Crypto Portfolio Outperforms ETH as LIT and ZEC Rally
Bankless co-founder David Hoffman reportedly sold his entire ETH position in late May or early June and redeployed the capital into VVV, NEAR, ZEC, HYPE and LIT. Half was allocated immediately across VVV, NEAR, ZEC and HYPE, while the remainder was gradually invested in LIT, the token of the zkRollup-based perpetual exchange Lighter.
Using approximate entry prices and early-September prices, the crypto portfolio gained an estimated 90%–120%, compared with about 17% for ETH. ZEC rose from roughly $540 to above $1,200, supported by Grayscale’s Zcash spot ETF launch and short liquidations. HYPE climbed from about $56 to $87, while LIT increased from an estimated dollar-cost-averaging range of $1.50–$2 to around $4.70. NEAR rose from approximately $1.40 to $2.37. VVV was the weakest holding and remained broadly flat.
Hoffman’s crypto portfolio thesis focused on application-layer revenue, protocol buybacks, verifiable on-chain activity, privacy adoption and crypto derivatives growth rather than Ethereum Layer 1 valuation. He cited LIT’s faster buybacks, lower latency, competitive fees and zero-knowledge transaction verification.
The reported performance suggests that revenue-linked tokens and narrative catalysts can outperform ETH, but the figures are based on approximate prices and disclosed positions, not audited trading records. Traders should check liquidity, token unlocks, actual protocol revenue, buyback execution and whether ETF or growth expectations are already priced in.
Bullish
The news is bullish for the mentioned assets overall because the disclosed portfolio significantly outperformed ETH, while ZEC, HYPE and LIT benefited from identifiable catalysts including ETF exposure, short liquidations, derivatives growth and token buybacks. Public attention could support short-term demand and increase trading volume, particularly in LIT and ZEC.
However, the price response may be uneven. Strong gains can encourage momentum trading but also increase profit-taking and liquidation risk. VVV’s weaker performance shows that the application-layer narrative does not benefit every token equally. Over the longer term, sustained upside will depend on actual protocol revenue, user growth, buyback execution, liquidity and token supply schedules. Because the performance figures are approximate and the catalysts may already be priced in, the bullish effect is positive but vulnerable to sharp corrections.