User-paid fees
observed$65.2M
User-paid swap fees across covered deployments. [1]
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · retrieved 2026-07-16
Multi-chain AMM exchange · Ethereum and multiple networks
Uniswap
Uniswap is a family of permissionless AMMs deployed across multiple networks. Traders pay pool fees; LPs receive most of them, while governance can activate protocol-fee shares that feed TokenJar, releasers, and the Firepit burn mechanism.
Economic brief
Three answers before the ledger.
- What users pay for
- Users generate activity by swapping through v2/v3/v4 pools.
- What the token gets
- Protocol fees create a conditional UNI burn pipeline.
- What gross flow hides
- The fee base is large, but holder capture depends on which pools/chains have the fee switch activated and how reliably accrued assets progress through the burn pipeline.
Protocol-directed
observed$4M
Assigned to protocol fee/burn mechanism; not retained operating income. [1][3]
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · retrieved 2026-07-16
Holder-linked
observed$4M
Accrued/assigned to the burn mechanism. Executed UNI burn is not separately measured here. [1][3]
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · retrieved 2026-07-16
Net revenue
unavailableNot available
Operating costs and release/burn execution timing are not period-matched. [1][3]
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · retrieved 2026-07-16
Money flow
$100 normalized trailing-30-day allocation
Derived from normalized fees less protocol/holder flow. Activated pool configurations differ; this is the aggregate observed mix, not the fee switch for every pool.
The diagram and table use the same values. Color is reinforced by labels and classifications.
01 · PayerPool traders and swappers
Users generate activity by swapping through v2/v3/v4 pools.
02 · Fee base$65.2M
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC)
derivedLP residual93.9%
Participant income · $61.2M of the normalized fee base
Assigned to UNI burn pipeline6.1%
Token burn · $4M of the normalized fee base
| Recipient | Share | Per $100 | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
| LP residual | 93.9% | $93.9 | Participant income |
| Assigned to UNI burn pipeline | 6.1% | $6.1 | Token burn |
Normalized statement
Every number keeps its boundary.
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC). USD. Review and retrieval: 2026-07-16. Missing data is never displayed as zero.
User-paid fees
observedUser-paid swap fees across covered deployments. [1]
Method, period & unit
DefiLlama trailing-30-day fees adapter total.
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · USD · retrieved 2026-07-16
Protocol-directed flow
observedNet protocol revenue
unavailableHolder-linked value
observedLP / supply-side income
derivedA reconciliation residual. DefiLlama's separately queried supply-side series was $62.09M and did not reconcile, so it is not substituted silently. [1][2]
Method, period & unit
$65,220,623 user fees − $3,955,507 protocol/holder flow.
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · USD · retrieved 2026-07-16
Validator / node income
unavailableNetwork validator/sequencer fees are separate chain costs, not Uniswap protocol income. [2]
Method, period & unit
No defensible period-matched figure available.
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · USD · retrieved 2026-07-16
Token incentives
source conflictTreasury income
unavailableThe activated protocol-fee flow is modeled as burn-directed, not retained treasury income. [3]
Method, period & unit
No defensible period-matched figure available.
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · USD · retrieved 2026-07-16
Unclassified residual
derivedReconciles by construction; source-side discrepancy is disclosed in the LP note. [1]
Method, period & unit
$65,220,623 fees − $61,265,116 residual LP flow − $3,955,507 protocol flow.
Trailing 30 days ending 15 Jul 2026 (UTC) · USD · retrieved 2026-07-16
Economic profit
unavailableToken value capture
What the token actually gets
Protocol fees create a conditional UNI burn pipeline. TokenJar accrual, release, conversion, and final UNI burn are distinct states and should not be conflated.
Sustainability
What gross flow still hides
The fee base is large, but holder capture depends on which pools/chains have the fee switch activated and how reliably accrued assets progress through the burn pipeline.
Recipients
Who receives value
- LPs receive the majority of swap fees.
- Protocol-fee assets enter the TokenJar/releaser/Firepit path.
- UNI holders benefit indirectly only when the pipeline produces actual supply reduction.
- Validators/sequencers receive separate network fees outside Uniswap revenue.
Governance
What can change
- UNI governance can configure protocol-fee shares within version-specific limits.
- Governance and operational releasers affect the timing of conversion and burn.
- Incentive programs can subsidize liquidity without changing organic fee revenue.
Risk register
What can break the thesis
- Accrued protocol fees may be mistaken for completed burn.
- Coverage differs by chain, version, and activated pool.
- Separate supply-side API series did not reconcile with the fee total in this snapshot.
- Liquidity can migrate when LP economics change.
Model history
How the economics changed
- Uniswap historically directed pool fees to LPs.
- The UNIfication governance change activated protocol-fee-funded UNI burn mechanics.
- This profile now separates accrual into the mechanism from executed burn.
Source ledger
Follow every material claim.
Primary sources establish mechanisms. DefiLlama supplies a consistent cross-protocol time series and is labeled as third-party normalization.
- Normalized third-party data
Uniswap metrics and methodology ↗
- Retrieved
- 2026-07-16
- Source updated
- Trailing snapshot through 15 Jul 2026
- Official documentation
Protocol fee configuration ↗
- Retrieved
- 2026-07-16
- Source updated
- Living documentation
- Official documentation
Uniswap protocol fee flow ↗
- Retrieved
- 2026-07-16
- Source updated
- Living documentation
- Governance source
UNIfication proposal ↗
- Retrieved
- 2026-07-16
- Source updated
- Proposal discussion