Single-asset evidence report · By CoinNudge Research · · Guide updated 2026-10-03 · 20 min read
What is NEAR coin, and is it worth holding?
NEAR is the native token of NEAR Protocol, used for network fees and staking; Intents is a related cross-chain product whose activity does not automatically become tokenholder income. For a holding decision, a defensible NEAR holding case needs independently reconciled net fee capture or token demand relative to issuance, not Intents routed volume or an AI narrative alone. In the frozen Binance spot daily-open window ending September 25, 2026, NEAR returned +154.4% versus BTC +40.5%; across 57 earlier monthly starts, its median was −10.2% and 20/57 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 NEAR?
- NEAR gained +154.4% in the last frozen 90-day window; this differs from its historical monthly-start median −10.2%.
- 20/57 complete historical 90-day starts beat BTC, while 56/57 had a deeper daily-open drawdown.
- A defensible NEAR holding case needs independently reconciled net fee capture or token demand relative to issuance, not Intents routed volume or an AI narrative alone.
What is NEAR coin, and what does Intents actually do?
NEAR is the native token of NEAR Protocol, used for network fees and staking; Intents is a related cross-chain product whose activity does not automatically become tokenholder income.
NEAR belongs to the network-asset category: using the chain and securing it are documented functions, while an Intents user may route assets other than NEAR. A product branded around AI therefore needs a separate explanation of why its activity would require or retain this token.
To assess holding NEAR, follow routed activity into retained economics, reconcile issuance and burns, and compare the historical risk with BTC. The 57 matched 90-day observations below test quoted spot paths, not whether a particular AI service generated the gains.
| NEAR at a glance | Dated evidence | How to read it |
|---|---|---|
| Documented token role | Native fee asset and staking/governance participation under network rules | Not an automatic claim on every project activity |
| Last frozen 90-day spot return | +154.4% | BTC on the same UTC dates: +40.5% |
| Historical 90-day monthly median | −10.2% | 57 overlapping complete starts, not a forecast |
| Current circulating supply | 1,307,320,959 | CoinGecko response updated 2026-09-26T08:35:30.000Z |
Verify: NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
What do NEAR holders, validators and Intents users each receive?
A NEAR holder can use the native asset for network fees and participate in documented staking or governance processes; holding it does not confer equity in an AI company or a claim on every Intents transaction.
A service user, solver, validator and passive token owner can receive different economic outcomes. A routed swap can be useful to its customer while a partner or solver earns the associated fee. Before crediting NEAR holders, establish which component is paid in NEAR and what happens to the retained amount.
Staking may earn protocol rewards, but compare the actual rewards after validator charges with issuance and market-price changes. An exchange product advertised as NEAR yield has additional custody and withdrawal terms; do not substitute its headline rate for network economics.
| Who owns what | Documented role or participation | What cannot be inferred |
|---|---|---|
| NEAR holder | Native fee asset and staking/governance participation under network rules | Not a share of every app or AI-agent business |
| Intents product user | Requests cross-chain outcomes from competing solvers | Product use is not proof of tokenholder profit |
| Staker | Potential protocol rewards subject to issuance and validator terms | Nominal rewards may coexist with dilution and price losses |
Verify: NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
Does NEAR Intents volume reach token holders after payouts?
Intents routed volume does not by itself establish retained NEAR-token economics. Product volume, gross fees, payouts and net protocol capture must be reconciled before attributing the result to token holders; this release has not completed that longitudinal reconciliation.
NEAR Intents lets users specify cross-chain outcomes while solvers compete to complete them. This product function is verifiable from NEAR’s own documentation; it is not evidence that every routed dollar becomes NEAR revenue. An activity thesis needs a common-time series of routed volume, gross fees, partner payouts and tokens bought or burned.
NEAR’s revenue dashboard describes fee capture and buyback/burn mechanisms, but its panels in the September 26 source review included zero or incomplete-looking values alongside lifetime figures. We do not turn those inconsistent display states into a positive net-revenue conclusion. Before claiming value accrual, reconcile the actual contract transfers and current issuance with a working, dated dashboard release.
For an auditable Intents thesis, align routed volume, gross fees, solver/partner payouts and retained token purchases or burns to one reporting interval. Verify the settlement unit at every step. If a panel is incomplete or an amount cannot be reconciled, mark that component unavailable; neither an absent value nor a zero-looking dashboard is evidence that the underlying business earned exactly zero.
NEAR'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: NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
Does fully unlocked NEAR mean there is no future issuance?
No. Fully unlocked original NEAR allocations do not stop future validator issuance. Current net supply needs enacted issuance and actual fee burns over matching dates; the provider fields below do not certify that reconciliation.
CoinGecko’s separate 2026-09-26T08:35:30.000Z response reports 1,307,320,959 circulating NEAR out of 1,307,347,346 total, with no maximum-supply field. These are provider classifications, not an audit of custodian balances or a schedule of future exchange selling.
CoinGecko reports circulating and total NEAR but no finite max-supply field in this frozen response. That is not a data error to fill with a made-up cap: assess actual net issuance, fee burn and buyback separately. Governance proposals about changing inflation are proposals, not automatically enacted current economics.
NEAR's supply check is an issuance-and-burn reconciliation, not a generic venture-token vesting forecast. Use the enacted validator issuance parameter and actual burned units over the same dates; distinguish a governance proposal from an effective change. Existing wallet concentration and transfers are a separate float issue even if original allocations are unlocked. A missing maximum-supply field is not zero issuance.
| NEAR supply field | Frozen provider value | Reading rule |
|---|---|---|
| Circulating supply | 1,307,320,959 | CoinGecko provider definition at 2026-09-26T08:35:30.000Z |
| Total supply | 1,307,347,346 | 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 · NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
How do NEAR tokenomics balance validator issuance, fee burns and holder dilution?
NEAR has validator issuance and fee burning rather than a fixed terminal cap. Fully unlocked original allocations do not mean no future new units. Net supply depends on enacted issuance rules and actual burns measured over the same period, not a proposed parameter or a historical headline rate.
Compare current protocol parameters, supply changes, staking participation and paid network activity before inferring value capture. Staking rewards and network usage do not automatically constitute company income for passive holders. Keep a governance proposal explicitly separate from an implemented network change.
| Token-economics dimension | Documented mechanism or attributed claim | What remains unproven / investor implication |
|---|---|---|
| Supply model | NEAR is a network asset with validator issuance and fee burning, not a fixed-cap token or a simple investor-unlock calendar. | Net supply change depends on the live issuance parameter and actual burned fees. |
| Distribution and unlocks | The network describes its original allocation as fully unlocked; validator rewards continue to affect supply. | “Fully unlocked” does not mean zero future issuance or dispersed wallet ownership. |
| Use and rights | NEAR pays network fees, secures staking and can participate through the documented governance process. | Network usage, protocol buybacks and tokenholder returns are separate measures; verify executed transactions. |
| Investor check | Read enacted network parameters, supply history, stake participation and fee burns at the same observation date. | A governance proposal is not an enacted change to issuance. |
Verify: NEAR official network and tokenomics overview · NEAR governance proposals
How unusual was NEAR’s latest 90-day rally versus its longer history?
At the September 25 UTC daily-open endpoint, NEAR returned +154.4% over 90 days versus BTC +40.5% on exactly the same days. The 365-day NEAR path was +51.9% 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 | NEAR spot return | BTC spot return | NEAR minus BTC / status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 days | +45.9% | +10.5% | 35.4 pp |
| 30 days | +146.6% | +7.5% | 139.2 pp |
| 90 days | +154.4% | +40.5% | 114.0 pp |
| 180 days | +291.3% | +27.2% | 264.1 pp |
| 365 days | +51.9% | −25.5% | 77.4 pp |
Verify: Full dated path and methods
Did NEAR’s earlier 90-day windows beat BTC consistently?
Across the frozen matched 90-day monthly starts, NEAR's median return was −10.2% versus BTC +1.9%, and 20/57 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 NEAR/BTC pair and 0 were excluded for missing daily opens. The NEAR median endpoint was −10.2%, BTC's was +1.9%; NEAR beat BTC in 20/57. Those windows overlap and must not be treated as 57 independent win-probability trials.
NEAR had a deeper daily-open peak-to-trough drawdown in 56/57 matched windows. The lower 10th-percentile NEAR endpoint was −47.7% and the upper 90th percentile +98.6%. Every-third-month sensitivity has only 19 observations and 7 BTC-beating starts; it is a dependence check, not a statistically powered forecast.
The worst BTC-relative start was 2024-10-01: −3.0% for NEAR against +48.0% BTC, with −37.4% asset drawdown. A counterexample is 2023-10-01: +219.3% for NEAR versus +56.0% BTC. Showing both prevents the current rally or a past collapse from becoming the whole story.
| 90-day monthly cohort measure | NEAR | BTC / paired comparison | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complete starts | 57 | 57 | Same UTC dates and 91 daily opens |
| Median endpoint | −10.2% | +1.9% | Not an expected future return |
| 10th / 90th percentile | −47.7% / +98.6% | −24.9% / +47.8% | Descriptive tail range |
| Outperformed BTC | 20/57 | — | Overlapping monthly windows |
| Deeper path drawdown | 56/57 | — | Measured at daily opens only |
| Every-third-month check | 7/19 | — | Small non-overlap sensitivity |
Verify: All matched starts and excluded candidates · Frozen calculation contract
Which NEAR entry months show the difference between rallies and drawdowns?
Both winning and losing NEAR windows are shown: all 57 eligible same-date NEAR/BTC 90-day observations are visible chronologically below. The worst BTC-relative start was 2024-10-01: −3.0% for NEAR against +48.0% BTC, with −37.4% asset drawdown. A counterexample is 2023-10-01: +219.3% for NEAR 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 | NEAR 90d | BTC 90d | NEAR − BTC | NEAR path drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-01 | +115.3% | +6.0% | +109.3 pp | −41.0% |
| 2021-11-01 | +8.7% | −37.7% | +46.5 pp | −47.8% |
| 2021-12-01 | +11.5% | −24.2% | +35.7 pp | −58.0% |
| 2022-01-01 | −9.0% | −1.5% | -7.5 pp | −58.0% |
| 2022-02-01 | +6.5% | +0.0% | +6.5 pp | −41.1% |
| 2022-03-01 | −46.9% | −31.7% | -15.2 pp | −72.6% |
| 2022-04-01 | −74.2% | −55.8% | -18.4 pp | −82.4% |
| 2022-05-01 | −57.7% | −36.8% | -20.9 pp | −76.2% |
| 2022-06-01 | −32.3% | −36.2% | +3.9 pp | −48.0% |
| 2022-07-01 | +7.2% | −2.7% | +9.9 pp | −40.1% |
| 2022-08-01 | −27.0% | −10.7% | -16.3 pp | −52.7% |
| 2022-09-01 | −63.3% | −18.0% | -45.3 pp | −69.4% |
| 2022-10-01 | −63.6% | −14.4% | -49.2 pp | −65.9% |
| 2022-11-01 | −17.2% | +15.9% | -33.1 pp | −62.3% |
| 2022-12-01 | +29.4% | +34.8% | -5.4 pp | −29.8% |
| 2023-01-01 | +58.4% | +72.1% | -13.6 pp | −33.8% |
| 2023-02-01 | −21.1% | +21.4% | -42.4 pp | −33.8% |
| 2023-03-01 | −27.0% | +19.9% | -46.9 pp | −33.3% |
| 2023-04-01 | −32.2% | +7.0% | -39.1 pp | −49.8% |
| 2023-05-01 | −27.1% | +0.4% | -27.5 pp | −39.0% |
| 2023-06-01 | −21.6% | +1.9% | -23.4 pp | −30.8% |
| 2023-07-01 | −19.9% | −11.3% | -8.6 pp | −30.1% |
| 2023-08-01 | −6.9% | +18.1% | -25.0 pp | −30.2% |
| 2023-09-01 | +55.8% | +45.9% | +9.8 pp | −15.4% |
| 2023-10-01 | +219.3% | +56.0% | +163.3 pp | −15.8% |
| 2023-11-01 | +125.9% | +25.0% | +100.9 pp | −38.4% |
| 2023-12-01 | +107.3% | +65.5% | +41.8 pp | −38.4% |
| 2024-01-01 | +90.1% | +64.6% | +25.6 pp | −32.5% |
| 2024-02-01 | +119.3% | +42.5% | +76.9 pp | −41.1% |
| 2024-03-01 | +95.5% | +10.7% | +84.9 pp | −41.1% |
| 2024-04-01 | −31.9% | −14.4% | -17.5 pp | −43.0% |
| 2024-05-01 | −14.9% | +10.1% | -24.9 pp | −46.9% |
| 2024-06-01 | −41.9% | −12.1% | -29.8 pp | −54.0% |
| 2024-07-01 | +4.9% | +4.9% | -0.1 pp | −45.2% |
| 2024-08-01 | −11.1% | +12.5% | -23.6 pp | −29.6% |
| 2024-09-01 | +72.7% | +65.3% | +7.4 pp | −34.9% |
| 2024-10-01 | −3.0% | +48.0% | -51.0 pp | −37.4% |
| 2024-11-01 | +9.0% | +47.6% | -38.6 pp | −46.6% |
| 2024-12-01 | −56.2% | −12.5% | -43.7 pp | −62.5% |
| 2025-01-01 | −48.9% | −11.8% | -37.1 pp | −62.0% |
| 2025-02-01 | −45.0% | −5.8% | -39.2 pp | −58.7% |
| 2025-03-01 | −10.2% | +25.2% | -35.4 pp | −46.3% |
| 2025-04-01 | −10.0% | +31.3% | -41.2 pp | −43.4% |
| 2025-05-01 | +10.6% | +25.3% | -14.7 pp | −43.4% |
| 2025-06-01 | +0.4% | +3.6% | -3.2 pp | −28.7% |
| 2025-07-01 | +30.3% | +4.7% | +25.6 pp | −22.8% |
| 2025-08-01 | −10.2% | −5.0% | -5.2 pp | −32.3% |
| 2025-09-01 | −21.8% | −16.1% | -5.7 pp | −42.6% |
| 2025-10-01 | −42.0% | −23.5% | -18.5 pp | −53.6% |
| 2025-11-01 | −34.4% | −22.8% | -11.7 pp | −55.3% |
| 2025-12-01 | −35.1% | −25.9% | -9.2 pp | −48.3% |
| 2026-01-01 | −21.5% | −22.1% | +0.6 pp | −48.3% |
| 2026-02-01 | +6.9% | −0.6% | +7.5 pp | −22.1% |
| 2026-03-01 | +103.1% | +9.7% | +93.4 pp | −22.1% |
| 2026-04-01 | +57.0% | −11.8% | +68.7 pp | −36.0% |
| 2026-05-01 | +25.0% | −16.2% | +41.2 pp | −42.4% |
| 2026-06-01 | −19.5% | +6.2% | -25.7 pp | −43.6% |
Can NEAR spot depth support your intended entry and exit?
A quoted NEAR price does not guarantee your order can buy or exit there. This report has one dated Binance order-book sample, separate from historical daily turnover; execution requires a fresh route-specific book and cost check.
The historical NEAR/USDT Binance spot candles show $62,301,494 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.
A separate CoinNudge Binance book sample observed at 2026-09-26T08:35:34.504Z shows 2.05 bps quoted spread and $1,537,239 returned depth within ±1% of mid. The modelled $10,000 buy slippage is 1.65 bps before fees and latency. Recheck the live book and your actual venue; this is one snapshot, not guaranteed execution.
Before an actual NEAR 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 | $62,301,494 | 30 complete archived UTC days; turnover ≠ executable depth |
| Sampled bid/ask spread | 2.05 bps | One Binance book observation; can change by the second |
| Visible depth within ±1% of mid | $1,537,239 | Returned 500 levels per side only |
| Simulated $10k buy / sell slippage | 1.65 / 1.97 bps | Excludes fees, latency and later book changes |
Verify: Frozen top-30 order-book source · Current market-depth research
Does NEAR’s AI discussion document paid token demand?
NEAR's AI and Intents discussion does not establish retained token economics. The useful community evidence is a reproducible link from a deployed service to actual fees and the recipient of those fees, not a count of announcements.
A third-party directory showed about 13,111 X mentions over 7 days and 43 Reddit mentions over 30 days for NEAR at the September 26 review. Those are different time windows and may include promotions, bots or ticker collisions. They are not unique people, buyers, monthly search volume or a measure of tokenholder rights.
The underlying social response was not frozen in this release. These report-time directory figures cannot now be independently replayed and are not used as a quantitative test of fundamental demand or current community size.
Community discussion asks whether the AI/Intents narrative explains the move. The test is not whether NEAR is called an AI coin; it is whether separately verified use and retained economics improve without relying on a rising token price as the proof.
To use NEAR 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 · NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
When does NEAR’s Intents thesis support holding rather than waiting?
There is no unconditional yes from this evidence. A defensible NEAR holding case needs independently reconciled net fee capture or token demand relative to issuance, not Intents routed volume or an AI narrative alone. The last frozen 90-day return was +154.4%, while the median of 57 earlier monthly-start windows was −10.2%; 20/57 beat BTC. These overlapping historical paths describe risk, not the chance of a profitable hold from today.
Evidence that would strengthen a holding thesis: Independent on-chain fee and transfer records show persistent, material token demand or burn versus measured issuance, while the product retains genuine users. Evidence that would weaken or end it: Activity is mostly routed volume with little net capture; reward issuance dominates burn, or the live dashboard cannot reconcile its figures.
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 confirmed change in fee split, inflation or buyback execution should be incorporated as a new dated version. The checklist is not a personal recommendation, target price or promise that the next 90 days resemble a prior cohort.
A NEAR review should separate three states: documented product functionality, measured token-specific economic capture, and executable market exposure. Functionality alone supports research interest, not an income valuation. If fee retention or enacted issuance cannot be reconciled, leave the economics thesis unconfirmed; if current depth or access fails, postpone execution even when the product is usable.
| Holding decision check | Evidence to verify | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Tokenholder benefit | Native fee asset and staking/governance participation under network rules | Not a share of every app or AI-agent business |
| 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 confirmed change in fee split, inflation or buyback execution should be incorporated as a new dated version. | A stated reason to reassess is more useful than an indefinite hold slogan |
Verify: Frozen NEAR/BTC price study · Complete NEAR monthly observation ledger · NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
How can you separate the NEAR price study from Intents revenue claims?
Reproduce NEAR'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 coin-profile-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 NEAR 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 1f45960b121fd96a15782c0282afddb5045ca9ae71f7a22bc1948a6185f7e070 of the complete normalized archive objects, and output SHA-256 02cfe56888dbe2b94a401d3757dcee6600ff82311cef72c484d1b658da8c069f of the research result identify the frozen release; the manifest separately hashes each downloadable file.
Supply comes from a separate CoinGecko 2026-09-26T08:35:30.000Z observation; the separate book package was generated at 2026-09-26T08:37:46.983Z, while the NEAR row was observed at 2026-09-26T08:35:34.504Z. 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/coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/near.json | Calculation version, summary and full paired cohort |
| Observation CSV | /research-data/coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/near-monthly-observations.csv | 57 matched monthly starts |
| Asset daily inputs | /research-data/coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/near-daily-inputs.csv | Event, observation and ingestion dates |
| BTC daily inputs | /research-data/coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/btc-daily-inputs.csv | Matched BTC daily opens and provenance |
| Excluded starts | /research-data/coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/near-exclusions.csv | 0 missing pairs; header retained if zero |
| Supply source | /research-data/coin-profiles/2026-09-26-v1/coingecko-supply-source.json | Dated provider fields, not a historical feature |
| Order-book source | /research-data/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 · NEAR Intents official product description · NEAR revenue dashboard · NEAR governance proposals
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 NEAR Protocol (NEAR) used for?
NEAR is the native token of NEAR Protocol, used for network fees and staking; Intents is a related cross-chain product whose activity does not automatically become tokenholder income. This answers the token's documented role, not whether its price is attractive.
Is NEAR worth holding?
There is no unconditional yes in this dated research. A defensible NEAR holding case needs independently reconciled net fee capture or token demand relative to issuance, not Intents routed volume or an AI narrative alone. The historical 57 monthly 90-day starts overlap, and 20/57 beat BTC; this is not a future success rate. Check your own horizon, loss limit and live evidence before deciding.
Is NEAR a good coin to buy now?
This report is not a personalized buy call. The latest dated 90-day NEAR path was +154.4% versus BTC +40.5%, but only 20/57 earlier 90-day monthly starts beat BTC and rights, supply and execution still matter.
How has NEAR performed over 7, 30, 90 and 365 days?
The matched Binance spot daily-open returns are 7 days +45.9%; 30 days +146.6%; 90 days +154.4%; 365 days +51.9% through September 25, 2026. These are dated historical windows, not live quotes.
Does NEAR Intents volume equal NEAR revenue?
No. Routed value, gross fees, partner payments and net protocol capture are different measures.
Is NEAR supply capped?
The frozen CoinGecko response has no maximum-supply value. Do not replace a missing cap with total or circulating supply.
Do NEAR stakers avoid token dilution?
Staking may receive newly issued rewards, but nominal rewards do not remove token-price risk or establish a positive real return.
Can I reproduce this NEAR 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 NEAR trading volume guarantee easy execution?
No. The 30-day Binance spot turnover is separate from one sampled order book. At the cited snapshot the returned ±1% book depth was $1,537,239; later depth and actual fills can differ.
What should I check before valuing NEAR Intents revenue?
Use one dated interval and distinguish routed value, gross fees, partner/solver payments and retained token-specific transfers. Unreconciled components remain unavailable, not zero.
Does an inflation-reduction proposal change current NEAR supply immediately?
No. Check whether the proposal was enacted and when its parameters became effective. The frozen supply snapshot does not certify a later governance change.
What are NEAR tokenomics?
NEAR has ongoing validator issuance offset in part by fee burns, so it is not a fixed-supply coin. Original allocation unlocks and future network issuance are different; live parameters and actual burns, not an old headline rate, determine current net supply change.
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.
- NEAR Intents official product descriptionWhat Intents does, not proof of token return.
- NEAR revenue dashboardPublished fee and capture definitions; rendered zero/blank data need independent reconciliation.
- NEAR governance proposalsProposals and discussions are not enacted token economics.
- NEAR official network and tokenomics overview
- NEAR governance proposals
Monitor NEAR 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