How do you assess which Web3 airdrops are worth taking?

Cryptocurrency airdrops often feel like "free money from the sky," but experienced airdrop participants know that not every airdrop is worth the gas fees and effort. Over the past 5–7 years, I've participated in dozens of airdrops, some yielding six-figure profits, others worthless. The difference lies in the ability to conduct a **prudent assessment**. In this report, I will attempt to propose a framework for assessing airdrop potential. I have developed an objective evaluation method to determine whether an airdrop opportunity is worth participating in. I will cite real-world examples (from Uniswap's legendary airdrops to recent L2 tokens) and quantitative benchmarks to provide practitioners with references and help them identify high-potential, low-risk airdrop opportunities.

Key Factors for Evaluating Airdrops

Assessing airdrop potential is not based on guesswork or following the crowd, but on a structured process.

● Does the project align with a strong narrative or market trend?

The crypto market is narrative-driven. In 2023–2024, themes such as modular blockchains, restaking, and ZK-rollups attracted significant investor attention. Projects that fit popular narratives (such as modular data networks like Celestia) often experience over-demand for their tokens when the narrative is strong. However, narrative reversals can be just as rapid. I personally prefer projects whose narratives are backed by strong technological capabilities.

● Are users and developers truly active?

Check on-chain data and community activity. High testnet participation, active Discord, and weekly development updates are all positive signs. It's even better if user behavior isn't purely speculative.

For example, Blur (an NFT marketplace) experienced explosive growth and real trading volume during the gamification of airdrops, demonstrating that its growth was not purely speculative but possessed genuine appeal. A solid basic narrative and active users are the cornerstones of airdrop value. If the protocol itself is flawed, even the smartest airdrop mechanism cannot save the token's long-term value. I learned this the hard way in 2022: I spent months on some L1 testnets, only to find that these chains never attracted real users. Even after issuing their tokens, there was almost no buying demand, and the price quickly plummeted by over 90%. In short, if you have no interest in a project beyond airdrops, you should reconsider. Projects that rely solely on "airdrops for the sake of airdrops" are unlikely to provide long-term, realizable value.

Token Allocation and Token Economic Model

Token design is the second key part of evaluating the value of an airdrop. This includes the airdrop allocation ratio, value capture mechanism, lock-up rules, and valuation rationality.

• User Allocation Ratio

• Value Capture Mechanism

• Unlocking and Locking Rules

• Fully Diluted Valuation

• Pre-IPO Market Structure

• Allocation Fairness

1. **User Allocation**>

How much of the airdrop is actually distributed to users?

Allocating a sufficient proportion of the airdrop to users usually leads to stronger community stickiness and provides positive support for the price.

Based on empirical data, airdrops with a user allocation of >10% generally result in better retention and performance, while airdrops with <5% often experience "instant dumping and rapid price drops." For example, Uniswap's legendary 2020 airdrop allocated 15% of its $UNI supply to users, reaching a peak value of approximately $6.4 billion, and successfully established a user community willing to govern. Conversely, in 2024, the user allocation ratio for multiple airdrops was very small, with most tokens held by insiders. The small user shares were quickly sold off on the day of listing, and the price never recovered. In contrast, Celestia's "Genesis Drop" allocated approximately 7.4% of $TIA to testnet and early participants; Arbitrum's March 2023 airdrop accounted for approximately 11.6%. Both of these proportions were sufficient to ensure users were "truly involved" in the ecosystem, rather than marginalized. If the community receives only a small amount of supply, I will immediately mark it as a high risk of selling pressure.

2024 cryptocurrency airdrop, low user allocation, internal dominance.

2. Value Capture

What is the role of the token? Can it extract value from the success of the protocol?

Not every token benefits from a successful protocol, which is the root cause of many airdrop failures. Some tokens are solely for governance (e.g., $UNI, $DYDX). Governance can constitute long-term value when the DAO truly controls cash flow or key parameters. However, in low-fee or passive protocols, governance rights often become "decorative rights," and the market quickly undervalues ​​them. Other "value tokens" pegged to revenue (e.g., $HYPE, $GMX) link real or synthetic revenue streams to the token through staking, buybacks, dividends, or native protocol rewards. This model is more friendly to airdrop participants, allowing them to earn from the airdrop while also having the option to hold long-term for cash flow. I prefer tokens with substantial economic value, rather than just governance functions; ideally, they should actually capture protocol fees, inflation, or various revenues. 3. **Unlocking and Locking** Can I trade the airdrop immediately after receiving it? Is there a lock-up period? For hunters, airdrops that are immediately tradable are generally better because they allow them to lock in profits. If the token is not transferable or locked for a long time, it essentially forces you to become a "long-term investor." A typical example of failure is EigenLayer's $EIGEN airdrop in 2024. Users spent a whole year accumulating points, but the token was not tradable when it was first launched, causing widespread dissatisfaction among hunters because they couldn't cash out. Generally, I avoid mechanisms that force long lock-ups or complex lock-up designs like veToken, which don't give users a choice, unless I have extremely high confidence in the long-term value of the project. My strategy is simple—I want optionality—they can hold if they want, and sell immediately if they don't. A principle worth remembering: "No protocol is 100% secure, therefore no airdrop is a reason to assume I will hold 100% forever." 4. **Full Diluted Value (FDV)** Before a token launch, estimate its FDV (Total Token Supply × Expected Price After Listing). If the FDV is too high, the token price is almost certain to be under pressure. It's important to understand that airdrops cannot violate the most basic valuation logic; there is no magic formula to sustain a high valuation. In 2024, many airdrops launched with extremely high FDVs, resulting in a rapid drop of 50-80% within two weeks. A study of 62 airdrops showed that 88% of the tokens fell within 15 days of launch, often due to unreasonable initial pricing.

Performance of newly launched crypto tokens relative to their FDV

I will seek a certain **margin of safety**. If similar projects have a market capitalization of around $500 million, while a certain project's implied valuation is as high as $5 billion, then we must be wary. Conversely, if the project is of high quality but the initial market capitalization is relatively modest, that is usually a positive sign. We also need to consider **liquidity**, and whether the token will be listed on major exchanges? Is the liquidity pool on the DEX deep enough? Without sufficient buying support, even excellent projects may experience sharp selling pressure in the early stages. A common characteristic of the few airdrops in 2024 that maintained value after the first month was a **reasonable FDV and deep liquidity**. 5. **Pre-TGE Market and Early Valuation Signals** A noteworthy new trend is the rise of the Pre-TGE (pre-token generation event) market. Many projects associated with airdrops begin trading on perpetual contract DEXs or over-the-counter channels before the official launch. These early markets are often based on narrative pricing, with implied FDVs frequently reaching billions, often driven by sentiment and expectations. For airdrop participants, these signals are crucial. If the Pre-TGE price is high, it usually indicates a strong narrative and high market expectations, meaning further participation could potentially yield greater returns; however, it also carries greater risk, as the token price may quickly retrace after the premium is open for collection if the fundamentals don't truly support it. In short, the Pre-TGE market is both a driver and a risk amplifier; it tells you the market's true "appetite" for a project and can also be a warning sign of an impending bubble burst. I consider these early price signals as **sentiment indicators**, not guarantees of value. The key is to identify when the market is **paying too high a premium** for unrealized potential and adjust your exposure before this misalignment is corrected. 6. **Distribution Fairness** It's necessary to check whether the airdrop is likely to be too concentrated in the hands of a few wallets or more evenly distributed. Highly concentrated airdrops mean that a few whales might dump their holdings, driving down prices. For example, while Arbitrum's airdrops were generally generous, a few high-scoring users (at the top of the leaderboard) received the maximum allocation of 10,250 $ARB, forming a group of "instant whales." Interestingly, a small number of wallets often receive the majority of the tokens. If I find signs in data (such as the Dune dashboard or project blog) that "the top 1% of participants will receive a large share," I will consider it a risk factor. I prefer to cap individual rewards or use a quadratic allocation formula to avoid a winner-takes-all outcome. For example, Blast L2's points program introduced an activity-based cap, ensuring that even ordinary users receive meaningful allocations, thus preventing a "rich get richer" dynamic. In summary, a higher community allocation ratio, well-liquidated tokens, and reasonable valuations generally mean a healthier and more worthwhile airdrop. Airdrops with extremely small allocations, high lock-up periods, or excessively high valuations are often the type that are "sold quickly." While you might make some short-term profits if you can enter quickly, it's usually not worth investing a lot of upfront effort.

Eligibility Criteria and the Witch's Resist

Next, let's examine how to qualify for the airdrop and the measures the project might take to prevent Sybil attacks (multi-account airdrop farming). This helps determine the probability of actually receiving the airdrop and how the operation can be scaled (using multiple wallets or just one).

1. **Criterion Transparency**>

How much has the team disclosed about the eligibility criteria?

Some airdrops are **retroactive and come with surprise conditions** (e.g., the Uniswap airdrop, where anyone who had used Uniswap could receive 400 $UNI); others are **task-based or points-based**, completed over a period of time (e.g., Optimism, Arbitrum, many testnet "tasks").

If the conditions are public (or at least inferred from documentation/leaked information), list them and assess their difficulty. For example, Arbitrum's airdrops publicly disclosed the behavioral requirements of the points system (bridging funds, trading across different months, providing liquidity, etc.), allowing me to plan ahead and maximize my points in my wallet. Conversely, if the conditions are ambiguous, you might have to over-participate (try various actions) to ensure you cover all possibilities, which is inefficient. 2. **Investment and Return for Each Wallet** Estimate how much a qualifying wallet might earn. Sometimes the team hints at different tiers, or you can extrapolate from past airdrops. For example, many average Ethereum L2 users end up with tokens worth $500–$2000; if I judge that the airdrop is likely in this range and the task is simple, then it's worthwhile. But if it requires a very high investment (e.g., running a node for months) to get a similar return, I might only operate one wallet, or simply give up. On the other hand, if there's a possibility of a five-figure return (e.g., early dYdX traders received several $DYDX), then the high investment is worthwhile. I also consider whether using multiple wallets truly increases returns, or whether the rules restrict multi-account operations. Many airdrops explicitly target Sybil; for example, Optimism identified and removed over 17,000 Sybil addresses in 2022 (approximately 6.8% of eligible wallets); Hop Protocol even reclaimed tokens from Sybil addresses after an airdrop. If a project is explicitly anti-Sybil, using dozens of wallets might backfire—wasting gas and getting disqualified. My rule is that when Sybil risk is high, concentrate on one or a few high-quality (genuinely active) wallets, rather than spreading operations. 3. **Sybil Resistance Mechanism** Besides directly banning Sybil addresses, pay attention to the design of points weighting or conditions to see if they favor genuine users. Some projects offer higher rewards for behaviors that are difficult to forge, such as long-term activity, on-chain reputation NFTs, or KYC verification. In 2024, LayerZero labeled 800,000 addresses as Sybil and planned to reduce their rewards to 15% of normal. Starknet's first airdrop required holding at least 0.005 ETH in L2 at the time of the snapshot. While this seems like a small requirement, it still excluded many genuine users who didn't hold funds in L2. I will consider these special conditions, and if I find any unusual requirements (minimum balance, specific NFTs, etc.), I will adjust my strategy, for example, ensuring all addresses meet the minimum balance before the snapshot. Additionally, if the project has testnet NFTs or Crew3/Galxe events, these may also be prerequisites for claiming the airdrop; missing early tasks may result in complete ineligibility, so I will closely monitor this information. 4. Risk of Rule Changes The worst-case scenario is that you complete all the tasks but are disqualified due to rule changes. While rare, some projects adjust their conditions at the last minute to address Sybil attacks or modify based on community feedback. There have been instances where users who initially thought they were eligible were ultimately excluded, triggering community backlash. Staying active in the project community is helpful. I've also seen protocols indicate which behaviors are considered violations (e.g., one address funding dozens of new wallets = prohibited). I appreciate projects with clear communication, but always assume the possibility of being excluded isn't zero. This mindset prevents overconfidence. An important principle is, "If you miss an airdrop, it's your fault, no excuses." On-chain data doesn't care about excuses, so I'll do things in a way that looks natural under scrutiny. In short, understanding eligibility criteria and Sybil risk allows us to assess the level of competition for airdrops and how to strategize. High Sybil risk scenarios require more caution (ideally focusing on one reliable identity); open free-for-all (no Sybil checks, pure quantification tasks) can try multi-wallet strategies, but often result in significantly diluted rewards. This is a delicate balance. My default strategy is to act as a "genuine, highly active user" on at least one account, which usually passes most Sybil filters and yields substantial rewards. Airdrops are essentially an investment of time and money, so I must conduct a cost-benefit analysis from the outset. 1. Time and Complexity Some airdrops are "one-off operations" (e.g., making a single trade on a DEX). Others, such as testnet programs, may require weeks of running the software, completing tasks, or continuous use over months. I break down the entire process. If the task list contains dozens of operations (e.g., cross-chain transactions, swaps, providing liquidity across multiple dApps), I estimate the total time investment. Spending 100 hours for a $500 reward is a poor return on investment; I'd rather invest that time in projects with greater potential. I'm especially wary of "points programs" with no clear end date. These programs often turn into endless treadmills with diminishing returns. Some L2 incentive programs in 2022 taught me to set an "exit threshold," for example, "If after one month my points are less than X% of the top users, I will reassess whether to continue." I would calculate how much gas and other costs (cross-chain fees, minimum deposit requirements) might cost. For example, some Arbitrum eligibility requirements require cross-chain transactions exceeding $10,000 and continuous operation over multiple months. These are not cheap during periods of high gas costs. These costs must be compared with the potential returns. A very practical approach is to first test the gas by running a few transactions, then multiply that by the number of tasks or wallets. I've stopped farming many times because, despite the strong narrative, the gas fees far exceeded the expected returns. Especially during the high-fee period of 2021, many small airdrops weren't worth paying $100 to "claim the tokens." 3. Funding Risks Does it require you to lock up large amounts of assets or bear market risk? Providing liquidity, lending, and staking can all lead to impermanent loss (IL) or smart contract risks. For example, during the DeFi "liquidity mining" craze (such as Sushi), while some mining brought additional airdrops, it also encountered risks such as IL and protocol attacks. If qualifying for a new project requires depositing a large amount of capital into it (such as a new bridge or lending protocol), I would check for audits, contract maturity, team reputation, and hacking risks. Hacking is not a theoretical event; from the breach of Ronin's $600 million cross-chain bridge to the failure of many smaller testnet bridges, I have seen many people lock their principal into a vulnerable system while chasing airdrops—ultimately suffering heavy losses. 4. Worst-Case Assessment I would always ask myself, "What if I end up with nothing?" If the answer is, "I would waste more time or money than I can psychologically bear," then it's not worth participating. I assume a certain percentage of farms will fail (the project cancels the airdrop, I get filtered out, or the token becomes worthless). For example, I spent many hours on certain L1 testnets (I won't name them), but they never actually issued tokens—pure sunk costs. These failures taught me to minimize irreversible losses. In terms of time, I set regular checkpoints to reassess and avoid being misled by the "sunk cost fallacy." In terms of money, I avoid spending large amounts of gas and remain flexible, such as using scripts to automate operations or choosing periods with less network congestion to reduce costs. To determine if it's "worth it," I usually do a quick expected return (ROI) calculation: the airdrop probability (assuming 80% chance of issuance and 20% chance of cancellation) multiplied by the expected token value (e.g., approximately $1000 per wallet) minus the cost. If the result is clearly positive, and the qualitative factors are also sound, I participate. If the result is close to break-even or negative, I abandon it or wait for more definitive signals.

Market Environment and Timing

1. Bull Market vs. Bear Market

In a bull market, airdrops often bring extremely high returns. Tokens are usually listed at higher valuations, and buyers' FOMO sentiment is stronger. Conversely, in a bear market, even if the project itself is good, market demand may be lukewarm when the token is launched. For example, many large airdrops during 2022–2023 (such as Optimism, Aptos, etc.) occurred in a bear market environment, which led to significant selling pressure and a slow price recovery in the early stages of launch.

However, many tokens airdropped during the 2021 bull market cycle continued to rise after launch.

I won't deliberately try to perfectly time the macro market (airdrops are relatively market-neutral before token launch), but the market environment will influence my exit strategy (which I'll discuss later) and my level of participation. In a strong bull market, I'll participate in more opportunities and be more willing to hold some tokens for a longer period; in a deep bear market, I'll only choose the most promising projects and tend to sell them immediately upon launch.

2. Narrative Cycle

I previously mentioned narrative and fundamentals, but here I'm focusing more on timing. Is the current narrative in an upward phase, or is it already crowded?

For example, the restaking narrative in early 2024 was very popular; any expectation of an airdrop would attract a lot of attention. If you participated early (when TVL was low), your behavior would be more noticeable; but by Q1 2024, later participants were already crammed into a very crowded pool.

I would judge whether an airdrop route's "meta-narrative" is in its early or late stages. If everyone on Crypto Twitter is discussing a testnet, it usually means that easy money has already been mined; Sybil attacks will be subject to stricter censorship. Conversely, a quieter activity within a new narrative might be a treasure trove. For example, in 2025, hybrid AI + DeFi protocols began to gain attention; airdrops in this niche might be less crowded and have a higher success rate.

3. The Project's Own Pace

Consider the project's stage on the roadmap. If the mainnet or token launch is imminent (within a few weeks), your time is limited, and the standards may already be largely set.

For long-running testnets with no announced end date, you'll need to determine the duration yourself. Some projects have a "seasonal" system, which can be helpful if the schedule is public. Pay attention to snapshot times; many airdrops take a snapshot of user behavior at a certain block height. If you know or feel a snapshot is approaching, that's the last chance to confirm whether your actions are sufficient (or if you feel you've done enough, you can reduce spending).

4. Reactions to News and Setbacks

This is more subtle but crucial: observe how the project reacts to bad news or unexpected situations. For example, if the testnet goes down, will users return?

Liquidity and Exit Strategy

Finally, I will plan how to realize its value once the airdrop arrives. The old trading adage says, "Plan your trade first, then execute your plan." For airdrops, this means:

1. Claiming Strategy

The price of the token may fluctuate wildly once it's available for claiming. I remember Arbitrum's claiming day; users incurred extremely high gas costs, the RPC crashed, and the scene was chaotic.

I will prepare in advance by setting up backup RPCs, scripting the claiming process (if possible), and acting swiftly at the opening. If I have multiple wallets, I usually prioritize those intended for immediate sale to complete before the peak; smaller wallets intended for long-term holding can claim later.

At the same time, I check if there is a claiming deadline.

Many airdrops allow for collection over several months, but some may reclaim unclaimed tokens back to the DAO after a certain period. (For me, missing out on collection is usually not a problem; I'll collect as soon as possible.) I prefer airdrops that are immediately tradable on well-known exchanges or have ample liquidity on AMMs. If a project has major investors or high hype, it's likely to be listed directly on exchanges like Binance and Coinbase, or at least have large DEX pools providing pre-existing liquidity. For example, Arbitrum's $ARB was almost immediately traded on major exchanges with a daily trading volume exceeding $1 billion, making exits relatively easy. In contrast, niche airdrops may only be traded on a single DEX with insufficient liquidity; large sales could lead to price crashes or slippage eroding profits. I do my research beforehand, and a green flag is a sign that the team has announced market maker partnerships or exchange support. Conversely, for niche Cosmos airdrops that require exchanging tokens in the native wallet, I anticipate significant price volatility and adjust my position accordingly (absconding if necessary). 3. Selling, Holding, or Staking I decide in advance how many tokens to sell and how many to hold after receiving them. Experience shows that most airdropped tokens typically peak within the first two weeks. My inclination is to sell a portion as early as possible; a typical strategy is to sell about 50% on the day of receipt to lock in profits, holding the remainder with a trailing stop-loss or target price. This mitigates common sell-off risks while preserving upside potential. I only hold the majority of tokens in special circumstances (high confidence in the project, or an initial price significantly lower than its fundamental valuation). Even then, I usually stake or lend tokens to earn additional returns, but I operate cautiously: if staking requires locking up tokens (such as governance lock-up), I weigh the loss of flexibility. 4. **Tax and Legal Considerations** I cannot completely ignore compliance and regulatory issues. Airdrops are generally considered taxable income in many jurisdictions (at least taxed at their value upon receipt). Large airdrops can lead to tax burdens, so I set aside funds for tax purposes. Sometimes selling immediately is also a safer option for tax payment. Additionally, I pay attention to geographic restrictions. For example, EigenLayer once prohibited US users from receiving airdrops. I look for projects that require KYC or implement geographic blocking. If so, the airdrop may be largely ineffective for me, or I may need to participate through a more lenient legal entity. This is an emerging issue; for example, some 2025 airdrops have begun requiring simple KYC to comply with regulatory requirements. Essentially, airdrops are not considered profits until they are cashed out. I develop an exit plan for every airdrop to avoid being trapped in rapidly depreciating tokens.

Best Practices and Final Thoughts

Based on the above, the following are the best principles I follow when evaluating whether an early airdrop is worth investing time in.

1. Do your homework

Before jumping into any "new project," always research the project's fundamentals and token plans. Read the project documentation or governance forums as much as possible for clues about token issuance. Many missed opportunities come from the wrong assumption that there will be an airdrop (or vice versa). Don't rely solely on rumors; verify what is realistically feasible.

2. **Establish Hypotheses First, Then Continuously Verify** Clearly define your reasons for believing this airdrop might be valuable, such as: "This project is leading in a new sector, may issue tokens at a low initial market capitalization, and will generate strong demand." Then continuously verify your hypothesis using on-chain data and news. If the narrative breaks down (e.g., growth stagnates, competitors overtake), adjust or abandon it promptly. Flexibility is an advantage; stubbornly clinging to a flawed hypothesis will only waste months. In my experience, **pride and confirmation bias** are the biggest enemies. Never think you "deserve" an airdrop; adjust your strategy as reality changes. 3. **Quantify Scoring and Comparison** Each opportunity can be scored across multiple dimensions (fundamentals, token economic model, cost of investment, etc.). I sometimes use tables to configure weights, for example... Protocol quality 30%, return potential 30%, cost/risk 20%, Spell Difficulty 20%. This quantification forces you to confront the project's weaknesses. A project may be very popular, but if the token distribution is poor, the overall score will still be dragged down. After scoring, you might find that a less popular airdrop actually has a better risk-reward ratio and is more efficient than a popular project with 100,000 competitors. 4. Manage risk, not gamble. Treat airdrops as a portfolio. Diversify your portfolio across several potential opportunities instead of betting everything. This way, even if one fails (no airdrop or low price), other projects can compensate. I typically run 5–10 projects in parallel per quarter, with the expectation that only half of them will actually generate returns. Always remember capital preservation. "Be there when the big airdrop comes." This means don't burn all your ETH on the gas of marginal projects. Reserve your ammunition so you can jump in when a real "big opportunity" arises. Closely monitor on-chain signals: Pay attention to project wallet growth, testnet usage, and leaderboards (if public). If you find your relative position declining during your evaluation (others are doing more than you), reassess whether it's worth continuing to invest. Similarly, if project activity declines, it means community interest is waning, which is usually a bad sign for the token's future value. 5. Plan your exit (and entry) strategy. From the moment you enter, think about your final exit strategy. Figure out how to claim and sell, and try to avoid situations with low liquidity. If there are indications of long lock-ups or trading only on a single-chain DEX, assess whether you can accept them. If not, you probably shouldn't have participated in the first place, as you might not be able to exit smoothly in the end. When the airdrop is actually distributed, don't be controlled by greed or fear; exit according to your plan. I've seen people receive a $10,000 airdrop, intending to sell at $20,000, only to see it drop to $2,000. Don't be that kind of person. **Systematically realize profits.** Not everyone will give you free tokens every day; there's no shame in locking in your gains. 6. **Continuous learning and iteration.** Every airdrop, whether successful or not, contains lessons. Write them down or at least mentally review them: Did you overestimate a project? Did you miss key eligibility requirements? Or did a project you underestimated later explode in popularity (the pain of "if only I had done more")? Use this to refine your framework. Over the years, my attitude towards airdrops has become more "skeptical but opportunistic"—skeptical of hype, but decisive when I spot mispriced opportunities. The goal is to cultivate an intuition to **identify scenarios where the market underestimates the value of airdrops, from which you can profit.** **Summary** Evaluating early airdrops is half art and half science. You need to understand the art of human nature, incentives, and narratives, and the science of analyzing data and token economics. The best airdrops tend to reward early, genuine participation, not one-off interactions. This means that those who truly use and support excellent projects early on often reap the greatest rewards. My framework helps me filter these opportunities. By focusing on fundamentals, taking a realistic view of token design, carefully evaluating input and return, and remaining adaptable to new information, I can significantly increase my probability of only participating in truly worthwhile airdrops. Ultimately, airdrop hunting should be treated like any other investment: **done due diligence, manage risk, and develop a clear strategy.** By doing these things, you can find the signals in the noise and successfully seize the next UNI or ARB-level opportunity when it arises.