Key Takeaways
- Market Share (Raw Data): Opensea (36.77%), Blur (28.05%), X2Y2 (24.35%), Looksrare (7.42%)
- True Market Share (Adjusted): Opensea (59.1%), Blur (19.5%), X2Y2 (13.2%), Looksrare (2.9%)
- Current Exchange Listings: X2Y2 is undervalued; Looksrare is overvalued.
- Blur's FDV Estimate: $382M–$458M
Introduction
Blur is set to launch its platform token on February 14, converting user "Boxes" and "Points" into tokens. With limited details on tokenomics and utility, this analysis focuses on comparative valuation against peers (X2Y2, Looksrare) while addressing wash trading distortions.
1. Industry Competition
Ethereum NFT Exchange Landscape
Top contenders:
- Opensea (36.77% raw share)
- Blur (28.05%)
- X2Y2 (24.35%)
- Looksrare (7.42%)
Wash Trading Adjustments
Methodology:
- X2Y2/Looksrare: Excluded zero-royalty NFT flip trades (e.g., Meebits).
- Blur: Estimated true volume by comparing Opensea’s gas-to-transaction ratios, assuming Blur’s average ticket size is 1.5x higher due to royalty-free blue-chip trades.
Adjusted Market Share
| Platform | True Volume (ETH) | Adjusted Share |
|--------------|-------------------|----------------|
| Opensea | 299,224 | 59.1% |
| Blur | 98,600 | 19.5% |
| X2Y2 | 69,857 | 13.2% |
| Looksrare| 14,553 | 2.9% |
Key Insight: Blur’s dominance is overstated in raw data due to wash trading and Seaport-driven transactions.
2. Valuation Analysis
Assumptions
- Opensea’s FDV: $3B (down from $13B peak).
- P/S Multiples: 0.27 (avg); P/E: 15.39 (avg).
- Blur’s Future Fee: 0.5% (hypothetical).
Scenarios
| Metric | Unadjusted Valuation ($B) | Adjusted Valuation ($B) |
|----------------------|---------------------------|--------------------------|
| P/S (vs X2Y2) | 0.204 | 0.088 |
| P/S (vs Looksrare)| 1.144 | 0.494 |
| P/E (vs Opensea) | 0.458 | 0.197 |
Preferred Method: P/E (more stable, fee-income-driven).
👉 Why P/E matters in crypto valuation
Final Blur FDV Range: $382M–$458M (closer to Looksrare’s upper bound but below Opensea).
3. Risk Factors
Token Model Uncertainty
- Unknown utility/fee capture mechanisms.
- Airdrop-driven initial circulation may skew MC/FDV.
Competitive Threats
- Opensea’s exclusivity deals limit Blur’s contract control.
- Reliance on Seaport may reduce fee accrual to Blur tokens.
FAQs
Q1: How does Blur’s wash trading compare to X2Y2?
A: Blur’s volume is inflated by royalty-free flips, while X2Y2’s stems from zero-royalty collections like Meebits.
Q2: Why use P/E over P/S?
A: Fee income (P/E) is less volatile than raw trading volume (P/S).
Q3: Will Blur’s FDV rise post-listing?
A: Likely, given exchange hype—but long-term value depends on sustainable fee models.
Final Note: Blur’s valuation hinges on post-launch tokenomics and ability to monetize without wash trading. Stay tuned for updates!