Arc was a comparison I saw floating around that immediately triggered my skepticism, because “chain hits milestone faster than everyone else” is one of the most recycled bragging formats in crypto.
But when I actually went and checked its DefiLlama page against what’s publicly documented about how long other major chains took to hit the same $300 million TVL mark, the number itself holds up. What doesn’t quite add up, once you look closer, is why a milestone this fast is being met with this much hostility.
What Defillama Actually Confirms About Arc’s Number
Arc, Circle’s new blockchain that charges gas fees directly in USDC, crossed $300 million in total value locked within hours of going live, which confirmed the bulk of that TVL came from lending activity on Morpho Blue and Aave V4. Checking Arc’s live chain page on DefiLlama directly, the network currently sits at $343.1 million in TVL, and DefiLlama’s own auto-generated data notes flag Arc’s TVL as having surged by over 1.1 billion percent since inception, which is really just DefiLlama’s way of saying the chain went from effectively zero to hundreds of millions almost instantly.
I think that’s worth sitting with for a second: this isn’t a rumor circulating on crypto Twitter, it’s a number sitting on the same public dashboard the rest of the industry uses to track every other chain’s TVL too.
How That Compares To Every Other Chain’s Path To $300 Million
The comparison that’s been circulating puts Arc’s roughly one-day sprint to $300 million against a genuinely wide spread of timelines for other major chains reaching the same threshold, Arbitrum in roughly 10 to 11 days, Robinhood Chain in about 21 days, Base in around 22 days, Monad taking close to four months, Optimism also around four months, Mantle stretching to about six months, and Linea taking the longest at roughly nine months. I want to be straightforward about what I could verify directly and what I couldn’t.
Arbitrum’s own well-documented history shows it reaching $2.2 billion in TVL within two weeks of its August 2021 launch, which is broadly consistent with a $300 million mark falling somewhere in that first 10-to-11-day window, so that comparison checks out against the public record.
Why So Much Of That Money Isn’t What It Looks Like
Here’s where I think the actual controversy lives, and it’s a more interesting story than a simple speed record. That $300 million-plus wasn’t retail users slowly building conviction in a new chain, it landed almost entirely through large lending deposits into Morpho Blue and Aave V4 within the first few hours. Layered on top of that is a retail ecosystem that CoinMarketCap’s own reporting describes as genuinely noisy, a directory called ArcLens already lists over 200 projects on the chain, roughly 30 of them meme coin launchpads racing to grab early liquidity days into the chain’s existence.
Reporting also points to a specific incentive behind a lot of that early activity: Circle raised $222 million in a presale for Arc’s own future token back in May 2026 at a $3 billion valuation, with 60% of a 10 billion token supply earmarked for “network participants” and no published snapshot criteria yet. That unpublished eligibility requirement is functionally an invitation for exactly the kind of frantic, speculative early activity that inflates a chain’s numbers without reflecting genuine belief in it.
The Real Reason The Timeline Won’t Stop Arguing
I think this is exactly why the backlash exists alongside the record. A TVL number that arrives almost entirely through large institutional lending deposits and airdrop-driven speculation is a very different achievement than a chain organically earning $300 million in user trust over weeks or months the way Arbitrum, Base, or even Monad did. Critics bashing Arc aren’t necessarily disputing the number on the DefiLlama chart, they’re disputing what that number is actually evidence of.
A milestone hit in hours through concentrated lending deposits and airdrop farmers positioning for an unannounced token doesn’t carry the same weight as the same dollar figure built gradually by a genuinely growing user base, even though both show up identically on a TVL leaderboard.
What I Actually Make Of The Gap Between The Number And The Noise
I don’t think the record itself is fake, and I don’t think the backlash is baseless either. Both things are true at once. Arc genuinely reached $300 million faster than any of the chains in that comparison, and that speed is a real reflection of how much idle institutional capital Circle was able to mobilize on day one simply by being Circle.
But speed isn’t the same thing as depth, and a number built mostly from lending deposits and speculative launchpad activity chasing an unconfirmed airdrop is a fundamentally different kind of milestone than the slower, retail-driven growth curves Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism actually climbed. I think the timeline is arguing past each other because one side is reacting to the number and the other is reacting to what’s underneath it, and honestly, I think they’re both looking at the same chart and drawing reasonable, if incompatible, conclusions from it.
Disclosure: This is not trading or investment advice. Always do your research before buying any cryptocurrency or investing in any services.
Follow us on Twitter @themerklehash to stay updated with the latest Crypto, NFT, AI, Cybersecurity, and Metaverse news!