Pump.fun’s Creator Revenue Sharing: Reality vs. Hype

3,566 Creators Shared $3.07M: But Nearly 35% Earned Less Than $100

Published: Jun 4, 2025 at 10:21
Edited: Jun 4, 2025 at 10:27

On May 12, Pump.fun made waves by announcing its "Creator Revenue Sharing" initiative, promising to share 50% of its total revenue with creators.

While the announcement initially appeared generous, a closer examination reveals a more nuanced and somewhat controversial reality.

A Closer Look at the Fee Structure

Originally, Pump.fun charged a straightforward 0.25% fee per pumpswap’s transactions, with 0.2% directed to liquidity providers and the remaining 0.05% retained by the protocol itself. However, following the introduction of the Creator Revenue Sharing program, Pump.fun imposed an additional 0.05% fee, increasing the total transaction fee to 0.3%. Essentially, this meant that creators' "share" was not drawn from existing revenues but rather from an extra fee passed onto users.

Community Concerns: Incentivizing "Rug Pulls"?

The revised fee structure quickly attracted criticism across crypto communities, particularly on platforms like X.

Critics argued the new model might inadvertently encourage "rug pulls," where developers abandon projects but continue earning fees from transactions involving their tokens. Such criticism emphasizes concerns that this revenue model could potentially undermine community-driven initiatives to revive tokens that creators have already abandoned.

Diving into the Data: Creator Earnings Analysis

To gain a deeper understanding, we analyzed onchain data from May 12 onward to evaluate the actual impact of the new revenue-sharing initiative on creators.

Initial Earnings and Growth

Daily Breakdown of Fees Based on Flipside data, creator earnings began modestly at under $20,000 on the program's launch day. However, this amount grew quickly, eventually peaking at over $200,000 per day. At its peak, creator revenues represented roughly 12% of daily Pumpswap fees. However, as trading volumes decreased after May 22, creator revenues also fell significantly, settling recently at around $130,000 per day.

Comparing Total Revenues

Total Fees From May 12 to the present, creators collectively earned more than $3.07 million. In comparison, Pumpswap generated over $4.4 million during the same period—approximately 43% more than creators' earnings. Liquidity providers, meanwhile, have significantly outpaced both creators and Pumpswap, earning over $17.7 million.

Earnings Distribution among Creators

Dist of Creator Earnings The distribution of revenue among the 3,566 participating creators highlights considerable disparities:

48.5% earned between $100 and $1,000.
34.9% earned less than $100.
Overall, 83.4% earned less than $1,000.
13.7% earned between $1,000 and $5,000.
Only 1.8% earned between $5,000 and $10,000.

The Gap among Top Earners

Top Earners A review of the top ten creators underscores even greater disparities:

The highest-earning creator (address 547L…w3rE) amassed over $104,000 from just three coins.
The tenth-highest earner (address 7Lsg…gmyv), however, earned only around $25,000—merely a quarter of the top earner's revenue.

Quantity vs. Quality: Token Creation Strategies

Dist of Top Earners A deeper dive into the token creation patterns among the top 100 earners reveals interesting strategies:

43% launched fewer than five tokens, with 26 creators launching just one token each.
Conversely, 19% released over 1,000 tokens each.

The average number of tokens created by the top 100 earners was 1,626, yet the median number stood at just 10. This discrepancy highlights distinct approaches among creators—some focus on quality and limited quantity, while others flood the market with numerous tokens to maximize their earning potential.

Conclusion: Transparency and Realities

Pump.fun’s Creator Revenue Sharing initiative, while initially appealing, raises essential questions about transparency and the true nature of revenue sharing in decentralized finance. The controversy and criticism surrounding the program highlight the importance of clarity in marketing claims and the potential unintended consequences of fee structures in crypto ecosystems. As the decentralized finance landscape continues evolving, honest and clear communication will remain crucial for building trust and sustaining community engagement.