The important data that almost nobody mentions about $INJ.
While most only look at the price, few stop to consider what truly supports the value of the token: its technical architecture and economic model.
🔹 Fixed maximum supply: 100 million INJ.
Unlike other projects that modify their issuance over time, Injective maintains a rigid limit that acts as a long-term scarcity anchor.
🔹 Dual tokenomics (inflation + deflation):
Injective combines two opposing, yet well-designed forces:
Controlled inflation: used for staking rewards and to maintain the security of the Proof-of-Stake network.
Progressive deflation: driven by a continuous burn mechanism directly tied to the actual usage of its ecosystem.
🔹 Unique burn mechanism in the sector:
Every week, 60% of the fees generated by the dApps built on Injective accumulate in a common “basket.”
That basket is auctioned, and the INJ used in the bidding is permanently burned.
This means that the burn does not depend on arbitrary decisions: it depends on the growth of the ecosystem.
🔹 Real impact, not theory:
Millions of tokens have already been removed from the total supply, and the burn rate increases as more protocols, exchanges, and applications use the chain.
In a system with a limited supply, each token burned increases scarcity pressure.
🔹 The point that many overlook:
Injective does not just bet on the narrative: it built a self-sustaining economic model that reinforces the value of the token as its adoption grows.
A design meant to withstand market cycles, not just temporary trends.
Is the market underestimating the model of @Injective ?
