2026-01-07 06:26:23

Seeing FXS undergo a major upgrade—transforming into a FRAX ecosystem token.

This upgrade of FRAX is very interesting, mainly serving two roles: one as the gas fee payment token for Fraxtal L1, and the other as a means to grow the digital dollar ecosystem through the growth of frxUSD stablecoin compatible with GENIUS.

In simple terms, this is not just a change in the token name, but a redefinition of its ecosystem role. As an independent L1 chain, Fraxtal needs its own ecosystem token to drive network operation; at the same time, the development of the frxUSD stablecoin also opens up new value imagination spaces for FRAX holders.

If you are interested in stablecoin tracks and L1 ecosystem development, this upgrade is worth a deeper look.

FRAX-7,25%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

4 Likes

Reward
4
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SatsStacking

· 01-07 06:55

This move is actually aimed at locking FXS into the ecosystem, with gas fees and stablecoins driving it on two wheels. It looks pretty good.

View OriginalReply0

GreenCandleCollector

· 01-07 06:55

The renaming of FXS to FRAX... honestly, it's still about trying to catch a ride on L1's coattails. The real potential lies in the frxUSD part.

View OriginalReply0

TheShibaWhisperer

· 01-07 06:54

FXS renamed to FRAX? Alright, another round of "repositioning." Let's see if this time they can really come up with something new.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrier

· 01-07 06:43

Another upgrade, another repositioning. Hearing this kind of rhetoric too often... Can the FRAX team first stabilize the fundamentals before hyping?

View OriginalReply0

CryptoNomics

· 01-07 06:33

ngl if you actually ran the regression analysis on fraxtal's network effects versus competing l1s, the tokenomics fundamentals here don't hold up. correlation matrix's telling me something different entirely.

Reply0