Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
RAY 
PUMP 
MET Key Facts
As of 12:35 noon EDT on Monday, Pump.fun's token PUMP was up 17.6% to US$0.00633 in seven days, while Meteora's MET token fell 13.9% to US$0.29.
Pump.fun currently spends half of its revenue purchasing and destroying PUMPs. Its dashboard showed cumulative repurchase amounts of $474.8 million, but Pump.fun said the data did not accurately reflect the activity of custom trading pairs.
Meteora decided on its own to buy back MET. Blockworks Research pointed out that programing such repurchase could prompt the market to revalue the token.
Why does PUMP perform better than MET? The repurchase mechanism brings more returns to holders
Pump.fun clearly states its policy on its token page: "For every dollar Pump.fun earns, half of it will purchase $PUMP on the open market and destroy it permanently."
Pump.fun's dashboard shows that the cumulative repurchase and destruction amount reached US$474.8 million, accounting for approximately 17% of the total supply. However, the company warned that these numbers do not correctly reflect the activity of custom trading pairs. The destruction operation sends the token to an address where no one can control it, permanently removing it from the circulating supply.
In addition, purchasing behavior is closely related to new activities. AI proxy token launch platform Agency incurred approximately $760,000 in fees on Saturday, nearly half of which went to PUMP. Analyst Doshi wrote that the flow of funds "may explain the rally."
In contrast, Raydium (RAY) runs on a smaller scale. According to the documents, it spent 12% of its transaction fees on buying back RAY and holding the tokens rather than destroying them. RAY prices rose slightly this week.
How was Solana's ecological activity in September? DEX trading volume increased by 20%
DefiLlama data showed that Solana Decentralized Exchange (DEX) handled US$78.3 billion in transaction volume in September, a 20% increase from August. "Long-term activity trends have become too important to ignore," Sam Schubert of Blockworks Research wrote on X.
Meteora accounts for a growing share of trade. Its main product, DLMM, allows liquidity providers to choose the price range in which their funds trade. Doshi found that on Fomo, the fast-growing Solana trading app, Meteora handles more than twice the share of miniin transaction volume that Raydium handles.
Is MET underestimated? Blockworks believes its trading volume is not watched
According to DefiLlama, MET's market value is about three times Meteora's annualized revenue. The transaction multiple of PUMP is about five times, and RAY is about six times. Doshi believes Meteora's actual income is higher, which means MET is actually cheaper.
Doshi pointed out that Meteora uses part of its DLMM revenue for MET pledge rewards and believes criticism of its value capture ability is "exaggerated." Last week, traders also rotated to allocate DeFi tokens to share revenue.
What can narrow the gap? Programmatic repurchase from Meteora
Repurchase itself carries risks. Keyrock's research shows that most repurchase programs are funded by the treasury rather than recurring income and tend to spend more at market peaks.
Meteora said it will share details of the new version of DLMM at the Solana Summit in Singapore on Tuesday.
According to DefiLlama, MET needs to rise by about 50% to trade at the same revenue multiple as PUMP.
Doshi wrote: "If the market is concerned about value capture, then simply announcing the proceduralization of repurchase is enough to trigger a revaluation."
