How to get products across the Cow Bear: The Strategic Evolution of Meteora

In July of last year, we dismantled Meteora’s operational strategy in detail, and a highly consensual community concept did help our own project. (Refer to:How does Meteora build a strong LP Army

Meteora is still able to maintain a more stable level of mobility and revenue compared to other side-track products。

Looking back at Meteora ' s product iterative approach, it might make us feel more intuitive about what quality a product needs if it can cross a bear。

I. The capital efficiency revolution: the structural problems Meteora is trying to solve

At the heart of Meteora lies the optimization of liquidity and capital efficiency. The traditional AMM has problems of decentralized mobility, high slide points and limited returns, which Meteora addresses through the DLMM (dynamic market) and dynamic AMM mechanisms。

For example, DLMM divides liquidity by price into multiple "bins" and allows real-time adjustment of processing rates: When market volatility increases, transaction costs increase, thereby offsetting LP losses in volatile markets. The design of this dynamic cost and precision liquidity concentration has resulted in virtually no slide points for transactions within the same zone, significantly increasing transaction efficiency and LP returns。

The Dynamic AMM product in Meteora also automatically invests part of its assets in the backstage of the lending agreement, generating additional gains and avoiding sustainability problems arising from mining incentives alone. In sum, Meteora has significantly improved its capital efficiency and LP profitability through technological upgrading and incentives (e.g., process fee sharing, MT credits, etc.)。

II. DLMM: How dynamic mobility models reshape the market logic on Solana

DLMM is the core innovation product of Meteora and can be considered as “ sub-centralized ” mobile pool. DLMM assigns the liquidity of a transaction to multiple price ranges and allows LPs to choose different fluctuations according to their own strategy。

WHEN DEALING WITHIN EACH ZONE, THE TRANSACTION SLIDE POINT IS ALMOST ZERO BECAUSE OF THE PRECISE CONCENTRATION OF LIQUIDITY, AND THE LP CAN MAINTAIN A HIGHER CAPITAL UTILIZATION RATE UNDER HIGH TURNOVER. IN ADDITION, DLMM ADJUSTS PROCEDURES RATES TO MARKET FLUCTUATIONS: INCREASES TRANSACTION COSTS WHEN VOLATILITY IS HIGH, THEREBY OFFSETTING THE ERRATIC LOSSES THAT THE LP FACES AND REDUCING COSTS IN A SMOOTH PERIOD. LP EARNS NOT ONLY TRANSACTION COSTS ON THE BASIS OF LIQUIDITY BUT ALSO OVERHEADS AND MOBILITY INCENTIVES IN DLMM。

DLMM also derived the Launch Pool model, which was designed for new tokens, enabling the initial issuance of tokens to quickly gather mobility and be tradable in routes such as Jupiter. In short, DLMM has created more returns for the LP through capital efficiency, flexible volatility strategies and dynamic cost mechanisms。

DLMM will organize its liquidity at price (Bins) by maintaining sufficient funds in each sector to achieve intra-boundary & ldquo; 0 slide & rdquo; transactions。

Core algorithms include a base rate and a maximum rate mechanism, automatic price increases when market volatility increases, and smooth price reductions that attract more transactions. Slide point control is achieved through discrete interfilling: transactions within each price zone only occur at the inter-zone price, avoiding the impact of deep dispersion。

Meteora also designs a variety of strategies for different market conditions, such as “ curve policy ” concentration of liquidity near current prices, “ inter-trade strategy ” and hedge extreme volatility。

FOR EXAMPLE, FOR STABLE TRANSACTIONS LIKE USDC/USDT, MOST OF THE TRANSACTIONS ARE CONCENTRATED IN NARROW COMPARTMENTS, AND THE LARGE AMOUNTS OF TRADITIONAL AMM FUNDS ARE LEFT IDLE. UNDER THE DESIGN OF DLMM, LPS CAN INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF LIQUIDITY IN THIS NARROW ZONE, THUS GENERATING ADDITIONAL HANDLING FEES, THEREBY ACHIEVING SIGNIFICANT CAPITAL EFFICIENCY GAINS。

More importantly, DLMM is not just a price spread; it automatically adjusts costs based on actual transactional activity and volatility, such as & ldquo; & rdquo; the mechanism is not achievable in the traditional fixed rate AMM. Because of the linkage between rates and volatility rates, LPs receive higher cost compensation during periods of high volatility, which fundamentally mitigates the risk of irregular loss and enhances profitability. At the data level, DLMM pool participation on Meteora has continued to grow with DLMM being used by aggregate routers such as Jupiter。

By the beginning of 2026, the total value of the DLMM locks was around $300 million and had brought in billions of dollars in transactions over nearly 30 days, which occupied an important place in the Solana DEX ecological landscape。

III. Two key leaps from DAMM v1 to v2: Meteora AMM

The Dynamic AMM (DAMM) series of products in Meteora are similar to the traditional constant build-up pool, but they have become more flexible。

DAMM v1 is the first AMM, launched by Meteora, where you can obtain transaction fees and earn additional loan earnings. In DAM v1, the assets deposited by the user are automatically placed in the backstage dynamic treasury (Dynamic Vaults) and configured in the loan agreement, with additional interest and incentives。

This mechanism reduces reliance on a single mining incentive, allowing LP to charge transaction fees, interest on borrowing and incentives for mining at the same time. LP may also choose to lock liquidity permanently in order to increase community confidence; targeted assets continue to generate sustainable returns, especially for dynamic cost configurations of the memecoin pool。

DAMM v2 is a new generation of AMM, compatible with Solana Token 2022 coins and providing a richer function. The features include an optional fixed or dynamic rate mechanism, a higher dynamic fee ceiling on the chain, a built-in anti-sniper mechanism, and a capability for partial centralization of liquidity (Position NFT)。

DAM v2 also supports the creation of single-currency mobile pools (unilateral pools like DLMM) and the placement of mining mechanisms in contracts to improve efficiency。

DAM v2 has lower creation costs than DLMM (creating a single pool and about 0.022 SOL, while DLMM requires about 0.25 SOL) and offers flexible fee collection and lock-in options. These designs allow projecters to sell tokens more easily and bring more autonomy and revenue tools to the LP。

IV. Evolving agreements: strategic intent behind functional overlaps

Since 2024, Meteora has continued to repeat new features to enhance user experience and protocol activity。

For example, the one-key Rebalance and one-key Ape In functions allow LPs to adjust or input quickly when markets fluctuate or new currency are sold; the PnL analysis dashboard allows real-time tracking of returns; the Pool Discovery (discovery) page helps users quickly screen the high-yield liquidity pool; multiple consolidation allows users to merge multiple slots in the same pool to reduce management costs; automatic re-investment allows the rewards to be reinvested in liquidity; and the LP creditboard will quantify liquidity provision and contribution behaviour as a build-up to stimulate long-term participation。

After each functional release, community feedback has been positive and the number of users and TVL have increased significantly. According to official data, the build-up incentive system that was launched in early 2024 directly contributed to the surge of TVL from ~ $40 million to ~ $160 million. After the functionality went online, community discussions were intense and the use of the new functionality was steadily rising, further consolidating Meteora's leading position in the Solana agreement。

v. LP Army: Meteora How to Turn Mobility Providers into & ldquo; Combat Units & rdquo;

The Meteora community operates with an education-driven focus through &ldquao; LP Army&rdquao; and system development for loyalty LP。

At its core is the regular LP Army Bootcamp: a two-day free training camp, an introductory LP foundation and practical exercises. Participants are required to obtain NFT graduation certificates and &ldquo on the first day for specified non-stable currency transactions; $100 liquid and hold ≥ one hour after pass of earnings and performance tests, NFT graduation certificates and “ LP Army Private” identity。

Upon completion of the training and subsequent rectification, the LP not only obtains protocol air drop credits and community identity, but also unlocks entry classes, exclusive Discord channels and a range of strategic analysis tools (e.g. profit trackers and Dune dashboards)。

Community-based tools are rich: Metlex provides a professional dashboard for DLMM LP to analyse warehouse performance in real time; Ultra LP as “ partner ” aggregates all benefits and PnL; DLMM Profiler for LP optimization strategy provided by GeekLad; MetEngine achieves a key builder and reproduction top-level strategy through channels such as Telegram。

In addition, the community introduced a one-on-one mentoring system, led by experienced LPs, covering mobility strategies, volatile loss management, etc. In terms of governance, user behaviour is closely tied to motivation: Meteora has set up the MET credit system, and the LP can earn points by providing mobility and inviting friends, and points can be convertible for future MET currency drops or community privileges. For example, when the system went online, the TVL jumped from $40 million to $160 million, showing a significant incentive effect。

Ultimately, this &ldquao; credit + token + honor & rdquao; multi-level incentives ensure that rewards are distributed to long-term contributors rather than short-term &ldquao; shearing & rdquao; behaviour. The forthcoming MET token release will be further linked to the crediting system to provide more governance and economic incentives to early community members。

VI. The survival model in the bear market cycle: the analysis of Meteora ' s anti-pressure mechanism

Since 2023, the encryption market as a whole has entered the deep bear market cycle, and the DeFi agreement is generally subject to structural pressures such as the contraction of TVL, declining trade activity and loss of users。

However, Meteora ' s chain performance presents a relatively robust recovery curve, such as “ &dquo; not an occasional market dividend, but rather a result of its multiple strategic synergies at the design, product architecture, risk control and community organization levels。

At the level of incentive mechanisms, Meteora not only attracts long-term participation by users through the traditional split between lock-in incentives and fees, but also creatively introduces the Starke2Earn model, which was designed to transform memecoin ecology, which could have led to rapid sales, into a system of returns based on & ldquo; pledge competition & rdquo。

In the traditional currency economy, memecoin projects tend to exert strong pressure at the beginning of the line, as currency holders tend to sell quickly after short-term arbitrage, especially in the late days of cattle or bear markets. The construction logic of Stake2Earn, on the other hand, is completely opposite, allowing currency holders to pledge their MEME tokens into a given Stake2Earn contract, and to participate in the split of transaction fees, the core value of which is not short-term speculation, but rather to encourage currency holders to lock their tokens in the agreement for long periods of time in order to earn transaction fees from the liquidity pool。

Stake2Earn ' s participation does not depend on the possession of LP, but requires only that the user pledge the original memecoin, a design that is important in two ways: first, that the user does not have to bear the risk of LP-specific loss, because the pledge is a single currency rather than a LP-denominated currency; and second, that the pledgeer has the opportunity to be directly involved in the proceeds of fees within the agreement, which will directly link personal interests to the growth of the agreement and will provide institutional incentives for the user to become a long-term supporter rather than a short-term hedge。

Specifically, the Stake2Earn mechanism assigns a ranking to users based on the number of pledges, and only the top pledge holders (e.g. Top 5 to Top 100, which can be configured) can benefit from the fee share. The higher the ranking, the larger the pledge, the greater the cost-sharing achieved by users from the liquidity pool transactions. The system updates the rankings in real time and distributes income according to the current ranking dynamic, such as &ldquao; real-time gain growth &rdquao; design motivates users not only to increase the amount of collateral, but also to keep participants competing to retain their eligibility for proceeds。

Stake2Earn ' s incentive structure is also unique, and it uses a dual incentive approach: the user can receive a fee gain in the form of priced tokens (such as SOL, USDC, etc.) after meeting the ranking conditions, while the memecoin pledgeer receives additional memecoin awards, which automatically add back to the user ' s total pledge, allowing the incentive to be repeated. This relapse mechanism not only raised long-term gains, but also eased market pressure on memecoin to be sold, thus enhancing overall market stability during the bear market phase。

Moreover, in order to prevent malicious and rapid divestiture, Stark2Earn has set a cooling-off period mechanism for the remand, and when the pledge makes a request for release, its memecoin enters a pre-set waiting period (for example, a minimum of six hours) during which the tokens will not be involved in the calculation of the proceeds, and if the pledgeer changes his mind and withdraws the request, they will be immediately re-incorporated. This design, while providing incentives for fairness, ensures liquidity stability and avoids short-term games affecting the distribution of benefits of the system。

If the incentive system locks in user behaviour, the continuous evolution of the product architecture ensures efficiency and security of funds. Between 2023 and 2024, the team issued key modules, such as Dynamic Vaults and Dynamic AMM, to further strengthen the capital attractiveness of the agreement in the bear market environment. The Dynamic Treasury system uses a minute-scale automatic rebalancing mechanism, which allows real-time allocation of funds between multiple loan agreements to find the best yield path. When a lending platform is over-utilized or risk indicators are abnormal, the system automatically withdraws and redistributes assets, thereby protecting LP funds. This structure is not a simple aggregation of gains, but rather introduces risk parameter judgements and financial fragmentation logic and creates a dynamic risk buffer. The mechanisms have been audited by institutions such as Quantstamp and Halborn and have stood the test in a volatile market environment, thus enhancing user confidence。

Dynamic AMM automatically connects funds provided by LP to a dynamic treasury system, allowing liquidity not only to earn transactional fees, but also to receive interest on loans and incentives for liquid mining, which creates a multiple-benefit supersed structure. Capital is no longer static in the pool, but maximizes benefits on a manageable basis. At the same time, Meteora continues and optimizes the multi-assets stabilization pool technology of its predecessor, Mercurial, which allows for efficient aggregation of non-same assets in the same pool, such as the hybrid liquidity structure of Allbridge or World Bridge assets with SOL/USDC. This design improves the liquidity efficiency of stable assets across the chain and maintains a high liquidity rate in a market environment in which overall transaction volumes decline。

At the data level on the chain, it can be observed that this dual structure of products and incentives does produce tangible results. After the crediting system went online at the beginning of 2024, TVL jumped from about $40 million to $160 million in a short period of time and then entered hundreds of millions of dollars. During the same period, Meteora's TVL was relatively small and recovered faster than the mainstream DEX Raydium on Solana. In terms of trade activity, its 30-day turnover remained at billions of dollars, indicating that liquidity had not been significantly lost by the bear market. Locking structures and automatic reinvestment mechanisms reduce the speed of financial outflows, while dynamic rates and capital efficiency optimization increase the motivation for retention。

In general, Meteora's survival and growth in Bear City is not dependent on one. Idquo; flow dividend ” or short-term subsidies, which build a sustainable ship model through product institutional innovation, incentive structural re-engineering, real-income drive and community-based collaborative governance. For other projects in the bear market cycle, the greatest inspiration lies in: building cash flow capacity around real transaction needs rather than exchange high-emission tokens for short-lived TVLs; optimizing the value capture path within the agreement rather than widening market sentiment; moving users from &ldquao through long-term lockouts, revenue-sharing and behavioural binding mechanisms rather than losing users; mobile mercenaries &rdquao; conversion to &ldquao; and interest community members &rdquao。

It is not the ability to finance, but the ability of products and mechanisms to make blood themselves. Meteora ' s practice shows that the project is structurally resilient to a life cycle only if the income from the agreement, the user ' s gain and the value of the token are closely linked. This strategy, centred on efficiency priorities, real returns and sustainable incentives, provides a clear evolutionary direction for DeFi projects in all bear cities: reducing external blood transfusions, strengthening internal cycles, and buying time with mechanisms rather than subsidies。

VII. THE MILITARY COMPETITION: THE BETWEEN DE FITuna AND HumiFi

In the Solana ecology, competition around liquidity and order flows is rising. In addition to Meteora, DefiTuna and HumidiFi are competing for market shares on very different paths. The former emphasizes product structure and functional innovation and attempts to attract professional users with more sophisticated chain-to-trading tools; the latter follows & ldquo; Prop AMM” and the model creates advantages in implementation quality and trade efficiency through the integration of efficient internal capital turnover and depth pathways。

DeFiTuna (TUNA) is positioned as advanced centralized liquidity DEX on Solana, using a hybrid AMM structure and integrating chain lending capacity into the framework of the same agreement. Its mechanism not only supports the dual-routing mobility of Orca AMM and the native DeFiTuna AMM, but also pioneers the introduction of a chain cap list in the Solana ecology, enabling users to complete a more sophisticated trading strategy layout without trust。

In addition, DeFiTuna has further integrated leverage transactions with the lending system to leverage management within the same agreement to provide an integrated financial efficiency programme for LPs and borrowers. This structural innovation makes it attractive to professional traders and high-frequency strategic users. However, at the scale level, its mobility is still at the stage of development. According to DefiLlama data, the current TVL in DefiTuna is approximately $4.1 million, with nearly 30 days of trading of about $115 million. Compared to headline agreements, there is room for improvement in market depth and brand recognition, and the long-term retention of new functions will need to be validated over time。

By contrast, HumidiFi (WET) follows a completely different route. As a proprietary business model (Prop AMM) in Solana, all the mobility of HumidiFi is provided within the professional municipal team, is not open to the public, and there is no external LP in the traditional sense. Its protocols, which do not have an official front-end interface, are accessed mainly through the router, which is particularly critical for the deep integration with Jupiter. With a private liquidity pool structure, HumidiFi can achieve tighter differentials and lower slides, especially for large transaction needs. Since it went online in mid-June 2025, the size of the deal has risen rapidly, with nearly 30 days of the deal exceeding $15 billion, and has at one point taken on 35% & ndash; 40% of the volume of the transaction in Solana. In statistical calibrations, because there are no open lock assets, their TVLs are usually counted as 0, but this does not affect their actual mobility at the implementation level。

In essence, HumidiFi is closer to “ Blackpool ” the trading model, which trades at the expense of openness and visualization liquidity in exchange for better implementation efficiency and capital turnover; and DeFiTuna, which represents the extension of the Open DeFi architecture, attempts to increase the complexity and financial efficiency of transactions along the chain through structural innovation. They are from “ product capacity ” with “ capital efficiency ” and two dimensions, which together exacerbate the competitive pattern of liquidity and order flows on Solana and present a more diverse and targeted challenge for Meteora。

Concluding remarks

Looking at the whole experience, in Meteora I see both technological ambitions and community cohesion. From DLMM, DAMM to dynamic treasury and liquidity lock-in, each product attire resembles a personal capital efficiency upgrade; “ Meteora adjusts rates and liquidity through dynamic adjustments and mechanisms designed for fair distribution, different from traditional AMM” From mobility tools to ecological hubs, it may be essential for them to become ecologically viable。