Task: Please perform a Part A Qualitative Task analyzing FTM’s historical price action before and after its Sonic upgrade. In your analysis, include the required qualitative components: tokenomics, funding & backers, narrative, and conclusion. Then, organize your findings into a concise report that can be shared or integrated into your aggregator resources. This will help you refine your strategy around FTM and inform future positioning for similar ecosystem upgrades.
PART A QUALITATIVE REPORT: FTM – THE THANKSGIVING TURKEY CHART
This qualitative report will dive into the long term price action of FTM before and after its highly anticipated Sonic upgrade and rebrand. FTM is a layer 1 blockchain that has been around since 2019. The true aim is to showcase how narrative and news drive price action over the longer term, which can inform future crypto trade decisions when looking into a project’s roadmap. We will cover the three core qualitative components of FTM, from tokenomics, funding and backers, and most importantly in this report, narrative. Lastly, we’ll end with a qualitative conclusion and scoring system for the project.
Highlighted Timeframe
Time frame of this FTM price analysis: 8/5/2024-12/30/2024 Data aggregators used: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/fantom/#About, https://cryptorank.io/ico/sonic, https://defillama.com/chain/sonic
The timeframe that this historical qualitative report will highlight is 8/5/2024 to 12/20/2024, The local bottom of the broader crypto market’s conditions, and ~2 weeks after FTM’s Sonic upgrade went live (12/18/2024). This time frame adequately captures the narrative driven price rise leading up to the event, and the significant follow through of the price action after the catalyst played out. Price action wise, FTM ran from a low of $0.2603 on 8/5/2024, to a local high of $1.475 on 12/16/2024, to a low of $0.6917 about 2 weeks after the Sonic upgrade taking place. This means that over the course of 133 days, FTM gained +466.65%, and within 14 days, wiped out over 50% of its value by dropping -53.11% between 12/16 and 12/30 (data sourced from https://www.tradingview.com/chart/vGoReh2F/?symbol=BINANCE%3AETHUSD) This timeframe is used to illustrate the prolonged strength in FTM’s price action leading up to the highly anticipated event, and subsequent the sharp and tremendous weakness in price action despite the network itself materially improving by all technical metrics (speed, transactions per second, finality, etc. sourced from https://defillama.com/chain/sonic).
Below is a screenshot of the highlighted timeframe of FTM price action on the 1D chart that we will be analyzing in this qualitative report (8/5/2024-12/30/2024): Link to screenshot of FTM’s 1D price chart image: https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/1334336042030993480/1361710832454733955/image.png?ex=67ffbf89&is=67fe6e09&hm=e3fbdf8e7089d33e02726ca53f9071272f435b710ef033673a5193e3db9eb9ca&=&format=webp&quality=lossless&width=1032&height=595
Tokenomics:
Data sourced from: https://cryptorank.io/price/sonic
As we can see in this screenshot below, FTM’s supply is 100% circulating (3.18B tokens), meaning there are no locked tokens waiting to be unlocked and liquidated by team members/investors. This makes for a very transparent cryptocurrency.
Link to screenshot of circulating supply: https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/1334336042030993480/1361711721684926777/image.png?ex=67ffc05d&is=67fe6edd&hm=128a452605496a7685907bf9aa25690d06096b1fb983c56b287a4dc25000e384&=&format=webp&quality=lossless
Tokenomics Commentary: FTM’s tokenomics are unusually transparent and arguably one of the cleanest among legacy Layer 1s. As of the Sonic upgrade, 100% of the 3.18 billion token supply was already in circulation. This fully unlocked supply meant there was no looming token unlock risk, a major advantage over other ecosystems where investors or insiders regularly sell into strength. This total circulating supply structure gave FTM the potential to support strong bullish price action without the fear of dilution—but it also removed one of the usual “unlock hype” catalysts that fuels narrative arcs in modern altcoins. Without any tokenomics-driven unlock cycles or emissions-based incentives to sustain attention, FTM was left reliant purely on external momentum and speculative demand. In effect, the tokenomics were not a weakness—but they were narratively neutral. They helped prevent technical sell pressure but did little to stimulate or sustain excitement. This configuration contributed to a chart pattern where price rose purely on narrative and collapsed once the story was fulfilled, not because of fundamental dilution. Funding and Backers
Data sourced from: https://cryptorank.io/ico/sonic
Link to funding and backers spreadsheet breakdown: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UKbk2hXDaFeYugJ4AL0cZgVUx7NNIJNQy-jiojnA1dg/edit?usp=sharing
Funding and Backers Breakdown Table:
Coin Participant Tier Type Stage Total Raise (Millions USD) S (Sonic, previously FTM) Stani Kulechov 1 Angel Investor Strategic
Hashed Fund 2 Venture Strategic
Arrington XRP Capital 2 Venture Undisclosed
SoftBank 2 Corporation Strategic
Signum Capital 3 Venture Strategic Undisclosed
HyperChain Capital 3 Venture Undisclosed
Aave 3 Corporation Strategic
Bibox Exchange 3 Exchange Undisclosed
UOB Ventures 4 Venture Strategic
JRR Capital 4 Venture Undisclosed 91.54
Grand Total Funding: $91.54M
Funding and Backers Commentary: FTM, now rebranded as Sonic, boasts a modest yet strategic list of backers. The protocol raised $91.54M across multiple stages, with contributions from recognizable entities like Stani Kulechov (Aave), Hashed Fund, SoftBank, Arrington XRP Capital, Signum Capital, and UOB Ventures. The list spans angels, exchanges, corporate venture arms, and traditional VCs. While not a flashy nine-figure raise from a16z or Binance Labs, the diversity of investor types demonstrates broad interest in Fantom’s technical vision, particularly from Asia-based funds and DeFi-native leaders. However, much like its tokenomics, the backing never translated into narrative fuel. None of these entities actively promoted Sonic in a way that galvanized market excitement. There was no hype cycle driven by endorsements, no major exchange-based marketing campaigns, and no coordinated VC amplification. As a result, while funding was credible, it was quiet—and thus failed to generate the speculative energy that fuels sustained upward moves in token price.
Narrative
The most dominant force behind FTM’s 2024 rally was not tokenomics or venture capital—it was pure narrative anticipation. For over five years, Fantom had operated under the “Opera” branding, a legacy mainnet that, while functional, had begun to lag in mindshare compared to newer chains. The Sonic upgrade, positioned as a complete rebrand and next-gen reboot, promised massive performance improvements—faster block finality, higher throughput, and scalability breakthroughs. But most importantly, it offered something far more valuable in crypto: the promise of transformation. From the summer 2024 bottom on August 5 ($0.2603) to its peak on December 16 ($1.475), FTM rallied +466.65%. And then, two days after the Sonic upgrade went live—price collapsed by -53.11% in just two weeks. This exact timeline illustrates the "hopes and dreams" hypothesis in action. Traders bought the idea of Sonic—not the product itself. Once Sonic launched on December 18, 2024, there was nothing left to bet on. FTM, now S, had realized its vision—but that very realization marked the end of the speculative arc. The story had reached its conclusion. What’s even more ironic is that Sonic was, by all technical accounts, a success. New DeFi projects like Shadow Exchange emerged to leverage the upgraded infrastructure (https://defillama.com/protocol/shadow-exchange), and TVL on the chain continued to rise (https://defillama.com/chain/sonic). But price action no longer followed fundamentals—because the narrative had run its course. FTM’s chart became a perfect “Thanksgiving turkey” formation: an extended feeding period of price growth, followed by a sudden slaughter once expectations were fulfilled. The emotional logic was exhausted. Sonic delivered—but crypto isn’t about delivery. It’s about belief. Thanksgiving Turkey Chart: Thanksgiving turkey chart image link: https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/1334336042030993480/1361738353799593984/0.png?ex=67ffd92b&is=67fe87ab&hm=1caebdf72471af8bd7581582f768d7684546683e4e42005b5b645e121018acea&=&format=webp&quality=lossless
Overall Qualitative Final Conclusion
FTM’s 2024 price action was driven not by technology, funding, or emissions—but by expectation. Its rebrand to Sonic created a long, multi-month window where investors could project hopes and dreams onto the token. The result was a +466% run-up purely fueled by what could be. And when “could be” became “is,” the chart collapsed—even though the underlying product had improved. This report reinforces a central qualitative truth in crypto investing: value is often not priced in—expectation is. FTM teaches us that the best trade opportunities lie in the build-up to an event, not the event itself. Once anticipation ends, price usually follows. From a strategic perspective, this creates a framework for identifying high-potential trades: Look for projects with upcoming transformative upgrades
Confirm that narratives are being built in community and media circles
Enter before the narrative matures
And exit before the catalyst delivers
Sonic was not a failure of technology. It was a case study in what happens when price has nothing left to look forward to. A reminder that in crypto, as in stories—the journey is worth more than the destination.
Qualitative Scoring Mechanism for Evaluating FTM Scoring Methodology This qualitative scoring system evaluates crypto projects across three core pillars—Tokenomics, Funding & Backers, and Narrative—with weighted scores that reflect their real-world impact on long-term price performance. Each pillar is broken into sub-criteria scored from 0 to 10, emphasizing structure, strategic alignment, and emotional market impact. Narrative receives the highest weight (40%) due to its dominant role in driving speculative demand. The final score out of 100 offers a standardized way to compare projects based on their qualitative potential, enabling investors to identify assets that are not just technically sound, but also narratively positioned for sustained attention and price strength. Qualitative Scoring Mechanism: FTM (Sonic) Category Weight Max Score Sub-Criteria
- Tokenomics 30% /30
• Distribution Strategy 10 All tokens in circulation; fully transparent
• Vesting & Lockups 10 No unlock risk—but also no scarcity-driven hype
• Community Alignment 10 Lacked structured community-focused staking or narrative-based incentives
- Funding & Backers 30% /30
• Capital & Round Types 10 $91.5M raised from diverse strategic investors
• Investor Reputation 10 Solid names: Stani, Hashed, SoftBank
• Ecosystem Participation 10 Limited amplification—no narrative value from backers post-raise
- Narrative 40% /40
• Story & Vision 10 Powerful: transformation + rebrand hype
• Market Positioning 10 Clearly positioned as a next-gen upgrade to a legacy L1
• Hype vs Shipping 10 Perfect speculative arc—peaked before launch
• Sentiment Impact 10 Massive run-up, instant crash—textbook narrative-driven lifecycle
FTM / S Final Score: 79 / 100 – Strong narrative-driven asset with weak follow-through Sonic (formerly FTM) is a prime example of narrative outweighing fundamentals. This score reflects a project that structured itself well, marketed itself effectively pre-launch, but ultimately lacked sustained post-launch mechanics to hold attention or build a secondary story.