#Jupiter Spent 70 million USD on buybacks, yet the token price still dropped to 0.2. What does this indicate?

‍#Solana The largest DEX aggregator Jupiter,
spent 70 million USD on token buybacks last year.
And the result?
The price should have stabilized or risen, but instead, it kept falling all the way to 0.2.
Yesterday, Jupiter co-founder Siong Ong directly revealed on Twitter:
"We spent 70 million USD on buybacks last year, but the token price clearly didn't increase much.
Can we instead use that 70 million USD to grow our user base?"
One sentence, exposing the collective superstition in the crypto community about "buybacks."
Buybacks are heavily mythologized in crypto circles.
Many people automatically get excited when they hear "buyback":
They think it’s to stabilize the price,
It shows project team’s sincerity,
It’s the price floor.
But the reality is—
Buybacks are never a cure-all.
Project teams buy:
Retail investors sell,
Whales exit,
Institutions watch.
That small amount of buyback money
cannot withstand systemic selling pressure.
Is Jupiter’s fundamentals really weak?
Not at all, in fact, they are very strong:
Solana DEX market share: 95%
Trading volume in the past 30 days: 49.1 billion USD
Total protocol revenue: 369 million USD
According to traditional logic:
With these numbers, the price shouldn’t be so miserable.
But the market never only looks at fundamentals.
Why can’t 70 million USD in buybacks save the price?
I believe there are three core reasons:
1️⃣ The overall market is in a downtrend
The crypto market in 2025 is generally weak,
When the trend is downward, buybacks are just a decelerator, not a steering wheel.
2️⃣ The buyback scale isn’t actually large
70 million USD sounds like a lot,
but it only accounts for about 20% of Jupiter’s total revenue,
Compared to circulating market cap and potential sell pressure, it’s a drop in the bucket.
3️⃣ Buyback failure → Confidence backlash
When retail investors see:
"Even buybacks can’t lift the price,"
confidence rapidly collapses,
leading to faster selling.
A harsh but important conclusion:
Buybacks are not a scam, but they are definitely not a lifesaver.
They are just a capital allocation tool for project teams,
Only effective when all three conditions are met simultaneously:
Market trend is not weak,
The project is still expanding,
Timing is right.
Otherwise, buybacks ≈ money burning.
Jupiter at least did one thing right:
Siong Ong chose to openly admit that buybacks are useless,
And seriously discuss:
Should the money be used for user growth and product expansion?
This is actually quite rare in crypto circles.
Compared to:
Pretending buybacks solve everything,
Rushing to dump and run,
Such projects deserve at least some serious consideration.
Final words:
There are no saints in crypto,
Project teams are not philanthropists.
But we shouldn’t blindly believe in any "single positive narrative."
Staying sober-minded
is much more important than blindly trusting buybacks.
The only projects worth holding onto are those with:
Products, cash flow, and self-correcting capabilities.