$CLAUS has played out pretty much as I expected In my previous update, I said the $12–14M range wasn’t where I wanted to chase. If the thesis remained intact, the $7–8M area would offer a much better risk/reward CLAUS eventually reset to around $7.5M, right into the area I was watching, before pushing to a new ATH near $20M. It has since cooled off and is now trading around $16–17M The chart playing out is one thing, but what interests me more is what has happened behind the scenes since my last post At the time, I said CLAUS had already shown that the team could ship quickly. The next stage was no longer about counting how many hooks they could add. I wanted to see whether those mechanisms could actually start generating real activity and cash flow NFT Vaults are the first place where we’re starting to get an answer All 300 NFTs are still outstanding, representing roughly 15M CLAUS locked in the vaults. According to the on-chain snapshot I checked at around 23:52 UTC on October 6, the first epoch had accrued roughly 4.406 ETH, with around 4.082 ETH already distributed to NFT holders, worth approximately $11K at the time The epoch started at 22:41 UTC on October 5, with roughly 0.325 ETH still remaining in the epoch pot and not yet distributed This is a much more meaningful update to me than the NFT floor In my previous post, I deliberately avoided putting too much weight on the projected yield because everything was still theoretical. Now we at least have real payouts showing that the mechanism actually works That said, my view on the 15M CLAUS hasn’t changed. This is a temporary lock, not a burn. Each NFT is backed by 50,000 CLAUS, and holders can burn the NFT to receive those tokens back So the next thing to watch isn’t just how large the payouts are. It’s whether volume can remain high enough to keep the yield attractive, and how many NFTs start getting redeemed if activity slows down The team has also continued expanding the programmable layer with Higher or Lower It’s essentially a prediction market built directly into the pool. Users choose a target market cap and deadline, then bet ETH on Higher or Lower. The result is determined using the average market cap over the final 30 minutes For now, the scale is still very small. The pot I saw was only around 0.025 ETH So at this stage, I see it more as another demonstration of what can be added to the same live token than a meaningful source of economic activity Prediction markets themselves aren’t new. What interests me is that another completely different mechanism has been added directly to CLAUS without launching another token There was also another update that I think is equally important, even though it isn’t bullish The Arbitrage hook was deployed and then removed on the same day after the mechanism failed to execute real arbitrage as intended The token didn’t change. The pool and NFT Vaults continued operating. The part that failed was simply rolled back This shows the other side of programmability The team can add new mechanisms quickly, but they can also ship an experiment that doesn’t work and have to remove it For me, that strengthens the technical thesis while also making the execution risk clearer Shipping fast doesn’t mean everything they ship creates value On the burn side, roughly 4.58M CLAUS has now been burned, equivalent to around 0.46% of the original supply That still doesn’t change how I view the token The burn is too small to become the main thesis What matters more is how fees are being distributed across the different mechanisms At the snapshot I checked, while the weather state was dry, the active split was roughly 1% to the project, 0.35% to NFT rewards, 0.35% to auto liquidity, 0.15% to buyback and burn, 0.15% to FOMO buybacks and 0.30% to the programmable layer This isn’t a permanent configuration Weather can change the allocation between burn and liquidity. When it rains, burn can increase to 0.35% while liquidity drops to 0.15% What matters to me isn’t which percentage is higher at any specific moment. It’s that most of this economic loop still depends on volume NFT rewards need volume Burn needs volume Auto liquidity needs volume FOMO buybacks also need activity So from here, I care much more about volume than the number of hooks Another area where I’m still cautious is liquidity The main pool only has a few hundred thousand dollars of liquidity while the valuation is already in the eight-figure range That helps explain how CLAUS could move from around $7.5M to nearly $20M so quickly, but it also means the downside can happen just as fast More importantly, GoPlus currently shows 0% of the LP locked, with the LP tokens of the main pool sitting in the project wallet That’s a separate risk I think is worth monitoring because downside doesn’t only have to come from traders selling the token. Any meaningful change involving the LP or project wallet could directly affect the liquidity structure After the move from around $7.5M to nearly $20M, my approach is naturally different from the previous post At $7–8M, the question was whether the thesis remained intact enough to justify the risk At the current valuation, the question is whether economic activity can start catching up with the valuation The first payout of roughly 4 ETH is a good signal, but one epoch isn’t enough to answer that question I want to see the main pool continue doing a few million dollars in daily volume, future epochs continue paying ETH, NFT redemptions remain under control and the existing mechanisms start seeing real usage The prediction market is live, but the pot is only around 0.025 ETH Arbitrage failed and was rolled back Burn remains below 0.5% So I think CLAUS is now entering a pretty clear new stage The team no longer needs to prove that they can modify a live token or continuously add new mechanisms. They’ve already done that What they need to prove next is whether these mechanisms can retain users, volume and cash flow once the initial attention starts fading That’s what I’ll be focusing on from here The chart has already gone through the reset I was waiting for and then expanded from around $7.5M to nearly $20M. NFT Vaults have moved from projected yield to real payouts. Programmability continues to be demonstrated, while the Arbitrage failure also shows the other side of moving this fast So the thesis hasn’t changed much, but the bar for me to stay bullish is higher now At this stage, I don’t need more hooks I want to see the things they’ve already built actually being used 0x1b54e762aa34cf6e28e9c082f2848e28e45da6b8

Only a few hours after my previous research post on $CLAUS, there’s already quite a lot to update First, the chart. $CLAUS broke through the previous $10–11M ATH zone and pushed to around $13.5–14M MC, before resetting back toward $10–11M But price isn’t the most interesting part to me. During those same few hours, @contractclaus and @founderclaus kept shipping, and this time we got a few updates that actually add to the thesis I talked about before The biggest one is that NFT Vaults are now live and all 300 slots have already been minted The mechanism is pretty simple. Each NFT requires 50,000 CLAUS to be locked. NFT holders then receive a share of the ETH fees from the main pool based on how long they hold 300/300 have been minted, which means roughly 15M CLAUS, or 1.5% of the supply, is currently sitting inside these vaults According to the Founder, 0.35% of the ETH volume from the main pool is distributed to NFT holders from the existing 2% fee. There’s no additional tax Exiting is also pretty simple: burn the NFT and get the 50,000 CLAUS back So I don’t consider those 15M CLAUS burned. They’re only temporarily locked. If a lot of people redeem at the same time, those tokens can return to the market and potentially create sell pressure And don’t confuse NFT Vaults with passive yield for simply holding CLAUS. You need to lock 50,000 CLAUS into an NFT to receive these fees Their current estimate is around $70/day if volume stays around $6M and all 300 NFTs are held for the full day. Sounds pretty good, but I’m not going to hype that number yet What I want to see next is real payouts If the first batches actually distribute ETH, volume remains in the millions per day and holders keep their vaults instead of redeeming, then NFT Vaults start to have some real economic proof behind them Another interesting detail is that the market is currently valuing these NFTs much higher than the CLAUS backing each one 50,000 CLAUS at the current price is only around $550, while the OpenSea floor previously reached around 0.95 ETH That premium is basically the market pricing in future fee flow If payouts come in as expected, there’s a reason for that premium to exist. But if payouts are much lower or volume starts dying, the NFT premium can collapse pretty quickly. That’s when I’ll start watching whether redemptions increase There’s another update that I think fits the CLAUS thesis even better than the NFTs They literally changed the live token itself from : Claus / CLAUS to SAME FUCKING COIN / SAME and then changed it back to : Claus / CLAUS Same contract Same balances No new token launch In my previous post I was careful with the name/ticker part because at the time, most of the proof came from an earlier test token This time they actually did it directly on the live CLAUS contract It sounds degen as hell, but it demonstrates exactly what I’ve been interested in from the beginning : Same token, new rules. And now even the same token, new identity That’s why I still think people are looking at CLAUS the wrong way if they only call it an AI coin, weather coin or NFT coin Weather is one hook Arena is an experiment NFT Vaults are another hook The name change is another demonstration What I’m actually betting on is the ability to keep changing the token after it has already launched The existing mechanisms haven’t stopped either Burn has increased from around 3.36M CLAUS in my previous post to roughly 4.4M, or around 0.44% of the original supply It’s moving, but my view hasn’t changed: burning less than 0.5% of supply isn’t enough for me to call this a deflationary play Auto-liquidity is still running in batches of around $500, weather still adjusts the allocation between burn and liquidity, Fomo still uses 0.15% to buy CLAUS into the Founder wallet rather than burning it, Arena is still running, and now NFT Vaults have been added on top So basically, in just a few hours we got : A new ATH, the 8th hook, 300/300 NFTs minted, around 15M CLAUS locked, more tokens burned, and a live demonstration of changing the token’s name/ticker on the same contract That’s the part I’m slightly bullish on: the speed of execution But I also think CLAUS is entering a different stage now Before, the question was : “Can they actually ship these ideas?” They’ve shipped quite a few of them now The next question should be : “Can the things they ship create real economic activity?” NFT Vaults will be a pretty good test of that I’ll be watching the actual ETH payouts, how many NFTs get redeemed, the NFT premium relative to the underlying 50,000 CLAUS, main pool volume and, of course, whatever hooks they deploy next If volume stays in the millions per day and payouts actually work, I think NFT Vaults could become an interesting layer On the other hand, if volume drops hard below roughly $1–2M while the valuation stays high, the yield drops with it. At that point, the NFT premium could collapse and those 15M locked CLAUS won’t look nearly as attractive as the headline “1.5% of supply locked” My chart plan also needs to change after the new ATH $12–14M is now the new high zone. I’m not chasing here, especially with only a few hundred thousand dollars of liquidity in the main pool $9–11M is where we are now, and it’s still only a shallow dip from the new ATH. I’ll be watching the reaction here, especially volume and NFT payouts $7–8M would be a deeper reset, roughly 40% from the top. Risk/reward starts looking much better to me there if the thesis remains intact $5–6M is still the area I’d prefer if the market actually gives it back, but I’m not going to sit around waiting for exactly $5M either And below $3.5M, I’m no longer asking, “Is it cheap?” I’m checking whether they’re still shipping hooks, whether volume is still alive, and whether the thesis itself is starting to break So overall, my thesis on $CLAUS hasn’t changed over the last few hours, but it’s becoming easier to prove I’m not betting on whether it rains in London I’m not betting on 4.4M tokens being burned And I’m not betting on the NFT floor being high I’m betting on the idea that the same token can keep changing, testing new mechanisms and creating new economic experiments without having to relaunch from scratch @contractclaus and @founderclaus are shipping fast, but from here I want to see more than just new features I want to see real payouts, real volume and real demand for the mechanisms they’ve just built Price can do whatever it wants They keep shipping, I keep watching 0x1b54e762aa34cf6e28e9c082f2848e28e45da6b8