The “Crypto President” year of declining crypto values

One year ago, Donald Trump took office branding himself as the first “pro-crypto President.” For an industry battered by regulatory hostility and incoherence, the moment felt historic. Campaign rhetoric promised clarity, innovation, and a reset of the U.S. government’s adversarial posture toward digital assets. Many in crypto wanted to believe that politics had finally aligned with technological reality.

One year later, the results are hard to ignore — and even harder to defend.

A widely circulated post by investor Ted Pillows captured the outcome succinctly. Using straightforward price data, the post laid out what the crypto market has delivered during Trump’s first year in office:

• Bitcoin: down ~12%

• Ethereum: down ~5%

• XRP: down ~40%

• Solana: down ~50%

• Other large caps: down 50–60%

• Mid-caps: down 70–80%

• Small caps and meme coins: down ~90%

  
  

The post ends with a biting conclusion: “Thank you, Mr. President.”

This isn’t cherry-picking. It’s a snapshot of broad underperformance across nearly every segment of the crypto market — from blue-chip assets to speculative risk. And it stands in stark contrast to the promise that a “crypto president” would usher in a renaissance of innovation, capital formation, and confidence.

One of the defining features of Trump’s crypto posture has been spectacle over substance. Rather than focusing relentlessly on durable regulatory frameworks, market structure, and legal clarity, the administration presided over — and in some cases directly participated in — the meme-ification of crypto politics.

Trump-linked tokens such as $TRUMP and $MELANIA became emblematic of this era. Initially hyped, rapidly listed, and aggressively marketed, they briefly attracted massive attention and liquidity. Then they collapsed. According to exchange-level analysis shared by Binance Square, $TRUMP fell nearly 90% from its peak, while $MELANIA lost almost all of its value. Retail traders were wiped out. Insiders and early allocators were not.

For an industry already battling accusations of scams, rugs, and insider advantage, the optics were disastrous. Instead of elevating crypto’s legitimacy, the President’s personal entanglement with speculative tokens reinforced the worst stereotypes critics have long used against the space.

To be fair, Trump’s administration did reverse some of the most aggressive enforcement-first tactics of prior years. High-profile SEC cases were paused or dropped. Rhetoric shifted from punishment to “innovation.” The GENIUS Act introduced a federal framework for stablecoins.

But regulatory relief is not the same as regulatory clarity.

What the market received instead was uncertainty masked as friendliness — a system where outcomes appeared increasingly dependent on political proximity rather than transparent rules. Builders still lack clear answers on token classification. Exchanges still face ambiguous compliance obligations. Capital remains cautious, not because regulation is harsh, but because it is inconsistent.

Markets don’t reward vibes. They reward predictability.

Defenders of the administration argue that crypto’s underperformance reflects broader macro forces — interest rates, global instability, risk-off sentiment. That’s true, but incomplete. Leadership matters most during difficult environments. A genuinely effective crypto policy agenda would have mitigated uncertainty, not amplified it.

Instead, Trump’s broader economic policies — trade tensions, tariff threats, and geopolitical unpredictability — added volatility that bled directly into risk assets, including crypto. The result: a market that never found stable footing despite supposedly favorable political conditions.

Trump’s first year as the “crypto president” will not be remembered for building foundations. It will be remembered for branding, conflicts of interest, meme-coin excess, and a market that quietly voted no confidence.

The Ted Pillows X post resonates because it strips away narrative and leaves only outcomes. Prices aren’t everything — but they are signals. And the signal from the past year is unmistakable: political alignment without principled governance is not bullish.

Crypto doesn’t need a mascot in the Oval Office. It needs clear rules, ethical leadership, and a commitment to decentralization over self-enrichment.

On that score, the first year has been a failure.