CoinW Research Institute
Abstract
As of September 7, the CoinW platform's UNIUSDT perpetual quotes indicate that UNI is reported at approximately 7.01 USDT, which is an increase of about 12.33% in 24 hours, with an intraday high of 7.478 USDT; looking at the past week, CoinW's candlestick chart shows a cumulative increase of over 30%. This surge is certainly linked to the market's warming risk appetite, but if it is only understood as being driven by the broader market, one might overlook the changes occurring within UNI itself. Recently, trading activity on the Robinhood Chain has rapidly heated up, and as an important liquidity infrastructure, Uniswap has directly benefited from this, with trading activity and fee income significantly increasing. At the same time, the scale of UNI burn has expanded further and set a new record. The rise in price, on-chain trading volume expansion, growth in protocol fees, and acceleration of token burn have all started to occur simultaneously, providing more fundamental support for this round of UNI's market rather than just emotional speculation. However, a few days of data improvement are still insufficient to prove that Uniswap has welcomed a fundamental reversal. Rather than focusing on how much more UNI can rise in the short term, the more pressing question is whether the trading fervor brought by the Robinhood Chain can be sustained, whether Uniswap can truly convert short-term traffic into long-term trading demand, and if the continuously growing protocol income and UNI burn can eventually form a sustainable value cycle. Only when these changes shift from a few days of hype to a more stable trend can the logic behind this round of market truly be considered sound.
1. UNI suddenly strengthens, with the Robinhood Chain as the most direct catalyst
Behind UNI's current surge, the Robinhood Chain is undoubtedly one of the most direct catalysts. The Robinhood Chain is a layer-2 network (L2) launched by Robinhood Crypto. According to Uniswap's official blog, when this chain went live, it simultaneously supported Uniswap v2, v3, v4, and UniswapX, and integrated with Uniswap's web interface, wallet, and developer interface. In other words, Uniswap did not wait for the new chain to gain traction before rushing to catch up; rather, it occupied an important trading gateway from day one. The greater possibility is that what the Robinhood Chain brings may not merely be "another new chain." In the past, Uniswap primarily handled exchanges of ETH, stablecoins, and various native crypto assets; however, behind Robinhood lies a vast base of securities users and traditional financial operations. As stock tokens and other real-world assets gradually enter the blockchain, the types of transactions that Uniswap may handle in the future could extend from crypto assets into traditional financial assets. This anticipation quickly manifested in trading data. On August 28, the Robinhood Chain's daily decentralized exchange (DEX) trading volume was approximately 989 million USD; this figure rose to about 1.56 billion USD around September 1, and by September 4, it even surpassed 3 billion USD at one point. Notably, Uniswap captured approximately 98% of that trading volume on that day. Crypto Times cited data from Dune and DefiLlama stating that the rapid spike in trading volume also directly pushed up protocol fees, which further drove an increase in UNI burn.
2. Daily fervor has cooled, but weekly trends remain strong
If one only sees the "single-day 3 billion USD" record, it is easy to assume that the Robinhood Chain is still on an upward trajectory, but the latest data indicates a cooling trend. As of September 7, DefiLlama shows that its DEX trading volume in the past 24 hours was approximately 1.368 billion USD, which is about a 54% drop from the peak on September 4, and lower than levels around September 1. However, when looking at the week, the situation is not that grim. The cumulative trading volume over the past 7 days still reached 10.424 billion USD, representing an approximate 95.26% increase from the previous week. Of that, Uniswap contributed about 8.302 billion USD, accounting for approximately 79.6%, with a share of about 77.8% in the past 24 hours. It can be observed that although the Robinhood Chain's daily highs have clearly cooled, the weekly trading activity remains in a phase of high expansion, and it is still too early to judge whether the market will continue to erupt or has fully receded.
The number of trades also needs to be understood in the same way. Dune data shows that as of the week prior to September 7, the Robinhood Chain completed approximately 94.21 million transactions, an increase of 12.81% from the previous week; there were about 7.21 million active addresses, which increased more than fivefold. While the numbers look impressive, one address does not equal one real user, and one transaction does not necessarily represent a true and sustained trading demand. Dune's community provides a typical sample for screening transaction quality. An asset named CATGAME recorded 29,178 trading wallets and 61,663 transactions within 24 hours, but the average transaction was only about 9.33 USD, with many wallets exhibiting rapid buy-and-sell features post-purchase. This does not represent the entire chain, but it reminds us that bot trading, task incentives, and small round trips can also rapidly boost the number of addresses and transactions. Therefore, what is truly worth observing about the Robinhood Chain is not just whether trading volume can break through 3 billion USD again, but how many real users remain after the heat fades, and whether trading demand can gradually spread from a few hot assets launched by platforms like Pons and long.xyz to a wider array of more sustainable assets and application scenarios.
3. Who is contributing to trading volume? New coins are more active than stock tokens
The Robinhood Chain is primarily about stock tokens and real-world assets (RWA), but from the trading structure seen in early September, the short-term increment mainly comes from the new coin trading created by launch platforms such as Pons. Bitquery's analysis of on-chain records from August 3 to September 3 shows that Pons created 207,893 types of tokens within 32 days, of which only 3,228 met the criteria and entered Uniswap, accounting for about 1.55%. These tokens recorded a cumulative trading amount of approximately 736 million USD during the issuance phase, and the trading volume after entering Uniswap reached 2.14 billion USD. This means that for every 1 dollar of trading generated during the issuance phase, about 3 dollars of transactions occurred on Uniswap afterward. This batch of tokens once contributed about a quarter of Uniswap v4's trading activity on the Robinhood Chain, but the trading volume is not evenly distributed. Microduck recorded a cumulative transaction of approximately 88.7 million USD, ROBINCAT about 42.6 million USD, and TA about 38.5 million USD, while the transaction volume for most tokens rapidly decreased afterward. The entire market resembles "a few blockbusters driving a large number of long-tail assets," rather than all new tokens forming stable liquidity. Once the heat of the leading assets declines, the overall trading volume may be significantly affected.
The Robinhood Chain has also seen a relatively unique trading mode emerge. Some Memecoins are no longer paired with ETH or stablecoins but are paired with stock tokens like NVDA, HIMS, AMC. On September 2, trades involving these "Memecoin + stock token" pairs amounted to approximately 217 million USD, surpassing the direct trading of stock tokens at 127 million USD. Although stock tokens have entered the trading system of the Robinhood Chain, a significant portion of current demand does not arise from users directly trading stock but is driven by the issuance of new coins and Memecoin trading. This aspect is also what warrants more attention when judging the quality of trading on the Robinhood Chain. The current question is not whether there are stock tokens on-chain, but whether these assets can gradually form trading demand independent of hot new coins. Therefore, what is truly worth observing is whether the trading structure can improve. If, after the hot trends fade, trading can diffuse from a few launch platform tokens to stablecoins, mainstream assets, and direct trades among stock tokens, it would indicate that the Robinhood Chain is moving from a "new coin-driven high turnover market" to more diversified financial trading scenarios; conversely, if trading volume remains highly dependent on a few popular tokens and rapidly declines with the popularity of launch platforms, then current growth is still more akin to speculative flow.
4. Fees have increased, but only a fraction truly reaches UNI
The explosion of the Robinhood Chain has already been significantly reflected in Uniswap's fees. As of September 7, Uniswap's total fees over the past 7 days were approximately 66.79 million USD, of which the Robinhood Chain contributed about 57.03 million USD, accounting for 85.4%; in the past 30 days, total fees were approximately 141.76 million USD, with about 98.96 million USD coming from the Robinhood Chain, accounting for 69.8%. This new chain has become the primary source of fee growth for Uniswap in recent times. Breaking down the 30-day data further reveals a more intuitive change. In the past 7 days, the Robinhood Chain has contributed an average of about 8.15 million USD in fees daily to Uniswap; excluding these 7 days, the previous 23 days averaged only about 1.82 million USD daily. In just one week, the average daily fee has already risen to about 4.5 times the previous level. However, the fervor has not continuously accelerated. On September 5, recorded rolling 24-hour fees for the Robinhood Chain were about 11.8 million USD, and by September 7, the reading had fallen back to about 7.12 million USD. Although rolling data cannot be directly compared to natural daily figures, at least it indicates that fees are also cooling down along with trading heat from their peak.
Another easily overlooked issue is that the fees paid by traders do not all convert into UNI's value. Most of Uniswap's trading fees still go to liquidity providers; only pools that have already initiated protocol fees will retain a portion of fees at the protocol layer. According to records from DefiLlama during the same period, Uniswap's protocol income over the past 7 days was approximately 4.61 million USD, which equates to about 6.9% of total fees. Moreover, this proportion is the result of summary data across versions and networks, rather than Uniswap taking a fixed 6.9% fee. Therefore, what the market is really concerned about is not how much Uniswap earns in fees, but whether the increase in trading activity can lead to more protocol retention fees, further promote UNI burn, and reduce circulating supply, allowing this value transmission mechanism to continue operating. So far, this mechanism has begun to show effects. Crypto Times citing Entropy Advisors' Dune panel reported that on September 4, approximately 184,000 UNI were burned, valued at about 1.15 million USD, marking the first single day to exceed 1 million USD. About 150,000 of these came from the Robinhood Chain, accounting for about 81.5% of the day’s burn volume. However, one record-breaking burn is not enough to alter UNI's supply-demand landscape. Based on an approximate circulating supply of 622 million tokens, 184,000 represents only about 0.03%. What truly matters is not how much UNI was burned on a particular day, but whether trading, protocol income, and burn can form a continuously operating cycle.
5. Have the whales started to accumulate? The answer remains polarized
In early September, some positive signals did appear regarding UNI's large addresses. BeInCrypto citing Nansen data reported that within about 30 hours, the tracked sample of UNI whales increased their holdings from 3.2 million to 3.46 million, net adding 257,777; during the same period, exchange balances decreased by 351,274. Typically, when tokens flow from exchanges to wallets, it suggests a decrease in short-term sellable chips, which is favorable for price. However, upon further examination, the whales' attitudes did not completely turn uniformly bullish. Within the same window, these whales net sold approximately 130,000 USD on decentralized exchanges, and their derivative risk exposure also decreased; some large transfers also passed through over-the-counter trading or market-making addresses such as Flowdesk, so they cannot simply be equated with open market purchases. The concentration of holdings can lead to misinterpretations. Data shows that the top ten addresses of UNI hold proportion exceeds 50%, giving the appearance of high concentration, but about 36.97% actually belongs to Uniswap’s governance treasury, not ordinary whale holdings. Therefore, a more accurate judgment currently is that some large funds have indeed begun to accumulate, and the chip structure of UNI has shown marginal improvement, but there remains significant divergence among the whales. To confirm that large holders have entered a stage of continuous accumulation, longer-term net inflows and increases in holdings need to be observed.
6. Uniswap is expanding, but the long-term vision still requires real use
If we zoom out from the Robinhood Chain, we discover that what Uniswap is doing goes beyond merely "allowing users to swap tokens." From the underlying trading mechanisms, its own chain, to wallets, trading routing, and new asset issuance tools, it is attempting to cover more aspects of an on-chain transaction from asset creation and liquidity establishment to final settlement. Uniswap v4 is one of the most important steps in this process. It introduces customizable plugins (hooks), which ordinary users can understand as reserving a set of "plugin interfaces" for liquidity pools. In the past, developers primarily created trading pools under Uniswap's established rules; now, they can design dynamic trading fees, market-making methods, and liquidity management rules themselves. The official statement indicates that over 150 plugins had been developed by the time v4 launched. If these plugins are actually adopted by project parties and market makers, Uniswap will no longer just provide a standardized trading model but will resemble a set of on-chain trading infrastructure that can be freely combined. Unichain is responsible for keeping more trading within its own ecosystem. Through a lower-cost, higher-frequency trading environment, Uniswap aims to reduce reliance on other networks and further capture trading, liquidity, and ordering revenue. Meanwhile, the web interface, wallet, developer interfaces, and UniswapX continue to fill in user entry points and trading routing; the liquidity launch tools and Pools.trade further extend the reach into new asset issuance and early liquidity establishment. Uniswap's boundaries are expanding from "exchange" to a more complete on-chain trading infrastructure.
However, expanding the product map does not automatically mean that UNI will gain more value. V4 ultimately depends on whether the plugins can sustain trading and liquidity, Unichain needs to see if locking volumes, trading volumes, and ordering income can grow, and the issuance tools need to verify if stable demand can form beyond hot assets. Only when these products are truly used long-term and further converted into protocol income and value capture for UNI will the expansion reflect on the fundamentals of the token. Therefore, these layouts are better viewed as medium- to long-term growth options for Uniswap rather than the sole reason explaining the current rise of UNI. The product has already been laid out, and the next real test is whether users and funds can remain.
7. Don't rush to conclusions, focus on four changes first
UNI's recent rise is increasingly difficult to explain solely with market sentiment. The Robinhood Chain has indeed brought higher trading volumes, fees, and UNI burn, and signs of accumulation have appeared among some large addresses. However, on the other hand, daily trading volumes and fees have retreated from extreme highs, and short-term activity is mixed with Memecoins, launch platforms, arbitrage, and bot trading, so the current data still carries obvious traits of a hot market. Therefore, instead of judging whether UNI has already “reversed,” it may be better to focus on several more specific changes. For instance, after the daily trading volume on the Robinhood Chain cools, can the seven-day cumulative trading volume continue to grow; can Uniswap’s market share stabilize around eighty percent; after the total fees cool down, can protocol income and UNI burn maintain resilience; and can Unichain, v4, and issuance tools bring new demand outside the Robinhood Chain?
September 29 could be an important verification point. According to public reports, the 90-day trading fee subsidy provided to wallet users by Robinhood will expire on this date. At that time, after this layer of "booster" is removed, how much trading volume, active addresses, and user retention remain will more directly test whether the current boom is from real demand or largely relies on low-cost trading and short-term incentives. Hence, there’s no need to rush to label UNI as "emotion rebound" or "fundamental reversal." What is truly worth observing is what will remain after the hot trends fade. If trading volumes remain active after cooling, and protocol income and burn maintain resilience, while Uniswap's new infrastructure begins to contribute additional demand, the market's pricing logic for UNI may be undergoing changes; conversely, if fees and burn swiftly drop with the excitement, the emotional component in this rise may be greater than the improvement in fundamentals.
This article is for market research and information analysis only and does not constitute any investment or trading advice.
References
1.Uniswap: Robinhood Chain Is Live
4.Uniswap Governance: UNIfication Proposal
5.Uniswap Docs: Protocol Fee Overview
6.Uniswap Docs: Liquidity Launchpad
9.Crypto Times: Why Is UNI Up 12% Today
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
