This post aims to open a much-needed conversation around a persistent and often overlooked issue in crypto: the near-complete absence of investor relations.
Despite strong product-market fit and deep moats, some protocols continue to strengthen their fundamentals, yet the token price shows little to no correlation with this progress.
In the past, the “last mile” challenge for users has been widely discussed and solved in part by improved UX, integrations, AI agents, or CEXs.
But there has been virtually no discussion about the “last mile” for investors. Why? No one enjoys watching prices trend downward.
- But if fundamentals are improving, why does the market often fail to reflect that?
- Is this truly a fair representation of value or is it simply the absence of new demand?
- Who are the new bidders for these tokens, and what is actually being done to attract them?
It seems naive to believe that continued building alone will organically generate investor interest.
In a market saturated with opportunities, capital doesn’t flow passively.
You have to give it reasons to care: clear, compelling, and well-communicated.
This isn’t a CowSwap-specific issue though, it’s a systemic one across most of crypto.
In fact, Cow deserves some credit for having few decent dashboards on Dune. And yet the data is fragmented across multiple dashboards, and crucial metrics are still missing such as treasury balances, operating expenses, or even accurate “real” circulating supply figures.
But let’s be honest: how many investors even know how to navigate Dune?
Investor relations isn’t just a nice-to-have anymore, it’s a must-to-have. Without it, even the best-built protocols risk being mispriced, misunderstood, and ultimately ignored by capital markets.
@notsoformal has done a great job addressing many of these critical questions primarily via Discord. But can we realistically expect serious investors or institutional players to join Discord just to chase down fragmented information or ask questions that aren’t addressed elsewhere?
The more friction we introduce, the less likely any serious capital will engage. Every extra step is a drop-off point.
We should aim to make it as seamless and transparent as possible for both potential investors and existing token holders to understand the protocol.
That includes access to consolidated and trustworthy data, team commentary on performance, a clear roadmap, future guidance, treasury and token disclosures, and more.
These are basic standards in traditional equity markets. Yet in crypto, we often act surprised when investor interest is lacking while ignoring the infrastructure and practices that foster real capital formation.
If we (as Cow protocol) don’t actively build for investor engagement, we’re left competing for the same rotating pool of crypto-native capital that’s been cycling through narratives for years.
That capital is reactive, speculative, and transient. What we should be aiming for is a stronger investor base: one that offers feedback, holds teams accountable, challenges assumptions, and supports long-term value creation.
If we want crypto to mature as an asset class and position $COW as a credible, long-term investment, we can’t just keep building products! We have to build trust, visibility, and investor infrastructure alongside them.
The fact that we’re about to vote on a renewed incentive package for the team without a clear roadmap or a defined value accrual model is a clear indication that there’s significant room for improvement.
To be clear, this isn’t a critique of whether the team deserves incentives.
It’s a reflection of the broader issue I’ve been raising: the lack of structured investor communication and strategy.
The timing is actually quite fitting, given the current RFP around value accrual design.
My hunch is that many token holders will naturally gravitate toward short-term mechanisms like increased buybacks. Simply because they’re tangible and easy to grasp.
But that dynamic makes it harder to align around more strategic, high-leverage approaches that could offer better long-term ROI.
With an IR strategy in place, we could foster a community that’s better informed, more aligned, and more willing to support better (more value-add) initiatives.
As I mentioned at the start, the goal of this post is to spark a conversation and ideally gather feedback on whether others see this as an issue as well.
Let me ask a few simple questions:
-
Do you know how much profit Cow generated in 2025?
-
What were the average operating expenses?
-
Which chain was the most profitable?
-
What’s the current balance of the treasury?
-
How many $COW tokens were paid to solvers?
-
How much new token emission was there?
-
What is the product focus for 2026?
-
Which chains is Cow planning to expand to in 2026?
-
What are the team’s key challenges right now?
-
How many $COW tokens is owned by DAO?
If the answer to most of these is “no,” that’s precisely the point.
This post isn’t meant to criticize anyone. It’s meant to highlight the importance of IR. It remains one of the most misunderstood and underrated issues in crypto today imo.
**Investor relations doesn’t just help with price discovery. It helps align long-term holders, attract new capital, and create a healthier, more resilient cap table.
**
I’d also love to hear suggestions on how we might solve this issue because identifying the problem is only the first step.
One potential solution could be the formation of a dedicated Investor Relations (IR) group. Perhaps a small committee of three individuals with a clearly defined mandate. Their core responsibilities could include:
-
Identifying existing communication gaps and investor needs
-
Proposing solutions and frameworks for improvement
-
Acting as an intermediary between the core team and the broader investor community
-
Maintaining and publishing accurate, up-to-date data and protocol metrics
-
Organizing regular investor calls
-
Providing structured, transparent and regular reporting
Of course, the scope and responsibilities would need to be developed further through community input and collaboration with the team. So take this with a grain of salt but hopefully, it helps illustrate the direction I think we should be heading.
