Syrup de-risked its valuation faster than the price corrected. From June to December, Price-to-Fees fell from 12.9x to 2.7x, a 78.9% compression, while $SYRUP price declined 56.6%. This divergence was driven primarily by continued protocol revenue growth, not a collapse in demand. In other words, fundamentals improved faster than valuation adjusted. What makes this notable is when it happened. Q4 was one of the slowest quarters across crypto. Large liquidations, slower volume, and limited risk appetite. Despite this, Maple continued to generate and scale fees. That distinction matters. Valuation compression driven by revenue growth is fundamentally different from compression driven by demand loss. The market was not repricing Maple because the protocol weakened. It was repricing while usage persisted. Historically, this is the type of setup long-term accumulators tend to watch closely. Proven revenue in weak conditions, a valuation multiple reset, and a price that has not fully reflected fundamental scale. Worth monitoring assets like $SYRUP as market conditions change.