Who understands the family! The biggest DeFi event at the beginning of 2026 is undoubtedly the 'century marriage' between Uniswap and OKX X Layer. The official announcement for deployment will be made on January 16. On one side is the top DeFi DEX, and on the other side is the ecological giant with 50 million users, making it a 'bomb combination.' X Layer has been eagerly waiting for flagship applications, and the operation smoothness is off the charts; Uniswap also hopes to unlock a massive new user base. Logically, this should be a mutual journey to glory, but instead, the price of $UNI slapped the market in the face, still struggling to rebound properly. This confusing operation— is the market blind, or does Uniswap have a secret that cannot be revealed?
Don't rush to criticize the main players for the sell-off; let's look beyond the surface to understand the essence. This matter is not as simple as 'good news leads to bad outcomes.' The core issue lies in UNI's own 'genetic defects' and governance chaos. The most pressing problem is the fatal gap in the value capture mechanism. As Uniswap's governance token, UNI is still stuck in the 'voting tool' stage, without any trading fee dividends or ecological revenue feedback. In simple terms, it means 'the protocol earns abundantly while token holders can only hope for scraps.' In contrast, competitors have long mastered the concept of 'holding tokens to enjoy benefits.' Even if Unichain can turn Gas fees into revenue, and even if X Layer brings in millions of users, these profits have nothing to do with UNI holders. At most, they provide some data highlights for the protocol, and the token price naturally lacks upward momentum.
Even more outrageous is the Uniswap foundation's 'high salary and laziness' spectacle, which has directly driven community confidence to rock bottom. Last year's financial data showed that nearly 38% of the foundation's total expenses were spent on employee salaries. The salaries of three executives equaled the entire expenditure of the Optimism team, while the actual ecological subsidies issued were merely a fraction of what the latter received. On one side, TVL has shrunk by 60% from its peak, and protocol fees have plummeted by 63%. On the other side, executives enjoy a tranquil life with a $700,000 annual salary. Former core contributors to the DAO were so frustrated that they resigned, sarcastically labeling it 'salary hell.' With such a ridiculous misallocation of resources, who would still dare to have expectations for UNI? Funds must be used efficiently to rise; wasting them on high salaries will only lead to downfall. This is a principle that even newcomers to the space understand, yet the foundation insists on going against it.
Furthermore, although X Layer's benefits are substantial, it is challenging to break the 'liquidity fragmentation' dilemma in the short term. The 50 million users in the OKX ecosystem may sound impressive, but most are CEX users. To convert them into on-chain users of Uniswap, they must overcome barriers such as hard wallet operations and asset bridging. Moreover, the current number of active addresses on the X Layer has just surpassed 12 million. While there are over 300 ecological DApps, the scenarios that can truly retain liquidity are limited. It will not be easy for Uniswap to rapidly boost trading volume and TVL through this collaboration. More crucially, UNI is no longer the sole player in DeFi. Competitors are diverting liquidity with more flexible incentive mechanisms. Uniswap cannot rely solely on its 'top-tier reputation' and 'multi-chain deployment' to retain profit-seeking funds.
Some may ask: Does this layout serve no purpose at all? Not exactly. In the long run, Uniswap's binding with X Layer is akin to obtaining an 'entry ticket' to the OKX ecosystem. With the iterative development of X Layer's ZK technology and the penetration of the USDG stablecoin ecosystem, subsequent traffic conversion and trading depth are expected to gradually improve. However, the premise for all of this is that UNI must resolve the core bug of 'value capture.' It must either initiate fee-sharing through a DAO proposal or closely bind UNI's income with Unichain's; otherwise, no matter how impressive the ecological collaborations are, they will only serve to benefit others.
To be frank, UNI's current struggles fundamentally stem from the contradiction between 'high-quality protocols' and 'poor token models.' It resembles a wealthy second-generation individual who, despite holding top resources, chooses to remain idle in a critical field. Moving forward, two signals should be closely monitored: first, whether the foundation will rectify its salary structure and improve fund utilization efficiency; second, whether the DAO will restart proposals related to value capture.
I have clarified UNI's core contradictions and observation points. For those looking to catch the bottom opportunities for UNI and track the dynamics of the X Layer ecosystem, hurry up and give me a follow@链上帝王 #加密市场观察 $ETH
