Key Notes
- HYPE leads Grayscale’s Tokenholder Yield list at 8% while CAKE leads Adjusted Earnings Yield at 14.4%.
- The metrics distinguish net capital returns to holders from protocol earnings relative to valuation after dilution.
- The chart uses October 20 data and trailing 12-month financials through Q3 2026 within a selected financial-token universe.
Hyperliquid leads Grayscale’s comparison of net value returned to tokenholders, while PancakeSwap ranks first on earnings relative to valuation after dilution. The two lists offer different answers to a central question for crypto investors: does a successful protocol create economic value for its token?
In an October 21 research note, Grayscale Head of Research Zach Pandl sets out two measures: Tokenholder Yield and Adjusted Earnings Yield. HYPE leads the first at 8.0%, narrowly ahead of Lighter’s LIT at 7.9%. CAKE leads the second at 14.4%, followed by LIT at 14.1%.
These are analytical measures, not promised staking rates or forecasts for token prices. The underlying chart uses data as of October 20, with financial performance through the third quarter of 2026 based on the preceding 12 months.
Which Tokens Return the Most Value to Holders?
Tokenholder Yield starts with the value of staking rewards and token repurchases, subtracts new issuance and divides the result by circulating market capitalization. It compares the resources directed toward holders with the dilution created by issuing tokens.
A positive result means the counted distributions and buybacks exceed issuance under that calculation. A negative result means dilution outweighs those returns. It does not mean every holder received cash, or that a token with a positive figure necessarily rose in price.
| Rank | Protocol | Token | Tokenholder Yield |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hyperliquid | HYPE | 8.0% |
| 2 | Lighter | LIT | 7.9% |
| 3 | PancakeSwap | CAKE | 2.6% |
| 4 | Aerodrome | AERO | 0.9% |
| 5 | Uniswap | UNI | 0.8% |
| 6 | Raydium | RAY | -0.5% |
| 7 | Pendle | PENDLE | -0.7% |
| 8 | Aave | AAVE | -1.0% |
| 9 | Jupiter | JUP | -2.6% |
| 10 | Curve | CRV | -5.5% |
Source: Grayscale’s October 21 exhibit. Percentages are the published snapshot, not live readings.
Only five entries in this top-ten list have positive Tokenholder Yield. HYPE and LIT are well ahead of CAKE at 2.6%, while AERO and UNI remain below 1%. The second half of the list is negative, with CRV at −5.5%.
The denominator matters. Using circulating market capitalization relates these flows to tokens already circulating, rather than a fully diluted valuation that also counts tokens not yet in circulation. Future unlocks and issuance therefore remain relevant to how the economics develop.
Which Protocols Look Cheaper Relative to Earnings?
Adjusted Earnings Yield asks a different question. It divides protocol earnings by circulating market capitalization, then deducts the inflation rate of circulating supply. Grayscale treats earnings as the amount remaining after fees paid to service and capital providers, such as liquidity providers and lenders.
Higher earnings relative to market value produce a higher starting yield, while supply growth reduces the adjusted figure. This is a valuation lens; it does not establish that an asset is undervalued or that its earnings will persist.
| Rank | Protocol | Token | Adjusted Earnings Yield |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PancakeSwap | CAKE | 14.4% |
| 2 | Lighter | LIT | 14.1% |
| 3 | Hyperliquid | HYPE | 9.8% |
| 4 | Raydium | RAY | 4.0% |
| 5 | Aave | AAVE | 3.7% |
| 6 | Jupiter | JUP | 3.5% |
| 7 | Sky | SKY | 2.5% |
| 8 | Uniswap | UNI | 1.9% |
| 9 | Aerodrome | AERO | 0.9% |
| 10 | Pendle | PENDLE | 0.3% |
Source: the same Grayscale exhibit and measurement window. These percentages are distinct from the holder-return metric above.
CAKE’s 14.4% puts it just ahead of LIT at 14.1%, with HYPE third at 9.8%. Raydium, Aave and Jupiter then appear at 4.0%, 3.7% and 3.5%, respectively. Sky enters this top ten at 2.5%, while Curve does not appear in it.
Why Earnings and Tokenholder Returns Can Diverge
Aave makes the distinction clear. Its 3.7% Adjusted Earnings Yield is positive, but its Tokenholder Yield is −1.0%. Under Grayscale’s framework, a protocol can generate earnings relative to its valuation while the counted distributions and repurchases still fail to offset token dilution.
PancakeSwap shows another gap: 14.4% on adjusted earnings versus 2.6% on tokenholder yield. The two percentages should not be added together. They measure different stages of the economics, rather than two payments an investor can collect.
Nor does a buyback automatically amount to a dividend. It creates token demand, while its longer-term supply effect depends on what happens to the purchased tokens. A permanent burn differs from holding repurchased tokens in a treasury.
CoinScreamer’s earlier Hyperliquid analysis explains how its documented Assistance Fund mechanism connects fee income with HYPE purchases and burns. Our Pyth coverage describes a different structure, in which eligible DAO receipts buy PYTH for a reserve rather than burning it. PYTH is not included in either of the two top-ten lists shown here.
PancakeSwap’s emissions vote provides another relevant example. The proposal would change fee allocation and reduce CAKE issuance in stages if approved. Those prospective changes should not be treated as already implemented or substituted for the historical inputs in Grayscale’s chart.
What the Rankings Leave Out
Grayscale’s universe comprises tokens in the FTSE Grayscale Financials Crypto Sector that sit within the top 100 by circulating market capitalization, excluding centralized projects. This is a comparison within that selected group, not a ranking of every cryptocurrency or a universal list of the best investments.
The exhibit cites CoinMarketCap, DefiLlama, Token Terminal, Artemis, Blockworks, project-specific dashboards and Grayscale Investments. Its short accompanying note gives the formulas and the broad measurement window, but does not provide a token-by-token worksheet for independently reproducing every number.
Historical earnings, changes in circulating supply and the token’s market price can all alter the resulting yields. The framework helps separate protocol activity from value accruing to holders; assessing a token still requires checking the durability of its income, its supply schedule and the rules governing capital returns.
Disclaimer: CoinScreamer is an independent media brand owned and operated by NuvexMedia LLC, publishing news, research, and market insights on digital assets and related technologies. NuvexMedia LLC invests in and collaborates with companies across the digital asset, blockchain, and technology sectors. These relationships do not influence CoinScreamer’s editorial coverage, and the publication maintains full editorial independence to provide accurate, timely, and objective information. © 2025 NuvexMedia LLC. All rights reserved. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal, tax, investment, financial, or other professional advice.
