In 2026, the on-chain trading market is undergoing a structural transformation driven by the "source of user traffic." Independent trading terminals, once essential tools for meme traders, now face intense pressure from token launch platforms. In February, Pump.fun, the leading meme token launch platform in the Solana ecosystem, completed its acquisition of the trading terminal Vyper. This follows its October 2025 purchase of Padre, which was subsequently rebranded as Terminal—marking another pivotal consolidation. Meanwhile, a new player with an MPC multi-signature wallet background, 1Keeper, pivoted into the space at the start of the year. By late February, it launched a new "Smart Money" signal system, aiming to carve out a position in the crowded field by leveraging institutional-grade security and a late-mover architectural advantage.
This vertical integration from "issuance" to "trading," combined with differentiated entries from emerging players, signals that the on-chain trading terminal sector has officially entered its "second half." This article will offer an in-depth analysis of this ongoing competitive revolution, examining timelines, data breakdowns, sentiment divergence, and endgame scenarios.
Integration and Entry: Key Timelines and Event Recap
To understand the current competitive landscape, we first need to revisit several landmark events in this sector over the past six months.
In October 2025, Pump.fun pioneered acquisitions by taking over the trading terminal Padre and transforming it into the platform’s built-in Terminal. At the time, this move didn’t spark widespread discussion, but it paved the way for token launch platforms to enter the trading tool space.
In January 2026, Pump.fun established its investment arm, Pump Fund, and launched a $3 million developer hackathon, aiming to extend its reach into broader Web3 scenarios.
February 2026 saw the pace of consolidation accelerate. Pump.fun acquired Vyper, another trading terminal, and Vyper announced it would gradually shut down its standalone product beginning February 10, migrating its core infrastructure into the Pump.fun ecosystem. That same month, Pump.fun introduced a trader cashback mechanism, allowing token creators to choose between a "creator fee" and a "trader cashback" model, directly incentivizing trading users through the integrated Terminal.
By the end of February, newcomer 1Keeper made its official move. This trading terminal, spun out from an MPC multi-signature wallet team, launched a new "Smart Money" signal system featuring visual bubble alerts, market cap range filtering, signal targeting, and rapid trading entry. The goal: boost efficiency in signal recognition and trade execution.
This series of events outlines a clear evolutionary path: token launch platforms are rapidly filling their trading gaps through acquisitions, aiming to build an integrated "issuance + trading + analytics" ecosystem. New entrants, meanwhile, are leveraging their technical foundations and late-mover advantages to seek breakthroughs in functionality and user experience.
Data and Structural Analysis: The "Flow Interception" Effect of Vertical Integration
The sudden crowding and sense of crisis in the trading terminal sector stems from structural differences in user acquisition costs.
Independent trading terminals rely heavily on external channels for user acquisition. Whether through KOL recommendations on Twitter, community word-of-mouth, or incentive-driven airdrops, each user is essentially brought in via marketing spend—a costly traffic procurement model.
In contrast, token launch platforms like Pump.fun have a built-in traffic source. Data shows thousands of tokens are created daily on its platform, and every token creator and early buyer is a potential trading terminal user. Once Pump.fun integrated Padre and Vyper as its internal Terminal, these users were locked into a seamless "token issuance to trading" workflow within the same ecosystem, eliminating the need to switch to external tools.
This is the logic of "flow interception": when user traffic is absorbed internally by the platform, the external traffic pools that independent terminals depend on risk drying up. The competitive pressure from this vertical integration is far more lethal than simple feature competition—it strikes at the core of the business model.
Sentiment Breakdown: Market Divergence and Consensus on the "Second Half"
The sector’s upheaval has led to clear divisions in market sentiment, though there is some consensus about the endgame.
Mainstream View 1: Independent terminals as a "category" may disappear. Some analysts see Pump.fun’s string of acquisitions as a strong signal—trading terminals are unlikely to remain a standalone category for long. Just as Web2 platforms absorbed third-party tool functions as internal modules, trading tools may soon be just a built-in tab on token launch platforms or decentralized exchange (DEX) frontends.
Mainstream View 2: Differentiation is the only path to survival. Facing the risk of consolidation, existing players are each betting on a different direction. Market observers note GMGN is betting on "data network effects," aiming to build a data moat through user density. Axiom is betting on "platformization," striving to become an all-in-one "on-chain Binance" for spot, derivatives, and asset management. Photon is betting on "ultimate experience," focusing on the Solana ecosystem to deliver the fastest performance.
For newcomer 1Keeper, market attention centers on its "late-mover advantage." As a new face in the sector, 1Keeper’s disadvantages are clear: a small user base and weak brand recognition. However, its MPC multi-signature wallet background gives it deeper insight into asset security and institutional-grade requirements. Crucially, as a late entrant, it can bypass compromises and technical debt accumulated by early movers who rushed their product architectures, adopting superior design from the outset. Its "Smart Money" signal system, launched at the end of February, exemplifies this late-mover advantage—integrating signal recognition and trade execution for a smoother experience.
Examining Narrative Authenticity: Is "Integration" the Ultimate Solution or a Transitional Phase?
Pump.fun’s push for an "issuance + trading" integrated narrative sounds powerful, but its real effectiveness warrants careful scrutiny.
On the factual level, Pump.fun has indeed completed technical acquisitions and integration, and launched a trader cashback mechanism to incentivize use of its internal terminal. However, market feedback reveals these moves came against the backdrop of a sharp decline in platform revenue. Data shows Pump.fun’s fees plunged 75.6% month-over-month in January 2026, dropping to $31.8 million. This means the push for integration coincided with the waning of platform traffic dividends.
Thus, while the integration narrative is logically sound, its impact may not be "icing on the cake," but rather "timely assistance." Whether it’s a defensive response to a cooling market or an offensive tool to reshape the industry remains to be seen.
There are also variables at the exchange level. If leading DEX aggregators like Jupiter or Raydium decide to enhance trading terminal features on their frontends, the survival space for independent terminals will be further squeezed. At that point, trading "entry points" may no longer be a single tool, but scattered across issuance, trading, and other endpoints—creating a multipolar landscape.
Industry Impact Analysis: Competition Shifts from "Features" to "Ecological Positioning"
With Pump.fun’s consolidation and 1Keeper’s entry, the competitive dynamics for on-chain trading terminals are fundamentally shifting.
Previously, the focus was on feature completeness: who supports more chains, tracks wallets more accurately, or offers faster trading speeds. In the "second half," competition has elevated to ecological positioning.
- Traffic Positioning: Pump.fun occupies the "issuance-as-trading" source ecosystem. It no longer needs to fight for external users, but simply serves its vast internal base of creators and buyers.
- Data Positioning: Top players like GMGN hold the "data network effect" position. The more users, the more accurate the data, which attracts even more users—a virtuous cycle.
- Scenario Positioning: Photon commands the "ultimate performance" vertical scenario, catering to professional traders most sensitive to latency.
- Architecture & Security Positioning: 1Keeper aims for the "late-mover architecture + institutional security" niche. With its MPC wallet expertise, it can differentiate in asset security, multi-signature collaboration, and flexible new feature design.
For Gate users, understanding this shift in competitive dimensions is crucial. The future of on-chain trading tools won’t just be about "order placement software"—they’ll be carriers for different ecosystem philosophies and traffic strategies.
Multi-Scenario Evolution: Three Possible Endgame Paths
Based on the above analysis, we can logically forecast the future evolution of on-chain trading terminals. Drawing from the development patterns of Web2 tool products, the sector’s endgame may follow three scenarios:
Scenario 1: Integration (Platforms absorb tools)
This continues the current Pump.fun acquisition trajectory. Most independent terminal features become internal modules of token launch platforms or DEX frontends. The independent terminal brands disappear, but their technical teams and some features survive within larger ecosystems. In this scenario, only terminals with unique but non-essential functions become acquisition targets.
Scenario 2: Becoming a platform (Tools evolve into ecosystems)
A few leading terminals leverage accumulated users and data to expand upstream or downstream, evolving from a single "tool" into a composite "platform." For example, Axiom’s attempt to build an "on-chain Binance" typifies this path. If successful, it becomes a traffic and ecosystem gateway, no longer subordinate to others.
Scenario 3: Vertical champion (Niche survival with excellence)
Achieving absolute dominance in a highly specialized area that platform players can’t cover, such as Photon’s focus on ultra-low latency trading for Solana. These terminals may have smaller user bases, but extremely high stickiness and rigid, specialized demand, making platform players abandon integration due to poor ROI.
It’s worth noting that the low user migration costs in crypto mean the endgame could evolve faster and more unpredictably than in Web2. Opportunities for disruption always exist, as Blur rapidly replaced OpenSea as the market leader.
Conclusion
From Pump.fun’s aggressive acquisitions to 1Keeper’s quiet entry, the "second half" whistle for on-chain trading terminals has sounded. This is no longer a simple competition of features and speed, but a deep strategic battle over user traffic sources, ecological positioning, and business model survival. For every on-chain trader, understanding the underlying logic of this transformation may be more valuable in the long run than fixating on which terminal will launch the next "golden dog." The ultimate winner of the sector remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the era when "feature completeness" alone ensured survival is over.
