What happened?
CryptoSlate reported on an analysis of data from blockchain analytics firm Bitquery, according to which only roughly 10% of wallets in the FOMO app on the Solana network were profitable after fees. The data covers a cohort of users over the period of January to October 2026.
The key finding has two layers:
- The app's fees erased thin profits for a portion of users. According to the data cited by CryptoSlate, the recorded fees pushed 32% of wallets that were still in profit before fees into the red.
- The larger share of losses, however, was not caused by fees but by the token trading itself. In other words, fees were the final blow in borderline cases, while the main cause of losses was the trading itself.
What exactly does "after fees" mean?
The difference between the before fees and after fees result is crucial here. "Before fees" only measures whether a user made or lost money on token price movements. "After fees" subtracts from that result the costs charged by the app.
The 32% figure describes a narrow group: users who were just barely in the green and whom fees tipped into the red. By contrast, the vast majority of loss-making wallets would have been in the red even without fees, because they lost directly on their trades.
What this means and what it doesn't
This is exactly the type of data worth reading carefully. It does not say that user losses were down to "fees alone." It says the opposite: fees were decisive only for a small group of borderline accounts, while the rest lost money on the trading itself.
With similar statistics on wallet profitability, it's worth watching three things:
- How profitability is defined (realized gains, unrealized, or both).
- What period the cohort covers and whether it includes market extremes.
- Whether all costs are included in the calculation (app fees, network fees, slippage).
This is not advice on what to do. It's a reminder that the cost of trading and the outcome of trades are two different things, and they need to be kept separate.
Is this connected to Polygon's expansion onto Solana?
In short: not directly. In the same week, Decrypt, The Block, and Cointelegraph reported that Polygon expanded its payments stack (Open Money Stack) onto Solana. According to these sources, the expansion gives companies on Solana a single integration that connects bank funding, embedded wallets, cross-chain transfers, and global payouts. Among the first users, according to Decrypt, is the cross-border firm Kira, and the move, according to Cointelegraph, builds on the earlier launch of Tron support and the acquisition of Coinme.
But this is a separate piece of news from the Solana ecosystem, not part of the FOMO analysis. The only thing linking them is that both concern Solana. None of the sources claim that the two events are directly related.
What remains unclear
The published data does not state Bitquery's exact methodology, the total number of wallets in the cohort, or precisely how FOMO structures its fees. We also don't know the distribution of account sizes. Until these details are public, the 10% figure is a useful signal, not a definitive verdict.