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

深潮Dipublikasikan tanggal 2025-12-22Terakhir diperbarui pada 2025-12-22

Abstrak

Snowball, a new meme token launched on pump.fun on December 18, gained significant traction in the English-speaking crypto community by introducing an automated market-making mechanism designed to create a self-sustaining "snowball effect." Unlike typical meme coins where creators take a fee (usually 0.5%-1%) from each transaction, Snowball redirects 100% of this fee to an on-chain bot. This bot uses accumulated funds to buy back tokens, add liquidity to the pool, and burn a small portion of tokens periodically. The goal is to create continuous buy pressure and improve trading depth, theoretically allowing the token to grow organically through increased trading activity. Within four days, Snowball reached a $10 million market cap with over 7,000 holders and relatively decentralized ownership. However, the mechanism relies heavily on sustained trading volume to fuel the buyback bot. In a cold market with low on-chain activity, this "flywheel" could reverse if new buyers diminish. While the structure reduces developer exit risk, it doesn’t eliminate other meme coin dangers like large holder dumps or narrative fatigue. Similar projects like FIREBALL are emerging, indicating interest in "mechanism-driven memes," but past examples like OlympusDAO and Safemoon show that mechanisms alone don’t guarantee long-term value. Snowball remains primarily a meme experiment—interesting, but high-risk.

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 in the Chinese CT (Crypto Twitter) space 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, devoid of 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 larger by itself."

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

To understand what Snowball is doing, you first need to know how tokens on pump.fun 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 or marketing, but in practice, most Devs choose to: accumulate enough and then run.

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 into 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 buy-side 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 taken as the creator fee 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 buy pressure and liquidity, instead of going into the developer's pocket.

Therefore, it's easy to understand this snowball effect:

Transactions generate fees → Fees become buy pressure → Buy pressure pushes the price up → Higher price attracts more transactions → More fees... theoretically, it can roll on its own.

On-Chain Data Situation

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

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

For a shitcoin on pump.fun, these results mean it's already one of the longer-lasting ones in the current environment.

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

(Data source: surf.ai)

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

Regarding trading data, there have been over 58,000 cumulative transactions since launch, with 33,000 buys and 24,000 sells. The total buy volume is $4.4 million, and 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 notable 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

Looking around, you can see 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; developers can't take the money and run, 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 schizophrenia, 4chan special forces, first-generation meme coin veteran," radiating a self-deprecating degen vibe that really 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 buy pressure, higher prices, attracting more people to trade...

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

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

What is the current crypto market environment? On-chain activity is sluggish, overall meme coin hype is down, and there's simply less capital willing to chase shitcoins. In this context, if new buy pressure doesn't keep up and trading volume shrinks, the fees the bot receives will become less and less, buyback strength weakens, price support falters, and trading willingness declines 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 money and running"—but meme coins face far more risks than that.

Whales dumping, insufficient liquidity, narratives going out of style—if any of these happen, 100% fee buybacks can only do so much.

Everyone is tired of being rugged. As one Chinese crypto brother aptly summarized:

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

More Than One Snowball 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 shows the market is currently responsive to the direction of "mechanism-based meme coins."

The traditional玩法 (playbook) 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 meme coins' latest tricks.

That said, artificially creating a specific mechanism isn't a new玩法 (play) either.

OlympusDAO's (3,3) in 2021 was the most classic case, packaging a staking mechanism with game theory, telling the story "if everyone holds, we all profit together." It reached a peak market cap of several billion 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 the founders charged with fraud.

A mechanism can be a great narrative hook, 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 (ingenious) flywheel will stop.

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.

Developers not being able to rug doesn't mean you'll 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.

Kripto yang Sedang Tren

Pertanyaan Terkait

QWhat is the core mechanism that makes Snowball different from typical meme coins on pump.fun?

ASnowball's core mechanism is that 100% of the creator fees from each transaction are automatically sent to an on-chain market-making bot instead of going to the developer's wallet. This bot uses the accumulated funds to buy back tokens, add liquidity to the pool, and burn a small portion of tokens, creating a self-sustaining 'snowball effect' of buying pressure and liquidity growth.

QHow does the 'snowball effect' theoretically work in this token's economic model?

AThe 'snowball effect' works through a feedback loop: transactions generate fees → fees are used by the bot to buy tokens and add liquidity → buying pressure pushes the price higher → higher prices attract more traders and transactions → which generates more fees for the bot to continue the cycle.

QWhat are some of the risks or limitations of Snowball's automatic market-making mechanism?

AThe mechanism relies on sustained trading volume to generate fees for the bot. If new buyers dry up and trading volume decreases, the bot's buying power weakens, potentially leading to a downward spiral. It also doesn't protect against other risks like large holders dumping, liquidity issues, or narrative fatigue.

QHow does the creator fee percentage in Snowball adjust, and why?

AThe creator fee percentage in Snowball fluctuates between 0.05% and 0.95% based on market capitalization. It charges a higher percentage when the market cap is low to allow the bot to accumulate funds faster, and a lower percentage when the market cap is high to reduce transaction friction for traders.

QWhat precedent exists in crypto for 'mechanism-driven' tokens like Snowball, and what were their outcomes?

APrecedents include OlympusDAO's (3,3) staking mechanism, which collapsed after reaching a multi-billion dollar valuation, and Safemoon's transaction tax redistribution model, which ended with fraud charges from the SEC. These show that while mechanisms can drive short-term hype, they don't create inherent value and often fail when external capital stops flowing in.

Bacaan Terkait

Rubin Ultra Terkuras Drastis, Apakah Nvidia Juga Tak Tahan dengan Kenaikan Harga Memori?

Laporan terbaru dari SemiAnalysis mengungkapkan bahwa NVIDIA telah merevisi spesifikasi Rubin Ultra, varian flagship dari arsitektur Rubin yang diumumkan di GTC 2026. Alih-alih peningkatan besar pada memori dan daya komputasi, fokus utama kini beralih ke kemampuan interkoneksi skala sistem. Spesifikasi kunci yang diungkapkan menunjukkan Rubin Ultra akan mempertahankan puncak komputasi teoretis yang sama dengan Rubin standar, yaitu 35 PFLOPs. Namun, terjadi pengurangan signifikan pada kapasitas memori, turun menjadi 192GB dengan konfigurasi 8-Hi, lebih rendah dari Rubin standar yang 288GB (12-Hi). Peningkatan bandwidth memori juga minimal, hanya 1 TB/s, dan daya chip bahkan sedikit lebih tinggi. Peningkatan utama justru pada "skala interkoneksi" (*scale-up world size*), yang melonjak dari 72 GPU menjadi 576 GPU. Ini memungkinkan ratusan GPU Rubin Ultra terhubung via NVLink membentuk satu "super GPU" logis yang sangat besar. Analisis SemiAnalysis mengaitkan perubahan desain ini dengan lonjakan harga HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) yang drastis. Biaya material (BOM) untuk rak server Rubin Ultra sempat melonjak menjadi sekitar $8 juta karena harga HBM, tetapi dengan spesifikasi baru, biaya turun ke sekitar $6.4 juta. NVIDIA diduga mengalihkan biaya dari komponen HBM yang mahal (yang pangsa biayanya turun dari ~40% menjadi 28%) ke peningkatan interkoneksi jaringan (naik dari 4% menjadi 12%). Berita ini memicu kekhawatiran pasar tentang permintaan HBM. Saham produsen HBM seperti SK Hynix dan Samsung anjlok sekitar 8%, mencerminkan kekhawatiran bahwa pembeli utama seperti NVIDIA mungkin mulai mengurangi ketergantungan pada HBM berkapasitas tinggi untuk mengontrol biaya sistem AI secara keseluruhan.

Odaily星球日报8m yang lalu

Rubin Ultra Terkuras Drastis, Apakah Nvidia Juga Tak Tahan dengan Kenaikan Harga Memori?

Odaily星球日报8m yang lalu

Model Generatif Bisa Dilatih End-to-End? Intinya Hanya Sebuah For Loop

Model generatif seperti model difusi atau autoregresif yang dominan saat ini biasanya tidak melatih seluruh proses generasi secara end-to-end. Mereka dilatih hanya untuk memprediksi satu "langkah kecil" dalam proses, namun saat inferensi, langkah ini harus diulang ratusan atau ribuan kali. Ketidaksesuaian ini menyebabkan masalah "exposure bias," di mana kesalahan menumpuk seiring waktu. Makalah terbaru dari UIUC dan Harvard memperkenalkan paradigma baru bernama **Explorative Modeling (XM)**. Inti dari metode ini sangat sederhana: alih-alih menghasilkan satu sampel, model menghasilkan **K kandidat** dalam setiap langkah pelatihan. Kemudian, hanya kandidat yang paling dekat dengan data target yang dipilih untuk menghitung gradien dan memperbarui model. Mengapa ini berhasil? Dalam tugas generatif, satu input bisa memiliki banyak output yang valid (mode). Fungsi kerugian rekonstruksi tradisional cenderung menyebabkan "mode blurring," di mana model hanya mempelajari rata-rata dari semua mode, menghasilkan output yang tidak realistis. Dengan menghasilkan beberapa kandidat, model dapat "mengeksplorasi" dan menangkap beberapa mode yang berbeda sekaligus, sehingga menghindari rata-rata yang kabur. Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa **"eksplorasi" (K) bertindak sebagai sumbu penskalaan ketiga** yang efektif, selain parameter dan data. Eksperimen pada gambar, video, dan bahasa menunjukkan peningkatan kinerja yang monoton dengan peningkatan K, dengan keuntungan yang lebih besar pada skala yang lebih besar. XM dapat meningkatkan efisiensi FLOP hingga 4.1x dan efisiensi sampel hingga 6.2x. Yang lebih menarik, ketika diterapkan secara ekstrem, XM memungkinkan **pelatihan generatif yang benar-benar end-to-end**. Dalam tugas kontrol robot, "Explorative Policy" berbasis XM mencapai kinerja yang setara dengan "Diffusion Policy" yang membutuhkan 100 langkah inferensi, sementara hanya membutuhkan satu langkah inferensi maju. Ini membuktikan bahwa kompleksitas untuk menangani banyak mode dapat dipindahkan dari inferensi ke pelatihan. Meskipun ide "best-of-K" bukan hal baru, kontribusi utama makalah ini adalah penjelasan teoritis bahwa mekanisme ini secara langsung meningkatkan **ekspresivitas generatif** model. Dengan demikian, ini menawarkan cara baru yang ampuh untuk mengatasi tantangan mendasar dalam pemodelan generatif.

marsbit1j yang lalu

Model Generatif Bisa Dilatih End-to-End? Intinya Hanya Sebuah For Loop

marsbit1j yang lalu

Trading

Spot

Artikel Populer

Cara Membeli QUICK

Selamat datang di HTX.com! Kami telah membuat pembelian Quickswap (QUICK) menjadi mudah dan nyaman. Ikuti panduan langkah demi langkah kami untuk memulai perjalanan kripto Anda.Langkah 1: Buat Akun HTX AndaGunakan alamat email atau nomor ponsel Anda untuk mendaftar akun gratis di HTX. Rasakan perjalanan pendaftaran yang mudah dan buka semua fitur.Dapatkan Akun SayaLangkah 2: Buka Beli Kripto, lalu Pilih Metode Pembayaran AndaKartu Kredit/Debit: Gunakan Visa atau Mastercard Anda untuk membeli Quickswap (QUICK) secara instan.Saldo: Gunakan dana dari saldo akun HTX Anda untuk melakukan trading dengan lancar.Pihak Ketiga: Kami telah menambahkan metode pembayaran populer seperti Google Pay dan Apple Pay untuk meningkatkan kenyamanan.P2P: Lakukan trading langsung dengan pengguna lain di HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Kami menawarkan layanan yang dibuat khusus dan kurs yang kompetitif bagi para trader.Langkah 3: Simpan Quickswap (QUICK) AndaSetelah melakukan pembelian, simpan Quickswap (QUICK) di akun HTX Anda. Selain itu, Anda dapat mengirimkannya ke tempat lain melalui transfer blockchain atau menggunakannya untuk memperdagangkan mata uang kripto lainnya.Langkah 4: Lakukan trading Quickswap (QUICK)Lakukan trading Quickswap (QUICK) dengan mudah di pasar spot HTX. Cukup akses akun Anda, pilih pasangan perdagangan, jalankan trading, lalu pantau secara real-time. Kami menawarkan pengalaman yang ramah pengguna baik untuk pemula maupun trader berpengalaman.

264 Total TayanganDipublikasikan pada 2024.12.11Diperbarui pada 2026.06.02

Cara Membeli QUICK

Diskusi

Selamat datang di Komunitas HTX. Di sini, Anda bisa terus mendapatkan informasi terbaru tentang perkembangan platform terkini dan mendapatkan akses ke wawasan pasar profesional. Pendapat pengguna mengenai harga QUICK (QUICK) disajikan di bawah ini.

活动图片