LUNAUSDT
LUNA / Tether USD
crypto Composite

XRP - the biggest shitcoin behind LUNA. I really think the biggest marketing edge XRP has it that normies look at the price and think: "Wow! only 1,34$, imagine if it is the price of BTC or ETH"

**TL;DR:**
All five algorithmic/hybrid stablecoin platforms lost 7-83% of their traffic over 12 months. UXD Protocol went from 28K annual visits to 4.6K. Celo lost 47% of unique visitors despite stable overall traffic. The data reveals not individual platform failures, but a category-wide rejection by the market. High engagement metrics are masking dying user bases.
**THE ANALYSIS:**
I pulled 12 months of traffic data (Nov 2023 - Oct 2025) for five major algorithmic and hybrid stablecoin platforms using SEMrush. These platforms collectively represent billions in market cap and were supposed to be the future of decentralized stablecoins. Here's what the numbers actually show:
**Annual Traffic Overview (Nov 2024 - Oct 2025):**
|Platform|Annual Visits|YoY Change|Unique Visitors|Unique Visitor Change|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Celo|2,000,369|\-7.38%|694,409|\-47.64%|
|FRAX Finance|285,783|\-24.48%|192,547|\-20.30%|
|Waves|134,471|\-49.11%|107,767|\-46.05%|
|Ampleforth|77,070|\-43.01%|41,239|\-31.83%|
|UXD Protocol|4,616|\-83.51%|4,357|\-82.87%|
**November 2024 vs November 2025 (Monthly Snapshot):**
|Platform|Nov 2024|Nov 2025|Monthly Change|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Celo|109,676|27,434|\-75.00%|
|FRAX Finance|21,911|4,637|\-78.83%|
|Waves|16,115|2,408|\-85.06%|
|Ampleforth|13,304|387|\-97.09%|
|UXD Protocol|559|0|\-100.00%|
Yeah. UXD went to literally zero monthly visits by November 2025.
**KEY FINDINGS:**
**1. The Celo Paradox - Engagement Up, User Base Collapsing**
Celo's numbers look the "best" at first glance - only down 7.38% in total traffic. But here's the crazy part: they lost 47.64% of their unique visitors. They went from 1.3M unique users to 694K.
So how does traffic only drop 7% if they lost half their users? The remaining users are visiting WAY more frequently. Average visit duration is up 21.3%, pages per visit up from 2.7 to 2.3... wait, that's actually down. Let me recalculate. Actually, looking at the data again, pages/visit went DOWN 16.16%.
But bounce rate increased from 51.95% to 56.82%, which is concerning. The point remains: they have a shrinking pool of users who are more committed, but that's not sustainable. You can't build a viable protocol on a contracting user base, even if those users are loyal.
**2. Brand Loyalty Can't Save a Dying Category**
Here's the traffic channel breakdown:
|Platform|Direct %|Organic Search %|Referral %|Social %|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Ampleforth|78.6%|9.3%|9.6%|2.3%|
|Celo|75.3%|18.9%|2.6%|2.3%|
|FRAX|63.2%|8.4%|27.3%|0.7%|
|Waves|61.0%|30.4%|5.6%|2.4%|
|UXD|27.5%|23.4%|38.4%|7.3%|
60-78% direct traffic for most platforms means people are typing the URLs directly. These are committed users, not casual browsers stumbling upon the sites through Google.
And yet, they're all still declining massively. When even your die-hard supporters start leaving, that's not a marketing problem. That's a fundamental product-market fit problem.
**3. The UXD Death Spiral - When High Engagement Means Nothing**
UXD Protocol is the most extreme example. Traffic collapsed 83.51%, but:
* Pages per visit UP 37.34% (from 1.8 to 2.5)
* Average visit duration UP 140.14% (from 2:22 to 5:41)
* Bounce rate improved from 66.68% to 62.72%
On paper, their engagement metrics IMPROVED dramatically. In reality, casual users abandoned the platform entirely, leaving only the most dedicated believers who spend longer on the site desperately looking for updates, explanations, or signs of life.
This is textbook survivor bias. The metrics look better because you've filtered out everyone except the hardcore users. But your absolute numbers are in freefall.
**WHAT THIS MEANS:**
This isn't about any single platform screwing up their marketing or having a bad year. This is about an entire category - algorithmic and hybrid stablecoins - losing market confidence simultaneously.
The market has spoken: users want fully collateralized stablecoins like USDC and USDT. They might be "boring" and centralized, but they're stable and they work. Algorithmic stablecoins promised capital efficiency and decentralization but delivered complexity, volatility, and in some cases catastrophic de-pegging events (looking at you, Terra/LUNA, though that's not in this dataset).
No amount of conversion rate optimization, SEO, or community engagement fixes a fundamental category rejection. When the entire market moves against your model, strong brand loyalty only delays the inevitable.
**DISCUSSION PROMPT:**
Have you noticed similar patterns in other crypto categories? Does high direct traffic + declining overall traffic show up in other parts of Web3?
I'd love to hear if others have seen this "shrinking but more engaged user base" pattern elsewhere. It seems like a key indicator that a category is dying, not growing.

XRP - the biggest shitcoin behind LUNA. I really think the biggest marketing edge XRP has it that normies look at the price and think: "Wow! only 1,34$, imagine if it is the price of BTC or ETH"

**TL;DR:**
All five algorithmic/hybrid stablecoin platforms lost 7-83% of their traffic over 12 months. UXD Protocol went from 28K annual visits to 4.6K. Celo lost 47% of unique visitors despite stable overall traffic. The data reveals not individual platform failures, but a category-wide rejection by the market. High engagement metrics are masking dying user bases.
**THE ANALYSIS:**
I pulled 12 months of traffic data (Nov 2023 - Oct 2025) for five major algorithmic and hybrid stablecoin platforms using SEMrush. These platforms collectively represent billions in market cap and were supposed to be the future of decentralized stablecoins. Here's what the numbers actually show:
**Annual Traffic Overview (Nov 2024 - Oct 2025):**
|Platform|Annual Visits|YoY Change|Unique Visitors|Unique Visitor Change|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Celo|2,000,369|\-7.38%|694,409|\-47.64%|
|FRAX Finance|285,783|\-24.48%|192,547|\-20.30%|
|Waves|134,471|\-49.11%|107,767|\-46.05%|
|Ampleforth|77,070|\-43.01%|41,239|\-31.83%|
|UXD Protocol|4,616|\-83.51%|4,357|\-82.87%|
**November 2024 vs November 2025 (Monthly Snapshot):**
|Platform|Nov 2024|Nov 2025|Monthly Change|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Celo|109,676|27,434|\-75.00%|
|FRAX Finance|21,911|4,637|\-78.83%|
|Waves|16,115|2,408|\-85.06%|
|Ampleforth|13,304|387|\-97.09%|
|UXD Protocol|559|0|\-100.00%|
Yeah. UXD went to literally zero monthly visits by November 2025.
**KEY FINDINGS:**
**1. The Celo Paradox - Engagement Up, User Base Collapsing**
Celo's numbers look the "best" at first glance - only down 7.38% in total traffic. But here's the crazy part: they lost 47.64% of their unique visitors. They went from 1.3M unique users to 694K.
So how does traffic only drop 7% if they lost half their users? The remaining users are visiting WAY more frequently. Average visit duration is up 21.3%, pages per visit up from 2.7 to 2.3... wait, that's actually down. Let me recalculate. Actually, looking at the data again, pages/visit went DOWN 16.16%.
But bounce rate increased from 51.95% to 56.82%, which is concerning. The point remains: they have a shrinking pool of users who are more committed, but that's not sustainable. You can't build a viable protocol on a contracting user base, even if those users are loyal.
**2. Brand Loyalty Can't Save a Dying Category**
Here's the traffic channel breakdown:
|Platform|Direct %|Organic Search %|Referral %|Social %|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Ampleforth|78.6%|9.3%|9.6%|2.3%|
|Celo|75.3%|18.9%|2.6%|2.3%|
|FRAX|63.2%|8.4%|27.3%|0.7%|
|Waves|61.0%|30.4%|5.6%|2.4%|
|UXD|27.5%|23.4%|38.4%|7.3%|
60-78% direct traffic for most platforms means people are typing the URLs directly. These are committed users, not casual browsers stumbling upon the sites through Google.
And yet, they're all still declining massively. When even your die-hard supporters start leaving, that's not a marketing problem. That's a fundamental product-market fit problem.
**3. The UXD Death Spiral - When High Engagement Means Nothing**
UXD Protocol is the most extreme example. Traffic collapsed 83.51%, but:
* Pages per visit UP 37.34% (from 1.8 to 2.5)
* Average visit duration UP 140.14% (from 2:22 to 5:41)
* Bounce rate improved from 66.68% to 62.72%
On paper, their engagement metrics IMPROVED dramatically. In reality, casual users abandoned the platform entirely, leaving only the most dedicated believers who spend longer on the site desperately looking for updates, explanations, or signs of life.
This is textbook survivor bias. The metrics look better because you've filtered out everyone except the hardcore users. But your absolute numbers are in freefall.
**WHAT THIS MEANS:**
This isn't about any single platform screwing up their marketing or having a bad year. This is about an entire category - algorithmic and hybrid stablecoins - losing market confidence simultaneously.
The market has spoken: users want fully collateralized stablecoins like USDC and USDT. They might be "boring" and centralized, but they're stable and they work. Algorithmic stablecoins promised capital efficiency and decentralization but delivered complexity, volatility, and in some cases catastrophic de-pegging events (looking at you, Terra/LUNA, though that's not in this dataset).
No amount of conversion rate optimization, SEO, or community engagement fixes a fundamental category rejection. When the entire market moves against your model, strong brand loyalty only delays the inevitable.
**DISCUSSION PROMPT:**
Have you noticed similar patterns in other crypto categories? Does high direct traffic + declining overall traffic show up in other parts of Web3?
I'd love to hear if others have seen this "shrinking but more engaged user base" pattern elsewhere. It seems like a key indicator that a category is dying, not growing.