Many assets claim to be the leading assets, but what kind of assets are actually leading? Is it only the ones with the largest market capitalization that are considered leaders?

First, assets with too small a market capitalization are definitely not leaders, because market capitalization generally reflects the strength of community market consensus. If an asset's market capitalization is not high and it claims to be a leader, that is purely laughable.

Second, assets with insufficient market consensus and overly concentrated holdings are definitely not market leaders. This involves the structure of the holdings; if the holdings of an asset are highly concentrated in a few hands, it may become a large market capitalization asset, but it is not necessarily the one with the highest market consensus.

Third, assets with insufficient community expansion capability cannot become market leaders. If an asset has a wide distribution, with many holders, but is overall quite scattered, lacking strong community cohesion and external dissemination ability, it will also not become a market leader.

Fourth, significant turnover in price increases, with a noticeable wealth effect.

Fifth, market-oriented pricing, smooth and robust; leading projects in the market definitely have relatively strong prices, showing resilience during general market pullbacks, and once the market stabilizes, they will quickly rebound and rise.