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

深潮Pubblicato 2025-12-22Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-12-22

Introduzione

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.

Crypto di tendenza

Domande pertinenti

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.

Letture associate

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7 h fa

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手7 h fa

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.

marsbit10 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit10 h fa

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11 h fa

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

链捕手11 h fa

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?

marsbit12 h fa

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

marsbit12 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare QUICK

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di Quickswap (QUICK) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente QuickswapQUICK.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva Quickswap (QUICK)Dopo aver acquistato Quickswap (QUICK), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia Quickswap (QUICK)Scambia facilmente Quickswap (QUICK) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

95 Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2024.12.11Aggiornato il 2026.06.02

Come comprare QUICK

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di QUICK QUICK sono presentate come di seguito.

活动图片