Over 50% of Pump.fun Traders Lost Money This Month, While 2 Wallets Made Over $1M

Two wallets made over $1 million on Pump.fun this month. What happened to everyone else is a different story.

New data from Dune Analytics tracking this month’s trader profit and loss on Pump.fun tokens has circulated widely on X, and the numbers are drawing attention for the stark picture they paint of memecoin trading outcomes.

What the Data Shows

Of the wallets tracked this month, over 50% ended in losses. The largest single group – 671,376 wallets – lost less than $500. Another 9,160 wallets lost between $1,000 and $10,000.

On the profitable side, 626,417 wallets made between $0 and $500. That is technically a win, but a small one. When you combine wallets that lost money with wallets that made under $500 in profit, the figure reaches approximately 96% of all participants – meaning only 4% made more than $500 this month. Only 2 wallets crossed $1 million in realized profit.

The Platform’s Position

While trader outcomes have been mixed, Pump.fun itself has accumulated over $500 million since 2024 – a figure that reflects the platform’s fee structure rather than trading performance. Like any exchange, Pump.fun earns on volume regardless of whether individual traders profit or lose.

That structural difference between platform economics and trader economics is what makes the Dune data worth understanding clearly.

Analyst commentary on X has suggested that the 4% of profitable wallets may skew toward insiders and early deployers who hold informational advantages over retail participants. That argument remains contested and is not confirmed by the on-chain data alone.

Why the Losses Run So Deep

Part of the answer lies in token quality. Research from Solidus Labs found that approximately 98.6% of tokens on Pump.fun have collapsed to below $1,000 in liquidity, effectively becoming worthless after launch. Of the over 7 million tokens deployed on the platform with at least five trades, only around 97,000 maintain enough liquidity to be meaningfully traded.

With hundreds of thousands of new tokens created each month, the odds facing any individual trader are structurally challenging regardless of skill or timing.

Pump.fun has acknowledged the imbalance.

In January 2026, founder Alon Cohen returned after two months of silence to announce Creator Fee Sharing – a system allowing creators to distribute fees more transparently and customize fee structures post-launch.

In March, the platform expanded beyond memecoins entirely, adding support for WBTC, USDC and other assets, alongside a Trader Cashback model that redirects a portion of trading fees toward active traders rather than solely to deployers. The changes signal the platform is aware of the incentive misalignment its own data reflects.

• Also Read :
•   SpaceX IPO Buzz Explodes After Elon Musk’s Confirmation
•   ,

How to Read This Data

Before drawing firm conclusions, it is worth noting what the data does not capture.

Realized PnL only reflects positions that have been closed. Traders still holding tokens with unrealized gains will not appear as profitable in this dataset. Additionally, a significant portion of wallets on Pump.fun are estimated to be bots or wallets created for a single transaction, which can distort the overall picture.

What It Means for Traders

Memecoin trading on launchpad platforms has always carried high risk. What makes this month’s data notable is the scale – hundreds of thousands of wallets active, most walking away with losses or negligible gains, while a handful of participants captured the overwhelming majority of returns.

Whether that reflects the nature of speculative markets broadly, or something specific to how memecoin launchpads are structured, is a question the data raises without fully answering.

FAQs

Trust with CoinPedia:

CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.

Investment Disclaimer:

All opinions and insights shared represent the author’s own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.

Sponsored and Advertisements:

Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.