Why do people often mistakenly think that coins with lower prices have more room to rise? When I first entered the crypto space, I was particularly drawn to coins priced at just a few cents or fractions of a cent. I always felt that $BTC was too expensive—I couldn’t afford many. But a coin priced at $0.01 rising to $1 would mean a 100x return, which sounded way more enticing than any valuation model. Later, I realized this is the classic case of 'unit price illusion.' The price of a coin is solely determined by how the total token supply is divided. If you cut a cake into 100 pieces, each piece will obviously be more expensive than if you cut it into a billion pieces, but the size of the cake itself hasn’t changed. What you should really be looking at are metrics like circulating market cap, fully diluted valuation, future unlock schedules, and how much additional capital the market would need to push the valuation higher. I once bought into a project priced at less than a cent, thinking it couldn’t drop any further. But then the team kept issuing more tokens, early investors kept unlocking their holdings, and the price fell from $0.008 to $0.0008, then to $0.00008. Cheap doesn’t mean it’s the bottom—those zeros can keep multiplying. Many projects intentionally set massive token supplies to make retail investors fantasize about 'holding millions of tokens, and what if it hits $1?' But if hitting $1 means the market cap would surpass the world’s largest companies, that’s not bold dreaming—it’s bad math. Remember: A low coin price doesn’t mean a low valuation. To judge whether a coin is expensive or not, don’t count how many tokens you can buy—calculate how much money the market would need to keep it going up.