Venice Token (VVV) - Price Potential May 2026

How High Can Venice Token (VVV) Go? A Comprehensive Price Ceiling Analysis

Venice Token (VVV) has already demonstrated the ability to command a substantial valuation, reaching approximately $1 billion market cap at its January 2025 peak. The question of maximum price potential is best answered through market cap scenarios rather than absolute price targets, because token price is a function of circulating supply, unlock schedules, and how much ecosystem value accrues to the token itself. Based on comprehensive analysis of market data, fundamentals, adoption metrics, and comparable projects, VVV's realistic ceiling ranges from $600 million in a conservative scenario to $2.5 billion in an optimistic scenario, with a base case around $1 billion.

Market Cap Comparison Framework

VVV's current $416.2 million market cap positions it as a meaningful mid-cap asset within the AI infrastructure category, not an early-stage microcap. This positioning is critical context for understanding upside potential, because it means the market has already assigned VVV a credible probability of becoming a durable AI/privacy utility token rather than a short-lived speculative asset.

Positioning Relative to AI Infrastructure Peers

VVV sits in a competitive but achievable band relative to established decentralized AI and compute projects:

The fact that VVV trades at nearly identical valuation to Fetch.ai ($447M vs. $416M) is significant. It indicates the market views both projects as serious mid-cap infrastructure plays with comparable probability of success. The gap between VVV and Render ($873M) is approximately 2.1x, suggesting that if VVV can demonstrate stronger adoption or network effects than Render, a move into that valuation band is plausible.

Versus Traditional Markets

A $416 million market cap is modest in traditional software contexts. For perspective:

• A mid-sized public software company typically trades at $500M to $2B market cap
• The global AI software market exceeds $500 billion annually
• Privacy and security software represents a multi-hundred-billion-dollar market

This comparison matters because it frames the upside potential: VVV does not need to capture a large share of the global AI or privacy markets to justify substantially higher valuations. Even a very small penetration of these massive markets can support a multi-billion-dollar token valuation. However, crypto tokens typically trade at discounts to comparable software companies due to regulatory uncertainty, liquidity constraints, and narrative-driven volatility.

Historical ATH Analysis and Context

VVV reached an all-time high between $22.45 and $22.58 in late January 2025, depending on the data source. Using the more widely cited CoinMarketCap figure of $22.45 and the circulating supply at that time (approximately 46M tokens), the implied market cap at ATH was roughly $1.03 billion.

This historical peak is important context for several reasons:

1. Proof of Concept VVV has already demonstrated the ability to attract sufficient capital to reach a billion-dollar valuation. This was not a theoretical ceiling; it was an actual market outcome. That proves the token can command large valuations when narrative, liquidity, and sentiment align.

2. Launch-Phase Premium The ATH occurred shortly after token launch (January 27, 2025) and was likely driven by:

• Initial exchange listing momentum
• Airdrop distribution and community excitement
• Thin circulating supply effects
• Broad AI token enthusiasm during that period

Launch-phase peaks often represent temporary liquidity events rather than sustainable fundamental ceilings. The subsequent 70%+ drawdown from ATH to current levels reflects the market repricing VVV based on actual adoption metrics versus initial narrative expectations.

3. Current Valuation Relative to ATH At $416M market cap, VVV is trading at approximately 40% of its prior peak valuation. This discount could reflect:

• Disappointment in adoption growth relative to expectations
• Broader crypto market weakness
• Profit-taking after the initial rally
• Or simply a more realistic repricing as the market moved beyond launch hype

The key question is whether VVV can justify a return to $1B+ valuations through improved fundamentals, or whether the ATH represented an unsustainable peak driven primarily by launch momentum.

Supply Dynamics and Price Potential

Supply structure is one of the most critical constraints on price appreciation. VVV's supply dynamics create both opportunities and risks:

Current Supply Structure:

• Genesis supply: 100 million VVV
• Burned at launch: ~33.7 million
• Current total supply: ~79.77 million
• Circulating supply: 45.74 million (57.3%)
• Non-circulating: 34.03 million (42.7%)

The 42.7% of supply still not circulating represents significant future dilution potential. This non-circulating supply breaks down as:

• Team allocation (vesting): ~10M (12.5%)
• Company/Venice reserve: ~17.5M (21.9%)
• Incentive fund/other: ~6.53M (8.2%)

Inflation and Burn Dynamics

VVV is not a fixed-supply asset. Current emission schedules and vesting create ongoing supply pressure:

• Annual emissions: Reduced from initial 14M to current 6M VVV per year
• Monthly vesting inflows: Approximately 926.7K VVV from emissions plus vesting
• Monthly organic burns: Only approximately 35.7K VVV from protocol revenue
• Net monthly inflation: Approximately 891K VVV per month

This represents a critical constraint: at current rates, the token is experiencing net inflation of roughly 10.7 million VVV annually, or about 13.4% of circulating supply per year. For price to appreciate meaningfully, market cap growth must outpace this dilution. If market cap remains flat while supply expands 13.4% annually, token price would decline approximately 11.8% per year (accounting for the dilution effect).

Price Implications by Market Cap Scenario

Using the current circulating supply of 45.74M tokens, here are the implied token prices at different market cap levels:

The base case scenario ($1B market cap, $21.87 price) essentially represents a return to the historical ATH valuation. Reaching that level would require VVV to demonstrate that the January 2025 peak was not merely launch hype, but rather a sustainable valuation justified by improving adoption metrics.

The optimistic scenario ($2.5B market cap, $54.67 price) would place VVV near Bittensor's current valuation and would require the project to establish itself as a category leader in decentralized AI inference.

Supply Unlock Risk

A critical risk factor is the January 2027 vesting cliff, when a significant portion of team tokens become fully vested. This creates a potential selling pressure event that could suppress price appreciation in the months leading up to and following that date. The market typically prices in anticipated unlock events, so awareness of this timeline is important for understanding potential volatility.

Network Effects and Adoption Curve Analysis

VVV's upside potential depends critically on whether Venice can create a self-reinforcing adoption loop where increased usage drives token demand, which attracts more users and developers, which further increases usage.

Current Adoption Metrics

Venice's growth trajectory shows meaningful momentum:

• User base: Grew from 400K+ at token launch (January 2025) to 1.3M+ by March 2026
• Daily active users: 50K+ to 70K+ range
• Daily inference requests: 1.1M+ per day
• Monthly recurring revenue: Up 62% post-launch
• Staking participation: 69.6% of circulating supply staked (31.89M VVV)
• Locked staking: 27.1% of staked supply locked in DIEM

These metrics indicate strong product-market fit within the crypto-native user base. The high staking ratio (69.6%) is particularly significant because it demonstrates that users are willing to commit capital to the token for access rights rather than simply holding it speculatively.

Adoption Curve Stages

VVV appears to be transitioning from early adoption into early mainstream adoption:

Stage 1: Early Adopters (Completed)

• Crypto-native users discovered Venice
• Token launch created initial excitement
• High staking participation established

Stage 2: Product-Market Fit Validation (Current)

• User growth accelerating (3.25x growth from launch to March 2026)
• API usage expanding beyond consumer app
• DIEM tokenized compute product launched
• Developer integrations beginning

Stage 3: Network Effects (Required for Higher Valuations)

• Broader developer ecosystem adoption
• Integration into AI agent workflows
• Enterprise or institutional usage
• Self-reinforcing demand loop where more users attract more builders

The transition from Stage 2 to Stage 3 is the critical determinant of whether VVV can sustain valuations above $1B. If Venice can establish itself as essential infrastructure for AI agents and applications, network effects become powerful. If adoption remains primarily consumer-focused and speculative, the ceiling is much lower.

Staking as a Utility Anchor

The 69.6% staking ratio is a strong positive signal because it indicates:

• Token utility is real and economically meaningful
• Users are willing to lock capital for access rights
• The staking mechanism creates a natural price floor (users need tokens to access the service)
• DIEM adds a second layer of demand (locked sVVV mints DIEM, which represents perpetual AI inference credits)

This staking-based model is more defensible than pure governance tokens because it creates recurring demand tied to actual usage rather than only speculation.

Total Addressable Market (TAM) Analysis

VVV's maximum price potential is ultimately constrained by the size of the market it can address and its ability to capture share of that market.

Relevant TAM Layers

1. Decentralized AI Inference Market The most direct TAM. This includes:

• Users seeking privacy-preserving AI access
• Developers building on uncensored inference
• Enterprises with compliance constraints
• Crypto-native applications requiring decentralized AI

Conservative estimates place the decentralized AI compute market at $50-100B over the next 5-7 years, representing a small but growing subset of the broader AI infrastructure market.

2. Privacy-Focused AI Access A narrower but potentially premium-priced segment:

• Users concerned about data retention and surveillance
• Jurisdictions with strict data protection regulations
• Applications handling sensitive information
• Developers building privacy-sensitive workflows

This segment is smaller than general AI access but may command higher pricing due to regulatory and competitive advantages.

3. Crypto-Native AI Demand The most immediate TAM:

• AI agents operating on blockchain networks
• DeFi applications requiring AI inference
• Crypto-native users preferring tokenized access
• Developers building on Base and other L2s

This segment is currently the largest source of Venice's usage but is also the most volatile and sentiment-driven.

4. Traditional Software Market Comparison For context, the global AI software market exceeds $500B annually. Even if VVV captured just 0.5% of AI inference spend, that would imply $2.5B in annual revenue, which could justify a multi-billion-dollar token valuation. However, crypto tokens typically capture value differently than traditional software companies, so direct revenue-to-valuation comparisons are imperfect.

TAM Implications for Price Ceiling

At a $2.5B market cap (the optimistic scenario), VVV would represent:

• 2.5-5% of the estimated $50-100B decentralized AI compute TAM
• A reasonable penetration level for a leading infrastructure project
• Approximately 0.5% of the broader $500B+ AI software market

These percentages are plausible if Venice becomes a recognized category leader, but they require sustained execution and network effects.

Comparison to Similar Projects at Peak Valuations

Understanding how comparable projects have been valued at their peaks provides useful ceiling benchmarks.

Bittensor (TAO) — Upper-Tier Benchmark

Bittensor reached $2.71B market cap in May 2024 and currently trades around $2.44B. TAO demonstrates that decentralized AI infrastructure tokens can sustain multi-billion-dollar valuations when the market believes in long-term economic value. Key factors supporting TAO's valuation:

• Established network with real validator participation
• Clear economic model (validators earn rewards for providing AI services)
• Institutional recognition and exchange support
• Demonstrated ability to attract developer ecosystem

For VVV to reach TAO-like valuations, it would need to establish similar credibility as essential infrastructure.

Render Network (RNDR) — Mid-Tier Benchmark

Render reached an ATH of $13.60 in March 2024 and currently trades around $873M market cap. RNDR is particularly relevant because:

• It operates in a similar infrastructure space (decentralized compute)
• It has demonstrated real usage (GPU rendering jobs)
• It has achieved sustained mid-cap valuation
• It shows that compute infrastructure tokens can reach high hundreds of millions without being category leaders

VVV's current $416M valuation is roughly 48% of Render's current level, suggesting that if VVV can demonstrate comparable adoption and utility, a move toward $800M+ is plausible.

Fetch.ai (FET/ASI) — Direct Competitor

Fetch.ai trades at $447M market cap, nearly identical to VVV's current $416M. This is significant because:

• Both projects operate in AI infrastructure
• Both have similar market cap valuations
• The market views them as comparable risk/reward profiles
• Either could outperform the other based on execution

The fact that two direct competitors trade at nearly identical valuations suggests the market has not yet clearly differentiated between them based on fundamentals. This creates opportunity: if VVV can demonstrate superior adoption or network effects, it could capture market share from FET and move higher.

Akash Network (AKT) — Lower-Tier Reference

Akash trades at $152.8M market cap despite being an established decentralized compute project. This shows that even real infrastructure projects can trade at relatively modest valuations if:

• Adoption is not fully monetized
• Token utility is weak or optional
• Competition is intense
• Market sentiment is unfavorable

AKT serves as a cautionary example: real infrastructure alone does not guarantee high valuation if the token does not capture meaningful value from that infrastructure.

Monero (XMR) — Privacy Benchmark

Monero trades at $7.05B market cap, demonstrating that privacy-focused assets can command very large valuations. However, XMR differs materially from VVV:

• XMR is a native currency with long-standing trust
• XMR has strong network effects (privacy requires critical mass)
• XMR has been established for over a decade
• XMR's use case is primarily payments, not AI access

While XMR shows that privacy narratives can support large valuations, VVV would need to establish similar credibility and network effects to approach those levels.

Realistic Ceiling Scenarios

Based on the comprehensive analysis above, here are three realistic scenarios for VVV's maximum price potential:

Conservative Scenario: $600M Market Cap

Assumptions:

• User growth continues but slows from current trajectory
• API usage expands modestly
• Staking remains strong but does not deepen significantly
• Emissions and vesting create ongoing dilution pressure
• Market assigns VVV a mid-cap utility-token multiple without major breakout
• Broader crypto market remains in risk-off conditions

Implied Token Price: $13.12 (at 45.74M circulating supply)

Rationale: This scenario represents roughly 44% appreciation from current levels and would place VVV between Fetch.ai ($447M) and Render ($873M). It assumes continued operational execution and relevance within the AI token category, but without major catalysts or category expansion. This is a "steady-state growth" scenario where Venice maintains its position as a credible mid-cap infrastructure token but does not become a category leader.

Market Context: At $600M market cap, VVV would still be below its historical ATH valuation, suggesting the market has not fully re-rated the project based on improved fundamentals. This scenario is plausible if adoption metrics improve but remain primarily crypto-native.

Base Case Scenario: $1.0B Market Cap

Assumptions:

• Venice sustains current user growth trajectory (3-5x growth annually)
• API usage expands meaningfully as developer ecosystem grows
• DIEM and staking mechanisms drive recurring token demand
• Emissions continue to decline as planned
• Buy-and-burn becomes more material as platform revenue scales
• Market recognizes VVV as a serious AI infrastructure token
• Crypto market sentiment improves from current Extreme Fear levels

Implied Token Price: $21.87 (at 45.74M circulating supply)

Rationale: This scenario represents approximately 140% appreciation from current levels and essentially represents a return to the historical ATH valuation. It assumes that the January 2025 peak was not merely launch hype but rather a sustainable valuation justified by improving adoption metrics. At $1B market cap, VVV would be positioned alongside Render and would represent successful execution of the Venice platform roadmap.

Market Context: The base case is the most defensible "successful execution" scenario. It does not require VVV to become a category leader like Bittensor, but it does require sustained product-market fit and network effects. This is the valuation level that would indicate Venice has evolved from a speculative AI token into a durable infrastructure asset.

Optimistic Scenario: $2.5B Market Cap

Assumptions:

• Venice becomes a leading privacy-first AI platform with strong brand recognition
• User base expands to multi-million scale with strong retention
• API usage scales sharply as developer ecosystem matures
• Enterprise or institutional adoption begins
• Buy-and-burn accelerates materially as platform revenue scales
• Emissions continue to decline
• Token becomes integral to AI agent workflows and applications
• Broader market cycle supports AI infrastructure tokens
• VVV establishes itself as a category leader comparable to Bittensor

Implied Token Price: $54.67 (at 45.74M circulating supply)

Rationale: This scenario represents approximately 501% appreciation from current levels and would place VVV near Bittensor's current $2.44B valuation. It requires Venice to move from a niche privacy-focused AI app into a dominant infrastructure layer with strong monetization and network effects. This is the upper end of what looks realistic based on comparable project valuations and market dynamics.

Market Context: The optimistic scenario is achievable but requires multiple favorable conditions to align simultaneously: sustained product execution, strong adoption growth, favorable market sentiment, and successful network effects. It is not the most likely outcome, but it is plausible if Venice executes exceptionally well and benefits from favorable market conditions.

Growth Catalysts That Could Drive Significant Appreciation

Several catalysts could support movement toward higher scenario valuations:

Product and Adoption Catalysts:

• Sustained user growth from current 1.3M toward 5M+ users
• Daily active user expansion from 50-70K toward 500K+
• API usage scaling to 10M+ daily inference requests
• Developer ecosystem expansion with meaningful integrations
• Enterprise or institutional adoption announcements
• Expansion into new use cases (video generation, agents, etc.)

Token and Economics Catalysts:

• Accelerated buy-and-burn as platform revenue scales
• Further emission reductions
• DIEM adoption expanding tokenized compute demand
• Staking lock-up deepening (currently 27.1% of staked supply locked)
• New exchange listings improving liquidity

Market and Narrative Catalysts:

• Broader AI token category re-rating
• Privacy-preserving AI becoming mainstream narrative
• Regulatory clarity supporting decentralized AI
• Crypto market rotation from Extreme Fear toward Neutral/Greed
• Institutional capital entering AI infrastructure tokens
• Short squeeze if bearish positioning persists while price trends higher

Competitive Catalysts:

• Outperformance versus Fetch.ai and other direct competitors
• Capture of market share from centralized AI platforms
• Partnerships with major AI ecosystems or Base-native projects
• Technology breakthroughs in privacy or efficiency

The strongest catalyst would be evidence that token demand is tied to actual usage rather than purely speculative narrative. This would shift VVV from a "narrative token" to a "utility token," which typically commands higher valuations and more stable price floors.

Limiting Factors and Realistic Constraints

Several structural factors cap VVV's upside potential:

Supply and Dilution Constraints:

• Ongoing emissions at 6M VVV annually (13.4% of circulating supply per year)
• 34M tokens still not circulating (42.7% of total supply)
• January 2027 vesting cliff creating potential selling pressure
• Buy-and-burn still modest relative to total issuance (35.7K per month vs. 926.7K inflows)

Competitive Constraints:

• Intense competition from better-capitalized AI infrastructure projects (Bittensor, Render, Fetch.ai)
• Centralized AI platforms (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) with superior resources
• Multiple decentralized compute networks competing for same capital
• Difficulty differentiating privacy claims in crowded market

Adoption Constraints:

• Token utility may remain optional rather than essential
• User retention risk (many crypto apps see initial spikes but weak long-term usage)
• Dependence on crypto-native users rather than mainstream adoption
• Difficulty converting consumer app users into API/developer demand

Market and Regulatory Constraints:

• AI token valuations highly sentiment-driven and cyclical
• Regulatory uncertainty around decentralized compute and token-based incentives
• Crypto market volatility affecting all tokens regardless of fundamentals
• Potential restrictions on privacy-preserving AI in certain jurisdictions

Fundamental Constraints:

• TAM is smaller than general AI market (decentralized AI is niche)
• Token capture of value depends on unclear mechanics
• Privacy claims are not the same as fully trustless privacy
• Execution risk on roadmap items and product development

These constraints mean that while $2.5B is plausible in an optimistic scenario, valuations materially above that would require either exceptional execution or a market-wide speculative cycle similar to prior AI token manias.

Derivatives Market Context

The current derivatives backdrop provides useful context for understanding whether the market is positioned for upside or downside:

Open Interest Trend:

• Current: $59.23M
• 30-day high: $71.55M
• 30-day low: $45.32M
• 30-day change: +4.46%

Open interest is stable to mildly rising, indicating healthy participation without extreme leverage accumulation. The current level sits 83% of the way between the monthly low and high, suggesting neither extreme complacency nor excessive positioning.

Funding Rates:

• Current: 0.0012% per 8-hour period
• Annualized: ~1.28%
• Interpretation: Neutral funding indicates the market is not showing strong long-side leverage imbalance

Neutral funding is constructive because it means the market is not excessively leveraged long. This leaves room for price appreciation without triggering cascading liquidations that could reverse gains.

Long/Short Positioning:

• Long: 41.8%
• Short: 58.2%
• Ratio: 0.72

The crowd is still net bearish, with shorts outnumbering longs by 58% to 42%. This is mildly supportive from a contrarian standpoint because it means the market is not fully convinced of upside. If spot demand improves, shorts can be squeezed, providing additional upside momentum.

Liquidations:

• Total 24h: $86.9K
• Long liquidations: $15.55K
• Short liquidations: $71.35K

Recent liquidations have favored shorts (71.35K vs. 15.55K), indicating that bearish positions have been getting squeezed more than bullish positions. This can support upside continuation if spot demand persists.

Broader Market Sentiment:

• Crypto Fear & Greed Index: 25/100 (Extreme Fear)
• 30-day average: 23

Extreme Fear is typically a contrarian environment. When sentiment is this weak, speculative capital has not fully re-entered the market, which leaves room for appreciation if conditions improve. However, Extreme Fear can also persist for extended periods, so it is not a reliable timing indicator.

Implication: The derivatives backdrop does not indicate a crowded top. Open interest is stable, funding is neutral, retail is net short, and liquidations are favoring shorts. This combination suggests there is room for upside if spot demand improves, without the risk of cascading long liquidations that could reverse gains quickly.

Supply Dynamics and Inflation Impact

A critical factor often overlooked in price potential analysis is the ongoing inflation from emissions and vesting. VVV's supply dynamics create a structural headwind that must be overcome for price to appreciate:

Monthly Supply Pressure:

• Emissions + vesting inflows: 926.7K VVV/month
• Organic buy-and-burn: 35.7K VVV/month
• Net monthly inflation: 891K VVV/month
• Annual inflation rate: ~13.4% of circulating supply

For price to remain flat while supply expands 13.4% annually, market cap must grow 13.4% annually just to offset dilution. For price to appreciate 10% annually, market cap must grow 23.4% annually (13.4% dilution + 10% appreciation).

This is a significant constraint. It means VVV cannot simply rely on market cap growth; it must achieve market cap growth that exceeds the inflation rate by a meaningful margin.

Positive Supply Dynamics:

• Emissions declining over time (from 14M to 6M annually)
• Buy-and-burn mechanism in place (though currently modest)
• DIEM adds second layer of demand for locked VVV
• High staking ratio (69.6%) reduces liquid supply

The positive supply dynamics are meaningful, but they are not yet sufficient to offset ongoing inflation. For VVV to reach higher valuations, either:

1. Emissions must decline further, or
2. Buy-and-burn must accelerate materially, or
3. Market cap growth must exceed inflation by a wide margin

Valuation Methodology and Reasonableness Check

The scenarios presented above are grounded in comparable company analysis and historical precedent rather than speculative extrapolation. Here is the methodology:

Conservative Scenario ($600M):

• Represents 1.44x current market cap
• Positions VVV between Fetch.ai ($447M) and Render ($873M)
• Assumes modest outperformance versus current trajectory
• Reasonable if adoption continues but does not accelerate

Base Case ($1.0B):

• Represents 2.4x current market cap
• Equals historical ATH valuation
• Positions VVV alongside Render ($873M)
• Reasonable if Venice executes on roadmap and network effects emerge

Optimistic ($2.5B):

• Represents 6.0x current market cap
• Positions VVV near Bittensor ($2.44B)
• Requires category leadership and strong network effects
• Reasonable if Venice becomes dominant AI infrastructure layer

Each scenario is anchored to comparable projects and historical precedent. None assumes valuations that would be unprecedented for AI infrastructure tokens. The optimistic scenario is the most aggressive, but it is still below the valuations that some AI tokens have reached during peak cycles.

Bottom Line: Maximum Realistic Price Potential

Venice Token's maximum realistic price potential is best understood through three distinct scenarios:

Conservative Scenario: $600M market cap, implying $13.12 per token (44% upside)

• Assumes steady-state growth without major catalysts
• Positions VVV as a credible mid-cap infrastructure token
• Plausible if adoption continues but remains primarily crypto-native

Base Case Scenario: $1.0B market cap, implying $21.87 per token (140% upside)

• Assumes successful execution and network effects
• Represents return to historical ATH valuation
• Most defensible "successful execution" outcome
• Requires sustained product-market fit and adoption growth

Optimistic Scenario: $2.5B market cap, implying $54.67 per token (501% upside)

• Assumes category leadership and strong network effects
• Positions VVV near Bittensor's current valuation
• Requires exceptional execution and favorable market conditions
• Upper end of realistic range without assuming extreme speculation

The base case of $1.0B market cap ($21.87 per token) represents the most plausible ceiling if Venice executes well and achieves meaningful network effects. This level would indicate the project has evolved from a speculative AI token into a durable infrastructure asset with real adoption.

The optimistic scenario of $2.5B is achievable but requires multiple favorable conditions to align: sustained product execution, strong adoption growth, favorable market sentiment, and successful network effects. It is not the most likely outcome, but it is within the realm of possibility.

Valuations materially above $2.5B would likely require either exceptional execution that establishes VVV as a category leader comparable to Bittensor, or a market-wide speculative cycle similar to prior AI token manias. Such outcomes are possible but less probable based on current evidence.

The key determinant of whether VVV approaches the upper end of these ranges is whether Venice can convert its AI/privacy narrative into recurring, measurable token demand tied to actual platform usage rather than only speculation. If the token becomes integral to accessing Venice's services or participating in its ecosystem, valuations can sustain at higher levels. If token demand remains primarily speculative, the ceiling is lower.