ArbMe is finally live! Trading platforms stole $1 billion from you in 2025... this year, traders are taking back control. The extension lets you arbitrage your own trades and earn cashback by arbitraging your price impact. A new era is beginning. Trade to Earn.

The @solana summit germany organized by @SuperteamDE was truly incredible! It was my first time in Germany, meeting the builders is always an amazing experience but the energy here is absolutely wild! Also super happy to see my mates from @SuperteamCAN they’re the best 🍁

I agree: MEV is dead on @solana. I read and reacted to @buffalu__ article over a month ago, but it gave me a lot to think about as the CEO of one of the largest MEV data applications. After going through the opinions of traders and companies over the past month, I realize that MEV is still very often associated with sandwiching, mostly because the topic is misunderstood. If we exclude all the malicious parts of MEV, what is the concrete idea behind this practice? The idea is to monetize transactions. Nothing more complex than that. Most of the time, the expected monetization from MEV comes from arbitrage between DEXs. This practice is profitable for the arbitrager, but it also makes the market healthier by bringing the quote you see on your frontend closer to the actual execution value, meaning the real amount of tokens you will receive. In arbitrage, we need to clearly distinguish between several practices: - Spam: on-chain computation, not the most efficient for the chain - Shreds: off-chain computation, moderately efficient - Orderflows: off-chain computation, extremely efficient But we have the same problem with the word "Orderflow". It is the most efficient and healthy approach for the market, but people assume orderflow is a bad practice because it is often associated with sandwiching. There are already companies in the market representing around 35% of generated revenues. I won't name them in this tweet, but looking at Circular's top 10 makes it very easy to understand (one of them does not use Jito because they are a direct competitor 👀). Today, 35% of revenues are generated through orderflows. Which means 65% of revenues are still generated through shreds or spam. My opinion: no clear leader has emerged, and there is no solution that everyone knows, for several reasons: - The use of the word "MEV" - The use of the word "orderflow" - The fact that these players want to stay in the dark, fearing a bad image and the loss of customers After considering all these factors, and coming back to the article, I decided that with Circular, we are going to build a layer. Death to the terms "MEV" and "Orderflow". If the only purpose is to monetize transactions in a healthy way, why not call it exactly what it is? A monetization layer. Healthy. Clean. Transparent. Without harmful behavior for the chain. At @Circular_fi, we want to create the first Solana transaction monetization layer, giving full traceability to flow providers while also making it accessible to everyone. Everyone should be able to monetize their transactions. Validators. Wallets. dApps. AI. Traders. If this monetization layer had existed in early 2025, we could have already redistributed over $1 billion to flow providers. But our goal is not only to receive transactions earlier than the rest of the network simply to get an arbitrage hedge. Our goal is to build technologies on top of this hedge that will benefit the entire ecosystem. The ultimate goal? To use our monetization layer as a prediction layer, allowing us to build the most powerful and trustable aggregator in the ecosystem, giving traders the ability to truly get the most optimal quote and execution possible. That is possible. We're going to do it. Accelerate.

If you understand the data better than Solscan on Solana, you're on the right way 😎 Solscan output token: 0.001452081 SOL Circular output token: 2.990537666 SOL 3bLYrzph5JwqwRq3K7pF23hkm33cc3vJYBp8ZJRbLHcdheZgPX2RtR2fYga32CGDfDYSrh56Ptr7pR3QiZw1GAn1

Have you ever heard about transaction monetization layers on Solana? It was a $1b market in 2025 but it could be bigger in the future. In theory on the Solana network, a transaction remains private until it is officially recorded on the blockchain. But in practice, there is an entirely different world evolving in parallel. A monetization layer is built on top of Solana, allowing actors known as flow providers to monetize their transactions. Flow providers can take several forms: - Traders: They can share their own transactions with a monetization layer - dApps / Wallets: Axiom, FOMO, Terminal, ... - Landing providers: Temporal, Astralane, Fast, ... - RPC / MEV infrastructure: Helius, Jito, Harmonic, ... - Validators: Figment, Jupiter, Binance, ... (These are examples. It does not mean that all of them already use a monetization layer). A transaction on Solana is more than just a transaction. It creates value. The main value that can be monetized in a healthy way for a company is through arbitrage. If a transaction is going to create an imbalance or inefficiency in an AMM and you have that information in advance as a flow provider because you are part of the transaction transmission path to the network, you can monetize it. Today, monetization layers are mostly focused on arbitrage because it allows a transaction to be monetized without having any harmful impact on the end user, simply capturing the value that was leaked during the trade. Monetization layers are important for the ecosystem because they enable two main things: - Generate extra yield for flow providers - Stabilize markets, helping keep quoted prices as close as possible to execution prices during trades This is where monetization layers stand today. But if we take the thinking further, what is the future of monetization layers? In my view, there are several ways these layers can improve, especially around prediction, which could enable a healthier and more optimal DeFi ecosystem with better resource sharing enabled by this type of infrastructure. Routing prediction The approach taken by @dflow is very interesting and similar to what some arbitragers already do: determine an execution route initially, then during on-chain trade execution by the validator, try to find a route that generates more output than the one determined off-chain. But this approach has some limitations. During on-chain execution, due to Solana's structure, they can only search very limited on-chain routes, typically between 1 and 6 liquidity pools maximum depending on the size of the trade. If you have advance information about the trades that are going to be executed, this would allow an aggregator to pre-compute the impact of incoming trades and determine a more optimal route to maximize output value. Let's take an example: I trade 100 USDC → SOL. - Jupiter shows me an output of 1 SOL. - DFlow shows me an output of 1 SOL, but during execution finds a better route and gives me 1.02 SOL. - An aggregator based on a Monetization Layer shows me 1.05 SOL because it has already accounted for the impact of transactions before they are even executed and can predict the fees/tips required to reach an optimal position in the block. This approach could drastically improve DeFi and the prices traders receive for their trades. Price prediction PropAMMs allow SOL-USDC traders and now increasingly more trading pairs, to get better on-chain prices compared to CEXs like Binance. That is a fact. This also implicitly means that traders will increasingly migrate on-chain to get the best price, right? In the future, monetization layers will be able to predict the price of any asset in advance. We are not talking about predicting the price of a memecoin here, but the price of Nasdaq assets and gaining an edge over traditional traders. Large HFT firms compete in microseconds to execute their orders in traditional markets. Having even a few milliseconds of advantage could create a real competitive edge with massive impact. Prediction is, in my opinion, one of the most important areas a monetization layer should focus on in the future, without having to leak the transaction itself. This is the crucial point: the monetization layer must have the transaction in advance, but must absolutely not leak it, in order to avoid behavior that is harmful to the network. This is where @Circular_fi positions itself. We are currently building a monetization layer for Solana and its ecosystem participants, enabling better revenue sharing for flow providers while also improving the efficiency of DeFi. What about you? How would you improve DeFi efficiency with a monetization layer built on top of Solana?

Money laundering or a setup error? Either way... this guy paid $55k in fees to transfer $0.08 on solana... Even my bank doesn't charge that much :( 3YHhY3pSjowRqG84oNj5i595KuyAhmd52D8qaVSq3y6hGJBS6UpZc9Wy3jq3Mi3bgWjrkmkv5qf3iDMeE1yM1h8J

Have you ever heard about the inefficiency of AMMs? When you trade on-chain, you lose money. As a daily Solana user, I make swaps every day. Simpler, cheaper, faster. But I have a crazy statistic to share with you: traders on Solana lost $1 billion in 2025 because of the math. What does math have to do with any of this? An AMM/liquidity pool operates, for the most part, without an order book but using math (x * y = k). This mathematical formula is the core concept behind an AMM. Let's take a simple example: x = USDC y = SOL Market price of $SOL is $100. If I deposit 1,000 USDC, I’ll also deposit 10 SOL so that my liquidity pool has a market price of $100 per SOL (1,000/10 = $100). Now, let's do the calculation (x * y = k): 1,000 USDC (x) * 10 SOL (y) = 10,000 (k). Great so we know the mathematical value our liquidity pool aims to achieve: 10,000. Now let's make a trade of 250 USDC to exchange it for SOL… how much do you think you'll get back? If the price is $100 per SOL, by exchanging 250 USDC you'll get 2.5 SOL, right? Absolutely not! Let's do the math again: 1,250 (1,000 initial USDC 250 deposited by your trade) * 7.5 (10 initial SOL - 2.5 withdrawn by your trade) = 9,375. 9,375, not 10,000. Whereas: 1,250 * 8 = 10,000. So the liquidity pool will give you 2 SOL instead of 2.5 SOL. You just lost 0.5 SOL. This is what's known as AMM inefficiency. Now the question is: how can you protect yourself from this? Arbitrage. You can recover the value you lost by arbitraging liquidity pools. In this case, if I buy SOL from another liquidity pool and sell it on this one, I’ll rebalance it to 1,000 USDC – 10 SOL and capture the lost value (0.5 SOL). It was by realizing this that we built @arbmesol for the @colosseum. It's an extension that lets you recover the SOL you lose during your trades on Solana as cashback directly into your wallet. Now that you know this and that a solution exists… you're the only one responsible for losing SOL due to the inefficiency of AMMs. Trade to Earn.

Today I gave a pitch on @Circular_fi and our ambitions with @arbmesol at @theBlocksSummit. It's always an incredible experience to pitch as a founder. But pitches are rarely just pitches, we're mingling with other players in the blockchain space. It doesn't matter if the other founders are from Solana, Ripple or Ethereum… sharing ideas and understanding other ecosystems is always the best part of this kind of event. Exploring new ideas is the key. I think I love it… @SolanaEvents, where's your next event?

Confirmed. Our submission to the Solana Colosseum Frontier hackaton was well received 🫡 What have we done? We've created an extension that lets you earn cashback on your Solana trades. Just that. arena.colosseum.org/projects…

Great evening at the @theBlocksSummit welcome reception, tbh I was surprised to see people from the Solana ecosystem… we’re everywhere 🔥

Dammn! You can now get the best solana quotes on @Titan_Exchange and earn cashback on your trades if your price impact is high! Best of both worlds.

I'll be giving a pitch on @arbmesol this Thursday to explain how traders can get back some of their slippage as cashback through arbitrage on Solana. Major blockchain events like Chain of Blocks are rare in Malta and deserve a big support, can't wait to be there!

New supported platform on @arbmesol, we just integrated @MeteoraAG to protect your trades from high slippage and price impact on @solana. Lots of new dApps are coming... stay tuned!

Have you ever looked at what types of transactions land in a block on @solana? In the last 7 days, 25% of blocks were filled with arbitrage transactions and hasn't dropped in CU with the p-token upgrade. What's most surprising is when you dive into the data and realize what kind of transactions are landing in the blocks. On-chain arbitrage is a trading strategy that allows you to buy a token from liquidity pool A and instantly resell it on liquidity pool B. This is a very important strategy for DeFi, because in addition to generating profits for arbitragers, it stabilizes the market and makes it more efficient: a quote on @JupiterExchange or @Titan_Exchange doesn't necessarily mean that the value displayed on your screen will be the value you actually receive... Arbitrage exists so that the value displayed on your screen is as close as possible to the value you will actually receive. But the question we might ask is: why haven't the CU consumed by arbitrage decreased since the p-token upgrade? There are several strategies in arbitrage: - (Quality) Backrunning with orderflow: obtaining a trade before it even hits the network to determine whether its price impact will create an opportunity, and placing an arbitrage trade immediately after it land on the network (this is what we do with @arbmesol). - (Quality) Analyzing new transactions that have just land on the network via shreds; this strategy is the most difficult and requires an ultra-optimized infrastructure to ensure you get the transaction first, which is why @doublezero now plays such a crucial role in MEV. - (Spam) This strategy is completely different. The idea behind it is to select a few tokens with the highest arbitrage potential and volume at a given moment and send at least one transaction per block so that your on-chain program can calculate whether there is an arbitrage opportunity between different pools when it executes. The spam strategy is why arbitrage didn't drastically reduce these CU costs during the p-token upgrade. CU is used to calculate opportunities, not to execute them, which results in maintaining the high volume of CU used even though AMMs and token transfers are now 90% cheaper. Arbitrage is constantly evolving. A year ago, spam strategy accounted for 50% to 60% of transactions in a block; now it's less than 25%. At @Circular_fi, by tracking the entire arbitrage market, we’ve seen that over the past year, spam arbitrage has been used less and less as the trend reverses and shifts toward orderflows. An orderflow is a simple concept: for example, when @AxiomExchange sends your transaction to the network, they simultaneously route it to a server so they can calculate the value they can generated if your transaction creates an arbitrage opportunity. But an orderflow is also much more efficient for the network: if the AMM's inefficiency or the value leaked by the trader is captured in a single index within the block (for example, index 250 for the trade transaction and index 251 for the arbitrage transaction), this creates a "patch" for the AMM's inefficiency and contributes to a much more stable network. My vision for arbitrage over the coming months and years is that everything will happen through orderflows; a sort of parallel layer alongside the normal network that will allow entities to perform arbitrage without spamming the network, while simultaneously stabilizing it. Now the question we might ask is: who should get these profits... the trader? the validator? the dAPP? or the arbitrager?

If you think @arbmesol is a game-changer for traders on @solana... just wait to see the next update 🫡