Jupiter’s JUP token is at a crossroads as the Solana-based DeFi “super-app” weighs ending an aggressive buyback program that has cost the project roughly $70 million. What’s happening - On Jan. 2, Jupiter co-founder and CTO Siong Ong said in a social post that the buyback hasn’t meaningfully moved the token price and called the program a “waste” of resources. He suggested those funds could be better used as growth incentives for existing and new users. - Jupiter launched the JUP buyback in mid-February 2025 and reportedly spent about $70 million on purchases. The token initially rallied ~300% in the first month after the buyback began but later sank to new 2025 lows. At press time JUP traded around $0.20, down from a peak near $1.80 — an 88% slide (source: JUP/USDT, TradingView). Community reaction and proposals - The community is split. Some users argue the buyback should be dropped in favor of sharing revenue directly with stakers to boost staking yield and reduce selling pressure. One community math suggested that, given ~753 million JUP staked, revenue sharing could translate to attractive per-token payouts and large dividend-like yields. - Analyst Fabiano echoed the staking-rewards pivot as a short-term fix, noting JUP currently lacks a direct claim on protocol cashflow (it’s not equity), so holders have little on-chain reason to retain tokens. He proposed redirecting roughly $10M of buyback funds into staking rewards, which he estimates could deliver ~25% APY at current prices and materially reduce quarterly dumping by stakers (source: X). Context and comparisons - Not all buybacks succeed. Critics pointed to projects such as Pump.fun (PUMP) whose buybacks didn’t produce durable price gains, while others — notably Hyperliquid (HYPE) and Aave (AAVE) — have seen more positive outcomes when market sentiment was favorable. - Jupiter has expanded well beyond a DEX aggregator into lending, prediction markets and perpetual trading, and has scaled cumulative revenue to about $369 million (source: DeFiLlama). That growth likely factors into the team’s debate over whether buybacks are the best use of capital for long-term product expansion. What’s next - The team solicited feedback and had not settled on a path at the time of reporting. Options on the table include continuing buybacks, reallocating funds to staking rewards, funding user-growth incentives, or other uses intended to better align token economics with protocol success. Bottom line Jupiter’s buyback experiment highlights a broader industry question: do buybacks reliably support token value, or are targeted incentives and clearer revenue-sharing mechanisms a better way to build sustainable token demand? Jupiter’s decision will be watched closely as a bellwether for how DeFi projects allocate capital to align product growth with tokenholder interests. Disclaimer: This article is informational and not investment advice. Cryptocurrency trading is high risk; do your own research before making any decisions. © 2026 AMBCrypto (sources: Jupiter social post, TradingView, DeFiLlama, X). Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news