2 Days, 20x: A Quick Look at the Automated Market Making Mechanism of the New Gem Snowball

marsbitPublicado a 2025-12-22Actualizado a 2025-12-22

Resumen

The meme token Snowball" launched on pump.fun on December 18 and gained significant traction in the English-speaking crypto community, reaching a $10 million market cap within four days while largely flying under the radar in Chinese crypto circles. Its core innovation is an automated market-making mechanism: instead of the typical "creator fee" (usually 0.5%–1% per transaction) going to the developer’s wallet—a common setup that often leads to rug pulls—Snowball directs 100% of this fee to an on-chain bot. This bot periodically: 1. Buys back tokens to create buy pressure, 2. Adds the purchased tokens and corresponding SOL to the liquidity pool to improve depth, 3. Burns 0.1% of tokens to induce deflation. The fee rate also adjusts dynamically based on market cap (0.05%–0.95%) to balance accumulation and transaction friction. The idea is a "snowball effect": trading generates fees → fees fuel buybacks → buybacks may push price up → higher prices attract more trading. On-chain data shows 7,270 holders, with the top 10 holding ~20% of supply. Trading volume has been relatively balanced between buys and sells. However, the token remains highly speculative. While the structure reduces dev exit risk, it doesn’t eliminate other meme coin risks like low liquidity, narrative fatigue, or large holder dumps. Similar projects like FIREBALL are emerging, suggesting a trend toward "mechanism-driven memes." But as past examples like OlympusDAO and Safemoon show, complex t...

The crypto market in December is as cold as the weather.

On-chain transactions have been dormant for a long time, and new narratives are hard to come by. Just look at the drama and gossip circulating in the Chinese CT (Crypto Twitter) these past few days, and you'll know hardly anyone is playing in this market anymore.

But the English-speaking community has been discussing something new.

A meme coin called Snowball launched on pump.fun on December 18th. In four days, its market cap surged to $10 million and is still hitting new highs; yet it's barely mentioned in Chinese circles.

In the current environment, lacking new narratives and where even memes are considered unplayable, this is one of the few things that catches the eye and shows some localized wealth effect.

And the name Snowball itself tells the story it wants to convey:

A mechanism that allows the token to "roll and grow bigger by itself."

Turning Transaction Fees into Buying Pressure, Rolling the Snowball for Market Making

To understand what Snowball is doing, you first need to know how pump.fun tokens typically make money.

On pump.fun, anyone can create a token in minutes. The token creator can set a "creator fee," essentially taking a cut of every transaction into their own wallet, usually between 0.5% and 1%.

This money could theoretically be used for community building and marketing, but in practice, most Devs choose to: accumulate enough and then rug.

This is part of the typical life cycle of a shitcoin. Launch, pump, harvest fees, rug. Investors aren't betting on the token itself, but on the developer's conscience.

Snowball's approach is to not take this creator fee money.

To be precise, 100% of the creator fees do not go to anyone's wallet but are automatically transferred to an on-chain market-making bot.

This bot performs three actions at regular intervals:

First, it uses the accumulated funds to buy tokens on the market, creating buying support;

Second, it adds the bought tokens and the corresponding SOL to the liquidity pool, improving trading depth;

Third, it burns 0.1% of the tokens with each operation, creating deflation.

Additionally, the percentage of creator fees this coin charges is not fixed; it fluctuates between 0.05% and 0.95% based on market cap.

It takes a higher percentage when the market cap is low, allowing the bot to accumulate ammunition faster; it reduces the fee when the market cap is high, decreasing transaction friction.

In one sentence, the logic of this mechanism is: every time you trade, a portion of the money automatically becomes buying pressure and liquidity, instead of going into the developer's pocket.

Therefore, you can easily understand this snowball effect:

Transactions generate fees → Fees become buying pressure → Buying pressure pushes up the price → Higher price attracts more transactions → More fees... theoretically, it can roll on by itself.

On-Chain Data Situation

Now that we've covered the mechanism, let's look at the on-chain data.

Snowball launched on December 18th, four days ago. Its market cap grew from zero to $10 million, with a 24-hour trading volume exceeding $11 million.

For a shitcoin on pump.fun, this performance is considered relatively long-lasting in the current environment.

In terms of token distribution, there are currently 7,270 holder addresses. The top ten holders combined account for about 20% of the total supply, with the single largest holder holding 4.65%.

(Data source: surf.ai)

There's no address holding 20-30% of the supply; the distribution is relatively decentralized.

Regarding transaction data, there have been over 58,000 transactions since launch, with 33,000 buys and 24,000 sells. The total buy volume is $4.4 million, and the sell volume is $4.3 million, resulting in a net inflow of about $100,000. Buying and selling are basically balanced, with no one-sided selling pressure.

The liquidity pool holds about $380,000, half in tokens and half in SOL. For a market cap of this size, the depth isn't very thick, and large orders would still experience significant slippage.

Another noteworthy point is that Bybit Alpha announced listing the token less than 96 hours after launch, which to some extent confirms the short-term hype.

Perpetual Motion Meets a Cold Market

After looking around, you can see that the English community's discussion about Snowball mainly focuses on the mechanism itself. Supporters' logic is straightforward:

This is the first meme coin that locks 100% of the creator fees into the protocol, preventing developers from rugging, making it structurally safer than other shitcoins, at least.

The Dev is also playing into this narrative. The developer wallet, market-making bot wallet, and transaction logs are all public, emphasizing "verifiable on-chain."

@bschizojew labels himself as "on-chain schizophrenic, 4chan special forces, first-generation meme coin veteran," radiating a self-deprecating degen vibe that strongly appeals to the crypto-native community.

But a safe mechanism and making money are two different things.

The snowball effect relies on the premise that there is sufficient trading volume to continuously generate fees to feed the bot for buybacks. More trades mean more ammunition for the bot, stronger buying pressure, higher prices, attracting more people to trade...

This is the ideal state where any meme coin's so-called buyback flywheel spins up in a bull market.

The problem is, the flywheel needs external force to start.

What is the current crypto market environment? On-chain activity is sluggish, overall meme coin hype is down, and there's already little capital willing to chase shitcoins. In this context, if new buying pressure doesn't keep up and trading volume shrinks, the fees the bot receives will become less and fewer, buybacks will weaken, price support will diminish, and trading willingness will decline further.

The flywheel can spin forward, but it can also spin in reverse.

A more realistic problem is that the mechanism solves only one risk point—"developers taking the money and running"—but meme coins face far more risks than that.

Whales dumping, insufficient liquidity, narratives going out of style—any one of these happening would render the 100% fee buyback largely ineffective.

Everyone is tired of being rugged. A Chinese crypto brother summarized it quite well:

Play if you want, but don't get in over your head.

More Than One Snowball is Rolling

Snowball isn't the only project telling this automated market-making story.

Within the pump.fun ecosystem, a token called FIREBALL is doing something similar: automatic buybacks and burns, packaged as a protocol other tokens can plug into. But its market cap is much smaller than Snowball's.

This indicates the market is currently responsive to the direction of "mechanism-based meme coins."

The traditional玩法 of shilling, pumping, and community hype is finding it harder to attract capital. Using mechanism design to tell a "structurally safe" story might be one of the recent trends for meme coins.

That said, artificially creating a specific mechanism isn't a new玩法.

The most typical case in 2021 was OlympusDAO's (3,3), which used game theory to package a staking mechanism, telling the story "if everyone holds, everyone profits," reaching a peak market cap of billions of dollars. The ending, as everyone knows, was a death spiral, dropping over 90%.

Even earlier, there was Safemoon's玩法 of "taxing every transaction and distributing it to holders," also a narrative of mechanism innovation, which ended with the SEC suing and charging the founders with fraud.

Mechanisms can be great narrative hooks, capable of gathering capital and attention in the short term, but the mechanism itself does not create value.

When external capital stops flowing in, even the most精巧designed flywheel will stop turning.

Finally, let's recap what this little gem is actually doing:

Turning the meme coin's creator fees into an "automated market-making bot." The mechanism itself isn't complicated, and the problem it solves is very clear: preventing developers from directly taking the money and running.

The developer not being able to rug doesn't mean you will make money.

If after reading this you find the mechanism interesting and want to participate, remember one thing: it is first and foremost a meme coin, and only secondly an experiment with a new mechanism.

Criptos en tendencia

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the core mechanism that Snowball uses to create a 'self-rolling' effect?

ASnowball uses a mechanism where 100% of the creator fees from each transaction are automatically sent to an on-chain market-making bot. This bot periodically uses the accumulated funds to buy tokens (creating buy pressure), adds the purchased tokens and corresponding SOL to the liquidity pool, and burns 0.1% of the tokens to create deflation.

QHow does the creator fee in Snowball differ from a typical pump.fun token?

AIn a typical pump.fun token, the creator fee (usually 0.5% to 1%) goes directly into the developer's wallet, which they can withdraw and potentially abandon the project with. In Snowball, 100% of this fee is automatically sent to an on-chain market-making bot instead of going to any individual, making it structurally harder for the developer to 'rug pull'.

QWhat are the potential risks of investing in a meme coin like Snowball, according to the article?

AThe risks include a general decline in market activity and meme coin hype, which could lead to reduced trading volume. If new buying pressure doesn't materialize, the bot's funding from fees decreases, weakening buy support and price stability. Other risks not solved by the mechanism include large holders (whales) dumping, insufficient liquidity, and the narrative simply falling out of fashion.

QWhat precedent does the article mention for meme coins with innovative mechanisms, and what was their outcome?

AThe article mentions OlympusDAO's (3,3) staking mechanism, which promised mutual gains if holders sold, but its市值 eventually fell over 90%. It also references Safemoon, which used a transaction tax redistribution mechanism and whose founders were later charged with fraud by the SEC. These examples show that mechanisms can be a good narrative but don't inherently create value if external capital stops flowing in.

QWhat key piece of advice does the article give to potential participants interested in Snowball's mechanism?

AThe key advice is to remember that Snowball is first and foremost a meme coin, and only secondly an experiment with a new mechanism. While the mechanism addresses developer rug pulls, it does not guarantee profits. Participants are advised to 'play but don't get too carried away' or 'don't go overboard'.

Lecturas Relacionadas

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手Hace 3 hora(s)

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手Hace 3 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbitHace 5 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbitHace 5 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手Hace 6 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手Hace 6 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros

Artículos destacados

Cómo comprar QUICK

¡Bienvenido a HTX.com! Hemos hecho que comprar Quickswap (QUICK) sea simple y conveniente. Sigue nuestra guía paso a paso para iniciar tu viaje de criptos.Paso 1: crea tu cuenta HTXUtiliza tu correo electrónico o número de teléfono para registrarte y obtener una cuenta gratuita en HTX. Experimenta un proceso de registro sin complicaciones y desbloquea todas las funciones.Obtener mi cuentaPaso 2: ve a Comprar cripto y elige tu método de pagoTarjeta de crédito/débito: usa tu Visa o Mastercard para comprar Quickswap (QUICK) al instante.Saldo: utiliza fondos del saldo de tu cuenta HTX para tradear sin problemas.Terceros: hemos agregado métodos de pago populares como Google Pay y Apple Pay para mejorar la comodidad.P2P: tradear directamente con otros usuarios en HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): ofrecemos servicios personalizados y tipos de cambio competitivos para los traders.Paso 3: guarda tu Quickswap (QUICK)Después de comprar tu Quickswap (QUICK), guárdalo en tu cuenta HTX. Alternativamente, puedes enviarlo a otro lugar mediante transferencia blockchain o utilizarlo para tradear otras criptomonedas.Paso 4: tradear Quickswap (QUICK)Tradear fácilmente con Quickswap (QUICK) en HTX's mercado spot. Simplemente accede a tu cuenta, selecciona tu par de trading, ejecuta tus trades y monitorea en tiempo real. Ofrecemos una experiencia fácil de usar tanto para principiantes como para traders experimentados.

103 Vistas totalesPublicado en 2024.12.11Actualizado en 2026.06.02

Cómo comprar QUICK

Discusiones

Bienvenido a la comunidad de HTX. Aquí puedes mantenerte informado sobre los últimos desarrollos de la plataforma y acceder a análisis profesionales del mercado. A continuación se presentan las opiniones de los usuarios sobre el precio de QUICK (QUICK).

活动图片