Overview
- DefiLlama data captured on August 23–24 show Pump.fun’s full Solana stack reporting higher 24‑hour gross fees while Hyperliquid reported larger daily net revenue that is routed into buybacks and burns.
- Pump.fun’s ecosystem pulled landmark weekly and 30‑day totals in early August, including a week above $10 million in protocol fees and a 30‑day window where Pump.fun led Hyperliquid by several million dollars.
- Hyperliquid’s Assistance Fund automatically converts qualifying trading fees into HYPE and burns them, producing steadier holders‑revenue flows in the Coindoo snapshot and a larger share of protocol revenue directed to buybacks.
- Key differences change the headline numbers: Pump’s gross fees include funds passed to liquidity providers and token creators, Pump.fun measures its full platform, and Hyperliquid’s metrics exclude builder fees that bypass burns.
- The rivalry has practical implications for holders and markets because Hyperliquid has far deeper liquidity and higher TVL (about $6 billion) while Pump.fun’s retail-driven model funnels roughly half of protocol revenue back to PUMP buybacks and burns.