Not to be blunt, but most people counting on significant Jup airdrop are likely to end up in the $1k–$10k range or less. For many, the reality of their actual payouts compared to the high expectations will be very disheartening. It’s crucial for the team to manage these expectations to prevent potential fallout within the community. This isn’t to criticise the effort; it’s simply a reminder that, as in life, you often get out what you put in, those with more tend to keep more, and vice versa. Effective communication around this can help keep the ecosystem resilient. Personally, my faith in the team’s commitment for and capability reassures me that they will work towards a solution that satisfies most - PPP, given all the data they have.
4 Likes
Yes, I agree with that! I think most people underestimate the exponential growth of Jupiter since November 2023, and I hope this data analysis helps with making Jupiter users understand that this airdrop is going to be significantly different (lower) for each user.
I do believe this level of broad distribution as per my latest proposal would greatly help the distribution and decentralisation of JUP. Reading through most replies to this post, it is evident I’ve made a strong case for some degree of inclusion of Adjusted Volume-Based allocations (after deduplication to exclude farmers) in the airdrop distribution for Jupuary round 2, alongside the new Non-Trading Based Community Allocations.
2 Likes
Thank you for your feedback @WTP! The inclusion in the first bucket for DAO Voters / Stakers would be according to the amount staked at ~ 0,159 JUP per 1 JUP staked.
The second bucket in it’s most basic form would be a general bucket of everyone who used any new feature with a set airdrop amount, for example 70 JUP per user. So when the database registered a certain wallet doing DCA, or perps, or staking/voting etc if the address would end up in that bucket.
Volume and extent of the activity such as amount staked, amount traded, perpetual volume etc is not necessarily considered here, but it could be considered. This mainly would depend on the ability of the team to map this data without too much effort, and depend on his complex or easy to understand they would want to make the Jupuary airdrop round 2.
I have intentionally not specified it to much and left it a bit open. It will depend on the ability of the team; how specific they are able to go with the data, and the twist they like to give it.
The most simple approach would be a set amount for every New Feauture User (Any user who traded JUP, JLP, JupSOL and/or who used new Jupiter features like DCA, Perps, DAO Staking/Voting.) but in theory it could be as advanced as the team can / wants to make it.
I agree that DVA and LO’s can be included in the second bucket. Thanks for your feedback!
2 Likes
Thank you very much! Understood. 
I think this is a very well thought out and researched proposal. I appreciate you taking the time to compose it - thanks again!
4 Likes
This is also quite logical and interesting, what do you think? 
1 Like
People who create volume solely in the hopes of receiving something during jupuary, these are the people I call farmers and these are the people we don’t want to get rewarded. Or people who spam social media with no value content in the hopes of getting something, are also farmers and should not be rewarded. If these people get rewarded on the (potentially) upcoming jupuary, the farming will be even more significant going forward.
Jupiter now has a grants program so anyone who thinks can bring some value to the project can potentially get rewarded through it.
4 Likes
@WTP I just published the latest version of my proposal after fine-tuning it to include your feedback and some more adjustments based on other feedback.
2 Likes
I do not agree with the quoted proposal. IMO it would be a big mistake to exclude trading volume as a metric for distribution all together. As I replied to @num17 before:
I have since made several adjustments to implement feedback from users like @num17, yourself @WalterZan and many others, resulting in the below updated proposal.
.
Airdrop Distribution Proposal
Below you find our JUP Airdrop Distribution Proposal for Jupuary round 2. The proposal has been expanded multiple times to include feedback from community members in the comments. Scroll down for all the data, analysis and discussions.
New Jupiter Features & Community Allocations 250M JUP:
-
DAO / JUP Stakers: 70M JUP / 439,582,771 Staked JUP = 159 JUP per 1,000 Staked JUP
- 0.159 JUP per 1 staked JUP / 15.9% bonus on top of staked JUP. If possible using the average of different snapshots of round 2.
-
Community contributors: 70M JUP = distributed at the team’s discretion
- eg. Discord, Workgroups, Forums, Promotors etc. based on level of contribution; with community submissions as in last round.
-
New Feature Users: 70M JUP: / est. 1,000,000 users = ~ 70 JUP per user
- Any user who traded JUP, JLP, JupSOL and/or who used new Jupiter features like DCA, DVA, Ape, Perps. The exact amount of ‘New Feature Users’ is unknown, we estimate it to be at least 1 Million users. The specific distribution would be up to the team, based on available data on New Feature Users.
-
Perpetual Traders: 20M JUP = 176 JUP per $1M perp volume
- Total volume of the user / 113.3B total perp volume (source) x 20M JUP.
-
JLP Holders: 20M JUP / 235M JLP x 1000 = 85 JUP per 1000 JLP
- If possible using the average of different snap shots of round 2.
.
Adjusted Volume-Based allocations 450M JUP: with deduplication:
- $10M+ tier¹: 40M JUP / 4,422 users = 9,045 JUP per user
- $1M - $10M tier: 70M JUP / 31,920 users = 2,193 JUP per user
- $100K - $1M tier: 100M JUP / 182,332 users = 548 JUP per user
- $10K - $100K tier: 100M JUP / 664,448 users = 150 JUP per user
- $1K - $10K tier: 100M JUP / 1,419,121 users = 70 JUP per user
- All $100+ users²: 40M JUP / 3,885,443 users = 10 JUP per user
- $0 - $100 wallets²: No Allocation / 11,361,557 users = 0 JUP per wallet
Total: 70M + 70M +70M +20M +20M (= 250M Community & New Features) + 40M +70M + 100M + 100 + 100 + 40M (= 450M Trading Volume Based) = 700M JUP.
¹ A new $10M+ tier is added to reflect the 9.5X volume growth of Jupiter in 1 year. The new tier properly rewards the top power users like traders, whales and KOL’s.
² $100 minimum volume requirement used to reduce the general user base from ~ 15.25 Million wallets to ~ 3.9 Million users. This effectively weeds out around ~ 11.36 Million low quality spam users / bots and airdrop farmers. No allocation for wallets with < $100 volume. Further deduplication may also need to be performed.
2 Likes
So you are telling me with a straight face there are 36000 “users” that did 1m$+ vol on Jupiter + there is 100-200% increase in the active users per 24h to average 350k and they (swap based category as a whole) deserve to receive roughly 70% from the whole airdrop while community members, stakers/voters and niche products users (which as a category by the way are 100 times less than swappers) deserve to split between them the remaining 30% or with other words 10% for each other category? This is flawed grading system and there is no way you can prove me something else. I could agree for swappers to receive portion of the pie but it should be no more than 20% from whole airdrop.
3 Likes
Thank you @WTP, I have fine-tuned my proposal even more to include your feedback and some more adjustments based on other feedback.
I do believe perp should have it’s own allocation considering the significant revenue it generates for Jupiter and the significant costs for its users. I added a specific allocation for perpetual volume, using a simple volume based formula:
3 Likes
The latest proposal entails:
-
35% (250M) to New Jupiter Features & Community Allocations 250M JUP
-
65% (450M) to Adjusted Volume-Based allocations 450M JUP (with deduplication)
Now included are in the distribution proposal are DAO / JUP Stakers, Community contributors, New Feature Users, Perpetual Traders, JLP holders, $10M+ tier, $1M - $10M tier, $100K - $1M tier, $10K - $100K tier, $1K - $10K tier and $100+ users.
Adjusted Volume-Based allocations represent the largest group of 3,885,443 $100+ volume Jupiter users who contribute a combined ~ $333 Billion USD trading volume.
Trading volume and user count / onboarding is and will always be the most important metric for any cryptocurrency exchange; centralised or decentralised.
The volume tiers help identify which users are more valuable and contribute more to the trading volume. It would be irrational to remove an adjusted volume-based allocation all together.
Distributing more than 35% among the much smaller New Jupiter Features & Community Allocations would put thousands of JUP up to Millions of JUP into the hands of certain individuals, disrupting proper token distribution and decentralisation and generating a greater sell-off risk by a small group of people.
3 Likes
I think your amendments are very good and would vote for this distribution model. Good work and appreciate the compromises
I think further considerations could be made for the swap users such as 3 months active time and 3+ txs etc to further cut down numbers and allocate more to worth while users
6 Likes
detailed and well explained proposal also ty for quoting my proposal
4 Likes
Appreciate the response and changes. I still think that swap volume should not be at the center of the 2nd distribution.
Yes it is important to the dex, but its already been cemented as the cornerstone agg on Solana and does not need to incentivise swapping further, to grow the ecosystem and expose new users to ALL that JUP has to offer more allocation needs to be committed to the areas that need further growth as stated in my original post.
The three pillars
- community
- Niche products
- Governance
are far more important to further growth than generic swaps, I am interested to see how the team allocate the new Jupuary
4 Likes
great stats, data and analysis man! but i kinda need to come with a single observation related to the volume tiers…this is very important and need to be more specific from where that total volume comes? cause if lets say 70-80% of that total volume is from basic swaps…that that’s kinda the basic of farming :))…
basic swaps does not take fees. i mean…better reward those who make volumes from perps than swap. this should be clarified from my pov.
4 Likes
Thanks for your comment!
There actually is a fee, but it’s not incurred by Jupiter.
The fact that Jupiter doesn’t charge an additional fee on swap trading volume is correct, but it doesn’t man that there are no fees on swap trading volume at all.
I’ve tested and calculated this and $1,000,000 of swaps on Jupiter would still cost about $250 - $750 in third party fees and slippage for the most stable and largest assets. For other semi-established tokens it can be as high as $2,000 - $5,000+ and for small caps it can go into the $10,000’s of incurred costs.
That would hardly make it profitable for a farmer, especially considering the uncertainty around the actual allocations and distribution.
Furthermore this will remain a very important one to implement:
And regarding to your last point:
I’ve added a specific 20,000,000 JUP allocation for Perps volume in the latest version of my proposal:
- Perpetual Traders: 20M JUP = 176 JUP per $1M perp volume
- Total volume of the user / 113.3B total perp volume (source ) x 20M JUP.
4 Likes
Thank you By the way I don’t remember if I told you that already, I’m grateful for you having the ability to see all sides of the die, That is what we really need as its important for one to see the benefit to all parties even when it may not include oneself.
3 Likes
You have somewhat of a point. I’m not sure if you got to read the part where I put $16 Million and years through Jup expecting Nothing in return, I did it because JUP was and still believe the best option out there for swapping.
I just feel typically a "farmer is someone who tries to “game” the airdrop or system through any means. I guess people who create volume in the hopes of getting something in a way would also be farming - But the Protocol gets its value through Volume users. To clarify a bit I never gamed any system for airdrops and usually the ones we had no “idea about” tended to be the best.
Either way If your loyal to JUP I have confidence it will return the favor if possible, If not - At very least I got the fastest cheapest most advanced swaps as a feature, its a win anyway I look at it.
Unfortunately there are hundreds of thousands of people who swap $10 - Buy $10 of Jup products and Use each feature once and will come on these Blogs saying they feel people who Farm on social media deserve more than So and So on. The root of the issue is exactly that pitting PvP, Instead the better option would be to give examples or Ideas as to why you think Such and such could use more benefits. I’m not saying your PvP but PPP is what’s going to make us all winners in the end and goes much further to benefit the whole.
Sorry for the long Post.
Hope all works out and Best wishes
J4J
PPP
2 Likes
Bringing an inflation of +50% and rewarding the stakers/DAO with a 70M reward (the same as in an ASR) with all due respect seems like a terrible plan to me.
If there’s so much concern about DAO whales, it’s as simple as doing a tier-based distribution among the stakers.
Before trying to please new people, I would prioritize maintaining respect for those of us who have trusted and contributed to the project through the DAO.
And honestly, by only allocating 10% of Jupuary to the stakers, you would be sending a very clear message in my opinion
Don’t stake Jupiter and just farm for the next airdrop
3 Likes
There is no 50% inflation if it’s already known in advance and priced into JUP. Also inflation isn’t a bad thing as long as it’s matched with economic growth, which clearly is the case with 9.5X volume increase to $333 Billion USD for Jupiter.
With all due respect I believe JUP stakers have a conflict of interest and all seem to be wanting a very high percentage of the airdrop allocation for some reason, although there already is 215 Million extra unclaimed JUP allocated from round 1.
I’ve written an analysis going deeper into this issue of the DAO conflict of interest.
2 Likes