PumpSwap’s New Revenue Model Hands Token Creators the Keys—And the Cash

DeFi’s latest power shift: PumpSwap flips the script by letting coin creators pocket 85% of trading fees—because apparently, middlemen were taking too big a slice of the pie (shocking, right?).

How it works: The protocol’s smart contracts now auto-distribute fees to token issuers, bypassing traditional fee-gobbling market makers. No more begging centralized exchanges for scraps.

The catch? Creators actually have to build something people want to trade. Novel concept in a space where ’utility token’ often means ’exit liquidity.’

$172 (SOL) to coin creators. In April 2025, the transaction volume reached $11.2 billion, indicating that approximately $5.6 million could have been distributed to creators based on the fee structure. Currently, PumpSwap charges a 0.25% fee per transaction; however, the updated models introduce an additional “coin owners’ account,” raising the total fee to 0.3% per transaction, with 0.05% going directly to coin creators.

ContentsDetails of PumpSwap’s Revenue Sharing ModelMixed Reactions from the Community

Details of PumpSwap’s Revenue Sharing Model

The platform’s strategic alignment with its foundational objectives received positive feedback. While most decentralized exchanges allocate only a fraction of transaction fees to liquidity pools, PumpSwap directly involves coin creators in profit sharing. Focused on memecoin projects on solana Blockchain, Pump.Fun aims to offer attractive advantages to its users, reinforcing their commitment to this direction.

April’s transaction volume further highlights the revenue distribution magnitude. With a transaction volume of $11.2 billion, the 0.05% share translated to nearly $5.6 million for coin creators. This support provides substantial added value for many smaller projects, enhancing both liquidity and project owners’ motivation.

Mixed Reactions from the Community

The cryptocurrency community on social media platform X had mixed reactions to the revenue-sharing model. Criticisms centered on providing additional income to developers of malicious projects. Some commentators expressed displeasure, arguing that “rewarding fraudulent coin creators with a 0.05% share is truly a bad idea,” reflecting their concerns.

Additionally, critiques were made regarding the oversight of community takeovers (CTOs) and the weakening motivation of independent groups to sustain the project. Concerns arose about coin creators earning transaction fees without engaging in the project’s sustainability. From this perspective, long-term community-focused projects could be at a disadvantage.

You can follow our news on Telegram, Facebook, Twitter & Coinmarketcap Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.