Deep Dive
1. Buyback Sustainability & Token Unlocks (Mixed Impact)
Overview: Meteora has executed an aggressive buyback program, spending $10.6 million in Q4 2025 to acquire 2.3% of the MET supply. This is funded by protocol revenue and aims to return value to holders. However, the protocol faces ongoing dilution from scheduled unlocks of 22 million MET per quarter. Furthermore, Q1 2026 was marred by a $1.5 million OTC scam loss during buyback operations.
What this means: The bullish case relies on sustained, revenue-funded buybacks outpacing sell pressure from unlocks, which could flatten or reduce circulating supply. The bearish risk is that softening revenue (Q1 2026 fees down 51%) may force buybacks to slow, allowing dilution to weigh on the price. The scam loss also highlights operational risks.
2. Solana DeFi & Memecoin Dependency (Bullish/Bearish Impact)
Overview: Meteora is foundational Solana DeFi infrastructure, processing 26% of the chain's DEX volume. Its Dynamic Liquidity Market Maker (DLMM) is the preferred platform for launching and trading memecoins like TRUMP and MELANIA. Growth is directly linked to Solana's memecoin activity.
What this means: High Solana network activity and memecoin fervor drive trading volume and fee revenue, which supports MET's buyback program and utility demand. Conversely, a downturn in Solana's speculative activity or a shift in narrative away from memecoins could significantly reduce MET's core revenue streams and perceived value.
3. Whale Concentration & Regulatory Scrutiny (Bearish Impact)
Overview: On-chain data indicates extreme concentration, with 72-73% of MET supply held by just 10 wallets. This creates a persistent risk of large-scale selling. Additionally, the protocol has been linked to insider-trading investigations and past memecoin scams, with founder Benjamin Chow named in a U.S. class-action lawsuit.
What this means: High concentration makes the price vulnerable to coordinated selling by a few entities, potentially leading to sharp declines. Ongoing regulatory scrutiny or negative legal developments could damage investor confidence and trigger outsized selling pressure, overshadowing fundamental improvements.
Conclusion
MET's path is a clash between strong fundamental mechanics—revenue share and utility building—and substantial structural risks from dilution, concentration, and legacy controversies. For a holder, this means watching quarterly revenue reports versus unlock schedules and any developments in regulatory probes.
Will protocol revenue rebound strongly enough to let buybacks win the supply battle?