Solana Claims Starknet’s Trading Volume Is Fueled By Mercenary Activity

TLDR

Table of Contents

Starknet has $36.6B in trading volume but collects only $250K in monthly chain fees.
Extended accounts for most of Starknet’s trading via a points-based program.
Solana generates over $30M in monthly REV, showing more consistent user demand.
Solana claims Starknet’s metrics reflect temporary activity, not long-term network use.

Solana has ignited a heated debate in the crypto space by publicly challenging Starknet’s network activity and valuation. In a sharp social media post, Solana claimed Starknet’s $36.6 billion trading volume is largely driven by reward-based incentives rather than real demand. This bold accusation raises key questions about how blockchain networks are valued, and whether high-volume figures reflect sustainable growth or just short-term interest from point-farming traders.

Public Dispute Over Blockchain Valuation

Solana’s official X account criticized Starknet, alleging that its market valuation does not match real network usage. In a direct post, Solana claimed Starknet had only a few active users and transactions but still held a market cap of $1 billion and a previously misreported fully diluted valuation (FDV) of $15 billion.

Though the $15 billion FDV was based on outdated data from April 2024, the central claim focused on trading activity driven by points programs rather than real user demand. Solana accused Starknet of relying on “mercenary volume,” which refers to short-term activity linked to incentives and token farming.

NEW: @solana SAYS "STARKNET HAS 8 DAILY ACTIVE USERS, 10 DAILY TRANSACTIONS, AND STILL SOMEHOW HAS A 1B MC AND 15B FDV" – "SEND IT STRAIGHT TO 0" pic.twitter.com/VrDMlnv4S2
— DEGEN NEWS (@DegenerateNews) January 14, 2026

The critique highlighted the contrast between high notional trading figures and low actual fees paid by users, raising questions about the sustainability of such activity.

Starknet’s Volume Concentration Raises Concerns

According to DefiLlama, Starknet recorded $36.6 billion in monthly trading volume. Of this, nearly all came from one perpetual exchange, Extended, which operates a reward system involving weekly point distributions, fee discounts, and referrals.

Despite this high activity, Starknet’s 30-day fee revenue stood at just around $186,293. This low revenue suggests the activity may not represent lasting demand, but rather users aiming to maximize rewards before token launches.

Extended’s dominance in trading activity also reflects high concentration. With only one major venue accounting for almost all volume, Solana argued that such metrics could drop significantly once incentives end.

Comparing Real Economic Value Across Networks

Solana emphasized the importance of Real Economic Value (REV), which includes both chain fees and MEV tips users pay for faster execution. Unlike trading volume, which can be inflated through leverage and zero-fee programs, REV reflects actual demand for network services.

Starknet’s REV remains low relative to its volume, while Solana shows consistent performance with daily REV above $1 million and distributed trading volume across multiple exchanges like Jupiter, Raydium, and Orca.

Other chains such as Arbitrum and Optimism have shown mixed patterns. Arbitrum, with $52.8 billion in combined volume, sees 66% of its perpetual trades from a single incentivized platform called Variational. Still, its $3 billion in TVL and higher REV place it ahead of Starknet in terms of organic usage.

Valuation and Volume Metrics Reveal Market Gaps

Solana’s own 30-day spot and perp volume totals $154.2 billion against an FDV of $90.7 billion, resulting in a ratio of 0.59. This suggests that its market value aligns more closely with actual usage. In contrast, Starknet’s ratio of 0.025 indicates a wide gap between valuation and active usage.

The debate centers on how to evaluate a blockchain’s health. When most trading activity comes from one source offering incentives, the long-term value of that activity is uncertain. Once rewards stop, such activity could decline sharply.

Solana’s post may have been shared by a social media “intern,” but it sparked a wider discussion about what drives blockchain value and what doesn’