Binance Research’s report discusses the issues surrounding cryptocurrency airdrops, identifying common pitfalls like last-minute changes and unclear eligibility criteria that undermine community trust. It highlights successful strategies through sentiment analysis, showing that transparency and community engagement are essential for positive reception. The report provides recommendations for enhancing future airdrop processes, including clear communication and better monitoring to prevent exploitation.
A new report from Binance Research examines the prevalent method of token distribution known as airdrops, highlighting significant issues. Airdrops are categorized into two types: Retroactive Airdrops, which reward users for past actions without prior notice, and Engagement Airdrops that incentivise new users by announcing qualifying actions in advance. The report employs sentiment analysis with X’s Grok AI to assess community reactions to recent airdrop events.
Key issues affecting trust in airdrops include last-minute changes to token allocations and vague eligibility criteria. A notable example is Redstone’s March 2025 airdrop, which reduced its community allocation from 9.5% to 5% just before distribution, resulting in a backlash. Such abrupt changes can signal poor planning, undermining community trust in the project team. Additionally, the report criticises unclear eligibility rules that lead to inconsistent rewards, citing Scroll’s October 2024 airdrop, which was scrutinised for arbitrary snapshots and hidden requirements. Criticism also arose regarding distributions favouring insiders, as observed with Kaito’s February 2025 airdrop.
Sentiment analysis conducted by Binance Research indicates which airdrop strategies performed best within communities. The findings demonstrate that Pudgy Penguins achieved the top sentiment score of 10 for its December 2024 airdrop due to meeting community expectations and rewarding a high percentage of its token supply to NFT holders. Hyperliquid received a score of 9 for effectively rewarding early adopters, with other successful airdrops like Berachain, ZKsync, and Grass scoring 8 based on strong support and transparent allocation. In contrast, Redstone and Scroll received the lowest scores, facing discontent over allocation changes and excessive farming impressions.
To enhance future airdrop effectiveness, Binance Research presents three key recommendations. First, there needs to be heightened transparency and focus on community engagement, along with improved monitoring to thwart exploitation tactics, like sybil farming. For Retroactive Airdrops, it is crucial to communicate distribution metrics clearly before claims, aligning community expectations with project plans. For Engagement Airdrops, clarity in distribution metrics is vital, including avoiding post-publication changes. The report suggests leveraging on-chain analytics to identify and disqualify airdrop farmers, with an optimistic outlook that improved monitoring tools will mitigate unwanted farming activities as they become more standardised.
