Single-asset evidence report · By CoinNudge Research · · Guide updated 2026-10-03 · 20 min read
What is INJ coin, and is it worth holding?
INJ is Injective’s native staking, governance and utility token. The project documents a community buyback-and-burn mechanism, but a passive holder does not automatically receive each month’s revenue basket. For a holding decision, an INJ holding case should verify a same-period net-supply calculation and real paid protocol usage, while distinguishing passive holding from active buyback participation. In the frozen Binance spot daily-open window ending September 25, 2026, INJ returned +65.1% versus BTC +40.5%; across 57 earlier monthly starts, its median was −2.9% and 25/57 beat BTC. Overlapping history is not a future win rate or personal buy call.
Inspect all historical starts · Check current market context
What should investors know about INJ?
- INJ gained +65.1% in the last frozen 90-day window; this differs from its historical monthly-start median −2.9%.
- 25/57 complete historical 90-day starts beat BTC, while 57/57 had a deeper daily-open drawdown.
- An INJ holding case should verify a same-period net-supply calculation and real paid protocol usage, while distinguishing passive holding from active buyback participation.
What is INJ used for in the Injective ecosystem?
INJ is Injective’s native staking, governance and utility token. The project documents a community buyback-and-burn mechanism, but a passive holder does not automatically receive each month’s revenue basket.
INJ is the native Injective asset used for network activity, staking and governance. The Community BuyBack is a distinct participation programme, not a distribution paid automatically to everyone who holds INJ.
For holding INJ, distinguish passive exposure from committing tokens for a basket, then reconcile issuance and completed burns over matching dates. The 57 historical paired price windows below neither include programme rewards nor establish that buybacks caused the gains.
| INJ at a glance | Dated evidence | How to read it |
|---|---|---|
| Documented token role | Holds a native token used for fees, staking and governance | Not an automatic claim on every project activity |
| Last frozen 90-day spot return | +65.1% | BTC on the same UTC dates: +40.5% |
| Historical 90-day monthly median | −2.9% | 57 overlapping complete starts, not a forecast |
| Current circulating supply | 100,000,000 | CoinGecko response updated 2026-09-26T10:12:20.000Z |
Verify: Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
Who receives INJ BuyBack baskets: participants or all holders?
BuyBack baskets go to eligible participants under the round's commitment rules, not automatically to every passive INJ holder. Ordinary holding, staking and programme participation have different requirements and payoffs.
A participant gives up or commits INJ to obtain a rules-based basket; that exchange has an opportunity cost and an execution/valuation problem. Inspect the actual assets distributed and round terms rather than treating the basket as a free dividend while still counting the same committed INJ as held capital.
Staking may separately earn network rewards under live parameters. The token's utility and programme description do not establish net real profit after price changes, fees or supply dilution.
| Who owns what | Documented role or participation | What cannot be inferred |
|---|---|---|
| Passive INJ holder | Holds a native token used for fees, staking and governance | Does not automatically receive monthly basket income |
| BuyBack participant | May commit INJ and receive a rules-based pro-rata basket | Outcome, eligibility and opportunity cost depend on the round |
| Staker | May earn protocol rewards and support security | Nominal rewards are not guaranteed net real returns |
Verify: Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
How do you judge an INJ BuyBack basket after giving up the committed INJ?
Evaluate it as a conditional exchange of assets, not a free reward on an unchanged holding. A participant's net result depends on the basket actually received and the INJ committed, plus fees, restrictions and realizable exit prices.
For a round review, record the commitment amount and timestamp, each asset distributed, receipt time and eligible exit route. Compare the realizable basket value with the value or same-period opportunity cost of the INJ committed. If an asset has no executable bid or a distribution is incomplete, leave that component unresolved instead of valuing it at an unsupported displayed quote.
The programme description supports its mechanics, not a profitable outcome for every participant. The frozen INJ/BTC experiment is passive spot exposure and excludes BuyBack participation, so its 57 observations cannot serve as the success rate of this separate activity.
Verify: Injective Community BuyBack participation mechanics · Frozen passive INJ/BTC spot study
Does Injective fee activity outweigh issuance and create net INJ scarcity?
This release does not establish that Injective fee activity outweighs issuance in every period. Burn totals alone are insufficient: a complete net-supply calculation needs newly issued and burned units over the same interval, with transfers kept separate.
Injective’s current token page says its original allocated supply is fully circulating with no future insider unlock schedule. That is different from saying future circulating units or effective supply can never change; inspect protocol issuance and actual burns independently.
The project’s Community BuyBack is a participation mechanism. A participant commits INJ under program rules, may receive a pro-rata basket, and the committed INJ is burned. Passive holders are not automatically given that basket. To value the mechanism, audit each round’s committed INJ, distributed assets, fees, newly created units and participation constraints.
To assess net scarcity, use a common-period unit ledger instead of adding revenue dollars to burned INJ units. Separately value any basket received by participants and the INJ committed to obtain it. The price study below excludes both sides of that programme, so it is not an empirical BuyBack profitability test.
INJ's dated price experiment below measures spot returns and drawdown paths, not the causal contribution of project adoption. The release has no independently frozen continuous operating-economics series that completes this value-capture test.
Verify: Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
Is INJ net deflationary after issuance and actual burns?
Net INJ deflation is not established for every period by a fully circulated original allocation or cumulative burns. Compare new issuance with actual burned units on the same interval; the provider's equal total/circulating values do not perform that test.
CoinGecko’s separate 2026-09-26T10:12:20.000Z response reports 100,000,000 circulating INJ out of 100,000,000 total, with no maximum-supply field. These are provider classifications, not an audit of custodian balances or a schedule of future exchange selling.
The issuer states its original allocation is fully circulating and has no future vesting unlocks. Community buyback permanently burns committed INJ. This does not, by itself, prove net deflation in every measurement window; reconcile live issuance, burns and circulating balances. CoinGecko’s total and circulating fields are provider estimates, not an on-chain supply audit.
For INJ, separate the fully circulated original allocation claim from new protocol issuance and actual token burns. Reconcile issued minus burned units over the same interval and compare outstanding balances; a cumulative burn total cannot establish net deflation in an individual month. No future insider vesting is not a promise of unchanged effective supply or an automatic basket payment.
| INJ supply field | Frozen provider value | Reading rule |
|---|---|---|
| Circulating supply | 100,000,000 | CoinGecko provider definition at 2026-09-26T10:12:20.000Z |
| Total supply | 100,000,000 | May differ from circulating and maximum supply |
| Maximum supply | Not reported | Missing is not zero and not equal to total supply |
| Reported circulating / maximum | Not defined | Not a dated release schedule or tradable-float audit |
Verify: Frozen original supply response · Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
INJ tokenomics: unlocked allocation versus net-supply change
An originally fully circulating INJ allocation removes that particular insider-vesting schedule; it does not establish zero future protocol issuance. The documented Community BuyBack distributes its revenue basket to eligible participants who commit INJ, rather than automatically paying every passive holder.
Measure issued units minus actually burned units over the same interval before claiming net deflation. For participation, compare committed INJ, distributed basket value, eligibility and opportunity cost under the applicable round terms. Cumulative burn totals alone cannot establish monthly deflation or a profitable BuyBack return.
| Token-economics dimension | Documented mechanism or attributed claim | What remains unproven / investor implication |
|---|---|---|
| Allocation and unlocks | Injective states its original INJ allocation is fully circulating with no future insider vesting unlocks. | This does not establish that live protocol issuance is zero. |
| Community BuyBack | Eligible participants commit INJ for a pro-rata revenue basket; committed INJ is then burned. | A passive holder does not automatically receive the basket. |
| Net supply calculation | Compare units newly issued and actually burned over the same period. | Cumulative burns alone cannot prove net deflation in a specific month. |
| Investor check | Audit round-level committed INJ, distributions, burn transactions, issuance and participant terms. | Project descriptions and historical mechanisms may change through governance. |
Verify: Injective INJ overview · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics
Did INJ’s recent rally reverse its longer-term BTC lag?
At the September 25 UTC daily-open endpoint, INJ returned +65.1% over 90 days versus BTC +40.5% on exactly the same days. The 365-day INJ path was −35.1% versus BTC −25.5%. These different windows are one dated path each—not five independent tests or a prediction.
The 90-day chart plots all 91 matched UTC daily opens from 2026-06-27 to 2026-09-25, normalized to 100 on the first day. A later CoinGecko price or 24-hour change may differ because the venue, market window and timestamp differ. The table reports the actual shared-start comparison rather than mixing unrelated provider percentages.
| Matched holding window | INJ spot return | BTC spot return | INJ minus BTC / status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 days | +40.6% | +10.5% | 30.2 pp |
| 30 days | +44.5% | +7.5% | 37.0 pp |
| 90 days | +65.1% | +40.5% | 24.6 pp |
| 180 days | +185.3% | +27.2% | 158.1 pp |
| 365 days | −35.1% | −25.5% | -9.6 pp |
Verify: Full dated path and methods
How often did INJ’s 90-day return beat BTC?
Across the frozen matched 90-day monthly starts, INJ's median return was −2.9% versus BTC +1.9%, and 25/57 starts beat BTC. That is descriptive historical evidence, not a future success probability; the full overlapping sample, dependence check and opposing cases appear below.
We prespecified every first day of a month after the Binance listing had a full prior month through June 2026. Of 57 candidate 90-day starts, 57 had a complete 91-daily-open INJ/BTC pair and 0 were excluded for missing daily opens. The INJ median endpoint was −2.9%, BTC's was +1.9%; INJ beat BTC in 25/57. Those windows overlap and must not be treated as 57 independent win-probability trials.
INJ had a deeper daily-open peak-to-trough drawdown in 57/57 matched windows. The lower 10th-percentile INJ endpoint was −57.7% and the upper 90th percentile +120.5%. Every-third-month sensitivity has only 19 observations and 8 BTC-beating starts; it is a dependence check, not a statistically powered forecast.
The worst BTC-relative start was 2024-02-01: −29.8% for INJ against +42.5% BTC, with −55.1% asset drawdown. A counterexample is 2023-10-01: +366.8% for INJ versus +56.0% BTC. Showing both prevents the current rally or a past collapse from becoming the whole story.
| 90-day monthly cohort measure | INJ | BTC / paired comparison | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complete starts | 57 | 57 | Same UTC dates and 91 daily opens |
| Median endpoint | −2.9% | +1.9% | Not an expected future return |
| 10th / 90th percentile | −57.7% / +120.5% | −24.9% / +47.8% | Descriptive tail range |
| Outperformed BTC | 25/57 | — | Overlapping monthly windows |
| Deeper path drawdown | 57/57 | — | Measured at daily opens only |
| Every-third-month check | 8/19 | — | Small non-overlap sensitivity |
Verify: All matched starts and excluded candidates · Frozen calculation contract
Which INJ 90-day entry dates won or lost relative to BTC?
Both winning and losing INJ windows are shown: all 57 eligible same-date INJ/BTC 90-day observations are visible chronologically below. The worst BTC-relative start was 2024-02-01: −29.8% for INJ against +42.5% BTC, with −55.1% asset drawdown. A counterexample is 2023-10-01: +366.8% for INJ versus +56.0% BTC. These are contrasting examples from the complete table, not independent future scenarios. A first-of-month start is the frozen sample design, not a suggested buying schedule.
Compare terminal return with interim drawdown in each row. Daily-open paths can understate intraday harm; fees, spreads, slippage, tax, staking and leverage are excluded. The complete input CSV and exclusion ledger are available for independent recalculation.
| UTC start | INJ 90d | BTC 90d | INJ − BTC | INJ path drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-01 | −12.8% | +6.0% | -18.8 pp | −45.3% |
| 2021-11-01 | −59.3% | −37.7% | -21.6 pp | −70.6% |
| 2021-12-01 | −58.3% | −24.2% | -34.1 pp | −69.9% |
| 2022-01-01 | −28.2% | −1.5% | -26.7 pp | −52.6% |
| 2022-02-01 | −14.1% | +0.0% | -14.1 pp | −50.9% |
| 2022-03-01 | −62.7% | −31.7% | -31.0 pp | −71.5% |
| 2022-04-01 | −78.6% | −55.8% | -22.8 pp | −80.7% |
| 2022-05-01 | −60.6% | −36.8% | -23.8 pp | −73.2% |
| 2022-06-01 | −28.2% | −36.2% | +8.0 pp | −48.0% |
| 2022-07-01 | +37.3% | −2.7% | +40.0 pp | −30.8% |
| 2022-08-01 | +61.4% | −10.7% | +72.1 pp | −30.8% |
| 2022-09-01 | +3.0% | −18.0% | +20.9 pp | −46.1% |
| 2022-10-01 | −24.2% | −14.4% | -9.9 pp | −53.8% |
| 2022-11-01 | +3.8% | +15.9% | -12.1 pp | −53.8% |
| 2022-12-01 | +99.5% | +34.8% | +64.7 pp | −28.7% |
| 2023-01-01 | +270.5% | +72.1% | +198.4 pp | −40.0% |
| 2023-02-01 | +149.8% | +21.4% | +128.4 pp | −40.0% |
| 2023-03-01 | +111.1% | +19.9% | +91.3 pp | −37.8% |
| 2023-04-01 | +66.4% | +7.0% | +59.4 pp | −39.2% |
| 2023-05-01 | +3.2% | +0.4% | +2.7 pp | −28.7% |
| 2023-06-01 | −0.0% | +1.9% | -1.9 pp | −28.6% |
| 2023-07-01 | −9.4% | −11.3% | +1.9 pp | −29.6% |
| 2023-08-01 | +76.9% | +18.1% | +58.8 pp | −18.3% |
| 2023-09-01 | +139.4% | +45.9% | +93.5 pp | −21.2% |
| 2023-10-01 | +366.8% | +56.0% | +310.8 pp | −21.2% |
| 2023-11-01 | +164.4% | +25.0% | +139.4 pp | −26.6% |
| 2023-12-01 | +134.6% | +65.5% | +69.1 pp | −28.0% |
| 2024-01-01 | +0.2% | +64.6% | -64.4 pp | −32.5% |
| 2024-02-01 | −29.8% | +42.5% | -72.3 pp | −55.1% |
| 2024-03-01 | −35.4% | +10.7% | -46.1 pp | −58.8% |
| 2024-04-01 | −38.0% | −14.4% | -23.6 pp | −44.9% |
| 2024-05-01 | +1.7% | +10.1% | -8.4 pp | −40.4% |
| 2024-06-01 | −28.5% | −12.1% | -16.4 pp | −52.2% |
| 2024-07-01 | −2.9% | +4.9% | -7.8 pp | −45.9% |
| 2024-08-01 | −7.6% | +12.5% | -20.1 pp | −32.0% |
| 2024-09-01 | +75.7% | +65.3% | +10.4 pp | −30.7% |
| 2024-10-01 | −11.2% | +48.0% | -59.2 pp | −40.3% |
| 2024-11-01 | −3.4% | +47.6% | -50.9 pp | −48.3% |
| 2024-12-01 | −57.3% | −12.5% | -44.8 pp | −61.9% |
| 2025-01-01 | −55.6% | −11.8% | -43.8 pp | −66.6% |
| 2025-02-01 | −49.9% | −5.8% | -44.1 pp | −65.7% |
| 2025-03-01 | +4.4% | +25.2% | -20.8 pp | −51.5% |
| 2025-04-01 | +31.3% | +31.3% | +0.1 pp | −35.4% |
| 2025-05-01 | +46.0% | +25.3% | +20.8 pp | −35.4% |
| 2025-06-01 | +7.2% | +3.6% | +3.6 pp | −30.8% |
| 2025-07-01 | +12.5% | +4.7% | +7.8 pp | −30.0% |
| 2025-08-01 | −35.7% | −5.0% | -30.7 pp | −49.4% |
| 2025-09-01 | −53.2% | −16.1% | -37.1 pp | −63.7% |
| 2025-10-01 | −62.1% | −23.5% | -38.5 pp | −66.9% |
| 2025-11-01 | −46.3% | −22.8% | -23.5 pp | −50.3% |
| 2025-12-01 | −45.5% | −25.9% | -19.6 pp | −50.3% |
| 2026-01-01 | −31.2% | −22.1% | -9.1 pp | −50.4% |
| 2026-02-01 | +0.8% | −0.6% | +1.5 pp | −27.3% |
| 2026-03-01 | +106.0% | +9.7% | +96.3 pp | −17.6% |
| 2026-04-01 | +64.1% | −11.8% | +75.9 pp | −39.0% |
| 2026-05-01 | +34.6% | −16.2% | +50.8 pp | −39.0% |
| 2026-06-01 | −21.0% | +6.2% | -27.2 pp | −41.6% |
Can INJ spot turnover be mistaken for executable depth?
The frozen INJ evidence cannot establish a current executable price: the sampled book did not cover this coin. Historical turnover is present, but spread, exit depth and simulated slippage remain unavailable rather than zero.
The historical INJ/USDT Binance spot candles show $9,103,633 median daily quote turnover across 30 complete UTC days. This is a transaction-flow measure, not cash available at a specific bid or ask. It also excludes other exchanges and market-maker obligations.
The sampled order-book dataset did not include INJ. Therefore this report does not invent a current spread, ±1% depth or $10,000 slippage figure from a volume candle. A current book and actual trading venue are required before assessing execution.
Before an actual INJ order, match the pair, venue and observation time, then estimate the buy from asks and the planned exit from bids at the intended size. Add fees and any transfer costs; one basis point is 0.01%. If the returned levels cannot fill the size, or access/data is delayed, reduce the planned exposure or wait for adequate evidence—not extrapolate the historical turnover into depth.
| Liquidity or execution measure | Dated observed value | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| 30-day Binance spot median daily quote turnover | $9,103,633 | 30 complete archived UTC days; turnover ≠ executable depth |
| Current spread, depth and $10k slippage | Not covered by sampled top-30 book universe | Do not infer liquidity from turnover; obtain a fresh venue book before trading |
Verify: Frozen top-30 order-book source · Current market-depth research
Does the INJ burn narrative match a measured net-supply change?
An INJ burn headline is not evidence of same-period net supply contraction. Community claims become decision evidence only when their burn, issuance and participation records can be reconciled to matching dates and units.
Search-trending lists and public discussions show attention to INJ at the September 26 review. The cited lists are dynamic, and this release did not freeze a defensible unique-person or social-mention count. Attention is not a count of buyers, tokenholder rights or durable usage.
The useful community question is whether burns outrun newly issued units and whether revenue actually grows. A headline cumulative burn total without a same-period issuance denominator can exaggerate scarcity.
To use INJ discussion constructively, choose one factual claim, follow its direct source, note the date and beneficiary, and compare it with the rights and supply checks in this report. An unsupported promotion remains attention evidence; it is not converted into a holder-benefit claim or buying score.
Verify: Cross-platform social directory · CoinGecko short-window search attention · Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
Is INJ worth holding if buybacks do not outrun issuance?
There is no unconditional yes from this evidence. An INJ holding case should verify a same-period net-supply calculation and real paid protocol usage, while distinguishing passive holding from active buyback participation. The last frozen 90-day return was +65.1%, while the median of 57 earlier monthly-start windows was −2.9%; 25/57 beat BTC. These overlapping historical paths describe risk, not the chance of a profitable hold from today.
Evidence that would strengthen a holding thesis: Dated paid network use and audited buyback burns exceed new supply over meaningful periods, with broad participation and liquid exits. Evidence that would weaken or end it: Low actual fee capture, issuance offsetting burns, concentrated reward economics or liquidity thinning despite a strong scarcity narrative.
A holder should state a time horizon, position size, acceptable drawdown and specific facts that would trigger a reassessment. Revision trigger for this report: A change in buyback distribution, burn execution, staking issuance or governance parameters requires a new net-supply assessment. The checklist is not a personal recommendation, target price or promise that the next 90 days resemble a prior cohort.
Choose which INJ activity is being assessed: passive holding, delegated staking or a BuyBack round. For a round, require the actual commitment cost and realizable basket value; for passive holding, do not assign that basket as income. INJ was absent from the frozen book sample, so current bid depth must be obtained independently before planning an exit. Missing programme economics or depth supports waiting, not filling the gap with the historical rally.
| Holding decision check | Evidence to verify | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Tokenholder benefit | Holds a native token used for fees, staking and governance | Does not automatically receive monthly basket income |
| Future tradable supply | Official allocation dates and actual transfers | Provider float alone is not a sell forecast |
| Ability to exit | Fresh bid/ask depth plus fees and latency | Historical turnover is not a fill guarantee |
| Opportunity cost versus BTC | 57 complete historical paired starts plus current common window | Absolute gains can still lag BTC |
| Thesis invalidation | A change in buyback distribution, burn execution, staking issuance or governance parameters requires a new net-supply assessment. | A stated reason to reassess is more useful than an indefinite hold slogan |
Verify: Frozen INJ/BTC price study · Complete INJ monthly observation ledger · Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
How can the INJ-versus-BTC study be replayed without burn assumptions?
Reproduce INJ's spot results from the matched asset/BTC daily inputs, complete observation CSV, exclusions and frozen JSON below. Keep the original calculation version and cutoff: the October 3, 2026 edit clarifies decisions and subquestions, not a recalculation or a fresh market release.
Calculation hot-coin-spot-paths-1.0; historical cutoff 2026-09-25 UTC. The archived candle ledger preserves event_time, observed_at and ingested_at. Historical fills may have been collected retrospectively; this study does not claim every bar was available to CoinNudge on its original event date.
Recent returns use the same UTC daily-open start and endpoint for INJ and BTC with every intermediate day present. The monthly study buys at the first-day open and exits at the day-90 open, with 91 complete daily opens per pair; maximum drawdown is min(path / prior running peak − 1). It assumes no costs or dividends. The asset and BTC daily input CSVs enable independent numerical replay. Candidate and exclusion counts, input SHA-256 8b28a8df0281f0777efb032937ad9d859704f9c65dde3138ef5a4ef7e7773a88 of the complete normalized archive objects, and output SHA-256 b7efff994642b317078ed01a2dbf643381807700bae420dd01b964c67cdfcbce of the research result identify the frozen release; the manifest separately hashes each downloadable file.
Supply comes from a separate CoinGecko 2026-09-26T10:12:20.000Z observation; the separate book package was generated at 2026-09-26T10:14:13.653Z and contained no INJ row. Neither is silently inserted as information known to historical cohort investors. No causal claim links community activity or project usage to later return.
| Reproducible file | Contents | Time/interpretation boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Research JSON | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/inj.json | Calculation version, summary and full paired cohort |
| Observation CSV | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/inj-monthly-observations.csv | 57 matched monthly starts |
| Asset daily inputs | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/inj-daily-inputs.csv | Event, observation and ingestion dates |
| BTC daily inputs | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/btc-daily-inputs.csv | Matched BTC daily opens and provenance |
| Excluded starts | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/inj-exclusions.csv | 0 missing pairs; header retained if zero |
| Supply source | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/coingecko-supply-source.json | Dated provider fields, not a historical feature |
| Order-book source | /research-data/hot-coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/orderbook-source.json | Sampled current market, may omit this asset |
Verify: CoinNudge frozen spot-path research · Complete monthly observation ledger · Daily historical input ledger · Matched BTC daily input ledger · Frozen CoinGecko supply response · Dated order-book source · Social directory and limitations · Injective official INJ economics · Injective Community BuyBack mechanics · Injective tokenomics paper
Take the next step with this evidence.
Choose ongoing Telegram monitoring or inspect structured data in your own research workflow.
Receive qualifying events in Telegram.
Use the ready-made alert checklist, message explanations and daily briefing. Check the supported categories and coins before subscribing; every Research page is not a separate alert category.
Check the alert list · View alert plans
Inspect the data before choosing a pack.
Prepared research packs supply scoped features, separate outcomes where available and quality flags. Buy a fixed edition once and download directly; API use is optional.
Check data pack samples · Explore the full data catalog · Compare data plans
Each purchased pack includes its specified fields and published date range. This page's full dataset is not automatically included. Other data families require coverage, date, field and source-use confirmation before purchase. Telegram Pro is a separate 30-day service; historical packs are one-time purchases.
Frequently asked questions
What is Injective (INJ) used for?
INJ is Injective’s native staking, governance and utility token. The project documents a community buyback-and-burn mechanism, but a passive holder does not automatically receive each month’s revenue basket. This answers the token's documented role, not whether its price is attractive.
Is INJ worth holding?
There is no unconditional yes in this dated research. An INJ holding case should verify a same-period net-supply calculation and real paid protocol usage, while distinguishing passive holding from active buyback participation. The historical 57 monthly 90-day starts overlap, and 25/57 beat BTC; this is not a future success rate. Check your own horizon, loss limit and live evidence before deciding.
Is INJ a good coin to buy now?
This report is not a personalized buy call. The latest dated 90-day INJ path was +65.1% versus BTC +40.5%, but only 25/57 earlier 90-day monthly starts beat BTC and rights, supply and execution still matter.
How has INJ performed over 7, 30, 90 and 365 days?
The matched Binance spot daily-open returns are 7 days +40.6%; 30 days +44.5%; 90 days +65.1%; 365 days −35.1% through September 25, 2026. These are dated historical windows, not live quotes.
Are all INJ tokens unlocked?
Injective says its original allocation is fully circulating with no future insider unlocks. That is not a proof that protocol issuance or burns are zero.
Does every INJ holder receive buyback revenue?
No. The documented Community BuyBack distributes a basket to eligible participants who commit INJ under round rules.
Is INJ net deflationary every month?
Do not infer it from a cumulative burn total. Compare dated issuance and actual burned units on the same interval.
Can I reproduce this INJ study?
Yes. The page exposes every 57 matched 90-day start, the daily input CSV, exclusions, version and hashes. The windows overlap, so observed counts are not independent future probabilities.
Does INJ trading volume guarantee easy execution?
No. INJ was absent from the sampled top-30 book dataset. Turnover alone cannot establish current spread or executable depth.
Is the INJ spot study a BuyBack profitability test?
No. It excludes programme commitments and baskets. A round-level comparison needs committed INJ, actual distributions, costs and executable basket exits at matching times.
What are INJ tokenomics?
Injective says its original INJ allocation is fully circulating, while its Community BuyBack burns committed tokens. BuyBack revenue baskets go to eligible participants, not automatically to passive holders. Net deflation requires same-period issuance-minus-burn measurement.
Sources and verification
- CoinNudge frozen spot-path researchMatched daily-open returns, full cohort and audit hashes.
- Complete monthly observation ledgerEvery eligible 90-day matched start.
- Daily historical input ledgerActual daily inputs with observation and ingestion time.
- Matched BTC daily input ledgerThe same-date BTC opens used in every paired return and drawdown.
- Frozen CoinGecko supply responseProvider-defined current float, total and maximum supply at its own timestamp.
- Dated order-book sourceSampled Binance books for covered markets; not the entire exchange.
- Social directory and limitationsDirectional 7-day X and 30-day Reddit mention counts; bot and promotion filtering unverified.
- Injective official INJ economicsUse, vesting claim and buyback summary.
- Injective Community BuyBack mechanicsParticipant commitment, distribution and burn steps.
- Injective tokenomics paperHistorical supply-mechanism design; verify later changes.
Monitor INJ market changes without treating a dated report as a current order.
Use this report for the thesis and risk checks, then verify current liquidity and any alert separately.
Preview Telegram alert coverage