/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

Nansen: users spent ~$2.7B worth of ether to mint NFTs in H1 2022; 50.7% of the ETH raised stayed with the NFT projects and 45.7% went to non-entity wallets

Over 1 million unique wallet addresses were involved in the minting process, signaling that nonfungible token market activity remained strong. Source: Nansen .

Cointelegraph Zhiyuan Sun

Context & Ripple Effects

Ethereum-based NFT activity had been compounding for two years before this print: total transaction value rose from $62M in 2019 to $250M+ in 2020 (per the earlier Decrypt tally), and Chainalysis then sized 2021 NFT spending at nearly $41B (with small sub-$10K transactions dominating). Nansen's H1 2022 minting figure — ~$2.7B in ether from over 1 million unique wallets — lands at the top of that curve, measuring the primary-issuance layer specifically.

The distribution split is what makes it analytically useful: only 50.7% of the ETH raised stayed with the NFT projects themselves, while 45.7% went to wallets Nansen could not attribute to any entity. That matters because Nansen later showed royalties collapsing to a two-year low as royalty-optional platforms spread — meaning mint proceeds were the one revenue stream projects could count on, and they were already keeping barely half of it.

First-order effects

  • Projects raising via mints retain just over half their gross ether (50.7%), with 45.7% flowing to non-entity wallets — so headline raise sizes materially overstate what founding teams actually banked.
  • Over 1 million unique addresses minted in six months, confirming the retail breadth behind the 2021–22 boom that Chainalysis had measured at $41B for full-year 2021.

Second-order effects

  • With Chainalysis showing 32.4K wallets holding 80% of NFT value, a near-half mint share landing in unlabeled wallets points toward insider and concentrated-holder capture, pressuring projects to demonstrate genuine distribution to buyers.
  • As secondary markets shifted to royalty-optional models, primary-mint proceeds became the dominant reliable revenue line — the dynamic that preceded the royalty collapse Nansen documented in mid-2023.

Third-order effects

  • If mint treasuries are one-time raises and royalties are increasingly optional, NFT project economics tilt toward serial re-issuance and utility-backed launches, favoring repeat issuers over long-tail collections dependent on secondary fees.
  • On-chain attribution firms like Nansen and Chainalysis become de facto auditors of where crypto-raised funds actually settle — a role regulators and limited partners are likely to lean on as token fundraising scales.

The trend: NFT project revenue is migrating from guaranteed primary-mint raises to contested, optional royalties, with on-chain analytics firms mapping who actually captures the value.