Jupiter Co-Founder Drops Bombshell: Considering Halting $JUP Buybacks - What’s Next for the Token?
Jupiter's leadership just floated a trial balloon that could send shockwaves through the DeFi ecosystem.
The Buyback Reconsideration
Word on the chain is that Jupiter's co-founder is actively weighing whether to pull the plug on the platform's $JUP token buyback program. No official halt yet—but the mere suggestion opens a Pandora's box of questions about capital allocation and long-term tokenomics.
Why This Move Rattles Cages
Buybacks typically signal strength—a project using its treasury to support its own token, theoretically creating upward price pressure and rewarding holders. Pausing that engine? It makes traders and liquidity providers instantly nervous. It forces a brutal reassessment of where value truly accrues in the protocol's ecosystem.
The Treasury's New Mission
If buybacks stop, where does that capital go? The speculation mill is already churning: deeper liquidity incentives? Grants for new integrations? A war chest for acquisitions? The decision reframes the entire project's financial strategy overnight. It's a shift from artificial price support to—hopefully—organic, utility-driven growth.
Market Mechanics in the Crosshairs
This isn't just about sentiment. Removing a consistent buy-side demand source can alter the token's entire supply/demand equation. Volatility often spikes when a known market participant steps back. Long-term holders now have to ask: is the token's value backed by real usage, or was it propped up by the project's own checkbook?
The Cynical Take
Let's be real—sometimes a buyback halt is just smart treasury management, and sometimes it's the first clue the coffers aren't as deep as the marketing decks suggested. In crypto, the line between strategic pivot and quiet desperation is notoriously thin. After all, nothing says 'strong fundamentals' like reconsidering a core value-support mechanism.
The ball is in Jupiter's court. Their next move will either be hailed as visionary resource reallocation or dissected as a red flag. In this market, perception is everything.
Crypto exchange founders debate if buybacks are worth it
Ong doubled down on his proposal by quoting comments from Amir Haleem, the chief executive and co-founder of Helium and parent company Nova Labs. Haleem had said his team was stepping away from token buybacks because markets were largely indifferent to such programs under current conditions.
Helium and its Mobile network generated $3.4 million in revenue in October alone, Haleem said, adding that the funds WOULD be better deployed towards subscribers, increasing the network’s installed base, and improving carrier offload usage.
“We will be directing all our $ into those endeavors until morale improves, and data credits will continue to be burned for all carrier offload as always. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” the Nova Labs CEO surmised.
Ong praised the decision, thanking Haleem for what he described as “taking the first step” and suggesting that Jupiter could follow suit.
Some solana community members responded to the Jupiter co-founder by defending the buyback model, saying it would work long-term if paired with sustained revenue growth. One proponent argued that consistent protocol expansion would result in “more tokens being removed from circulation,” and this could boost JUP’s prices.
But back will be effective if it’s
A) long term
B) Jupiter keeps increasing its revenue for years to come
That way: the stronger the product, the more tokens getting swept off the floor
— Lochie (@lochie_sol) January 3, 2026
Responding to the above theory, one detractor accused the team of attempting to abandon commitments that had attracted investors to the token in the first place. The naysayer claimed canceling buybacks would undermine Jupiter’s success and JUP holders, warning that the token could lose relevance even if the platform continued to generate significant revenue.
“People bought JUP because buybacks aligned with the protocol’s success. Jupiter is doing well, token is doing well. Without buybacks, it becomes a memecoin with JUP logo that can cost 0 even if Jupiter rakes in billions, and that’s a pure rug,” the Solana enthusiast wrote on X.
Ong pushed back against the allegations and rejected the claims that executives were looking to rug the project. He said selling his own holdings would be the simplest way to gain any value, but JUP represented 99% of all of his net worth.
Jupiter’s head shuts down the staking idea
Among other ideas, community members proposed distributing protocol revenue directly to JUP stakers in the FORM of SOL or USDC rewards to help JUP’s valuation grow. Supporters of that approach believe organic price appreciation should follow revenue growth naturally, while staking rewards could motivate users to actively promote Jupiter adoption.
They propounded that such a system would add more incentives for token holders by allowing participants to benefit directly from increased trading activity.
Ong bashed that idea, convinced that stakers do not meaningfully contribute to platform growth. He said rewarding passive holders was unlikely to increase the token’s adoption and that staking incentives could weaken the project’s competitive drive against other Solana-based DEXes.
Jupiter is among the top 5 most used exchanges on Solana in the last month, according to data from DappRadar. Raydium currently leads the 30-day trading charts with $793.8 million in trading volume, serving about 3.67 million unique active wallets.
Meteora followed with approximately $9.38 million in monthly volume and 1.67 million active wallets, while Jupiter Exchange ranked close behind in wallet count, attracting around 1.48 million unique users over the same period and generating about $169.8 million in volume.
The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them.
