projects have spent approximately $640 million to repurchase tokens in 2026 — but buybacks do not equate to sustainable value. Token buybacks have become one of the biggest trends in crypto tokenomics. From the beginning of 2026 to date, projects have spent approximately $640 million to repurchase their own tokens, representing a 17% increase compared to the same period last year. Hyperliquid and https://t.co/8gnyZr3GA8 alone account for nearly 90% of this total. The mechanism is straightforward: protocols use revenue to purchase tokens on the market, creating additional demand. If the tokens are subsequently burned, supply decreases, potentially generating upward price pressure and tying token value more closely to protocol revenue and usage. Hyperliquid is said to allocate up to 99% of its revenue to repurchasing and burning HYPE, while https://t.co/8gnyZr3GA8 dedicates 50% of its revenue to repurchasing and burning PUMP. Over $446 million in PUMP has been removed from circulation. However, buybacks come with opportunity costs. Every dollar spent on repurchasing tokens is a dollar not invested in development teams, product expansion, acquiring other businesses, or strengthening the balance sheet. More importantly, buybacks do not guarantee token price increases. PUMP remains approximately 50% below its September 2025 all-time high despite continuous repurchases and burns. UNI has also lost about half of its post-UNIfication proposal gains. The key takeaway for investors is to distinguish between a buyback program funded by sustainable protocol profits and one designed solely to artificially create demand for the token. Buybacks can enhance the attractiveness of a protocol’s tokenomics, but they cannot turn a weak business model into a sustainable one. The most important question is perhaps this: if tomorrow the buyback program stops, will there still be strong enough reasons to continue holding the token?