Provide a concise narrative that clearly states each of (a)–(e) below.
Meteora addresses liquidity fragmentation and inefficient price discovery in DeFi. Traditional AMMs struggle with capital inefficiency, poor execution for altcoins, and suboptimal liquidity bootstrapping for new token launches. Meteora's core thesis is that the existing AMM infrastructure doesn't adequately serve the token experimentation and issuance needs of the crypto ecosystem, leading to poor LP returns, volatile launches, and limited pathways for tokens to mature into legitimate, tradeable assets.
Meteora sustains development and operations through protocol-generated revenue. The project generated ~$120M in revenues in 2025 from trading fees across its AMMs and launchpads. The team operates with strong treasury management and consistent financial reporting. The 34% "Meteora Reserve" allocation (vesting over 60 months post-cliff) provides a runway for ecosystem growth. Meteora has not raised capital to date and operates with a philosophy that all surplus value accrues to users/stakeholders rather than to separate labs or equity entities.
Meteora is a Solana-native liquidity infrastructure stack mainly comprising:
discrete bins with dynamic fees for concentrated liquidity
We plan to eventually enable staking for the $MET tokens, and to pilot a $MET Economy that revolves around Comets (read more here: https://x.com/MeteoraAG/status/1998748611233067200)
There is no anticipated change to the protocol’s governance/control model.
For each existing entity: Labs/DevCo (e.g., Founder, CEO, CTO, COO), Foundation (e.g., President, Executive Director, CFO, COO), and DAO / onchain governance leadership (if applicable) list the: (a) full names, (b) official titles, (c) and prior experience of key team members. For any non-existent entity, explicitly mention it does not exist. External links may be included but they will not factor into the score.
Full Name | Entity | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|---|
CG Corporate Services | Labs | Sole Director (nominee) | CG (Cayman) Corporate Services is a Cayman exempted company incorporated 10 November 2023, providing corporate administration services. |
Yong Zhen Hoe | Labs | Co-founder | Helped build Mercurial’s early product era and stepped in to become Meteora’s project co-lead after Ben Chow stepped down. |
Barbara Padega | Foundation | Director | Independent Director based in the Cayman Islands, Cayman Islands. Her career spans leadership roles at top-tier offshore firms, and is responsible for impartial, objective oversight to ensure ethical conduct and protect stakeholder interests. |
Intershore Consult (Cayman) Ltd. | Foundation | Company Secretary | Cayman Islands-based registered office provider offering trust administration, corporate services, and wealth management. |
CG (Cayman) Corporate Services | Foundation | Supervisor of the Foundation | Same corporate services entity described above under Solaris Labs. |
Provide a structured description of the DAO's governance, powers, and economic rights. If a DAO does not exist, state so. Address the lettered items below. Even if there is no DAO, there must be an answer to (d).
$MET token holders benefit from a straightforward value approach built on three pillars:
Blockworks note: There is no DAO.
For the Primary Foundation do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist. Definitions: The primary Foundation and DevCo can be explained as those entities which are directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.
Meteora Foundation - Primary Foundation Exempted Limited Guarantee Foundation Company incorporated in the Cayman Islands.
The Foundation holds a perpetual, royalty-free license from Solaris Labs Ltd to use, commercialize, sublicense, and generate revenue from the Meteora protocol and associated IP. Revenue generated accrues to a treasury owned by the Foundation.
There is no DAO. Meteora Foundation has full control over the treasury, operating under 4-of-7 or 3-of-5 signer thresholds distributed across independent team members.
The Foundation's influence over Solaris Labs Ltd is governed by the Services Agreement dated 5 June 2025, under which the Foundation engages Solaris Labs as an independent contractor for protocol development and maintenance. The Foundation may direct and require services, revoke or alter instructions and terminate the agreement for cause.
The Foundation has full pause/upgrade authorities via a 4-of-7 or 3-of-5 multisig.
For the Primary DevCo do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist. Definitions: The primary Foundation and DevCo can be explained as those entities which are directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.
Solaris Labs Ltd - Dev Co BVI Business Company, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands.
Solaris Labs Ltd has rights to all intellectual property rights in the Meteora protocol software, including protocol codebases, on-chain programs, SDKs, technical documentation, and all derivative works. Solaris Labs does not control any subsidiaries that hold protocol IP. The IP is licensed to Meteora Foundation under a worldwide, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, transferable, royalty-free license.
There is no DAO. Solaris Labs Ltd does not exert any form of direct or indirect influence over the Foundation's treasury.
Solaris Labs Ltd does not exert any form of direct or indirect influence over decision-making of the Foundation.
Solaris Labs Ltd has no pause/upgrade/governance-executor authorities.
Disclose launch and initial supply details in a single initial allocation schedule covering the token's launch.
480,000,000 (48% of total supply) ii. Non-circulating $MET at TGE: 520,000,000 (52% of total supply)
15% of total supply Meteora is a rebranded project and team from Mercurial. We are the direct legacy of Mercurial, sharing key team members and core technology. Mercurial raised off a SAFT in 2021, and launched as a token on FTX. A snapshot was taken, forming the foundation for $MET today. 20% of MET goes towards Mercurial stakeholders since Meteora was built with the early financing support and users from Mercurial. Read more here: https://meteoraag.medium.com/unveiling-the-meteora-plan-8b4164d8a5a5 ii. Mercurial Reserve 5% of total supply This is a discretionary pool to support MER holders affected by FTX, pending verification and fair distribution. It remains part of circulating supply since it is intended for retail MER stakeholders, but it will not be immediately claimable until due process is completed. Read more here: https://medium.com/r?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeteoraag.medium.com%2Ffrom-mercurial-to-meteora-my-story-caafd372a577 iii. LP Stimulus Plan 15% of total supply The focus here is to reward the most valuable users of Meteora — our early adopters, as well as our long-term liquidity providers. As such, the airdrop has been split into 3 key portions:
2% of total supply We initially allocated 2% of Supply towards DAO and Off-Chain Contributors who supported Meteora. We are distributing 1.2% of MET at TGE towards high quality leaders + anyone who supported Meteora via X posts, Discord discussions, feedback and more. The remaining 0.8% will be distributed across the first 1 year in compensation and incentives to external community contributors. Read more here: https://proposals.meteora.ag/t/2-dao-stimulus/201 vi. Jupiter Stakers 3% of total supply In our mission to grow the LP Army 10x, and to commemorate our long standing bond with the Jupiter ecosystem, $JUP Stakers will be included in the $MET TGE, receiving their airdrop as LP positions. Read more about the LP Distributor here. Read more here: https://proposals.meteora.ag/t/draft-proposal-distribute-3-out-of-the-tge-reserve-to-jupiter-stakers/2962 vii. M3M3 Plan 2% of total supply Recognizing that a majority of M3M3 tokenholders adopted and supported the $M3M3 token because of Meteora’s participation, 2% of our team’s 20% $MET allocation (not additional supply) will be distributed to the M3M3 stakeholders. Read more here: https://proposals.meteora.ag/t/draft-allocate-20-to-team-treasury-over-6-years/1331#p-2314-allocate-2-of-met-towards-m3m3-stakeholders-3 viii. TGE Reserve 3% of total supply To be used for Liquidity Provision, Market-Making, and other purposes during TGE. Any unused tokens will be returned to the Meteora Reserve. ix. Team 18% of total supply Vested linearly over 6 years to maintain the team’s alignment with Meteora’s long term growth plans.
34% of total supply Vested over 6 years, tokens in this bucket are to be used as liquidity mining rewards after TGE, to be strategically leveraged by the Meteora Team to attract liquidity providers. Exact allocation plan TBA.
$0.50
$MET
1,000,000,000 - fixed supply.
Address each of the following sub-items based on the project's airdrop status. If a sub-item does not apply to the project's situation, state that explicitly.
Projects must disclose all material terms of market-making arrangements that affect token liquidity. If the project has no agreements or deals with market makers, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit. For each market maker, include in a table:
If the project has no agreements or deals with market makers, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit. If no native tokens were loaned or allocated to market makers, state that explicitly; cash/fiat retainers or fees are not required for this item.
Projects must disclose all material terms of centralized or decentralized exchange listings that affect token liquidity. For each listing, include in a table:
If the project has no agreements or deals with CEX or DEX, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit; cash/fiat fee amounts are not required for this item.
Disclose all prior token sales by the Project — including fundraising rounds, any material OTC sales to investors, and any discounted market-maker sales. For each sale, provide:
If no prior sales occurred, state that explicitly (e.g., "No prior fundraising, OTC, or discounted MM sales have occurred.").
Blockworks note: No prior raises conducted.
If any, list prior exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply. This question is not asking about general protocol, application, or smart contract exploits unless the incident directly affected the native token itself. If no prior incidents, state this explicitly (e.g., "No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of YYYY-MM-DD").
Blockworks note: No prior exploits as of 2026-02-03
Describe material risk factors across the three categories below. Each category includes prompts to address at a minimum.
(a) Regulatory, Legal & Tax Risks — Describe how evolving laws and regulations could affect the project by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
Impact of Regulatory Change on TGE and Listings: (If applicable) How could evolving or conflicting laws and regulations affect your ability to complete the TGE, deliver tokens to purchasers, and list or maintain the token on trading venues in key jurisdictions?
Entity-Level Regulatory Impact: (If applicable) How could regulatory or legal changes impact your core entities (Foundation, DevCo, DAO, affiliated service providers), including enforcement actions, licensing requirements, or forced changes to structure or operations?
Tokenholder Tax Treatment: (If applicable) What uncertainties exist around how tokenholders may be taxed, and make clear that tokenholders are responsible for understanding their own tax obligations?
Jurisdictional & User Access Restrictions: (If applicable) If the project restricts access for certain jurisdictions or user types (e.g., U.S. persons, sanctioned countries, retail vs. professional), what are those restrictions and what risks do they create for users and for the project?
(b) Protocol, Technology & Security Risks — Describe risks to network and contract reliability, correctness, and safety by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
Bugs and Design Flaws: (If applicable) What bugs, design flaws, or implementation errors could exist in your core protocol code, smart contracts, and any bridges, rollups, or oracles that you depend on, and how could these lead to loss of funds or disruption of the protocol?
Security Measures & Their Limitations: (If applicable) What security measures have you taken (audits, formal verification, bug bounties), and what types of failures might these measures still fail to detect or prevent?
(c) Token Economics, Unlocks & Incentive Risks — Describe how the token's economic design and supply schedule could affect holders by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
Critical Economic Assumptions: (If applicable) Which economic assumptions (e.g., staking yields, fee revenue, liquidity incentives, MEV capture, demand for blockspace) are critical for protocol security, utility, and governance, and what happens if those assumptions fail?
Governance Control over Monetary Policy & Rewards: (If applicable) To what extent can governance change monetary policy, fee parameters, or reward allocations (e.g., inflation rate, treasury flows, incentive programs), and how could such changes adversely affect tokenholders?
Impact of Regulatory Change on TGE and Listings: The MET token was generated on 23 October 2025 via the Solana blockchain. As a decentralized protocol token, MET is not listed on centralized exchanges as a primary distribution channel — it was distributed via on-chain airdrops and LP positions. However, evolving or conflicting regulations across jurisdictions could impact the ability of secondary trading venues (DEXs and CEXs) to support MET trading pairs, restrict access for users in certain regions, or impose registration or licensing requirements on the token or its associated entities. Changes to securities classifications in key markets (e.g., the US, EU under MiCA, or Asia-Pacific jurisdictions) could affect the token's characterization and the legality of its distribution or trading. Entity-Level Regulatory Impact: Meteora's legal structure comprises foundations incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and the Cayman Islands, overseen by reputable nominee directors acting as fiduciaries. The development team operates through a contracting entity (Solaris Labs), compensated by the foundation in USDC and tokens. Regulatory changes in the BVI, Cayman Islands, or jurisdictions where team members operate could impose new licensing requirements, enforce structural changes to the foundation or contracting arrangements, or trigger enforcement actions. Shifts in global AML/KYC requirements, sanctions regimes, or crypto-specific regulations could require restructuring of operations, entity dissolution, or relocation of the legal domicile. There are no external investors or venture stakeholders with claims on token supply post-TGE, which simplifies the entity structure but does not eliminate regulatory exposure. Jurisdictional & User Access Restrictions: Meteora's core protocol is permissionless and accessible to any user with a Solana wallet. However, certain front-end interfaces or partner platforms may implement geo-restrictions in compliance with applicable law, including restrictions for US persons and users in sanctioned countries (e.g., OFAC-designated jurisdictions such as North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Syria, and the Crimea region). Users who circumvent such restrictions do so at their own risk, and Meteora bears no liability for losses incurred in connection with restricted access or enforcement actions. These restrictions may limit the addressable user base and could evolve as regulatory landscapes change.
Bugs and Design Flaws: Meteora's core protocol comprises multiple on-chain programs deployed on Solana, including the DLMM Program, DAMM V2 Program, Dynamic Bonding Curve (DBC), Token Distributor Program, Liquidity Distributor Program, and the Jupiter Lock / Meteora Lock Program. As with any smart contract system, there is an inherent risk that bugs, design flaws, or implementation errors exist in these programs that could lead to loss of funds, incorrect fee calculations, improper token distributions, or disruption of liquidity pools. Meteora's programs interact with Solana's SPL Token Program and rely on the security of the underlying Solana runtime (BPF Upgradeable Loader). Vulnerabilities at the Solana network layer, in upstream dependencies (e.g., the SPL Token Program), or in Meteora's own programs could result in exploitation. Additionally, the merkle tree cryptography used in the Token and Liquidity Distributor programs, if improperly implemented, could lead to incorrect airdrop distributions or unauthorized claims. Security Measures & Their Limitations: All core Meteora programs have undergone independent security audits. Audit reports for DLMM, DAMM V2, Meteora Lock, and the distributor programs are publicly available via Meteora's documentation. The SPL Token Program used for MET itself has been audited by Anza (formerly Solana Labs). Critical protocol operations are governed by multi-signature wallets powered by Squads (v3 for cold wallets with 4/7 quorum, v4 for hot wallets with 3/5 quorum), reducing single-point-of-failure risk. The MET token's mint authority has been burned and freeze authority was never initialized, preventing unauthorized token minting or freezing. Despite these measures, audits are point-in-time assessments and may not detect all vulnerabilities, particularly those arising from novel attack vectors, economic exploits, or complex interactions between Meteora's programs and external protocols (e.g., Jupiter aggregator routing). Multi-sig wallets mitigate but do not eliminate key compromise risk. Program upgrade authority resides with the team multi-sig, meaning protocol upgrades are possible — which provides flexibility for bug fixes but also introduces a trust assumption. There is no formal on-chain governance mechanism or timelock currently governing contract upgrades.
Critical Economic Assumptions: Meteora's protocol revenue — and by extension, the economic utility of MET — depends on sustained on-chain trading volume across DLMM, DAMM, and DBC pools. Key assumptions include: (1) continued demand for trading of memecoins, new token launches, and emerging asset classes on Solana, which collectively drive ~80% of Meteora's DEX volumes; (2) the continued competitiveness of Meteora's fee structures; (3) the sustained engagement and growth of the LP Army, whose liquidity provision is the foundation of fee generation; and (4) the continued vibrancy of the launchpad ecosystem and pipeline of new token launches using Meteora's DBC infrastructure. If Solana trading volumes decline materially, if competitors capture significant market share, if memecoin or ICM narratives fade, or if LP incentives prove insufficient to retain liquidity providers, protocol revenues could decline significantly. The Meteora Reserve (34% of supply, vesting over 6 years) is earmarked for future incentive programmes. If these incentives fail to attract or retain LPs, the protocol's competitive position and fee generation could deteriorate. Revenues are inherently cyclical and volatile, with high correlation to Solana ecosystem activity and crypto market sentiment. Governance Control over Monetary Policy & Rewards: MET has a fixed total supply of 1,000,000,000 tokens with mint authority permanently burned, meaning no additional tokens can ever be created. However, the Meteora team retains significant discretion over several economic parameters. The Meteora Reserve (34% of supply) is controlled by a team multi-sig (4/7 cold wallet) and may be deployed for future incentive programmes. The timing, magnitude, and allocation of these distributions are at the team's discretion and could materially affect token supply dynamics and market price. The team also controls protocol fee parameters (take rates on DLMM, DAMM, and DBC pools), which can be adjusted and could affect LP returns and trading competitiveness. Additionally, the team can direct treasury operations including token buybacks, strategic investments, and operational expenditures. There is currently no formal on-chain governance mechanism giving tokenholders voting power over these decisions.
This Token Transparency Filing is provided for general informational purposes only. Blockworks reviews completeness only and does not verify or warrant the accuracy of individual answers. Meteora is solely responsible for the content, accuracy, and legality of its disclosures.
