Exchange-run launchpads average 10x gains but face scrutiny over steep valuations, opaque models

Tokens launched through exchange‑run launchpads delivered double‑digit returns in 202, yet the fundraising channel still burdens retail users with steep valuations and opaque allocations, MEXC Research said in a July 15 report.

The report reviewed dozens of offerings across centralized exchange (CEX) and decentralized exchange (DEX) platforms. MEXC recorded five listings in the first half of the year with an average peak return of 10.83 times the sale price, topping the field by deal count.

Bybit posted the best single outcome, achieved by Xterio, with a return of 14.71 times the initial investment. Yet, it required users to lock platform tokens through a tiered system.

At the same time, Gate.io lowered the entry cost to 1 USDT, although most of the allocation still went to stakers who satisfied the snapshot rules.

DEX venues such as Pump.fun matched CEX returns at times and offered unrestricted access, yet participants faced extreme price swings and a higher incidence of rug pulls because listings skipped due diligence reviews.

Structural flaws hamper post‑sale performance

The report identified several mechanics that dilute long‑term value. Many launchpads list tokens at inflated fully diluted valuations while releasing only a small circulating supply. This combination encourages early holders and platforms to sell into the first wave of secondary‑market demand.

Immediate drawdowns erode confidence and leave retail buyers holding depreciating assets despite headline ROI figures.

Access design also skews benefits in favor of insiders. CEX programs often favor large balance holders through VIP tiers or increased staking thresholds, while DEX bonding curves can be gamed by bots that front‑run manual buyers.

Both pathways undermine the “democratic offering” narrative that originally distinguished token sales from traditional venture rounds.

Valuation caps and contribution‑based allocation

The report outlined emerging models designed to address these flaws.

Fair launch frameworks with dynamic pricing aim to widen distribution without overpricing tokens, while contribution-based systems, such as Virtuals Genesis, allocate spots to users who test networks or hold ecosystem NFTs, rather than those who stake capital.

Furthermore, full‑cycle incubation programs promise liquidity, marketing, and post‑listing oversight to align projects with investors. The report recommended hard caps on fully diluted valuations, higher public‑round ratios, and flexible qualification criteria that scale with project maturity.

They also called for post-launch accountability metrics, so platforms can track whether listings meet development milestones after the initial sale.

The study concluded that launchpads will continue to dominate early‑stage distribution during the next market upswing. However, only models that balance return potential with transparent allocation and realistic pricing are likely to retain user trust.