WLFI’s Buyback & Burn Strategy Sparks Debate

World Liberty Financial’s (WLFI) new buyback-and-burn program is grabbing headlines — but investors are asking a sharper question: will it actually be enough to save the token?

After plunging 41% in just one month, WLFI moved quickly to announce a strategy aimed at restoring confidence. The project said it would use 100% of the fees from its liquidity pools on Ethereum, Solana, and BNB Chain to buy WLFI tokens from the open market and send them to a burn address, permanently removing them from circulation.

While the mechanism sounds straightforward, the lack of clarity on just how many tokens are being destroyed has left the community divided.

WLFI confirmed the plan after a community vote, where more than 99% of holders backed the initiative. The promise of “total transparency” — with all buybacks and burns to be published — helped win overwhelming support.

But investors quickly noted a catch: only liquidity fees directly controlled by WLFI will be used, with community-managed liquidity pools excluding from the scheme.

In other words, the burn is not open-ended. Its scope is limited, and for many, that raises doubts about its real impact on price stability.

Investors Calls for Bigger, Bolder Burning

Even with the swift rollout of WLFI’s buyback plan, doubts linger over its long-term impact. The project has yet to release any official figures on the number of tokens actually burned, leaving investors to rely on speculation.

Some community chatter suggests as many as 4 million WLFI could be destroyed daily — roughly 2% of the annual supply — but there is no guarantee this pace is sustainable, or that it will ever be achieved.

Some in the WLFI community argue that the current plan doesn’t go far enough. A contributor known as Ghost suggested the project should also tackle the elephant in the room: the 80% of presale tokens still locked.

Ghost’s proposal introduces a hybrid model. Investors could either sell their frozen tokens back to WLFI for burning or allow them to unlock gradually through a vesting schedule of 40% per year. Either option, supporters argue, would reduce the looming risk of a massive supply dump when those tokens eventually hit the market.

By not addressing this presale overhang, critics fear WLFI’s current burn effort risks being seen as symbolic rather than structural. Despite its limitations, WLFI’s move highlights a broader trend in crypto: the use of buyback-and-burn models to signal commitment and reduce supply.

Similar strategies have been employed by projects like Binance Coin (BNB) and Shiba Inu (SHIB), often with mixed results. Success depends not only on the mechanics of burning but on how transparently and consistently the process is executed.

For WLFI, the question is no longer if tokens are being burned, but whether the burn is meaningful enough to stabilize its market and reassure investors after a sharp September downturn.

Token Burning Alone Won’t Guarantee Stability

WLFI’s burn program is a step in the right direction, but it looks more like a patch than a solution. Without tackling the massive presale token overhang — and without releasing hard data on how many tokens are actually leaving circulation — the initiative risks falling short of its promise.

In crypto, perception is reality. If the community feels the burn is too small, or too slow, confidence may erode further. For WLFI to regain its footing, it must move beyond symbolic gestures and embrace deeper structural reforms.

Otherwise, the project risks being remembered less for innovation and more for a slow burn — of both tokens and trust.