I find that many people talk about DUSK in a way that is very much like discussing short-term trading, with today's rise and tomorrow's fall, focusing all on the candlestick chart. But if you look at DUSK as a foundational resource for a compliant financial network, you will care more about two things. First, whether it is being used. Second, whether its supply and demand can form a structure that can sustain itself without relying on slogans.
Let's start with supply, as it is the part that is often overlooked but can most determine long-term experience. According to public information, the maximum supply of DUSK is 1 billion pieces, which can be understood structurally as early issuance plus long-term release, with a release span of up to 36 years. My first impression of this design is that it is not doing a sprint project, but more like long-term network operation. The number 36 years is very long, meaning that inflation is not something that ends in one or two years, but it also means that the release pace is relatively smooth, making it easier for the market to establish expectations. For holders, the most critical question is not whether there is inflation, but whether inflation can be absorbed by demand.
Looking again at circulation and market capitalization. In the public market of January 2026, the circulation of DUSK is around 500 million pieces, and the market capitalization fluctuates around 100 million USD. The trading volume is extraordinarily high on certain days, reaching tens of millions of dollars or even higher. There was a significant price increase in mid-January, and some media reported a substantial daily increase, while some analyses mentioned a very large cumulative increase over the past 30 days. The digital metrics may vary depending on the platform, but one fact is clear: the attention on DUSK has returned, and part of this wave of attention comes from the rotation of privacy narratives, while another part comes from its own actions in the direction of institutional compliance.
However, attention does not equal long-term value. Whether attention can settle depends on whether DUSK's demand relies solely on buying and selling or can be supported by usage. Here, I suggest using a more down-to-earth breakdown, dividing demand into three types, which will give you a clearer view.
The first type of demand is the hard demand for network usage. When you transfer, call contracts, issue assets, and settle, it will always consume network resources. As long as the Dusk Foundation's on-chain compliance finance really gets underway, the demand for transaction fees will grow accordingly. This demand does not rely on sentiment but on business volume. The more stable the business volume, the more stable the demand.
The second type of demand is security demand, which is staking. For the underlying network, staking is essentially a security budget. If someone is willing to lock up DUSK to participate in network security, the circulation speed decreases, the network becomes more stable, and institutions are more willing to use it. You can think of it as the security credit of the network. If the Dusk Foundation delves deeper into the compliance assets on-chain, and institutions pay more attention to security and stability, the attractiveness of staking will increase. This will affect the supply and demand structure of DUSK and even influence its volatility.@Dusk $DUSK
The third type of demand is access and liquidity demand. Simply put, it is whether you can easily buy, sell, move across chains, and use it in different ecosystems. The recent efforts by the Dusk Foundation in this area are quite crucial, and each effort is directly related to the availability of the DUSK token.
In October 2025, DUSK will go live on Binance US. For many people, this just means one more exchange, but I value more the improvement in its accessibility in the U.S. market. Especially for participants in a compliant environment, this type of entry will reduce much friction. It does not guarantee prices, but it can improve liquidity depth and price discovery efficiency. For a network that aims to create institutional compliant assets, liquidity is not a luxury; it is a necessity.
The launch of the mainnet and the two-way bridge to BSC in May 2025 is also crucial. Many people who previously held DUSK may have it in external network forms, but there will be thresholds to participate in the mainnet ecosystem. The two-way bridge connects the native DUSK on the mainnet with the token forms on BSC and clearly states that the bridge will charge 1 DUSK as a fee. This fee may seem like a small cost in the short term, but in the long run, it will form a type of usage consumption, especially as the frequency of cross-ecosystem usage increases, this type of consumption will gradually become a stable source of demand. More importantly, the two-way bridge reduces the migration costs for users and developers, making it easier for DUSK to enter more application scenarios.@Dusk $DUSK
Then there are more mainstream major actions. The Dusk Foundation and NPEX are adopting Chainlink's interoperability and data standards, introducing this set of end-to-end components, including CCIP, Data Streams, and DataLink, into the compliance asset issuance and settlement framework. Here, I want to put it more directly and explain what it means for the DUSK token.
If this link works well, the demand for DUSK will grow simultaneously in three areas. First, the issuance and trading of on-chain compliant assets will bring more consumption of network resources. Second, cross-chain settlements will bring more cross-ecosystem usage and bridging demand. Third, the entry of institutions will raise the requirements for network security, thereby increasing staking demand. The overlap of these three demands may allow DUSK to transform from a trading subject into a repeatedly used basic resource.
You might ask, where exactly are we now? My feeling is that the Dusk Foundation is transitioning from availability to scalability. The two-way bridge and exchange entry solve the issue of access, while interoperability and data standards address the institutional link issue. They all belong to infrastructure, not something that can be completed today and produce a blockbuster tomorrow. It is more like building a compliant on-chain financial system that institutions can also directly access.
Of course, reality won't just follow the script. There are several risk points that I think need to be put on the table.
The first risk is the misalignment of progress and market expectations. Market sentiment can move very quickly, but the landing pace of compliant finance is generally very slow. If you only measure the project with short-term market conditions, you will feel very uncomfortable. The recent rise of DUSK and the increase in trading volume may raise many people's expectations very high, but the landing of institutional links is more about delivery stability and compliance details, which belongs to slow work.
The second risk is the lack of transparency in data and adoption metrics. For investors, the most needed are sustainable on-chain metrics, such as transaction frequency related to compliant assets, settlement amounts, active accounts, and the intensity of cross-chain settlement usage. If these metrics do not grow in the long term, it will be difficult for DUSK's demand to shift from transaction-driven to usage-driven.
The third risk is the acceleration of competition in the field. RWA and compliance directions are currently too crowded, with many projects telling institutional stories. The Dusk Foundation's differentiation lies in binding privacy and compliance while leaning towards a standardized approach in interoperability and data standards. However, differentiation ultimately relies on adopting data to prove itself; otherwise, it is just positioning.
Finally, I want to give a more down-to-earth conclusion. If you want to take DUSK as a short-term subject, then just focus on trading volume and hotspots. But if you want to take DUSK as a long-term target, then you should focus on whether its demand structure has changed. Are more people buying and using DUSK to participate in on-chain compliant finance? Are more people staking DUSK for network security? Is there more cross-chain settlement and bridging making DUSK frequently scheduled in different ecosystems? If these three directions can continue to strengthen, DUSK will be more like an infrastructure asset; volatility will still exist, but the pricing anchor will be more solid.
