Last month, we published our "Does IR Matter in Crypto?" piece. This is a follow-up. We took the original 53-protocol dataset and scaled it to 150+, covering every major sector: DEXs, borrow/lend, perps, liquid staking, L1s, L2s, bridges, DePIN, AI, stablecoins, infrastructure, and CEX tokens. Protocols range from $40mm FDV to $45bn.

We checked each one across 15 binary, verifiable metrics. Does the protocol disclose this, yes or no. Every data point was verified against public sources: @artemis, @tokenterminal, @Blockworks, @Dune, and @DefiLlama.

Here's what we found:

<1% disclose market maker terms

One hundred and fifty protocols. Billions in combined daily volume. Only one publicly discloses any information about its market-making arrangements.

Market makers set the conditions under which tokens trade. The agreements often include token loans, option structures, and performance incentives that directly affect price discovery. In traditional markets, material agreements like these are disclosed. In crypto, every market participant operates without this information.

@MeteoraAG is the only protocol in the dataset that has disclosed information about its market-making arrangements, via its 2025 Annual Token Holder Report. One out of 150+.

This is the single most consequential transparency gap in the industry.

91% have revenue data. 3% have an IR hub.

Almost every protocol in this audit makes revenue data publicly accessible through third-party platforms or their own dashboards. The raw data exists.

But only 3% have built a dedicated investor relations hub that consolidates this data into an investor-facing experience. @MeteoraInside (ir.meteora.ag), @jito_sol, @JupiterExchange, @Raydium, and @MetaDAOProject are the exceptions.

Every other protocol distributes information across blogs, governance forums, X threads, and third-party platforms. There is no centralized, investor-grade experience. The gap is not data availability. It's communication infrastructure.

9% have filed the Blockworks TTF

The Blockworks Token Transparency Framework was presented to the SEC in June 2025 and covers 18 disclosure criteria across supply, allocation, financials, and market structure. Backed by Pantera, L1D, and Theia.

Of 150+ protocols reviewed, 13 have filed: Jito, Jupiter, Raydium, Morpho, Aerodrome, MetaDAO, Maple, dYdX, Euler, Marinade, EtherFi, Gains Network, and Meteora.

That's meaningful progress from zero. But the filing rate dropped from 25% at n=53 to 9% at n=150+. The original dataset was skewed toward DeFi protocols that were early TTF adopters. At scale, the picture is clearer: the vast majority of the market has not opted in. Zero L1s, zero L2s, and zero infrastructure protocols have filed.

The framework is there. More protocols should be using it.

38% have active value accrual. 62% return nothing.

We defined "active value accrual" broadly: does the protocol have at least one live mechanism directing economic value to token holders beyond governance rights?

Across 150+ protocols, we identified six distinct models: direct fee distribution (JUP, DYDX, GMX), buyback-and-burn (HYPE, RAY, MET), staking revenue share (PENDLE, AAVE, ETHFI), conditional buyback (LDO), ve-model epoch distributions (AERO), and governance-only with no economic rights (MORPHO, LINK, ARB).

62% of protocols in the dataset fall into the last category. Governance-only tokens with no value accrual include some of the largest names in the industry.

The sector breakdown is stark. 62% of perps protocols have active value accrual. 12% of L1/L2 tokens do. The perps sector treats token holder alignment as a competitive advantage. L1 foundations have not gotten there yet.

A deeper analysis of which models actually work is coming next week.

The data layer is built. The communication layer is not.

We checked five major third-party platforms: Token Terminal, Dune Analytics, Artemis, DefiLlama, and Blockworks Research.

The first four each cover 85-95% of the dataset. 72% of protocols are listed on 4 or more platforms. Every protocol in the audit is on at least one.

The raw data infrastructure for institutional analysis is largely built. What's missing is the interpretation, packaging, and communication layer that turns data into investable narratives.

The full picture

Disclosure rates across 150+ protocols:

<1% - MM terms disclosed
3% - Dedicated IR hub
3% - One-pager available
5% - Dedicated investor channel
7% - Per-token metrics published
8% - Token holder report
9% - TTF filed
15% - Exchange listing disclosed
18% - Quarterly updates
35% - Revenue segmented
38% - Active value accrual
88% - Float disclosed
91% - Revenue data accessible

What this means

The thesis from "Does IR Matter?" holds up. The data is more damning at n=150 than it was at n=53.

Crypto protocols are not hiding their fundamentals. They are failing to present them. The raw inputs to fundamental analysis exist onchain and across third-party platforms. But the translation layer, the IR infrastructure that turns data into institutional confidence, barely exists.

3% have an IR hub. <1% disclose market maker terms. 91% of the market hasn't filed the only standardized disclosure framework available.

The opportunity for protocols is straightforward: the cost of building IR infrastructure is low relative to the capital markets benefit. The protocols that invest in this now will be the ones institutional allocators can underwrite first.

The full interactive report with all 150+ protocols is live at:

novora.co/research/ir-transparency-2026.html

Next week, we plan to release the companion piece to this series: "Which Token Value Accrual Model Works?". This report breaks down the six token value accrual mechanisms we identified, their empirical performance, and what they mean for token classification and institutional adoption.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. All data was verified against publicly available sources as of April 2026. Novora may have advisory relationships with protocols referenced in this report. Always conduct your own research and consult a qualified financial advisor before making investment decisions.

novora.co/research