PONS vs pump.fun
The dominant launchpad on Solana against Robinhood Chain's — fees, buybacks, launches, and what the market pays for each dollar of revenue. 7-day basis, annualized linearly.
Side by side
PONS: on-chain via this site · pump.fun: DeFiLlama (+ PumpSwap) & CoinGecko, refreshed every 30 min| Metric | PONS | pump.fun ($PUMP) |
|---|---|---|
| Market cap | $31.28M | $732.35M |
| FDV | $31.28M | $1.56B |
| User fees · 7d | $1.28M | $10.07M |
| Protocol take · 7d | $895.6K | $6.62M |
| Buybacks · 7d | $640.6K | $3.35M |
| Buyback share of protocol take | ~80% (policy) | 50% (contract) |
| Token launches / day | 13,167 | ≈15,000 |
| Mcap ÷ annualized revenue | 0.67× | 2.12× |
| Mcap ÷ annualized fees | 0.47× | 1.40× |
| FDV ÷ annualized revenue | 0.67× | 4.51× |
| FDV ÷ annualized fees | 0.47× | 2.96× |
- PONS FDV equals market cap: burned supply is destroyed outright, so there is no locked or unvested overhang. PUMP's FDV reflects tokens not yet circulating.
- PONS user fees are estimated as the collector take ÷ 70% (the protocol's share). pump.fun combines launchpad + PumpSwap AMM fees, excluding the 0.20% share paid to LPs.
- Both columns are pre-buyback: PONS is WETH received by the fee collector; pump.fun is DeFiLlama's “Revenue” for launchpad + AMM. DeFiLlama's separately published “Protocol revenue” is net of buybacks, and therefore smaller.
- pump.fun buybacks are DeFiLlama's holders revenue, sourced from on-chain PUMP burns across all pump products.
- Buyback share shows each protocol's stated commitment: Pons routes ~80% of fees to the TWAP; pump.fun locks 50% by smart contract (since Apr 2026). Measured trailing-7d deployment — 72% and 51% respectively — lags policy when fees surge, because spend trails inflows.
- PONS is the trailing 7-day average from on-chain TokenLaunched events. pump.fun is approximate, from public dashboards — no free live source exists.
How to read this
The multiple math
pump.fun's market cap divided by its annualized 7-day revenue gives the multiple the market currently pays per dollar of launchpad revenue. Applying that multiple to PONS's annualized revenue, divided by remaining supply, gives the implied price. It is a comparison lens, not a valuation model.
Apples to apples
PONS "revenue" is WETH actually received by the fee collector — the protocol's ~70% cut across launch-phase and graduated-pool trading. The pump.fun side is therefore ecosystem-wide too: launchpad plus PumpSwap (their AMM), per DeFiLlama, excluding the 0.20% LP share that never reaches the protocol. Buybacks are DeFiLlama's holders revenue, sourced from on-chain PUMP burns across all pump products. PONS user fees are estimated by grossing the collector take up to 100%.
Why multiples differ
pump.fun is on Solana's mature ecosystem with a year of history and ~$1.1B all-time fees; Pons is days old on a new chain. Small, fast-growing protocols often trade at lower multiples because revenue durability is unproven — and multiples compress as protocols scale. Launch counts for pump.fun are approximate (no free live source). pump.fun buyback figures are DeFiLlama's, sourced from on-chain PUMP burns; their measurement code is open source in the DeFiLlama adapters repo. Nothing here is financial advice.