[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]

![alefwork Avatar](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:24/cr:twitter::1479038081873453057.png) alefbet [@alefwork](/creator/twitter/alefwork) on x XXX followers
Created: 2025-07-25 14:40:31 UTC

Comparison of $PUMP vs $BONK

Age 
$PUMP: 14d 22h 
$BONK: 2y 7mo 

Market Capitalization 
$PUMP: $931.7M 
$BONK: $2.67B 

Liquidity 
$PUMP: $14.1M 
$BONK: $3.7M 

Holders 
$PUMP: 58.13K 
$BONK: 966.98K 

Liquidity-to-Holders Ratio 
$PUMP: $XXXXXX per holder 
$BONK: $XXXX per holder

Ownership Concentration and Liquidity Indicate Different Types of Investors
The liquidity-to-holders ratio for $PUMP ($242.56 per holder) is several times higher than for $BONK ($3.83). This suggests that $PUMP is still "in the hands" of a relatively small number of investors (58K holders), possibly smart money: venture funds, early speculators, or influential players who provide high liquidity ($14.1M) for active trading.

Risks and Opportunities 
$PUMP: High liquidity at a young age and Mcap indicates potential for rapid scaling. However, this is also a sign of possible "overhype" or manipulation — with such a small number of holders, a few large sales could crash the price. If the token transitions to the retail phase, Mcap could grow exponentially (similar to early meme coins like $DOGE or $SHIB).

The comparison highlights the classic cycle of meme coins: from concentration among early adopters (like $PUMP) to broad distribution (like $BONK).


XXX engagements

![Engagements Line Chart](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:600/p:tweet::1948755248253673892/c:line.svg)

**Related Topics**
[holder](/topic/holder)
[holders](/topic/holders)
[$37m](/topic/$37m)
[$141m](/topic/$141m)
[$267b](/topic/$267b)
[$9317m](/topic/$9317m)
[$pump](/topic/$pump)
[pumpfun](/topic/pumpfun)

[Post Link](https://x.com/alefwork/status/1948755248253673892)