Introduction: The Revival of Launchpads in 2025
Launchpads have re-emerged as a pivotal mechanism for token distribution in the cryptocurrency ecosystem in 2025. As the industry matures, both centralized exchange (CEX) and decentralized exchange (DEX) launchpads are innovating to meet the growing demand for fair and efficient token offerings. These platforms, however, come with unique advantages, challenges, and risks that are shaping the future of token distribution.
This article delves into the differences between CEX and DEX launchpads, their ROI performance, systemic issues, emerging trends, and actionable recommendations for improving fairness and sustainability in the launchpad ecosystem.
CEX vs. DEX Launchpad Models: Key Differences
Centralized Exchange (CEX) Launchpads
CEX launchpads are hosted by centralized exchanges, offering a structured and secure environment for token launches. Key features include:
Structured Token Launches: CEX platforms follow a well-defined process, including token vetting, allocation mechanisms, and post-launch support.
Higher Security: Rigorous vetting processes reduce the risk of scams and rug pulls.
Accessibility Challenges: Many CEX launchpads favor large token holders or early insiders through tiered systems or capital lock-up requirements.
Decentralized Exchange (DEX) Launchpads
DEX launchpads operate in a decentralized and open manner, fostering inclusivity but introducing higher risks. Key features include:
Open Access: Anyone can participate, promoting inclusivity and democratization.
Community Engagement: DEX platforms often rely on community-driven marketing and social media buzz.
Higher Risks: Price manipulation, rug pulls, and lack of due diligence make DEX platforms riskier for retail investors.
ROI Performance of Launchpads: A Data-Driven Perspective
Return on Investment (ROI) is a critical metric for evaluating launchpad effectiveness. In H1 2025, CEX launchpads outperformed DEX platforms in terms of ROI:
MEXC: Delivered an average ROI of 10.83x, leveraging retail-friendly designs with fixed allocations and dual pool participation.
Bybit: Achieved the highest single ROI of 14.71x with its Xterio token, though it required substantial capital lock-up through tiered systems.
Gate.io: Offered low minimum participation requirements (1 USDT) but favored early participants through snapshot mechanisms.
In contrast, DEX platforms struggled with ROI consistency due to high volatility and systemic risks.
Systemic Issues in Launchpad Mechanics
Despite their popularity, launchpads face systemic challenges that undermine retail confidence:
Inflated Fully Diluted Valuations (FDVs): Many token launches feature inflated FDVs, leading to unrealistic expectations and immediate post-launch drawdowns.
Low Circulating Supplies: Limited token availability often results in price instability and reduced market liquidity.
Post-Launch Drawdowns: Tokens frequently experience sharp price declines after launch, discouraging retail participation.
Emerging Trends in Token Distribution
The launchpad ecosystem is evolving to address these challenges, with several emerging trends gaining traction:
Fair Launch Frameworks: These models aim to provide equal opportunities for all participants, reducing favoritism toward large token holders.
Dynamic Pricing Models: Token prices are adjusted based on demand and market conditions, ensuring more sustainable valuations.
Contribution-Based Allocation Systems: Participants are rewarded based on their contributions to the project, fostering community engagement.
Full-Cycle Growth Models for Token Projects
Industry experts are advocating for full-cycle growth models to replace the traditional "launch and exit" approach. These models include:
Liquidity Support: Ensuring adequate liquidity post-launch to stabilize token prices.
Marketing and Community Building: Sustained efforts to grow the project’s user base and ecosystem.
Post-Listing Oversight: Continuous monitoring and support to ensure long-term project success.
Risks Associated with DEX Platforms
While DEX launchpads offer inclusivity and community-driven engagement, they come with significant risks:
Rug Pulls: The lack of vetting processes increases the likelihood of scams.
Price Manipulation: Tokens on DEX platforms are often subject to artificial price inflation.
High Volatility: Rapid price swings can lead to substantial losses for retail participants.
Recommendations for Improving Launchpad Fairness and Sustainability
To build trust and fairness in the launchpad ecosystem, industry experts recommend:
Caps on FDVs: Limiting FDVs to ensure realistic valuations and reduce post-launch drawdowns.
Higher Public Round Allocation Ratios: Allocating more tokens to public rounds to increase retail participation.
Post-Launch Performance Tracking: Monitoring token performance to ensure accountability and transparency.
Conclusion: Shaping the Future of Launchpads
The competitive dynamics between CEX and DEX launchpads highlight trade-offs between trust, accessibility, and long-term value. While CEX platforms offer structured launches and higher security, DEX platforms provide open access and community-driven engagement. However, systemic issues like inflated FDVs, low circulating supplies, and post-launch drawdowns remain challenges for both models.
Emerging trends such as fair launch frameworks, dynamic pricing models, and full-cycle growth strategies are paving the way for a more sustainable and equitable launchpad ecosystem. By addressing these challenges and implementing industry-wide improvements, launchpads can continue to play a vital role in the cryptocurrency space.
