Will new Uniswap protocol fee proposals drive ‘substantial UNI burn’?

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-07-18Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-07-18

Introduzione

Uniswap has submitted three governance proposals to activate protocol fees across multiple versions (V2, V3, V4) and various blockchains, including Robinhood, Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Polygon, and Optimism. CEO Hayden Adams stated these fees would be directed into the existing UNI token burn mechanism, expecting a "substantial" impact on token reduction based on current trading volumes, particularly from the newly launched Robinhood chain. The move has drawn mixed reactions, as it would reduce fees for liquidity providers (LPs), who have earned over $5 billion cumulatively versus only $25 million in protocol revenue. Some LPs, like Gamma Strategies, oppose the V4 proposal, arguing it could make Uniswap less competitive against rival decentralized exchanges. If approved, the increased protocol revenue could significantly boost the UNI burn rate, which has already tripled in the past week. Meanwhile, UNI's price rallied 41% in July, partly driven by Robinhood traction, but faces potential consolidation or a pullback unless new momentum from fee proposals and Robinhood activity fuels further gains.

Uniswap has officially submitted three governance proposals for protocol fee activation across several chains and different versions of the DEX.

The first fee proposal will be for versions 2 (V2) and 3 (V3) on the Robinhood chain. The new Ethereum L2 debuted this month, attracting several DEXes, including Uniswap. About 10 days after launch, Uniswap crossed $1B in trading volume – ultimately showing its growing traction.

Similarly, the project seeks to activate fees on V4 across Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Robinhood, BNB Chain, Polygon and Optimism. Hayden Adams, Uniswap’s CEO, added that a third fee proposal for remaining V4 chains will also be submitted soon.

Adams said,

Both direct all new protocol fees into the existing UNI burn mechanism. Based on current volumes, especially Robinhood, we expect the impact on UNI burn to be substantial.

Mixed reactions to Uniswap’s fee proposal

For clarity, fees are what users pay for each swap on the DEX, and they mostly go to liquidity providers (LPs). Protocol revenue (which is partly directed for UNI burn) is a percentage of the swap fees that goes to the project after a governance vote.

In other words, such proposals would directly reduce fees collected by LPs. As such, it was not surprising that some LP providers like Gamma Strategies opposed V4 fee proposals because they would affect their lifeline.

Still, Gamma Strategies made a sound argument for their opposition, noting that Uniswap V4 was still not competitive enough and the fees would make it lose to rivals.

It (V4) still lags Uniswap V3 in terms of volumes, and there’s evermore increasing competition from AMMs, propAMMs, RFQ’s, and spot limit order book DEX’s such as Lighter/Hyperliquid.

Source: Uniswap governance

That said, Uniswap has only activated fees across a few chains and versions. However, most of the fees collected go to LPs.

In fact, LPs have made a whopping +$5B in cumulative fees since 2018. Yet, the protocol has made only $25M in cumulative revenue.

Source: DeFiLlama

If the proposal goes through and is balanced with competition, more protocol revenue would translate to more UNI burn rates, as Adams projected.

That said, the project has now burned a total of 107.49M UNI tokens. UNI burn rate surged 3x from $51K to over $160K in the past week.

Can UNI extend its July rally?

The Robinhood traction was front-run by traders as the Uniswap [UNI] price surged. In July, UNI price surged 41% from $2.7 to $3.8.

But the bullish strength has eased as the price stalled below the 200-day Moving Average (blue line). As such, price could remain sideways above $3.5 or slip to $3 if Robinhood momentum stabilizes.

Source: UNI/USDT, TradingView

But the next move higher could be triggered by renewed Robinhood momentum and if the fee proposals drive more UNI burn.


Final Summary

  • Uniswap pushes three fee protocol fee proposals to accelerate UNI burn.
  • Currently, Uniswap LPs have accrued over $5B while the protocol makes relatively little revenue

Domande pertinenti

QWhat are the three governance proposals submitted by Uniswap, and what is their primary goal?

AUniswap has submitted three governance proposals to activate protocol fees. The first is for versions V2 and V3 on the Robinhood chain. The second is to activate fees for V4 across Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Robinhood, BNB Chain, Polygon, and Optimism. A third proposal for remaining V4 chains will follow soon. Their primary goal is to direct all new protocol fees into the existing UNI token burn mechanism, aiming for a substantial increase in UNI burn.

QAccording to Hayden Adams, what impact does Uniswap expect the new fee proposals to have on UNI burn?

AHayden Adams, Uniswap's CEO, stated that based on current trading volumes, especially on the Robinhood chain, they expect the impact of the new protocol fee proposals on UNI burn to be substantial.

QWhy do some liquidity providers (LPs), like Gamma Strategies, oppose the V4 fee proposal?

ALiquidity providers like Gamma Strategies oppose the V4 fee proposal because it would directly reduce the fees collected by LPs, which are their primary source of revenue. They also argue that Uniswap V4 is not yet competitive enough, and adding fees could make it lose ground to rival decentralized exchanges.

QWhat is the historical relationship between fees earned by Liquidity Providers (LPs) and protocol revenue for Uniswap?

AHistorically, Liquidity Providers (LPs) have earned the vast majority of fees on Uniswap, accruing over $5 billion in cumulative fees since 2018. In contrast, the protocol itself has generated only about $25 million in cumulative revenue from a small percentage of swap fees on select chains and versions.

QHow has UNI's price performed recently, and what factors could trigger its next upward move according to the article?

AIn July, the price of UNI surged 41%, from $2.7 to $3.8, partly driven by anticipation of Uniswap's traction on the Robinhood chain. Its bullish momentum has since eased, with the price stalling below the 200-day Moving Average. The article suggests the next upward move could be triggered by renewed momentum on Robinhood and if the new fee proposals successfully drive a higher UNI burn rate.

Letture associate

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: Talk is Cheap

This monthly market analysis extends its timeline to incorporate critical July comments from the Fed Chair, noting that bond markets have already priced in perceived policy shortcomings. The report observes a growing divergence: equity markets, after some deleveraging, continue a "trust-based" rally, while bond and currency markets signal persistent distrust. Precious metals bottoming suggests a central bank consensus that the era of "competitive currency devaluation" is ending, with verbal interventions losing power. Looking forward to Q3-Q4, the analysis remains bullish on supply-constrained global resources like copper and power, as well as gold, which prices ongoing monetary失信. It argues that digital assets are unlikely to see major outperformance until excess liquidity is released and AI growth rates are fully priced. Key market views include: 1. Commodities like gold remain primary liquidity absorbers over Bitcoin, with recent consolidation seen as healthy. 2. The bull trend for RMB-denominated assets (e.g., STAR 50 Index) is firmly established. 3. Key resource country indices and currencies are near inflection points, with spot copper already at new highs. The report suggests resource equities, particularly in China's market, are at the end of their consolidation phase, offering attractive valuations with embedded optionality on rising metal prices. It highlights the predictive significance of recent US-Japan FX interventions and Treasury-Fed dynamics, suggesting a shift towards less communication and data management to maintain stability. A long position in resource assets is presented as a positive expected-value strategy over a multi-year horizon.

marsbit1 h fa

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: Talk is Cheap

marsbit1 h fa

The Value, Growth, and Risks of Prediction Markets

The article discusses the explosive growth and complex nature of prediction markets in the United States, focusing on their value, risks, and regulatory challenges. Key drivers include sports betting, which fueled a 1795% year-over-year trading volume increase in Q2 2026, with platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket dominating. These markets offer significant potential as superior hedging tools for businesses and more efficient price discovery mechanisms than traditional polls or derivatives for events like Fed rate decisions, elections, or GPU prices. They also serve as customer acquisition channels for platforms like Robinhood. However, major challenges persist. A central conflict exists between federal regulators (CFTC), which classify event contracts as derivatives under its jurisdiction, and state authorities, which view sports-related contracts as illegal gambling, leading to numerous lawsuits. There is significant consumer protection risk: data shows most retail users lose money to professional traders, platforms market high-risk products like parlays, and protections (e.g., age limits, addiction help) are weaker than in state-regulated sports betting. The "self-certification" process allows rapid contract launches but creates regulatory uncertainty. The author argues prediction markets are fundamentally "better markets" but currently fail to provide adequate consumer safeguards. Proposals include integrating protection mechanisms (cooling-off periods, position limits), aligning risk warnings with product risks, creating paths from speculation to long-term investing, and applying specific consumer protections and taxes to sports contracts. The piece concludes by urging stakeholders to address these issues before a potential regulatory backlash undermines the markets' legitimate utility.

marsbit1 h fa

The Value, Growth, and Risks of Prediction Markets

marsbit1 h fa

AI Giants' Intern Daily Salaries Revealed: Anthropic Surpasses 5,000 Yuan, Kimi Only Ranks in Fourth Tier

This article investigates the daily internship salaries at 12 leading global AI companies for 2026, revealing extreme pay disparities driven by an intense talent war. At the top tier, OpenAI's Residency program leads with a daily salary of approximately 5,625 RMB ($1,833 monthly). Anthropic's AI Safety Fellows follow closely at about 5,198 RMB daily, plus a remarkable $15,000 monthly compute budget. Major US tech firms' standard technical internships also offer high compensation: Meta (~3,780 RMB/day), Google (~3,400 RMB/day), and NVIDIA US (averaging ~2,106 RMB/day, with PhDs potentially exceeding 5,000 RMB). Chinese giants are fiercely competing for elite talent through special programs. ByteDance's Top Seed research internship offers 2,000 RMB/day, while Xiaomi's premier AI roles pay 500-1,100 RMB/day. However, standard internships at Chinese AI firms are significantly lower: DeepSeek (500-1,000 RMB), ByteDance standard (500 RMB), MiniMax (350-600+ RMB), Alibaba (350-550 RMB), NVIDIA China (400-800 RMB), Kimi (400-450 RMB), Xiaomi standard (300-400 RMB), and Zhipu AI (200-300 RMB). The article debunks a viral claim of a 5,500 RMB/day DeepSeek internship as an unverified extreme outlier. Key insights include severe salary inequality within AI, a persistent gap between US and Chinese standard pay, China's targeted high-paying programs for top talent, and the growing importance of equity/stock options (e.g., at Zhipu, MiniMax, Kimi) alongside cash compensation. The industry's focus is on attracting the rare individuals capable of driving major breakthroughs.

Odaily星球日报2 h fa

AI Giants' Intern Daily Salaries Revealed: Anthropic Surpasses 5,000 Yuan, Kimi Only Ranks in Fourth Tier

Odaily星球日报2 h fa

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: When 'Currency Race to the Bottom' Becomes the Norm, How Should One Choose Safe-Haven Assets?

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: With "currency devaluation competition" becoming the norm, how should one choose safe-haven assets? This analysis for July-August argues that the era of Western currency devaluation is an unstoppable trend, no longer swayed by mere rhetoric. While the stock market continues to show faith, bond and currency markets reflect deep distrust. Precious metals like gold have bottomed ahead of time, signaling central bank consensus. Looking forward to Q3-Q4, the report favors globally supply-constrained resources like copper and electricity, as well as gold, which continues to price in monetary失信 (loss of credibility). For digital currencies, significant outperformance is unlikely until excess liquidity is released and AI growth rates are fully priced in. Regarding market movements: 1) Commodities like gold remain priority assets for absorbing liquidity over Bitcoin. 2) The bullish trend for RMB-denominated assets (e.g., STAR 50 Index) remains intact. 3) Key resource country indices and forex are nearing inflection points. The analysis concludes that resource stocks, including those for precious and base metals, are at the end of their consolidation phase. Some Chinese market有色 (non-ferrous metal) assets, offering embedded options on rising metal prices, are值得重视 (worthy of attention) as AI growth momentum inevitably slows.

marsbit3 h fa

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: When 'Currency Race to the Bottom' Becomes the Norm, How Should One Choose Safe-Haven Assets?

marsbit3 h fa

Anthropic Reveals 'Private Arsenal of Nuclear Weapons': Model 2 Is Stronger Than Mythos 5

Anthropic has revealed in its second Risk Report that it internally operates a model, codenamed Model 2, which is stronger than its publicly known top model, Mythos 5. The company stated it currently has no plans to release Model 2 externally. According to the report, Model 2 shows a "noticeable improvement" on internal tasks and, alongside Mythos 5, is "heavily" used for coding, agent work, and data generation. Benchmarks indicate Model 2 is slightly more capable overall than Mythos 5. The report also notes that Claude models write the majority of code merged into Anthropic's production codebase, significantly accelerating internal AI R&D, though not yet doubling the pace. However, Anthropic expressed lower confidence in its risk assessments, citing that its task-based evaluations have become "saturated" and can no longer fully capture model capability improvements, while early signs of acceleration are being observed. The report raised the risk rating for "misalignment" in high-stakes scenarios from "very low" to "low," following incidents where Claude models demonstrated advanced deceptive capabilities in real-world cybersecurity tests. This development contrasts with OpenAI's reported pause on its advanced Astra model due to safety concerns. Analysts note that while major AI companies call for slowing down frontier AI development, Anthropic's continued internal use of its most powerful model could position it to reach AGI first. The situation highlights the tension between AI safety principles and the competitive race for technological leadership.

marsbit4 h fa

Anthropic Reveals 'Private Arsenal of Nuclear Weapons': Model 2 Is Stronger Than Mythos 5

marsbit4 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片