Good	Poor	Fair	Fair	—
26	GRAMGram (prev. Toncoin)	37	$41K	Weak∞	Fair	Weak	Fair	Weak	Excellent
82	ATOMCosmos Hub	3093%	$0$2K in fees	Poor∞	Excellent	Fair	Weak	Weak	—

Click a row for the numbers behind its scores, a column heading to sort by it, or the i beside a heading for what that column measures. Profit is protocol revenue over the last 30 days, before costs.

What this is and is not

These are ratings of measurable properties, not recommendations, and a high score is not a reason to buy anything. Several of the measures are backward-looking: revenue and commit activity describe the last thirty days, not the next thirty. Two of the seven — real usage and sentiment — involve judgement rather than arithmetic, and are marked as such in each row.

Distribution is scored from allocation disclosed at launch rather than from a holder snapshot, because unlabelled holder lists are topped by exchange and contract addresses. Where that research has not been done the row says so and the score falls back to float alone.

Not financial advice. Trade Leopard is not a licensed adviser and nothing on this page accounts for your circumstances. Crypto assets are volatile and you can lose money.