The ceiling on "bigger token, bigger size"
The pitch for a token that funds a trading desk is a flywheel: more demand, more capital, more profit, more demand. It has a hard limit here, and the limit is close.
The measurement
Across the 60 pools that still had liquidity at the snapshot block:
| Median pool liquidity | $7,427 |
| Middle half | $5,086 to $212,020 |
| Current stake | 0.070 ETH |
| Share of a median pool | 3.0% |
What happens if the capital grows
| Capital | Stake per entry | Share of the median pool | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| today | $163 | 3.0% | fits comfortably |
| ×10 | $1,635 | 30% | eats the pool on entry |
| ×50 | $8,173 | 151% | impossible |
| ×100 | $16,345 | 302% | impossible |
Thirty percent of a pool on entry is not an entry — it is moving the price against yourself before the position exists. A hundred and fifty percent cannot happen at all.
The conclusion, stated plainly
The strategy works because the size is tiny. Profit does not scale linearly with capital, and any model that multiplies today's result by a capital multiple is wrong.
The honest version of the flywheel
More capital can still mean more, just not more per trade:
- more launches covered at the same time, instead of skipping some while capital is tied up;
- inventory held longer where holding is worth it;
- less forced selling to free capital for the next entry.
That is real growth with a different shape and a different ceiling — and it has to be measured once there is capital to measure it with, not assumed from arithmetic.