The direct answer is: the supplied brief does not prove that users pay enough to keep these networks running. It shows that market value remains material despite very large drawdowns, and it highlights AVAX and ICP as affected assets. For a reader comparing these tokens, the key decision is to separate price recovery hopes from evidence of sustainable network demand.
| Primary source | CryptoSlate |
|---|---|
| Reported at | 2026-07-25T11:35:49.000Z |
| Topic | Analysis |
| Evidence limit | Reported facts are separated from interpretation; current prices and platform terms require independent verification. |
Evaluate OKX for your use case
Check regional eligibility, current fees and product availability on the official destination.
Review OKXWhat The Report Actually Establishes
The brief establishes a narrow but important fact pattern: ten once-prominent crypto networks still carry a combined market value of $12.06 billion while trading an average of 97.13% below their all-time highs. It also says a Taurex report placed recovery needs across the group from roughly 21.5x for Avalanche to roughly 323x for Internet Computer.
That evidence supports one conclusion: the market has not priced these networks at zero, but it has repriced them sharply from peak expectations. It does not, by itself, establish whether the underlying networks produce enough user-paid demand to support long-term operation.
Why The Recovery Math Matters
Large percentage declines change the burden of proof. A token that needs many multiples to revisit its prior high cannot rely on a small rebound narrative. It needs either much stronger demand, a major change in market perception, or both.
The brief names Avalanche as the largest of the ten at $2.91 billion and says its recovery need is roughly 21.5x. It also says Internet Computer sits at the far end of the recovery range at roughly 323x. Those figures frame the scale of the problem, not a forecast.
The User-Payment Question
The most important operating question is whether users pay enough to the network, directly or indirectly, to justify continued infrastructure, security, and development. The supplied brief asks that question but does not provide fee revenue, user activity, cost, or treasury data to answer it.
That evidence gap matters. A network can retain market capitalization because investors expect future recovery, because liquidity remains, or because holders are slow to abandon it. None of those conditions proves that current users are economically supporting the network.
How To Evaluate AVAX And ICP From This Brief
For AVAX, the brief provides two decision-relevant anchors: it is the largest named asset in the group at $2.91 billion, and its cited recovery need is roughly 21.5x. That makes it less extreme than the far end of the range, but it still faces a large recovery hurdle from the data supplied.
For ICP, the brief provides a different anchor: roughly 323x is cited as the largest recovery need in the described range. That does not automatically make ICP worse as technology or as a network, but it does mean the price-recovery burden described in the brief is much heavier.
Practical Checks Before Acting
A practical review should start with data that the brief does not supply: current user fees, transaction activity, active applications, incentive programs, validator or infrastructure costs, treasury runway, and whether usage persists when token incentives fade. Without those checks, the article's question remains open.
Readers should also distinguish between a token being tradable and a network being economically healthy. Trading access can help with execution and comparison, but it does not replace research into demand, liquidity, volatility, custody, and the specific risks of each asset.
Risk And OKX Context
This is not investment advice. The supplied event is an analysis item with a B rating and a B source rating, and the evidence is limited to the brief. It does not claim that AVAX, ICP, or any other altcoin will recover, fail, outperform, or become sustainably profitable.
For readers already comparing venues, OKX can be part of the workflow for checking listed markets, liquidity, order types, and risk controls. The provided campaign link is OKX official destination with code 11350287, but exchange access should come after independent asset research, not before it.
Evaluate OKX for your use case
Check regional eligibility, current fees and product availability on the official destination.
Review OKXAffiliate link · Availability varies by region · No guaranteed outcomeQuestions readers ask
Does the brief prove that these ten altcoins are undervalued?
No. The brief says they still have a combined market value of $12.06 billion after an average 97.13% decline from all-time highs. That shows remaining market value, not undervaluation.
Does a 97.13% average drawdown mean the networks are dead?
No. A large drawdown shows severe repricing from prior peaks, but the brief does not provide enough evidence to conclude whether the networks are dead, recovering, or sustainably used.
Why are AVAX and ICP highlighted?
The supplied brief lists AVAX and ICP as affected assets. It also names Avalanche as the largest of the ten at $2.91 billion and places Internet Computer at the far end of the cited recovery range.
What is the most important missing data?
The most important missing data is user-paid economic activity: fees, usage, retention, incentive dependence, and operating costs. Without that, market capitalization and drawdown figures cannot answer sustainability.
Should traders treat recovery multiples as price targets?
No. The recovery multiples described in the brief show how far prices would need to move to revisit prior highs. They are not forecasts, recommendations, or guarantees.