Pump.fun adjusts fee mechanism: low-risk incentive issues to be resolved

LiquidityWitch · 2026-01-10T01:00:11+00:00

Alon Cohen, co-founder of Pump.fun, pointed out that the platform's fee mechanism has flaws, overly relying on low-risk behaviors while neglecting high-risk transactions, resulting in limited creator fee effectiveness. To address this, the platform is about to launch an optimization plan to seek a balance between incentivizing innovation and sustainability.

LiquidityWitch

2026-01-10 01:00:11

Abstract generation in progress

【Crypto World】Pump.fun Co-founder Alon Cohen recently shared in-depth thoughts on the platform’s creator fee mechanism. The dynamic fee V1 launched a few months ago indeed brought many highlights—new creators quickly listed tokens on the platform, live streaming remained hot, on-chain activity hit new highs, and trading volume doubled. It sounds like a great achievement, but underlying issues have gradually surfaced.

This incentive model actually has a fundamental flaw: it heavily favors low-risk actions (such as simply creating a token), while neglecting high-risk behaviors that truly require capital and courage (actual trading). As a result, for ordinary meme coin deployers, the influence of the fee mechanism is limited, and creator fees have become somewhat trivial—for example, used to flatter celebrities to hype the community, with disappointing results.

Clearly, the current model cannot go far, and Alon Cohen has signaled that major updates are coming, with more optimization plans underway. The platform needs to find a new balance between incentivizing innovation and maintaining sustainability.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

Ser_This_Is_A_Casino

· 2h ago

All the low-risk incentives are given out, while no one is willing to engage in high-risk trading. This logic is indeed reversed.

View OriginalReply0

SelfStaking

· 01-10 03:57

Haha, still adjusting fees again. It feels like each pump adjustment is just to patch up the previous loophole. Really, this logic is mind-boggling. Incentivizing creation but discouraging trading—it's completely backwards. The low-risk, high-reward approach just sounds unsustainable; sooner or later, it’s going to crash. A bunch of meme coins are dead, and they’re still messing around with the fee mechanism. It’s starting to feel familiar. Just want to ask—do the big players really care about these fee differences? Feels like it's all just self-entertainment.

View OriginalReply0

HashBandit

· 01-10 01:30

nah this is exactly what happened back in my mining days... you incentivize the wrong metrics, gas fees spiral, whole system breaks. pump.fun just built their own version of the scalability trilemma lmao

Reply0

UnluckyMiner

· 01-10 01:23

Low-risk incentives, high-risk indifference... In simple terms, it's about incentivizing in the wrong place. When the creation cost is low, anyone can join, but trading is where the real money is.

View OriginalReply0

GweiTooHigh

· 01-10 01:14

Hmm... it's another self-redemption story of an air coin factory; the useless fee mechanism deserves to be cut.

View OriginalReply0

ZKProofEnthusiast

· 01-10 01:10

It's frustrating... Low risk equals returns, but the ones actually trading don't get incentives? That logic does seem a bit counterintuitive.

View OriginalReply0