Key Takeaways
- Novora found 91% of 150+ crypto protocols generate revenue, but disclosure remains limited.
- <1% disclose market maker deals, exposing risks in token pricing and liquidity.
- Only 9% adopt 2025 transparency frameworks, signaling the need for better investor reporting.
Crypto Protocol Transparency Lags Despite Growing Revenue Data
Most cryptocurrency protocols are generating measurable revenue, yet few provide the level of transparency expected in traditional financial markets, according to new research from Novora.
The study, which reviewed more than 150 projects across sectors including decentralized exchanges, lending platforms, and blockchain infrastructure, found that 91% of protocols have traceable revenue. However, only a small fraction presents that data in a way that is accessible to investors.
The sharpest gap lies in disclosure of market-making arrangements. Fewer than 1% of protocols provide any information about agreements with market makers, despite their direct influence on token liquidity and price formation. These arrangements often involve token loans, incentives, or options that can materially affect trading conditions.
Only one protocol in the dataset, Meteora, has publicly disclosed such details, highlighting what the report describes as a critical blind spot in the industry.
The findings point to a broader issue: while data exists, communication does not. Just 3% of protocols maintain a dedicated investor relations hub that consolidates financial and operational information. Most rely on fragmented channels such as blog posts, governance forums, or social media, making it difficult for investors to form a clear view.
The report also examined the adoption of the Blockworks Token Transparency Framework, a standardized disclosure model introduced in 2025. Only 9% of protocols have adopted it, with participation concentrated among a small group of decentralized finance projects. No major layer-1 or layer-2 blockchain networks were found to be using the framework.
Token holder alignment remains uneven. Around 38% of protocols offer some form of value accrual, such as fee sharing, buybacks, or staking rewards. The majority, 62%, provide governance rights without direct economic benefits, a structure more common among large blockchain networks than trading-focused platforms.
Sector differences are pronounced. Perpetual trading protocols are more likely to share revenue with users, while base-layer networks tend to lag in offering financial incentives tied to token ownership.
Despite these shortcomings, the underlying data infrastructure is largely in place. Most protocols are tracked across multiple analytics platforms, including Token Terminal, Dune, and Defillama, allowing for detailed financial analysis. The issue, the report suggests, is not availability but presentation.
Connor King, Founder of Novora, commented on X, saying, “ Crypto protocols are not hiding their fundamentals. They are failing to present them,” adding that “protocols that invest in this now will be the ones institutional allocators can underwrite first.”
As institutional interest in digital assets grows, the lack of standardized disclosure could become a constraint. Investors accustomed to traditional markets often expect clear reporting on revenue, governance, and contractual arrangements.
The study argues that improving investor communication may be a low-cost way for protocols to attract capital. Those who invest in structured reporting and transparency could gain an advantage as the market matures.
For now, the crypto sector presents a paradox: a data-rich environment with limited clarity. Until that gap closes, many investors will continue to navigate the market with incomplete information.
