# Jupiter JUP Airdrop: Balanced Proposal for Jupuary 2025 **URL:** \ **Category:** Jupiter DAO\ **Tags:** proposal\ **Created:** [November 5, 2024, 6:28pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573 "2024-11-05T18:28:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 187
**Author:** ![JUPWhale](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex003/user_avatar/discuss.jup.ag/jupwhale/32/5826_2.png) [@JUPWhale](https://discuss.jup.ag/u/JUPWhale)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2024, 11:32pm UTC](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573/187 "2024-11-08T23:32:29Z")
> [@777](#): > > Having no reward for the 0-1k range seems unlikely and makes little sense with the grow the pie ethos. I would expect a small reward around 5-20jup for the lowest tier. It’s possible with $100+ volume but $0+ is not an option anymore with 15.5M wallets. If you check **[my first proposal](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133)** there was this allocation: - **All $100+ users²** : 40M JUP **/** 3,885,443 users = **10 JUP per user** It would be possible to include the $100 - $1,000 tier. It’s around 1,585,443 users. I left it out now because some were against it, but I see no problem with either a $100+ or $1,000+ minimum. What is clear, is that you can’t include all 11,361,557 wallets with volume below $100 because there are not that many users on Jupiter. These low volume wallets are mainly bots and farmers. > [@777](#): > > Also think new OR more tiers need to be introduced rather than those used last year. i.e. 1k,10k, 100k 1m. This could be wider or larger Yes we did. I proposed a new $10M+ tier (last round it was $1M+). > [@JUPWhale](#): > > - **$10M+ tier** ²: 30M JUP **/** [4,422 users](https://dune.com/queries/4209743) = **6,784 JUP per user** > [@JUPWhale](#): > > **²** _ **A new $10M+ tier** is added to reflect the **9.5X volume growth of Jupiter in 1 year**. The new tier properly rewards the top power users like traders, whales and KOL’s._ > [@777](#): > > Downplays perps too much. The risk associated with trading is much higher. $1m vol gaining 925JUP seems off. Perps are important. **Perps volume represent ~ 27%** of total trading volume, with swaps making up the other ~ 70% and DCA and Limit only ~ 2.5% combined. Perps allocation was increased from 20M JUP in **[my first proposal](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-airdrop-round-2-2025-analysis-discussion-proposal-for-distribution/26133)** to 120M JUP (120,000,000 JUP) worth over $120 Million USD in this latest balanced version. The volume is leveraged up to 100X. With 100X, $1M volume can be made with $5K ($500K open and $500K close). It has about the same fees as doing $1M in swaps (no leverage). > [@777](#): > > Finally, I may have missed it but how are the fees associated with the products considered I feel like this proposal missed some key points. It was considered. For example $1M perps volume with 100X leverage has about the same fees as $1M swap volume without leverage. These two (perps and swaps) represent 97.5% of all trading volume, so there’s nothing more to consider. I mentioned the math for it in one of the combined 500 replies on both proposals but feel free to calculate or test it. 925 JUP for $1M in perps volume might seem off to you, but remember Jupuary is a gift. It’s not a compensation or reward for activity, for fees paid or for anything else. it has never been that. This round allocations could be 25X+ less due to increased user counts, increased volumes and a 30% tokens supply deduction going off the Jupuary airdrop allocation. --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.jup.ag/t/jupiter-jup-airdrop-balanced-proposal-for-jupuary-2025/26573)._