According to @PANewsCN, the Jupiter community has opened a DAO vote on whether to burn approximately 130 million JUP that were previously repurchased via the Litterbox trust, representing about 4 percent of circulating supply. Source: PANews on X, Oct 31, 2025; JupiterExchange on X, Oct 31, 2025. Jupiter stated that this Litterbox burn vote follows a downsizing of the DAO and a community reset, aiming to refocus the ecosystem around JUP and rebuild long-term confidence and consensus. Source: JupiterExchange on X, Oct 31, 2025; PANews on X, Oct 31, 2025. Currently, 50 percent of on-chain revenue is directed to the Litterbox trust fund, which has been buying back JUP from the open market and has accumulated around 130 million tokens intended for DAO use in three years, but holders raised uncertainty concerns. Source: PANews on X, Oct 31, 2025; JupiterExchange on X, Oct 31, 2025. The DAO vote on whether to destroy the existing Litterbox-held JUP started today and is scheduled to end in about 4 days and 13 hours from the announcement. Source: PANews on X, Oct 31, 2025; JupiterExchange on X, Oct 31, 2025. Jupiter added that a separate vote will be held in the coming weeks to decide how to handle the ongoing revenue inflows into the Litterbox. Source: PANews on X, Oct 31, 2025; JupiterExchange on X, Oct 31, 2025. If approved, the burn would remove about 130 million JUP, or roughly 4 percent of circulating supply, constituting a material tokenomics change relevant for trading and liquidity planning. Source: PANews on X, Oct 31, 2025; JupiterExchange on X, Oct 31, 2025.

According to @jp_mullin888, the project is nearing 600M dead ERC20 $OM tokens. Source: @jp_mullin888 on X, Oct 29, 2025. According to @jp_mullin888, Bybit, KuCoin, Bitpanda, HTX, Crypto.com, and Indodax were publicly called on to help push the tally over the 600M mark. Source: @jp_mullin888 on X, Oct 29, 2025. According to @jp_mullin888, this milestone request to major venues puts attention on OM supply tracking and potential venue support that traders monitor. Source: @jp_mullin888 on X, Oct 29, 2025.

According to @ranyi1115, Orderly One completed its first month with over 1,500 DEXs created, 76 graduated into revenue-earning exchanges, and more than $10B in cumulative trading volume, highlighting rapid ecosystem traction. Source: @ranyi1115 on X. The team reports an average of 50 new DEX launches per day and 2.5 daily graduations, indicating a fast conversion from creation to monetized exchanges that traders can track as an activity gauge. Source: @ranyi1115 on X. All graduation fees are burned in ORDER, implying supply reduction as more DEXs graduate, making burn events and graduation counts key tokenomics metrics for ORDER-focused trading strategies. Source: @ranyi1115 on X; @OrderlyNetwork on X.

According to @justinsuntron, a 5.66% reduction in total supply was announced with a reference link directing to a JUST DeFi update for further details, signaling a notable supply-side change relevant to market participants (source: @justinsuntron on X). The announcement post did not specify the affected asset, ticker, burn address, or transaction hash, meaning the exact token involved is not identified within the post itself at the time of the statement (source: @justinsuntron on X).

According to @justinsuntron, he announced "profit burn, user airdrop" in an X post on Oct 15, 2025 (source: @justinsuntron on X). The post did not specify the asset involved, amounts, timing, eligibility, or mechanism, and it only linked to an external post by @0xMayyy (source: @justinsuntron on X). With no parameters disclosed, any price or supply impact cannot be quantified at this time (source: @justinsuntron on X).

According to @adriannewman21, launching a new xxxstr can jeopardize existing NFT tokens, making holder alignment a critical risk factor for traders to watch, source: @adriannewman21, Twitter, Oct 4, 2025, https://twitter.com/adriannewman21/status/1974287354002354689. He advises either creating a clear linkage between the new xxxstr and the existing NFT token or internalizing a fee to sell at 1.2x followed by a token burn within the NFT token, source: @adriannewman21, Twitter, Oct 4, 2025, https://twitter.com/adriannewman21/status/1974287354002354689. For trading decisions, assess upcoming NFT-related token launches for explicit linkage or a fee-sell-1.2x-burn mechanism to gauge dilution and incentive alignment risk highlighted by @adriannewman21, source: @adriannewman21, Twitter, Oct 4, 2025, https://twitter.com/adriannewman21/status/1974287354002354689.

According to @lookonchain, WLFI repurchased 6.04M WLFI using $1.06M in collected fees across Solana, BSC, and Ethereum, then burned 7.89M WLFI on BSC and Ethereum, with 3.06M WLFI remaining unburned on Solana, source: @lookonchain. The team collected 4.91M WLFI (valued at $1.01M) plus $1.06M in fees before executing the $1.06M buyback for 6.04M WLFI, source: @lookonchain. The implied average buy price was approximately $0.176 per WLFI (1.06M/6.04M), while the burned tranche was valued at roughly $0.181 per WLFI (1.43M/7.89M), source: @lookonchain. Net supply contraction equals the 7.89M WLFI burned, while 3.06M WLFI remains on Solana pending any future action, source: @lookonchain. On-chain references were provided via Arkham Intel explorer addresses by @lookonchain, source: @lookonchain.

According to @MikeSilagadze, he posted a hypothetical 2032 scenario claiming only 67 unburned ETHFI tokens remain and each is priced at $85 billion, with an airdrop farmer holding 5 ETHFI becoming the richest person, source: @MikeSilagadze on X, Sep 27, 2025. The post provides no current ETHFI circulating supply, burn schedule, liquidity, or price data and should be treated as sentiment-driven commentary rather than verifiable fundamentals for trading, source: @MikeSilagadze on X, Sep 27, 2025. The post also links to an ether.fi Foundation status without details in the text; traders should independently verify on-chain supply and burn activity, exchange order book depth, funding rates, and open interest before acting, source: @MikeSilagadze on X, Sep 27, 2025.

According to @WatcherGuru, Binance founder CZ called to reduce BNB Chain fees by another 50% on Sep 23, 2025. Source: @WatcherGuru on X. A 50% fee cut would mechanically lower BNB burned per transaction under BEP-95, which burns a portion of gas fees in real time; traders should track on-chain burn rate and gas consumption for supply-impact signals. Source: BNB Chain BEP-95 documentation; BscScan BNB Smart Chain explorer. Lower fees also reduce validator fee revenue per transaction on BNB Chain, directly affecting validator economics to the extent defined in the fee split. Source: BNB Chain BEP-95 documentation. For trading, monitor BNB spot and BNB/BTC relative strength, on-chain transactions and burn dashboards, and Binance Futures funding and open interest for positioning shifts following the fee-cut call. Source: BscScan; BNB Chain docs; Binance Futures market data.

According to Justin Sun, 100% of sunperp.com's profits will be used to buy back and burn SUN, outlining a simple tokenomics policy centered on buybacks and burns for the SUN token (source: @justinsuntron on X, Sep 21, 2025). He added that the team’s primary focus is delivering the lowest trading fees, the best trading experience and liquidity, and the broadest trading support, positioning the platform for trader-centric execution (source: @justinsuntron on X, Sep 21, 2025). He also noted that SUNperp is only three days old and that there is still a lot to do, signaling the initiative is at an early build-out stage (source: @justinsuntron on X, Sep 21, 2025).

According to Crypto King, xCellar is presented as a DeFi privacy project rather than a typical mixer or pool, with claims that liquidity is locked forever, any unsold presale tokens will be burned, and the smart contract has been released for review, source: Crypto King on X, Sep 20, 2025. According to Crypto King, traders should note these disclosures as they relate to supply mechanics and execution milestones, including verifying the liquidity lock, monitoring any presale burn, and assessing the released contract for risks before participation, source: Crypto King on X, Sep 20, 2025.

According to the source, Trump-backed World Liberty announced a WLFI token buyback-and-burn plan, and WLFI rose following the news. The source adds that the initiative involves purchasing WLFI and permanently burning the tokens, which, if executed, would reduce circulating supply. The source links the price move to the announcement, making execution details and timing the key variables traders should monitor to gauge liquidity and volatility impact.

According to @AltcoinGordon, "Alex from Blackrock" has burned another 16.5M SWIF tokens, and the post states this single actor has burned over 12% totaling about $500k to date (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 15, 2025). According to the source post, no transaction hashes or wallet addresses were provided, so independent on-chain verification is not available within the post itself (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 15, 2025). According to the same source, the post tags @sheepwifhatcoin, signaling where traders might look for official confirmation (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 15, 2025). Based on the source claim, traders should treat SWIF as a potential supply-tightening setup and monitor on-chain circulating supply, top-holder concentration, and DEX or CEX liquidity for widening spreads and higher slippage that often follow large burns by a single wallet (analysis anchored to the claim by @AltcoinGordon). According to the source-triggered context, prudent steps include waiting for on-chain confirmation, watching for abnormal exchange inflows/outflows of SWIF, and tracking any follow-up statements from the tagged project account before initiating momentum entries or short squeezes (analysis anchored to the claim by @AltcoinGordon).

According to @AltcoinGordon, a post on X dated Sep 14, 2025 claims an additional 1% of SWIF supply will be burned next week, citing an unnamed contact at BlackRock as the source of the information (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 14, 2025). The post provides no supporting evidence such as an official statement, transaction hash, wallet address, or governance notice to validate the claim (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 14, 2025). For trading purposes, the only concrete details contained in the post are the alleged burn size (1%) and the tentative timing window of next week; no exchange notices or on-chain references are included in the post (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 14, 2025).

According to @AltcoinGordon, the project referenced will conduct regular token buybacks and burns, as stated in his X post linking to @sheepwifhatcoin on Sep 12, 2025. Source: https://twitter.com/AltcoinGordon/status/1966479427883205049; https://x.com/sheepwifhatcoin/status/1966415202611773476 According to @AltcoinGordon’s post and the referenced @sheepwifhatcoin post, no schedule, amounts, funding source, or burn addresses were disclosed, limiting any immediate quantification of impact. Source: https://twitter.com/AltcoinGordon/status/1966479427883205049; https://x.com/sheepwifhatcoin/status/1966415202611773476 According to the source posts, the next verifiable updates for traders would be follow-up announcements from these accounts or on-chain transactions they share to confirm buybacks and burns. Source: https://twitter.com/AltcoinGordon/status/1966479427883205049; https://x.com/sheepwifhatcoin/status/1966415202611773476

According to @AltcoinGordon, daily $SWIF token burns are underway and the token’s supply is shrinking, a supply-side change that is trading-relevant (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 12, 2025). The post provides no burn amounts, transaction hashes, or contract address, so the scale and pace of the reduction cannot be quantified from this post alone (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 12, 2025). The post tags @sheepwifhatcoin, indicating the project’s account is referenced in the communication around the burn claim (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 12, 2025). Traders tracking $SWIF can monitor official project disclosures and confirm burns on-chain via block explorer data before acting on the headline to manage execution and liquidity risk (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Sep 12, 2025).

According to @AltcoinGordon, another $1,000 worth of SWIF was burned, with daily burns reportedly removing nearly 11% of the token’s supply to date. Source: https://twitter.com/AltcoinGordon/status/1966052240562565426 Token burns permanently remove tokens from circulation, reducing total supply when executed as stated, a mechanic that can influence price dynamics in thin markets. Source: https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-a-coin-burn A shrinking float can tighten liquidity and heighten volatility and slippage, which are key considerations for short-term position sizing and stop placement. Sources: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/liquidity.asp and https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/slippage.asp For confirmation and timing, traders should monitor the project’s official updates before acting on the burn narrative. Source: https://x.com/sheepwifhatcoin

According to @MikeSilagadze, over 0.1% of ETHFI’s total supply was burned in the last two weeks, as disclosed in his X post dated Sep 10, 2025 (source: @MikeSilagadze on X, Sep 10, 2025). He stated a target to burn more than 10% of supply next year and linked the burn rate to better product, more users, and higher revenue (source: @MikeSilagadze on X, Sep 10, 2025). For traders, this communicates a revenue-linked burn strategy focused on supply reduction; monitoring future burn updates from this source can help track progress toward the target (source: @MikeSilagadze on X, Sep 10, 2025).

According to @cas_abbe, HELLO (HELLO) is deflationary, with HELLO burned via project voting, watching shows on HELLO TV, and playing games in HELLO Arcade, and with Killer Whales TV streaming revenue also contributing to the burn (source: @cas_abbe). Based on @cas_abbe’s description, traders can track engagement in HELLO TV, HELLO Arcade, and governance voting as direct drivers of burn-driven supply contraction when platform activity rises (source: @cas_abbe).

According to @AltcoinGordon, an additional 1,000,000 SWIF has been burned, raising the prospect of a supply shock. According to @AltcoinGordon, the post was published on Sep 8, 2025 and did not include an on-chain transaction hash or burn address to verify the burn. According to @AltcoinGordon, the wording "another" indicates there have been prior SWIF burns. According to @AltcoinGordon, no price action, liquidity details, or market impact metrics accompanied the burn claim.