详解Jupiter H2计划及近期更新,我愿称之为新周期DeFi之光

Odaily星球日报Published on 2024-07-12Last updated on 2024-07-12

Abstract

以流动性聚合为基础,让Solana链上交易流量助力LFG Launchpad发展,更适合当下的市场发展阶段。

原创 | Odaily星球日报

作者 | 夫如何

详解Jupiter H2计划及近期更新,我愿称之为新周期DeFi之光

今日,Jupiter 联合创始人 Meow 在视频中谈及下半年度(H 2)计划,团队将在多个方面进行实验,目的是推动 Jupiter 在关键垂直方向的发展,例如 Jupiter Product、LFG Launchpad、Trial WGs、Crucial J 4 J Votes、GUM 等。

此外,Jupiter 今日发布 4 项更新以优化 LFG,Sanctum 将在下周推出代币时利用以下功能:

  1. MinOutput:一种在启动时进行 swap 的新方法;

  2. LFG UI 中的 Alpha Vault:允许存款人成为池中首个 swap;

  3. Dynamic Airdrops:团队可以添加自定义奖励,例如等待申领的时间越长,得到的空投越多;

  4. Airdrop Vesting:团队可为空投接收者定制 vesting 参数。

Jupiter 作为 Solana 生态的 DeFi 核心,与 Solana 生态的繁荣关联巨大。Jupiter 究竟要如何发展,能否集采老一辈以太坊 DeFi 龙头们的经验教训,又将呈现何种未来景象?Odaily星球日报将今天 Jupiter 提到的要点进行展开分析。

Jupiter 过往成绩和产品支柱

Jupiter 联合创始人 Meow 在视频中表示,所谓 H2 计划是将在目前 Jupiter 的基础上将已开展的功能进行深入扩展研究,进而推动 Jupiter 在垂直方向的发展。

Jupiter 目前现有的业务主要分为:流动性聚合、限价单、DCA(定投策略)和 Perps 交易以及 LFG Launchpad。

Jupiter 的知名度很大程度是流动性聚合为其带来的。作为 Solana 上的龙头聚合器,Jupiter 占据 Solana 链上交易量的半壁江山,几乎大部分链上交易都出自于它。

下图是半年度 Solana 上交易份额图:

详解Jupiter H2计划及近期更新,我愿称之为新周期DeFi之光

通过此图可以证明 Jupiter 在 Solana 中 DeFi 的重要性。随着 Solana 上 meme 浪潮的盛行,Solana 的交易量稳居榜首,那么 Jupiter 自然在聚合器的领域上独占鳌头。

为什么 Jupiter 在 Solana 上发展的如此迅猛,反观更早出现在以太坊上的 1inch 和 Uniswap 聚合的效果反而一般呢,主要还是由于流动性聚合是利用不同 DEX 的 LP 深度来满足用户以更低的滑点来进行交易,但两者底层网络的不同,导致流动性聚合在以太坊上发展并不出色。

其次,Jupiter 的限价单、DCA(定投策略)和 Perps 交易其实相对流动性聚合的功能来比逊色一些,但丰富了自身对于用户不同需求的满足。

最后,LFG Launchpad 的出现以及在加密货币市场的知名度助力 Jupiter 的发展,从年初开始到如今,Launchpad 已经举办了三期,第一轮为 Zeus Network,第二轮是 Sanctum、第三轮是 deBridge。

Jupiter H 2 计划和近期优化的核心要点

以上简单介绍一下 Jupiter 的现状,回到文章起始部分,Jupiter 联合创始人 Meow 所提到的 H2 计划究竟是在哪些现有板块进行实验研究?

  • Jupiter Product:顾名思义,从 Jupiter 本身产品出发,应该代表的是 Jupiter 的流动性聚合以及各种交易模式的扩展和深入研究;

  • LFG Launchpad:作为 Jupiter 目前推出成功的实验产品,后续围绕 LFG Launchpad 的规则和发展将继续深入;

  • Trial WGs:Jupiter 上的多种试验工作组,比如 Jupiter 社区提案中有提到的在 Reddit 上为 Jupiter 宣传的工作组等各种有利于 Jupiter 发展的行动小组,由社区为其发展所需预算进行投票并决定其后续发展;

  • Crucial J 4 J Votes:关键性提案,这点其实对于任何项目方在去中心化道路中所追求的;

  • GUM:GUM 全称(Giant Unified Market),是将 meme 币、现实世界资产、股票和外汇等投资整合到 Solana 的 Jupiter 中,使其相互之间可以更便捷的直接交易。

今日,Jupiter 同样发布了一些升级方案,在此也同步解答一下,这 4 项举措的作用:

MinOutput:

  • 灵活定价:用户可以指定自己能接受的最低价格,确保交易不会因为市场波动而导致价格不符预期。

  • 降低风险:在市场波动较大的情况下,用户可以预设最低接受价格,确保交易能在预期范围内完成,降低损失风险。

  • 提升用户体验:用户不再需要担心报价在交易过程中发生变化,提高了交易过程的确定性和用户的信心。

Alpha Vault:

  • 优先交易:为存款人提供成为池中第一个 Swap 的机会,享受优先交易的优势。

  • 锁仓期:作为这种优势的回报,Alpha Vault 的买家需要接受锁仓期,防止短期投机行为。

  • 流动性管理:这种方式在提高透明度和用户体验的同时,也增加了流动性管理的效率,有助于维护市场稳定。

动态空投:

  • 激励持有:通过增加等待时间和空投奖励的关联,激励用户持有代币更长时间,减少短期抛售行为。

  • 自定义奖励:团队可以添加自定义奖励机制,使得空投更加灵活和具有吸引力,增加用户参与度。

  • 促进长期参与:用户为了获得更多的空投奖励,会更倾向于长期持有代币,有助于建立更稳定的用户基础和市场环境。

空投锁仓:

  • 长期利益对齐:通过定制锁仓参数,团队可以确保空投接受者的利益与项目的长期发展目标保持一致。

  • 减少短期投机:锁仓机制可以防止用户在空投后立即抛售代币。

  • 稳定市场:逐步解锁代币可以避免市场上突然出现大量抛售压力,维持代币价格的稳定性。

结论

作为 Solana 上 DeFi 龙头,Jupiter 本身就汇聚大部分流量,但如何将这些流量运用好,使产品的留存率高和用户粘度强是其(也是所有 DeFi 项目)研究的重点方向。

通过大力发展 LFG Launchpad,Jupiter 其实已经看见如何使 DeFi 产品不单单设计成为配套式功能性网络,而是以交易为核心的新币上线平台。

在新周期中,Jupiter 有希望利用链上交易份额的流量基础,将用户留存在自身平台的代表项目,这也是有别于此前其他 DeFi 项目的发展方向。称其为 Solana DeFi 之光,并不为过。

Related Reads

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Coming

"Glue Finance founder argues Ethereum's current price underperformance stems from its 'unfinished machine' status. Despite record usage and settlement value in 2026, ETH remains below its 2021 peak because the protocol's continued development creates a dependency on the Ethereum Foundation for guidance and fixes. Key issues include centralized L2 sequencers, governance-based freezes (as seen with Arbitrum), state bloat, a vulnerable public mempool, and looming quantum computing threats. This 'dependency discount' prevents ETH from accruing the 'ossification premium' that markets award to immutable, trustless systems like Bitcoin. The author, a self-described Ethereum maximalist, rejects two flawed escape paths: a 'war mode' shift towards centralization for speed (which would sacrifice Ethereum's core value), or simply replacing the EF with another governing body. The only solution is the 'Manhattan Plan' or 'Lean Ethereum': a concerted, accelerated effort to complete and then *freeze* the protocol's neutral core. This involves finalizing critical upgrades in consensus (Lean Consensus), scaling (targeting 1 trillion gas/sec), quantum resistance (leanXMSS signatures), and full ZK-provable execution. The goal is to pass the 'walk-away test'—where Ethereum could run forever, neutrally, without the EF. Success would transform Ethereum into the first programmable, quantum-resistant, immutable global settlement layer, flipping its current discount into a unique 'eternity premium' that surpasses Bitcoin's. Failure—stagnation or trading neutrality for speed—would relegate it to being a slower, less trustworthy competitor."

marsbit23m ago

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Coming

marsbit23m ago

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Approaching

Glue Finance founder argues that Ethereum's current price underperformance, despite high on-chain activity, stems from its incomplete state and lingering dependency on central stewards like the Ethereum Foundation. The core thesis is that the market is discounting ETH not for lack of use, but because the protocol remains a "machine under construction." Key unresolved issues include centralized L2 sequencers with limited escape hatches, state bloat, vulnerable public mempools, and the looming quantum computing threat. This perpetual "work-in-progress" status forces reliance on a small group of maintainers, undermining the network's promise of credible neutrality and immutability. The author, a self-described Ethereum maximalist, rejects two flawed paths: a "wartime mode" of centralizing for speed (surrendering Ethereum's unique value) or merely replacing the Foundation with another governing entity. The only solution is to complete and then "freeze" the protocol's neutral core through a focused "Manhattan Project" dubbed "Lean Ethereum." This project aims to bundle critical upgrades—consensus layer overhaul, massive scaling via ZK-proofs, quantum resistance, and statelessness—into a decisive push to finalize the base layer. Once the core rules are cryptographically solidified and beyond anyone's control (passing the "walk-away test"), Ethereum would shed its dependency discount and earn a "rigidity premium" for its credible neutrality and programmability, potentially surpassing Bitcoin's valuation. The race is between completing this hardening and the risks of protocol capture or stagnation.

链捕手25m ago

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Approaching

链捕手25m ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

According to an analysis published by ZeroDrift on June 22, 2026, attackers have stolen approximately $16.9 million over 40 days from five deprecated but still operational smart contracts across various blockchains. The primary issue is not a specific vulnerability but the incomplete decommissioning of legacy contracts. These "zombie contracts" often retain economic value, operational permissions, and callable functions, making them prime targets long after teams cease active development. The most significant loss occurred at DxSale, where an old locker contract lost about $7.3 million due to a forgotten control path becoming accessible again. Other affected projects include TrustedVolumes (~$5.87M), Raydium's legacy AMM pool (~$1.34M), Aztec Connect (~$2.28M), and Huma Finance V1 pool (~$101k). These incidents involved diverse systems—RFQ settlement, credit pools, liquidity lockers, AMMs—demonstrating the widespread nature of the risk. The analysis highlights that automated tools are lowering the cost for attackers to systematically scan for these long-tail targets, which have public code and weaker monitoring. In contrast, defensive practices for contract retirement remain underdeveloped. While the DeFi industry has mature audit processes for new deployments, it lacks strict protocols for securely sunsetting old contracts, which only become truly "retired" after all funds, permissions, authorizations, and trust assumptions are removed.

marsbit1h ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

marsbit1h ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbit1h ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片