ElizaOS Token Soars 150% After X Account Restoration—Social Media Proves Itself the Real Market Maker

Sometimes, the most bullish signal isn't a whitepaper update or a partnership announcement—it's a blue checkmark coming back online.

The Catalyst: A Platform Returns

ElizaOS's token didn't just rally; it went vertical. The trigger? Regaining access to its official X account. The move erased weeks of radio silence in an instant, proving that in today's market, communication channels are as critical as code. The surge highlights a simple truth: liquidity follows attention, and right now, attention lives on social feeds.

The 150% Spike: More Than Just Hype?

Let's be clear—a triple-digit gain on a platform restoration isn't normal. It screams pent-up demand, or perhaps, a market desperately seeking any narrative to latch onto. The bounce suggests the project's community was waiting, watching, and ready to buy the second legitimacy was visually restored. It's a masterclass in how perceived credibility—or the lack thereof—gets priced in, immediately.

The Bigger Picture: Narratives Over Fundamentals

This isn't just about one token. It's a case study for the 2025 market cycle. Development progress is measured in GitHub commits, but market momentum is often measured in likes, retweets, and verified profiles. When a project goes dark online, it creates a vacuum of uncertainty. The return doesn't just share news—it restores faith.

A Cynical Footnote for the Finance Bros

So, the next time a fund manager drones on about discounted cash flow models, remember: a Twitter admin with a password reset link just created more shareholder value than some quarterly earnings calls. The market has voted, and its ballot is a buy order placed the minute the 'follow' button became clickable again.

The takeaway? In crypto, your social media presence isn't just marketing—it's your balance sheet. And today, ElizaOS's balance sheet looks a whole lot healthier.

Why is ElizaOS surging?

ElizaOS went through major restructuring in November 2025, migrating from the AI16Z token at a one-to-six ratio and increasing total supply to 11 billion tokens.

Upon return, the Walters posted on X, “SO MUCH HAPPENED. We finished Eliza framework and migrated from ai16z to elizaOS. It was really really hard without X. We almost died. But now we’re back, and we’ve got some things built that I think people will be excited by. Can’t wait to show you.”

However, the recent token surge, which was around 175%, has failed to match that November high. The token currently trades at around $0.0064, which is an 83.17% decline from that all-time high.

Does this set a precedent for AI regulation?

While some industry participants call for stricter regulation of AI-generated content to maintain platform integrity, others view aggressive enforcement actions as potentially anticompetitive behavior that could stifle innovation.

The clash between ElizaOS and X touches on the application of AI on the social media platform, which also has its own agentic AI platform, Grok, embedded on it, raising eyebrows about fair play and antitrust violations.

The restoration of Walters’ account may also mean that the legal tussle between both parties has been resolved; however, neither Walters nor X has made any announcement that hints at that. It could also mean that X’s approach may have relaxed regarding some applications of AI on its platform.

The ban of Walters’ and ElizaOS accounts, for what X called a violation of its terms of service, brought to light ongoing tensions in the AI race and the usage of a social media platform to ward off competition.

ElizaOS and X have a history

In an August filing at a federal court in San Francisco, Eliza Labs and its founder, Shaw Walters, accused X of launching copycat AI products after being exposed to key technical information from Eliza. The lawsuit also claims that X removed the company from its platform.

“This case involves X Corp wielding its incredible monopoly power with perceived immunity from suit to deplatform users with the intent to restrain competition for launching AI Agents on the X Corp platform,” the lawsuit documents read.

In their argument, the plaintiffs said that X suspended Eliza Labs’ account and got rid of Walters without warning or legitimate justification.

This came after X reached out to Eliza last year to discuss AI agents operating on X’s platform. Eliza. During those meetings, Shaw Walters said they shared extensive details about the company’s development roadmap and vision for AI agents.

Eliza claims that X said it WOULD need up to $50,000 per month for an enterprise license to continue operating on the platform. The lawsuit suggested X was forcing developers to pay “exorbitant” prices if they wanted to remain on the site, but Eliza claims it had declined to pay for such services.

If you're reading this, you’re already ahead. Stay there with our newsletter.