Written by: c4lvin, Four Pillars

Translated by: AididiaoJP, Foresght News

Key Conclusions

If $100 is invested in each of the 59 tokens newly listed on Upbit with KRW pairs in 2025, by March 11, 2026, the value of that portfolio would remain at only 31% of the original investment (i.e., each dollar drops to $0.31). Bithumb (with 144 tokens) has a similar performance, also at 31%; while Binance (with 92 tokens) is slightly lower at 29%. All three major exchanges led to a reduction of about 70% of assets.

Among the 59 tokens listed on Upbit, only two ultimately realized gains: KITE (up 232.8%) and BARD (up 9.3%). Bithumb performed slightly better, with 8 out of 144 tokens maintaining positive returns. The median return rate for Upbit was -80.9%, while Bithumb was -82.1%.

The 50 tokens listed on both major Korean exchanges had an average return of -69.4%, which is almost identical to the 94 tokens listed solely on Bithumb (-68.9%). This data suggests that being listed on multiple major exchanges does not guarantee subsequent price performance.

Research Background

This analysis was inspired by a data chart published today by Messari research analyst @Degenerate_DeFi.

Data Source: @Degenerate_DeFi

The chart shows that if $100 is invested in each of the 92 tokens newly listed on Binance in 2025, as of today, each dollar investment remains at only $0.29. This means that out of a total investment of $9,200, the cumulative loss reaches 71.7%, with a remaining value of only about $2,600.

As the largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume in the world, Binance's listing standards are generally considered to be stricter than those of smaller platforms, and its liquidity advantage is unmatched. If Binance's data is still such, what about the situation on Korean exchanges? The Korean market is dominated by retail investors, and the trading model differs significantly from the global market. Will these differences affect the performance of newly listed tokens? Or will the data ultimately reveal similar patterns?

This article will adopt the same methodology as the Binance analysis to systematically analyze all tokens that gained KRW trading pairs on Upbit and Bithumb throughout 2025.

Research Methodology

Scope Definition and Selection Criteria

This research covers all tokens with newly added KRW market trading pairs on Upbit and Bithumb between January 1 and December 31, 2025. Upbit had a total of 59, while Bithumb had 144. For Elixir (ELX), Strike (STRIKE), and AI16Z, which were launched in 2025 but have since been removed, this study treats them as a total loss.

The investment simulation rules follow the unified framework used by Messari in analyzing the performance of Binance-listed tokens. We assume an investment of $100 at the closing price on the first day of each token's listing and hold it without selling until now. We construct a time series dataset by daily tracking the accumulated value and return rate of the portfolio.

Choosing the closing price on the first day as the buying point is a carefully considered decision. On Korean exchanges, the opening price on the first day is often significantly pushed up due to violent fluctuations and speculative buying. Using the closing price effectively filters out this short-term noise.

Data Collection

Price data were obtained directly through the public REST API of each exchange. For Upbit, daily K-line interfaces were used to collect complete daily OHLCV data for each token from the day of listing until March 11, 2026, and cross-verified the current price through market interfaces (/v1/ticker). For Bithumb, a 24-hour K-line interface was used to obtain data for the same period. To simplify the model, this study did not consider fluctuations in the exchange rate between the dollar and the won.

Overall Performance

The following chart visually presents the simulation results. The subsequent sections will provide a detailed interpretation and analysis of this data.

Comparison of Three Major Exchanges

The performance comparison of newly listed tokens on the three major exchanges in 2025 is as follows:

All three major exchanges recorded approximately 70% losses. Upbit (-69.5%) and Bithumb (-69.1%) performed almost equally, while Binance (-71.7%) was similarly close. Regardless of which exchange is chosen, investors who bought new tokens on the first day faced an average loss of about 70% of their initial funds.

Yield Rate Distribution Characteristics

The overall average is insufficient to reveal the differences in the performance of individual tokens. The following provides a detailed examination of the yield rates of each token divided by intervals:

Both exchanges had over 40% of tokens concentrated in the loss interval of -75% to -90%. In Upbit, this range accounted for 46%, with an additional 9 tokens (15%) suffering extreme losses exceeding 90%. Only two tokens ultimately achieved positive returns: Kite (KITE, up 232.8%) and Lombard (BARD, up 9.3%).

Bithumb’s yield rate distribution is more diversified. With 8 profitable tokens, it also has 33 tokens suffering extreme losses exceeding 90%. This diversification partly stems from the larger sample size of 144 tokens but also reflects Bithumb's listings strategy, which covers a broader range of project types compared to Upbit.

The median yield reveals a more severe reality: Upbit is at -80.9%, while Bithumb is at -82.1%, both below their respective averages. This indicates that a small number of relatively resilient tokens raised the overall average level, while the typical performance of newly listed tokens is actually bleaker than the surface data suggests.

Impact of Listing Time on Performance

To investigate whether the timing of listings affects subsequent performance, we will compare the data between the first half of the year (January to June) and the second half (July to December).

The data shows that tokens listed in the second half performed better on both major exchanges. This phenomenon is intuitive: tokens listed at the beginning of the year experienced a longer declining cycle. Considering that the overall cryptocurrency market is in a downward trend in 2025, the longer the holding period, the greater the likelihood of incurring significant losses.

It is worth noting that the gap in performance between the two halves is quite significant. In Bithumb, the yield rate difference between tokens listed in the first half (-77.3%) and those listed in the second half (-59.4%) is approximately 18 percentage points, a difference that cannot be solely explained by the time factor. Possibilities include: tokens listed in the second half indeed have stronger fundamental support, or market expectations have become more rational due to the lessons learned in the first half.

Selection Paradox

Relationship Between Number of Listings and Performance

Throughout 2025, Upbit added 59 KRW trading pairs, while Bithumb added 144. The number of listings on Bithumb is over twice that of Upbit and significantly exceeds Binance's 92. Upbit is renowned for having the strictest listing standards among Korean exchanges. However, despite the stark difference in the number of listings, the investment portfolio return rates of the two exchanges are almost entirely consistent: Upbit at -69.5%, Bithumb at -69.1%.

Cross-Listed Token Analysis

To delve deeper, we further compared the performance of tokens listed on both major exchanges simultaneously with those only listed on Bithumb. The data shows that 50 tokens were simultaneously listed on Upbit and Bithumb.

In theory, projects that can be listed simultaneously on two mainstream exchanges should have a certain level of industry recognition. However, the average return of these 50 tokens (-69.4%) is nearly identical to the 94 tokens listed solely on Bithumb (-68.9%).

This finding points to two conclusions:

First, being listed on multiple mainstream exchanges does not guarantee subsequent price performance.

Second, the price inflation induced by the listing event on the first day is a structural phenomenon that is unrelated to how much attention the project itself has received.

Whether a token simultaneously has the "honor" of being listed on Upbit or quietly listed only on Bithumb, the losses ultimately borne by first-day buyers are not significantly different.

Analysis of Survivors

Among the 59 tokens listed on Upbit, only KITE (up 232.8%) and BARD (up 9.3%) ultimately achieved positive returns. Only 8 tokens managed to maintain losses of less than 50%.

Bithumb's 8 profitable tokens form a more diverse sample.

KITE recorded an increase of 209.6%, which is a significant outlier. However, it should be noted that this token was only listed for four months, making it premature to interpret its performance as sustainable long-term results. STABLE and DEXE also need cautious consideration due to only having three months of tracking records.

A more instructive case is that of PAXG. As a token pegged 1:1 with the spot price of gold, its 69.0% increase is entirely driven by the steady rise in gold prices in 2025. This performance has nothing to do with the fundamentals of the cryptocurrency market, merely reflecting the macro trend of gold. In other words, the most reliable way to achieve profitability on Bithumb is, surprisingly, to not invest in cryptocurrency projects at all.

Conclusion

This study concludes that the performance of tokens newly listed on Korean exchanges in 2025 is fundamentally no different from the structural level of Binance. Despite the Korean market being characterized by a high proportion of retail participation and differing listing strategies among exchanges, the average loss for first-day buyers across the three major exchanges converges to around 70%.

We believe that the core insight revealed by this data is that the root of the problem does not lie in the specific exchange's listing standards or the quality issues of individual tokens, but in the inherent structural dynamics of the listing event itself. When a token is newly listed on a mainstream exchange, concentrated retail demand will drive up the price on the first day. As time goes on, the price naturally reverts, leading to losses for first-day buyers. The similar performance of tokens listed on both major exchanges compared to those listed on only one further confirms that these losses are not due to specific exchanges or tokens, but rather the structural characteristics of the listing event.

It should be noted that this study measures the performance of a specific strategy: buying at the closing price on the first day and holding until now. If short-term trading strategies utilizing price fluctuations in the following days or strategies entering after significant price corrections were adopted, vastly different conclusions might be drawn. However, such strategies require high precision in timing and deviate significantly from the actual behavior of most retail investors.

The 2025 data provides a clear indication: buying a token solely because it is newly listed on a mainstream exchange is a systematic loss strategy, regardless of which exchange is chosen. This phenomenon is not unique to the Korean market but is a global structural issue. The reason is not that exchanges opted for subpar projects, but rather that the listing event itself creates a demand-concentrated dynamic that persistently disadvantages first-day buyers.