Aster resolved a crisis of confidence after data update that showed changes in its unlock schedule, which sparked speculation about the project’s tokenomics. Aster’s tokenomics were reaffirmed by the platform itself: it moved 350 million ASTER to a public unlock address and stated that the schedule adjustments do not imply a change in total supply. The market reacted with a price rise close to 10–13%, stabilizing around $1.14.
The tokenomics of Aster were at the center of debate after a mid‑November 2025 update on CoinMarketCap that showed an unlock of 200 million ASTER and two large tranches —3,860 million and 1,600 million ASTER— projected in 2035, out of a total supply of 8,000 million, with approximately 75% locked and about 24% in circulation. That visual presentation was interpreted by the community as massive postponements or cancellations of vesting, generating panic and speculation about future sell‑offs.
Aster responded publicly and clarified that the alleged modification did not constitute a change in tokenomics. It explained that allocations intended for monthly ecosystem and community incentives never entered circulation due to lack of immediate use and remained in locked addresses.
To provide verifiable transparency, the company transferred 350 million ASTER to a public unlock address —the entirety of those allocations previously marked as unlocked but unused— clarifying that they are not intended for immediate spending.
In addition, Aster confirmed that more than $500 million in tokens originally scheduled for 2025 had their calendars adjusted toward the 2026–2035 period, a conservative rescheduling of supply. The market reaction was swift: the ASTER token registered a rebound of between 10% and 13% and an 8% increase in 24 hours, a figure that coincided with a return of confidence after the clarification and the on‑chain action.
Implications for Aster token
The decision to move tokens to a public address and explain the nature of the adjustments had an immediate stabilizing effect, by reducing informational uncertainty and minimizing short‑term panic selling.
For traders, the operational lesson is to monitor vesting addresses on‑chain and official communication before assuming imminent supply movements. For treasuries and institutional investors, the rescheduling of releases toward 2026–2035 eases selling pressure in the short term but concentrates supply risk in the long term, which must be incorporated into valuation and liquidity management models.
In the short term, on‑chain verification of the public address and a detailed reading of the rescheduled calendar will be the milestones that shape market perception; monitoring those addresses and future official communications will be key to assessing the impact on liquidity and valuation.
