Why Solana's On-chain Volume is Being Drained – A Detailed Analysis
Solana is the chain most driven by small users (retail) in the crypto world. Memecoins, NFTs, games, SocialFi – it dominates every category of on-chain usage.
But here's the problem: that value doesn't stick (doesn't remain).
Because the current infrastructure is built on PvE (Player versus Environment) models. Full extraction. No value cycle. Fragile TVL (Total Value Locked).
MEV (Maximal Extractable Value). False liquidity. Entry from 'The House' (House rake - platform profit). Layered fees. Ambiguous routing. Billions drained every year from the flow of small users.
Look at Pump.fun. A product worth five figures (under construction). No real infrastructure risk. It has extracted 700 million to 1 billion+ dollars and is now raising funds with a valuation of 4 billion dollars. This value was not created – it was directly extracted from the flow of small users.
And the biggest problem is systemic.
Solana rolls 30% of its total TVL every day – the highest TVL turnover in crypto. Hyper-fragile liquidity over aggressive extraction mechanisms.
Outcome: The price of SOL disconnects from usage. The more small user activity increases, the faster the extraction rate grows.
More wallets. More transactions. More memecoins. More games. More SocialFi. More sustained activity from small users.
But if the extraction mechanisms scale faster than adoption, the chain will lose more (will be drained more) as it grows.
And currently, there is no way to link value to the infrastructure. Builders can launch products worth five figures, place a nine-figure token on top, extract nine figures, and there is no connection between the current technical value and market capitalization.
It’s pure PvE game theory. The community becomes the product. Value is dictated by hype cycles, not by the real growth of the infrastructure.
This is why we continue to see builders optimizing for short-term hype, not for sustainable products.
If this continues, Solana could win the 'UX war' (user experience) – small users will continue to come – but the chain will continue to be drained by the PvE miners sitting directly on top of it.
Optional: Why we believe in a different approach (or: What we can do differently)
If you wanted to add a general reference without mentioning GlydeGG directly or leaving it too optional, you could use a paragraph like this:
This is why we believe there is a need for new protocols. Protocols that are fee-less, with locked TVL, and user-owned. Where the value of the infrastructure remains on-chain. The mission is simple: to fix the broken cycle. To fix the system so that small user usage builds ownership and value instead of being 'extracted'. More soon.
