The direct answer is that the supplied brief does not prove whether users pay enough to keep these networks running. It shows that the ten networks still have meaningful market value after severe drawdowns, and that recovery math is steep, ranging from roughly 21.5x for Avalanche to roughly 323x for Internet Computer. That is enough to make the user-payment question important, but not enough to answer it. Readers should treat this as a valuation and sustainability checkpoint, not as a buy or sell signal.
| Primary source | CryptoSlate |
|---|---|
| Reported at | 2026-07-25T11:35:49.000Z |
| Topic | Analysis |
| Evidence limit | Reported facts are separated from interpretation; current prices and platform terms require independent verification. |
Evaluate BYBIT for your use case
Check regional eligibility, current fees and product availability on the official destination.
Review BYBITWhat The Report Says
The event says ten once-prominent cryptocurrency networks now have a combined market value of $12.06 billion while trading an average of 97.13% below their all-time highs. That combination is the central tension: the market has not written the assets down to zero, but it has priced them far below their peak valuations.
The supplied brief names AVAX and ICP as affected assets. It also states that a recent Taurex report put the recovery requirement across the group from roughly 21.5x for Avalanche to roughly 323x for Internet Computer. Those figures frame the recovery challenge, but they do not by themselves explain whether the networks have enough paying user demand.
Why User Payment Matters
A crypto network can retain market value for several reasons, including expectations, liquidity, developer belief, or future optionality. The specific question in this event is narrower: whether users pay enough to support the economics implied by these valuations and recovery targets.
The brief does not provide the missing operating evidence. It does not state current user payment levels, network costs, recurring demand, active usage, fee capture, or whether any payment activity is growing or shrinking. Without those inputs, a reader cannot responsibly conclude that the remaining $12.06 billion valuation is fundamentally supported.
AVAX And ICP Read-Through
Avalanche is the largest named example in the supplied brief, with a stated market value of $2.91 billion and a roughly 21.5x recovery need. That makes AVAX the lower recovery-multiple case among the range described, but a lower multiple does not automatically make the asset safer or more sustainable.
Internet Computer sits at the other end of the stated recovery range, with a roughly 323x recovery need. That figure signals a much steeper path back to prior highs, but the brief does not provide enough information to judge whether ICP has the user payment base, demand, or operating traction needed to support such a recovery.
Evidence Limits
This article uses only the supplied event and brief. The evidence is enough to summarize the valuation drawdown, the combined market value, the average decline from all-time highs, the named assets, and the stated recovery range. It is not enough to verify the full Taurex methodology or add fresh market data.
Because the brief is evidence-limited, the safest conclusion is also limited. The data supports concern and further research, not a final investment thesis. It does not prove that these networks are failing, and it does not prove that they can recover.
Practical Checks Before Acting
A useful checklist starts with the missing data. Readers should look for whether users are paying for real network activity, whether that activity is durable, and whether the economic value captured by the network has any visible relationship to the market value still assigned to the token.
The next check is recovery math. A roughly 21.5x recovery requirement and a roughly 323x recovery requirement are very different risk profiles. Even when both assets are part of the same drawdown story, the amount of future value creation needed is not the same.
Risk And Bybit Context
This is not financial advice. Large drawdowns can create interest, but they can also reflect lasting repricing. A token that is down more than 97% on average across a peer group can still fall further, remain stagnant, or recover unevenly.
For readers who already use Bybit to monitor crypto markets, AVAX and ICP can be placed on a watchlist and reviewed against fresh price, liquidity, and project evidence. If using the supplied Bybit partner context, the referral URL is BYBIT official destination and the code is 11350287. That is a platform context, not a recommendation to trade.
Evaluate BYBIT for your use case
Check regional eligibility, current fees and product availability on the official destination.
Review BYBITAffiliate link · Availability varies by region · No guaranteed outcomeQuestions readers ask
Are these ten altcoins undervalued because they are still worth $12.06 billion after a 97.13% average collapse?
The supplied brief does not prove undervaluation. It only shows that the group still has a combined market value of $12.06 billion while trading an average of 97.13% below all-time highs.
Does the brief prove users pay enough to keep these networks running?
No. The brief raises that question but does not provide user-payment, revenue, cost, or usage data needed to answer it.
Why is Avalanche important in this event?
Avalanche is named as the largest of the ten networks in the supplied brief, with a market value of $2.91 billion and a roughly 21.5x stated recovery need.
Why is Internet Computer important in this event?
Internet Computer is named as the high-end recovery case in the supplied range, with a roughly 323x stated recovery need.
Should Bybit users trade AVAX or ICP based on this news?
This article does not provide financial advice or a trading signal. Bybit users can use the event as a research prompt, but any decision should depend on current market data, personal risk limits, and independent review.