Based on 1723 Collapsed Projects Retrospective: Developers Who Chose the Wrong Track Average a Loss of 37.5 SOL,
While Successful Ones Rely Not on Technical Advantages — But on Clear Role Recognition

1. Issuance Mechanism and Permission Control
| Dimension | Internal Trading (Pump.fun) | External Trading (CiaoTool, etc.) |
| Token Attributes | Fixed Supply of 1 Billion, Precision Cannot Be Modified | Custom Quantity, Precision, Name |
| Initial Distribution | Tokens All Enter Joint Curve Pool, Developers Need to Buy to Obtain Holdings | 100% Tokens Directly Transferred to Creator's Wallet |
| Permission Management | No Issuance/Blacklist Function, Contract Permissions Belong to Pump Platform | Developers Have Full Permissions (Can Issue More, Freeze Addresses) |
| Liquidity Start | Virtual Fund Pool (Initial 30 SOL Simulation), No Manual Liquidity Addition Required | Must Actively Inject Real SOL Token Pair to Raydium and Other DEXs |

2. Launch Path and Cost Structure
Advanced Internal Trading Process
Token Issuance (0.02–0.05 SOL) → Trading (Target: Pool Reaches 85 SOL) → Automatic Launch
When the Joint Curve Pool Accumulates to 85 SOL, Automatically Migrate to PumpSwap (Replacing Raydium After 2025)
LP Tokens Permanently Burned, Preventing Scams but Sacrificing Liquidity Control
Cost Composition: Creation Fee + 1% Transaction Fee + Gas Fee (No Later Liquidity Management Fee)

Standard External Trading Process
Token Issuance (CiaoTool) → Manually Create Raydium Liquidity Pool → Open Trading
Developers Need to Pre-Store SOL and Hold Tokens to Build Real Liquidity Pool (e.g., 10 SOL + 1 Billion Tokens)
Cost Composition: Token Issuance Tool Fee + Liquidity Injection Cost + Raydium Listing Fee (About 6 SOL)

II. Comparison of Operational Risks and Market Adaptability
1. The Double-Edged Sword Characteristics of Internal Trading
Advantages
Fairness Guarantee: LP Burn Mechanism Prevents Pool Withdrawal Scams, Enhancing Retail Investor Trust
Cold Start Efficiency: Virtual Pools Achieve 'Zero Liquidity Start', Suitable for Community-Driven MEME
Risks
'Internal Trading Means Death' Trap: Over 60% of Projects are Sold Off by DEV When Progress Reaches 80%-90% (Average Yield of 5 Times)
Market Cap Ceiling: Only 0.7% of Tokens Break $300,000 Market Cap, Long-Tail Project Liquidity Exhausted

2. The Flexibility and Challenges of External Trading
Applicable Scenarios
Serious Projects Requiring Token Economic Regulation (e.g., Airdrops, Staking)
Institutional-Level Compliance Requirements (Can Block Malicious Addresses through Blacklists)
Operational Threshold
Rely on Tools like CiaoTool to Reduce Technical Difficulty (Market Share Exceeds 60%)
Liquidity Depth Directly Relates to Project Survival Rate, Small Pools Are Easily Targeted by Whales

III. Token Issuance Practical Guide: Toolchain and Strategy Optimization
1. Efficient Internal Trading Launch Process (Pump.fun + CiaoTool)
1. Bundled Positioning: Use CiaoTool to Generate 16 Wallets to Buy Tokens at Once, Avoiding Initial Chip Insufficiency
2. Market Cap Management:
Traffic Tools Maintain Homepage Exposure (Anti-Squeeze Mechanism to Avoid Risk Control)
Pump Bots Impact the 'King of Hills' (Triggered Traffic Siphon at $30,000 Market Cap)
3. Escape Monitoring: Deploy PlonkBot to Track DEV Wallet Movements, Preemptive Sell-Off (Success Rate About 35%)

2. Refined External Trading Operations (CiaoTool + Raydium)

[CiaoTool Parameter Filling] → [Generate Custom Token] → [Inject SOL-Token Pair to Raydium] → [Set Market Making Algorithm] → [Continuously Monitor Slippage and MEV Attacks]

Key Actions:
Use 'Dog Project Clone Detection Tool' to Check for Same IP Clone Projects (Over 30% of Clones are Associated with CDN Nodes)
Initial Liquidity Proportion > 10% Can Withstand Targeting, and Reserve Issuance Permissions for Market Maker Collaboration

IV. Ultimate Choice Framework: When to Use Internal Trading? When to Choose External Trading?
| Decision Factor | Preference for Internal Trading | Preference for External Trading |

| Project Goal | Rapid Testing of Hot MEMEs (e.g., Riding on Trump Events) | Long-Term Ecological Construction (Clear Token Utility) |
| Team Resources | No Technical Capability / Limited Liquidity Budget | Equipped with Market Maker Resources or Institutional Endorsement |
| Risk Appetite | Accept High Failure Rate (>90%) but Pursue Hundredfold Odds | Demand Controllable Token Economics and Compliance Pathways |
| Typical Cases | TRUMPWIF (100 Times in 2 Hours) | DJCAT (Comeback After Community Takeover) |

V. 2025 Trend Warning
1. Internal Trading Competition Heats Up: Daily New Token Peak Breaks 20,000, Homepage Exposure Cost Increases by 300%
2. Regulatory Arbitrage Ends: The SEC of the United States Lists 'Fake MEME Websites' on the Fraud Accountability List, Compressing Survival Space of Cloned Projects
3. Tool Arms Race: CiaoTool Adds 'Token Economics Sandbox' Module, Supporting Simulation of Issuance/Repurchase Scenarios

> Survival Rules:
> Internal Trading is an Information War — Win in Hotspot Capture and Escape Speed;
> External Trading is a Resource War — Win in Token Models and Liquidity Depth.
> Regardless of the Path, the Ultimate Moat of MEME is Still Community Narrative, Tools Only Amplify the Stakes.

(Data Source: Dune Analytics On-Chain Dashboard #pump_fun, CiaoTool White Paper V2.3)