Dividend-paying DeFi tokens outperformed Bitcoin during a two-month period of narrow trading, with 14 of 19 large-cap protocols that shared value with holders beating Bitcoin’s 5.6% return between Aug. 22 and Oct. 20. The group’s median gain was 12.9%, led by Raydium’s 178% advance, while Bitcoin’s daily closing price remained between $75,600 and $86,600 and Ether declined 2.7%.
The results point to a market that rewarded several protocols whose tokenholders received buybacks, burns or direct distributions tied to business activity. Yet the data also shows that rising payouts alone did not guarantee gains: token unlocks, valuation and project-specific changes all affected performance.
Yield growth tracked stronger median returns
The 19-token screen used DeFiLlama’s “real yield to holders” classification, which counts value delivered through token buybacks and burns, fee burns, or direct distributions. It included decentralized exchanges, perpetual futures platforms, lending protocols, CDPs, liquid staking projects, yield tools and aggregators.
Layer-1 networks, oracle projects and launchpads were excluded. Each protocol needed a market capitalization above $100 million on Aug. 22 and at least one holder-yield distribution during the previous year. Price figures came from CoinGecko, with returns measured over the 59-day period ending Oct. 20 and compared with the preceding 59 days.
When the group was divided between projects where holder yield rose and those where it did not, the median price increase was 18.3% for the yield-growth group, compared with 6.9% for the other group.
That comparison does not establish that distributions caused the gains, particularly in a limited sample over a short period. It does show that several DeFi tokens with expanding buybacks or distributions delivered returns well above those of Bitcoin during a phase in which the largest cryptocurrency was largely range-bound.
Raydium was the standout. Its RAY token rose 178% over the period after the protocol’s buyback activity accelerated sharply. Following the Sept. 5 connection between tokenized-stock issuance platform StonkFun and Raydium’s LaunchLab, RAY buybacks increased from $360,000 in July to $3.94 million in September, an approximately 11-fold increase.
Revenue sources varied widely across protocols
The source of holder distributions differed substantially among the strongest-performing projects. Uniswap’s September protocol income was driven in part by trades routed through Robinhood Chain, which accounted for nearly half of protocol revenue, according to the supplied analysis.
Aerodrome’s distributions changed after its merger with Velodrome. The combined operation included trading fees as well as liquidity-purchase payments made by projects seeking trading depth. Aerodrome reported $14.9 million in September income for tokenholders, exceeding the $10.5 million it paid to liquidity providers during the same month. Its token gained 77% in the examined period.
The figures illustrate a crucial difference within DeFi yield models. A token distribution can come from recurring user-paid fees, project incentives, balance-sheet decisions or governance-directed allocations. The headline distribution total may look similar, but the durability of the underlying cash flow can be very different.
Sky provided another example of governance directly changing the economics for tokenholders. A vote on Aug. 13 allocated 55% of each period’s revenue to buybacks and 45% to stakers. Holder yield subsequently rose to almost four times its prior level, while the token gained 11%. Its reported valuation multiple fell from 98 times to 28.5 times as annualized distributions increased.
Cheap multiples offered no automatic advantage
The analysis also calculated a valuation measure described as market capitalization divided by annualized holder yield. The metric estimates how much market value traders assign to each dollar distributed to holders at the current run rate. Lower figures imply a lower price relative to the amount being returned to tokenholders.
The relationship between that multiple and token performance was inconsistent. Aerodrome traded at a multiple of 8.7 and rose 77%, but edgeX had the group’s second-lowest multiple at 15 and declined 22%. Its holder yield fell 15% over the period.
Aave also broke the apparent pattern. The protocol suspended token buybacks after an rsETH security incident and made no holder distributions during the measurement window, yet its token rose 24%. Meteora was left out of the yield-growth comparison because its distribution program was too recent to provide a comparable historical series.
THORChain’s RUNE was another special case. Its holder yield came from fee burns, but the protocol reduced the burn rate from 5% to 1% on Sept. 12. That rule change meant its price movement could not be evaluated cleanly through the same rising-yield framework.
Unlocks can outweigh buybacks
Hyperliquid offered the clearest warning against viewing distributions without considering token supply. Holder yield rose 79% and the protocol distributed $146.9 million during the 59-day period, representing 59% of the total holder yield across all 19 projects. HYPE gained only 6%.
The supplied figures attribute that muted response partly to a large supply overhang. About $800 million in HYPE was unlocking each month, compared with roughly $75 million in monthly buybacks. The project team was estimated to unlock about 9.9 million HYPE per month.
Hyperliquid also demonstrates why circulating market capitalization can give an incomplete valuation picture. Its multiple was listed at 19.6 times when calculated using a circulating market capitalization of $18.1 billion, but 85 times using a fully diluted valuation of $77.8 billion. Fully diluted valuation includes tokens that have not yet entered circulation, making it more useful for judging potential dilution where large unlock schedules remain.
DeFiLlama data cited in the supplied material placed total value locked across DeFi near $91.2 billion in October, underscoring the scale of capital supporting on-chain lending, trading and liquidity services. Yet token performance remains dependent on whether fees reach holders, whether the distribution mechanism is sustainable, and whether new supply enters the market faster than buybacks can absorb it.
For traders evaluating yield-bearing DeFi tokens, the recent performance gap offers a practical screening framework: examine the source of protocol revenue, track whether payouts are growing, and compare those flows against fully diluted supply rather than circulating market capitalization alone.
Want to capitalize on DeFi-style yields while trading? Start exploring advanced opportunities with Toobit’s Earn platform today.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
