Nobody is asked to burn anything
An earlier draft of this project asked holders to burn tokens to direct research. That was a bad mechanism and it was removed. Traders do not burn tokens, and a design that depends on them doing so is a design that does not run.
What replaces it is simpler and requires nothing from anyone: on pump.fun, the creator of a coin receives a share of the fee on every trade. That stream funds the work.
Where the money actually comes from
pump.fun's fee structure, as published
Sourced figures. These are the platform's terms, not ours, and the platform can change them.
| Item | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Total fee, bonding-curve trade | 1.25% | Split between the platform and the coin creator. |
| Creator share of that | 0.3% | The default creator fee on the bonding curve. |
| Platform share | 0.95% | Retained by pump.fun. |
| Creator fee range, tiered | 0.05% – 0.95% | Scales by market cap. The top of the range sits in the $88K–$300K band and falls to the floor around $20M. |
| Post-graduation (PumpSwap) | 0.30% – 1.25% | Total pool fee, tiered by market cap. |
| Cost to create the token | 0 SOL | Beyond the ordinary Solana network fee. |
| Graduation fee | 0.015 SOL | Fixed, taken from liquidity when the curve completes. |
Sources: pump.fun bonding curve documentation and public reporting on the January 2026 fee revision. Published accounts of the exact tier curve differ in places; where they conflict, the platform’s own documentation governs. pump.fun is not affiliated with this project.
Where received fees go
Since January 2026 pump.fun allows creator revenue to be split across multiple wallets. This is the stated policy split. Wallet addresses will be published here once they exist, so the routing is checkable on-chain by anyone.
50% Research treasury — Pays for model inference on the public measurement runs.
25% Liquidity — Deepens the pool so the market stays tradeable.
15% Distribution — Funds the earned coverage work in the Mention Engine.
10% Operations — Hosting, tooling, audits of the published record.
Why liquidity is in the split
The irreversible choice
What the reward engine does not do
The fee stream is real, and it is proportional to trading volume. That has an obvious and uncomfortable implication worth stating rather than hiding: if nobody trades, there is no funding, and the research does not happen.
It also means funding is highest exactly when speculative activity is highest, which is not the same thing as when the research is most valuable. That is a genuine structural flaw in this design and there is no clever fix for it.
What can be done is to make the routing verifiable. Wallet addresses published, splits on-chain, spending reported against the published record. That does not remove the flaw, but it means nobody has to take our word for where the money went.
Not a yield mechanism
Creator fees accrue to the project, to pay for inference and operations. They do not accrue to holders. Holding $ACME does not entitle anyone to any share of these fees, or to any distribution, dividend, or revenue of any kind.
There is no staking, no yield, no rewards programme, and no passive income. Anyone telling you otherwise about $ACME is not us. Risk disclosure →