<div id="readability-page-1">L1s got absolutely pulverized this year. Prices collapsed hard, but was that really the end?An analysis shared on the 25th of December by Schizoxbt showed severe underperformance across major Layer-1 tokens. Large-cap status offered little protection as multiple networks posted steep yearly drawdowns.Ethereum ended the year down 15.3%, while Solana fell 35.9% over the same period. Avalanche and Sui declined 67.9% and 67.3%, respectively, reflecting sustained downside pressure.<div id="attachment_556443"><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/UPDATED-L1S-e1766660877513.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="701" height="411" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/UPDATED-L1S-e1766660877513.png"/>Source: X</div>TON recorded the sharpest drop, falling 73.8% during 2025. Only BNB and TRX posted gains, rising 18.2% and 9.8%, respectively, against broader weakness.The data reinforced a harsh lesson for investors. Market capitalization alone did not guarantee resilience during provider risk-off conditions.But price action told only part of the story.<h2>Revenue and Fees: Did network monetization really weaken?</h2>While token prices fell, on-chain revenue data painted a noticeably different picture. Token Terminal data showed activity remained heavily concentrated across a handful of Layer-1 networks.<div id="attachment_556441"><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/REVENUE.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="1325" height="656" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/REVENUE.png"/>Source: Token Terminal</div>Tron led all Layer-1s in revenue, generating approximately $3.5 B over the past 365 days. Ethereum followed with $305.3 M, while Solana generated roughly $206.8 M during the same period.Fee generation showed a similar pattern. Solana led in fees with $699.9 M, while Ethereum recorded $549.3 M in cumulative fees.<div id="attachment_556440"><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/FEES.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="1344" height="684" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/FEES.png"/>Source: Token Terminal</div>BNB Chain also remained economically relevant, producing $260.3 M in fees despite muted price action. The consistency of suggested usage did not collapse alongside token valuations.<h2>User activity: Were traders actually leaving Layer-1s?</h2>Monthly active address data further challenged the bearish narrative surrounding Layer-1s. User activity remained elevated on networks, dominating transaction throughput.BNB Chain led with 59.8 M active addresses, while Solana followed at 39.8 M. NEAR Protocol recorded 38.7 M, placing it firmly among high-usage networks.<div id="attachment_556439"><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/ACTIVE-ADDRESSES.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="1353" height="675" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/ACTIVE-ADDRESSES.png"/>Source: Token Terminal</div>Sei Network reported 10.6 M active addresses, rivaling Bitcoin at 10.3 M. Ethereum trailed slightly with 9.3 M, reflecting steady but slower growth.The numbers suggested participation persisted even as prices corrected.<h2>Fundamentals vs. price action</h2>The divergence between prices and fundamentals became the defining theme of 2025. Layer-1 tokens appeared to undergo repricing rather than structural deterioration.Losses deepened after many Layer-1s peaked near all-time highs in early October. The subsequent October sell-off accelerated downside momentum and amplified year-end drawdowns.However, capital and activity consolidated around networks generating real usage, fees, and revenue. Speculative premiums faded, while economically productive chains retained relevance.<hr/><h2>Final Thoughts</h2><ul><li>The 2025 drawdown highlighted how Layer-1 valuations corrected sharply after October’s all-time highs. </li><li>However, on-chain revenue and user data suggested the sector faced repricing pressure, not structural decline.</li></ul></div>

HSDT

In 2025, Layer-1 token prices collapsed significantly, with Ethereum down 15.3%, Solana 35.9%, Avalanche 67.9%, and Sui 67.3%. Despite this, fundamentals remained strong, with Tron leading in revenue at $3.5B and Solana in fees at $699.9M. User activity was high, with BNB Chain having 59.8M active addresses. The divergence between prices and fundamentals indicated a repricing rather than structural decline.

L1 prices collapsed in 2025, but fundamentals held firm – What changed?