Crypto Projects Shut Down as Token Models Fail Under Pressure

A wave of crypto shutdowns is unfolding across the industry this year, hitting projects from trading platforms to analytics tools.

April was no exception, as decentralized email service Dmail said it is shutting down due to high infrastructure costs, failed fundraising and weak token utility.

“In prior cycles, projects could extend runway through new issuance or venture support,” Roshan Dharia, a restructuring advisor and CEO of crypto holding company Echo Base, told Cointelegraph.

“That path is largely closed, so losses are being recognized earlier, and outcomes are more often wind downs than recoveries,” he said.

Crypto built a fast way to raise capital through tokens, but still lacks a framework to unwind it when things go wrong, making it difficult to reorganize claims or coordinate stakeholders once conditions deteriorate.

Dmail’s token market cap fell below $1 million in November. Source: CoinGecko

Token funding falters as projects unwind

As market conditions have tightened in recent months, projects are drifting into slow declines instead of the abrupt collapses seen in past crypto downturns. Projects are deteriorating over time as user activity declines, treasuries weaken and funding options narrow.

“You see this in cases like Tally and Step Finance, where there is no single failure point, just a steady decline in treasury value and user activity that compresses optionality over time,” said Dharia.

DAO tooling platform Tally said it was winding down after concluding the market for governance tooling had yet to develop at scale, while Step Finance moved to shut down after a hack, saying efforts to secure financing or a sale failed to produce a viable outcome.

Step Finance suffered a $40 million security breach in January. Source: Step Finance

Related: Ethereum’s EEZ could pull other blockchains into its orbit

Some breakdowns still follow more familiar patterns. BlockFills filed for bankruptcy in March after freezing withdrawals. Its creditor, Dominion Capital, alleged in a lawsuit that the firm commingled customer assets to cover company losses.

Tokens once offered a fallback, allowing teams to raise capital or subsidize growth, but that mechanism is no longer as reliable, Dharia said. 

He added:

Earlier cycles treated tokens as a primary funding mechanism with an implied alignment between users, holders and operators. That alignment has proven fragile in stressed scenarios, particularly where token holders lack defined rights or recourse.”

Some are starting to treat tokens as claims that may need to be consolidated or reworked. In March, Across Protocol proposed a token-to-equity buyout. Risk Labs, the team behind Across, said the token and decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) structure limited its ability to close deals with enterprises and institutions.

Crypto lacks a playbook for restructuring

Unlike traditional companies, most crypto projects lack a clear path to restructure once conditions deteriorate. Corporate bankruptcies provide mechanisms to pause obligations, renegotiate with creditors and reorganize capital structures. 

In crypto, such avenues are often missing or poorly defined.

Each month in 2026 had a crypto project announcing shutdowns. Source: Stacy Muur

Related: Prediction market battle gets closer to Supreme Court

Crypto projects often operate through a mix of foundations, offshore entities and token-based communities, with no unified legal structure governing liabilities. In restructuring, token holders typically have no formal claims on assets or cash flows.

That limits what they can do under pressure. Projects are often left choosing between raising new capital on worse terms or shutting down without a clear hierarchy of claims or a way to bind stakeholders to an outcome, entirely.

“Most projects do not have access to formal restructuring tools, and their stakeholder base is fragmented across token holders, equity investors, and users with no clear hierarchy or enforcement mechanism,” said Dharia. 

“That makes it difficult to recapitalize, restructure obligations, or run a controlled process to preserve value. In that environment, once liquidity tightens, outcomes tend to default to wind downs or distressed asset sales rather than coordinated recoveries,” he said.

Limited recovery paths in token-based systems

Tokens made it easier and more accessible for crypto companies to raise capital and scale quickly, but offer limited support once conditions deteriorate.

Dharia said the current wave of shutdowns is driven by tighter capital availability and structurally weak balance sheets. Many projects entered the bear market with treasuries heavily concentrated in their own tokens or correlated assets. As prices fell, the runway contracted.

“At the same time, funding channels have narrowed, with more selective venture deployment, weaker token issuance and thinner secondary liquidity limiting both exit and financing options,” Dharia added.

So far this year, projects have more often wound down quietly than attempted formal restructuring. Without clear frameworks to reorganize claims or coordinate stakeholders, recovery paths remain limited.

Some projects have begun exploring ways to consolidate ownership and introduce more formal structures, suggesting parts of the market are starting to adapt after running into the limits of token and decentralized governance models.

Magazine: AI-driven hacks could kill DeFi — unless projects act now

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.