Messari's 2026 crypto theory reveals a shift from speculation to system-level integration, highlighting L1 valuation risk, AI agents, DePIN revenue, and equity perpetual contracts.
Article by: CoinRank
Article compiled and edited by: BitpushNews
Every year, countless outlooks and predictions emerge in the cryptocurrency market, most of which are fleeting. But a few reports truly guide the direction of capital, talent, and attention—Messari's annual "Crypto Themes" is one of them.
For many institutions, this report transcends ordinary forecasts and resembles an industry strategic memo. It not only attempts to outline market direction but also implicitly defines the key narrative of the next cycle. Historically, the sectors included in this report have often become the focus of entrepreneurship and investment in the following year.
The 2026 report unfolds around a clear central theme: the crypto world is shifting from pure speculation to systemic integration and value creation. In the first of this three-part series, I will outline the report's core arguments and incorporate observations and inquiries from the front lines of the market—going beyond the research itself to attempt to recreate the perspectives and choices of real participants.
Between 2024 and 2025, a wave of venture capital-backed Layer 1 blockchain projects emerged, often boasting valuations of tens of billions of dollars after full dilution. Projects like Monad, Berachain, and Sei appeared with familiar promises: higher TPS, stronger teams, and superior execution environments. The implicit assumption was that each new L1 blockchain had the potential to become "the next Ethereum."
Messari believes that this assumption has now been refuted by real data.
Early valuation logic viewed L1 tokens as potential currencies. If a chain could become a settlement layer with sufficient activity, then a huge currency premium seemed justified. However, in practice, most such networks eventually became highly inflated systems with negligible revenue. Token issuance far exceeded on-chain transaction fee revenue, leading to structural losses for many L1 tokens.
At the same time, the market environment has changed. Ethereum's Layer 2 ecosystem has matured significantly, while Solana has solidified its dominance in the high-performance consumer cryptocurrency space. In this context, it's difficult for new chains to attract loyal long-term token holders. Instead, they attract airdrop hunters and short-term liquidity tourists.
Messari's conclusion is straightforward: apart from BTC and a few truly compelling ecosystems (Solana and Base are the most frequently mentioned examples), most L1 valuations have completely deviated from fundamentals.
Looking ahead to 2026, the report anticipates the market will actively strip away the so-called "currency premium" of L1 tokens. Simply touting high throughput is insufficient to justify billions of dollars in FDV (Final Value). At a minimum, a chain's daily gas fee revenue should exceed the amount distributed through inflationary rewards. Otherwise, the consequences will be dire.
In extreme cases, some newly launched parallel EVM chains are trading at prices as high as $5 billion to $10 billion, while daily gas revenue is less than $10,000. At this rate, it would take thousands of years for transaction fee revenue to offset token issuance costs. This is not a temporary mismatch, but a structural problem.
While Messari's optimism about Solana may be influenced by its own holdings, the report reveals a more general revelation: a viable L1 public chain must build genuine "ecosystem appeal" or establish a substantial monopolistic advantage at key application layers. In this new phase of competition, speed itself is no longer the decisive factor.
One area highlighted in the report that I think deserves more detailed study is chain abstraction.
The goal of blockchain abstraction is theoretically simple, but its practical impact is far-reaching. Users don't need to know which chain they are using. With just a wallet and a balance denominated in stablecoins, users can initiate operations, and the system will automatically handle all aspects in the background, including bridging, gas conversion, routing, and signing.
If this vision becomes a reality, blockchain will no longer be directly faced by consumers, but will instead take a backseat and become an "invisible" infrastructure supporting the digital ecosystem.
Projects such as Near and Berachain are exploring this possibility from different paths. Near positions itself as a distributed computing platform centered on AI, while Berachain enhances capital stickiness through a "liquidity consensus" mechanism, essentially locking liquidity within its ecosystem.
From an investment perspective, this redefines the value assessment dimension of Layer 1 blockchains. Faster transaction processing speeds alone are no longer sufficient to build barriers to entry; those blockchains with truly lasting influence are those that can dominate user access, guide liquidity flow, or control application distribution . In the "post-abstraction" era, power no longer stems from execution efficiency, but from the ability to coordinate and control .
Perhaps the most controversial claim in the Messari report is that by 2026, most on-chain activity will no longer be driven by humans.
Conversely, AI agents will dominate transaction volume.
The logic is simple. Traditional banking systems cannot open accounts for autonomous software agents. However, AI systems increasingly require uninterrupted 24/7 access to payments, hedging tools, and yield optimization features. Crypto-native assets, especially stablecoins, are perfectly suited to this role.
If AI agents achieve economic autonomy, they will be able to pay each other, rebalance portfolios, and seek optimal execution paths without human intervention. Messari estimates that up to 80% of on-chain transactions could be generated by machines in the next cycle.
This shift has profound implications. The importance of user interfaces, dashboards, and retail-friendly design has decreased. APIs, smart contract composability, and machine-readable financial primitives have become the real battleground.
The virtual protocols Virtuals and Wayfinder represent early attempts to build the infrastructure for this world. Virtuals positions itself as a platform where AI agents can have autonomous identities and control over their funds. Wayfinder, on the other hand, focuses on handling complex on-chain operations on behalf of agents.
However, the real opportunities may lie at a more fundamental level. Rather than chasing the abstract narrative of "AI tokens," Messari actually directs our attention to the "consumables" necessary for AI to truly function —such as gas optimization layers, proxy authentication systems, and the underlying infrastructure that AI agents must rely on.
Paying for these features is less about chasing a narrative and more about paying for the value of the tool itself.
Another important trend is the rise of equity perpetual contracts.
With the success of protocols like Hyperliquid, DeFi is expanding beyond crypto-native assets into the realm of global equity price exposure. Equity perpetual contracts are synthetic derivatives whose prices are pegged to oracles and funding rates, rather than actual ownership.
This distinction is crucial. Trading Nvidia stock options involves no dividends or shareholder equity. It is purely a bet on price movement, realized through a financing interest rate mechanism. If the underlying stock rises, the short seller gains the profits of the long position; if it falls, the opposite occurs.
Messari compared this model to tokenized stock. While tokenized stock theoretically represents ownership, it suffers from issues such as insufficient liquidity, opaque custody, and platform risks. Currently, equity incentive models appear to be more scalable.
Messari believes that if the Hyperliquid market truly expands in 2026, its surrounding ecosystem could experience exponential growth. Of course, other competitive models also exist. Aster, often considered closely integrated with the Binance ecosystem, uses cross-chain liquidity aggregation rather than building a vertically integrated L1 service.
Hyperliquid, by owning the entire blockchain technology stack, prioritizes on-chain transparency and performance. Aster, on the other hand, prioritizes capital efficiency and convenience, allowing users to deploy leverage across chains with minimal friction. In a bull market, the latter's appeal is obvious. However, its architectural complexity also introduces higher systemic risks.
Finally, Messari points out that DePIN is the only industry it expects to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in verifiable revenue by 2026.
This argument is not without controversy. DePIN's concept was once popular, but mostly failed because unilateral supply growth lacked genuine demand. Many early projects encouraged hardware deployment but ignored the question of who would pay for the service.
The report argues that this landscape is changing. The infrastructure is in place. What follows is demand—driven primarily by a shortage of AI computing power.
Similar projects like io.net focus on GPU aggregation rather than speculative data collection. A key metric is external revenue: does the token buyback funding come from genuine enterprise contracts, or simply from new participants purchasing equipment?
Messari points out that Aethir is an example.
The company achieved over $160 million in annual recurring revenue in the third quarter, with growth primarily driven by users who cannot afford high-end hardware but urgently need AI computing resources. Whether this momentum can be sustained remains to be seen, but its business model is gradually becoming clearer.
For DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network), its long-term viability is determined not by network size, but by the quality and sustainability of its revenue .
While Messari's report is detailed, its perspective is essentially rooted in the primary market. For most retail investors, fundamental analysis often fails to translate directly into price momentum—liquidity and market narrative remain the dominant forces driving short-term returns.
User growth does not directly equate to returns; the real key lies in the flow of marginal funds.
This tension—between "what should matter" and "how the market actually works"—will precisely define the direction of the next cycle. And the greatest value of reports like Messari's may lie not in providing answers, but in offering us a mental map worthy of inquiry, verification, and even challenge.
To be continued...
