In late July, S&P Global and Pantera Capital rolled out the S&P Pantera Digital Asset (SPPDA) Index, a new crypto benchmark designed to focus on financial fundamentals rather than pure market-cap momentum. The index excludes Bitcoin and XRP while including Ethereum, Solana, and Hyperliquid—an outcome that sheds light on which tokens institutional investors may favor when searching for investable exposure to crypto networks.
Key takeaways
- Price move: The launch is an index/basket event, not a direct trading catalyst for any single coin.
- Catalyst: S&P Global and Pantera Capital introduced the SPPDA Index with inclusion rules tied to protocol revenue and value distribution to token holders.
- What changed: Ethereum, Solana, and Hyperliquid qualified, while Bitcoin and XRP did not under the index’s revenue-and-distribution thresholds.
- Implication: The framework signals that “fees-to-holders” economics may become a stronger selection factor for future institutional crypto products.
What the SPPDA Index is built to measure
According to S&P Global and Pantera Capital, the SPPDA Index includes only tokens whose underlying networks generate “real revenue” and route that revenue to token holders. The designers aim to provide a crypto benchmark that is more suitable for financial institutions, explicitly filtering out the most speculative or economically weak projects.
In practice, the index ties eligibility to transaction fees collected by blockchain networks. Aggregating these fees is intended to capture protocol revenue—positioned as the crypto analogue to sales revenue in more traditional business models. Unlike a market-cap-weighted crypto index, the SPPDA Index keeps only those networks that clear a revenue threshold, then applies additional rules to confirm that holders receive some share of incoming value.
Why Bitcoin and XRP were left out
Under the index methodology described by S&P Global and Pantera Capital, clearing the basic revenue bar is not enough. Tokens must also demonstrate that part of the network’s incoming revenue is distributed to holders via mechanisms such as token buybacks, coin burns that reduce supply, or staking rewards that deliver yield exceeding dilution from new issuance.
Bitcoin was excluded despite notable transaction activity, because fees are directed to miners rather than routed to holders. In other words, the index’s distribution requirement treats Bitcoin’s fee economics as not providing upside to token owners.
XRP, while traditionally viewed as having utility and fee-generating activity, also failed the index’s criteria. The report said the network’s fees are so low that even if they were burned, the impact on token supply would be negligible. That, in turn, limits how much holder upside is derived from ongoing chain activity. The index framework also reflects a competition problem for limited index slots: if a network’s fee revenue is too small, it may struggle to outperform peers under the index’s thresholds even when holders are theoretically eligible for distribution.
What qualified: Ethereum, Solana and Hyperliquid
Ethereum, Solana, and Hyperliquid were included, alongside select peers, because their token economics align more closely with the SPPDA Index’s focus on protocol revenue and holder-relevant value capture.
The report also pointed to a meaningful gap in network revenue between some high-activity ecosystems and others. It cited Solana generating chain revenue in June, while the XRP Ledger’s chain revenue in the same period was far lower. The key takeaway for investors is not simply that some networks transact more, but that they must translate that activity into token-holder-facing economics strong enough to satisfy the benchmark’s inclusion rules.
Why the index could matter for institutions
Data-driven benchmarks designed around “fees to holders” can be attractive to institutions because they reduce the need to manually screen out low-quality networks. According to the report, having a ready-made benchmark may also make it easier to build future products—potentially including exchange-traded funds—once the underlying index methodology is established and rules are transparent.
If that happens, the index may create an incentive for crypto projects to structure tokenomics that capture network revenue and distribute at least a portion to holders, rather than relying on speculative narratives alone. In that scenario, the next crypto bull cycle—at least among assets most likely to be packaged for mainstream portfolios—may tilt toward tokens with stronger protocol revenue and clearer mechanisms for value transfer.
What to watch next
Investors will likely watch whether SPPDA-style benchmarks gain traction among allocators and whether additional crypto index products adopt similar revenue-and-distribution filters. The next practical signals to monitor are product announcements tied to the index, any updates to its inclusion criteria over time, and broader market catalysts for crypto exposure as rates and risk appetite evolve.
