- Lookonchain reported $436.5 million in USDC moved to Kraken.
- Project revenue fell to $27.3 million in November.
- Wallets still held over $855 million in stablecoins and $211 million in SOL.
Pump.fun’s internal fund activity has drawn intense scrutiny after pseudonymous co-founder Sapijiju challenged claims that the project cashed out more than $436 million in stablecoins.
The discussion began when blockchain analytics platform Lookonchain reported that wallets linked to the Solana memecoin launchpad had transferred large amounts of USDC to the crypto exchange Kraken.
The activity raised fears of selling pressure and uncertainty about how the project handled its reserves.
The story quickly spread across X, where users analysed the movement of funds, debated the project’s finances, and questioned the clarity of the explanations offered.
USDC flows tied to internal management
In an X post, Sapijiju said the transfers were part of Pump.fun’s treasury management process and were not sales.
The post said the USDC originated from the PUMP token’s initial coin offering and was moved between internal wallets to support the company’s runway and reinvestment plans.
The post also stated that Pump.fun had never worked with Circle.
Treasury management typically involves reorganising wallets, allocating capital, and preparing budgets, and does not always indicate selling or liquidation.
Lookonchain’s report said the transfers to Kraken had reached $436.5 million in USDC since mid-October.
The timing drew more attention because Pump.fun’s monthly revenue had fallen to $27.3 million in November, its first drop below $40 million since July, according to DefiLlama.
Despite the concerns, data from DefiLlama, Arkham, and Lookonchain showed that the Pump.fun-tagged wallet still held more than $855 million in stablecoins and $211 million in Solana SOL, which traded at $136.43.
Analysts and community respond
Nansen research analyst Nicolai Sondergaard interpreted the reported transfers as a sign that more selling could follow.
In contrast, EmberCN suggested the activity reflected institutional private placements of the PUMP token rather than active dumping.
The competing interpretations led to a broader review of the token’s performance and project structure.
CoinGecko data showed that PUMP traded at $0.002714, down 32% from its ICO price of $0.004 and almost 70% below its September high of $0.0085.
Currently, PUMP is trading at $0.002738, rising 6.9% in the past 24 hours.
The price movement added more tension to community discussions as users examined whether the treasury actions aligned with the token’s market conditions.
Across X, multiple posts highlighted the divide in sentiment.
Some users argued that the explanation raised more questions, pointing to inconsistencies and asking for clearer communication.
Others dismissed the statement entirely and linked the treasury activity to concerns about token performance and execution.
A separate group of users said Pump.fun had the right to manage its revenue, ICO proceeds, and reserves as it saw fit.
They described treasury movements as common practice after an ICO and said the main issue was whether USDC reserves properly backed the circulating supply.
Treasury structure becomes central issue
As more users examined the fund flows, the debate shifted from selling pressure to the broader structure of Pump.fun’s treasury.
The discussion focused on the scale of reserves, how the project organised its wallets, and whether the team provided enough visibility into its financial management.
The presence of more than $855 million in stablecoins indicated that large amounts of capital remained under project control, but users continued to question the timing, communication, and purpose behind the transfers.
The situation highlighted how treasury management can become a point of market sensitivity, especially when combined with falling revenue, volatile token prices, and community scepticism.
With attention across X still focused on the movements, the conversation has moved toward transparency expectations, reserve backing, and the company’s approach to supporting long-term development.
