I think you're completely missing the point.
You also clearly don't understand crypto at all to make a ridiculous claim that it has 'zero' fundamentals.
Plenty of crypto pays out dividends and interest to investors. In fact, that's predominately how people grow their wealth in crypto as it's very difficult to reliably make money from trading unless you're a pro. That goes for the share market also.
Bitcoin had 22bn USD of transactions in the past 24 hours. That's one singular crypto currency.
Ethereum had nearly 13bn.
Tether, the no.1 stablecoin had 52bn.
This is very low volume for these 2, during peak market conditions they'll far exceed 100bn per day.
Pretty impressive for a sector that has around 1% share of the global financial system. Not sure it's fair to compare the volume from the world's banks combined to what Bitcoin does, considering banks have had a few hundred years to gain traction over Bitcoin.
I can understand people comparing Bitcoin to banking in regards to power usage, as Bitcoin is soon to be the only major 'proof of work' currency on the blockchain. Even then, it'll mostly be sourced from sources of renewable energy, making your claim that it's wasteful redundant.
If you're interested, watch the below video which explains this very thoroughly.
You directly compared the two when arguing that Bitcoin uses less energy then say it's only 1% of the market?
If Bitcoin was to become a universally recognised currency, the proportion of renewable energy would be the same as the grid in general..... so not majority renewable.
What is the definition of fundamentals as it applies to crypto? Can any produce a financial statement?