Decentralized perpetuals exchange (Perp DEX) Lighter recently launched its native token, $LIT, on December 30, 2025, through a Token Generation Event (TGE). This highly anticipated event saw early participants receive up to $675 million worth of tokens via an airdrop, according to data from Bubblemaps.
Lighter earmarked a significant 50% of its total token supply for ecosystem development. This included an immediate 25% airdrop to early participants of the 2025 points season, directly converting 12.5 million points from Seasons 1 and 2 into LIT at a rate of 20 tokens per point. While intended to reward loyal users, this distribution ignited a fierce backlash within the community. Roughly half of the community lauded the promotion as fair and community-centric, while the other half raised concerns about resource allocation potentially favoring insiders and the long-term implications of such a structure.
LIT Tokenomics: A Divisive Force in DeFi?
Critics swiftly labeled Lighter’s tokenomics as “VC-led,” drawing a stark contrast to more community-driven models like Hyperliquid. This sentiment stems from the substantial 50% allocation designated for the team (26%) and investors (24%), coupled with a 1-year cliff and a 3-year linear vesting schedule. Further fueling the controversy is Lighter’s issuance as a C-Corp entity in the United States, circumventing traditional foundation structures akin to Ripple’s XRP. This decision has raised questions regarding regulatory alignment and the utility of the token.
In the immediate aftermath of the airdrop, approximately $30 million in funds rapidly exited the Lighter platform. This exodus sparked intense community debate regarding short-term profit-taking versus long-term commitment, suggesting widespread disappointment among users who had participated in points farming under what some perceived as opaque rules. On-chain data corroborated this sentiment, revealing declines in both trading volume and Total Value Locked (TVL) as incentive-driven activities waned, leading to a more cautious community outlook.
Despite $LIT trading at around $2.80 in pre-sale markets, its Fully Diluted Valuation (FDV) has become a point of contention, estimated between $2-3 billion, with trading pairs on major exchanges still pending. Detractors have highlighted potential risks, including past platform downtime during market volatility and concerns that Lighter’s LLP (Liquidity Provider) pool mechanism could amplify losses in extreme market conditions.
Discussions have also centered on the protocol’s revenue—an annualized $105 million against a $700 million market capitalization—with concerns that this may not be sustainable post-hype, especially in the absence of a detailed buyback program, despite promises of value accrual for LIT holders. This capital outflow underscores a broader trend within decentralized perpetuals exchanges: a shift from incentive-driven growth to a more rigorous scrutiny of genuine demand.
Market sentiment regarding LIT’s FDV has notably soured. On Polymarket, the probability of LIT exceeding a $4 billion valuation within a day of its launch has plummeted to a mere 8%, reflecting pessimistic odds. Current pre-market estimates of $2-3 billion FDV highlight the division among traders, particularly under the pressure of upcoming token unlocks and unproven tokenomics.
While Coinbase’s roadmap inclusion and potential spot listing initially generated excitement, skeptics predict further declines if transparent mechanisms linking fees to buybacks or governance remain absent.
Looking ahead, the remaining 25% of the ecosystem allocation is earmarked for future points seasons, strategic partnerships, and expansion into spot trading (with ETH deposits already live). Lighter’s long-term success hinges on its ability to retain users once initial incentives conclude, proving the sustainability of its zero-fee model, the viability of its zk-Rollup technology, and its API revenue in a highly competitive landscape. As $LIT enters public trading, observers will be keenly watching to see if it can sustain momentum or succumb to the post-airdrop sell-off common in similar launches.
Disclaimer: This article provides market information only. All content and opinions are for reference purposes and do not constitute investment advice. They do not represent the views or positions of the author or BlockTempo. Investors should make their own decisions and trades. The author and BlockTempo will not be held responsible for any direct or indirect losses incurred by investors’ transactions.
