TLDR
MNT trades like the buyback-and-burn is never coming. At ~$1.7B it carries none of the scarcity premium the market pays BNB and OKB for and that gap only makes sense if you assume the one mechanism that earned them that premium simply won’t arrive for MNT. That’s the mispricing because the business is further along than the price implies.
Here’s what you’re getting at this price. MNT already runs the same demand engine BNB does. Bybit pushes fee discounts, VIP tiers, and collateral through the token, and it now settles tokenized US stocks on-chain through xStocks, with Binance doing the same. I estimate around $400M of MNT is already locked up in all that, and none of it is being burned. On top of that, the DAO has already passed one burn-related proposal (MIP-34), and a treasury burn with real numbers attached is being discussed on the forum right now.
If the DAO ships a real, revenue-funded burn the re-rate is aggressive. Not because the scarcity math is powerful as on its own it isn’t, but because it moves MNT from “fee token” to “exchange token that compounds,” and puts a recurring buyer underneath a token that today only has soft, releasable locks. You’re paid to wait for a catalyst the market has priced at roughly zero.
Where We Are Today
BNB and MNT are fed by the same kind of demand: a top-tier exchange pushing fees, gas, settlement and collateral through the token. Only BNB permanently destroys supply on the other end. That difference is most of the valuation gap and imo closing it is the cleanest catalyst MNT has.
BNB is fed by several demand streams: exchange fee revenue, gas on BNB Chain and DeFi activity, and Binance just added a fourth. It launched trading in over 7,000 US stocks and ETFs, fundable directly in BNB, and previewed bStocks, a product that will let users mint tokenized versions of those equities natively on BNB Chain in the coming weeks.
Every share funded in BNB and eventually every tokenized equity minted, traded and settled on BNB Chain, routes a
...