The competitive landscape of the storage track is quietly changing. Filecoin, Arweave, and Walrus are three protocols, all involved in storage, but each taking a completely different approach.

From the demand side, Filecoin's token price is directly linked to storage supply and demand, with obvious cyclical characteristics; Arweave focuses on permanent storage, with more stable demand; Walrus relies on early subsidies and a programmable model to attract users. As adoption increases, token consumption and staking mechanisms will gradually become more apparent.

The differences in ecosystems are even greater. Filecoin is expanding into the computing layer, with cross-chain capital continuously flowing in; Arweave is strengthening the value consensus of permanent storage; Walrus is deeply integrated into the Sui ecosystem, with development potential and ecosystem growth tightly intertwined. These different strategic choices directly determine the liquidity and valuation space of each token.

Technologically, each has its own focus—dynamic storage, permanent archiving, programmable scenarios—forming differentiated competition within niche segments. The future storage sector will not be dominated by a single protocol but will feature multiple protocols coexisting, each leveraging its strengths. The key to investment logic lies in observing the actual data growth of each protocol and the strength of its ecosystem collaboration capabilities.