WealthVille
ECAT
E
EMBER
E

ECAT-EMBERon Meteora DAMM v2

Chain
Solana
TVL
TVL $2.70K
APR
1.7% APR
24h Volume
$53.87 24h vol
Pool address
D4WXdMxp…XYtp · observed 2026-10-26

Liquidityhelp

lock

$2.70K

Total value locked

$53.87

24h volume

×0.0 turnover

Yieldhelp

trending_up

1.7%

advertised APR

Fee yield, annualized

≈ -11.7%

adjusted · net of IL (est.)

My Position

account_balance_wallet
Live DataUpdated 4220m ago
warning

AI Verdict

Proceed with Caution

WealthVille AI evaluation verdict for this liquidity pool investment opportunity.

check_circleFee-driven yield: 99% of APR from trading fees
warningElevated risk score: 100/100
tips_and_updates

Enter only with a pre-set exit rule: remove liquidity if 24-hour volume falls materially below $54 or pool TVL declines materially from $3K, and rebalance only while observed swaps justify the monitoring cost; do not treat 1.7% as a fixed return.

syncAI analysis is refreshing in the background

table_chart

Performance Breakdown

Metric24h / Day7d / Week30d / Month
Total APR1.7%——
Fee APR1.7%——
Volume$53.87——
Fees Earned$0.43——

Data sourced from Raydium Protocol, Birdeye, and DexScreener. Updated every snapshot cycle.

analytics

Efficiency Metrics

Computed

Deterministic efficiency metrics computed from on-chain data for this liquidity pool. All values are calculated directly from pool analytics — not AI-generated.

Sustainable Gross APY
5.8%(trailing 24h fees)
Impermanent-Loss Drag
−17.5%(realized, 30d annualized)
Adjusted Net APY (est.)
-11.7%(drags exceed yield)
Volume / TVL Ratio (24h)
0.02x
Fee Yield per $1 TVL / Day
$0.0002
Fee APR Sustainability
99% from trading fees(sustainable)
leaderboard

Pool Rankings

compare_arrows

#1 of 1 ECAT-EMBER pools

by AI Farmer Score

hub

#692 of 2467 on meteora-damm-v2

by AI Farmer Score

leaderboard

Top 14% of all Solana pools

overall rank #19606 of 148664

lightbulb

How This Pool Works

Beginner Friendly

This page provides real-time AI analytics and performance data for the ECAT-EMBER liquidity pool on Meteora DAMM v2. Data is sourced from on-chain Solana activity, Birdeye, DexScreener, and CoinGecko.

Providing liquidity here means depositing ECAT and EMBER into a shared pool so traders can swap between them. You receive part of the trading fees, but large price differences between the tokens can leave you with a less valuable mix than if you had held the tokens separately.

description

Pool Analysis

trending_upYield Source Breakdown

The quoted APR decomposes into 1.7% from trading fees and 0.0% from rewards. 99% means the displayed return depends on actual swap flow rather than emissions. Reward duration is not established, so emission decay cannot be assigned a reliable schedule; because this is a MEMECOIN pool, fee income and exit liquidity should be reassessed as attention shifts.

shieldRisk Assessment

Seven-day impermanent-loss history and the seven-day share of liquidity currently inside the active tick range are not established, so recent IL and range efficiency cannot be verified from these metrics. Concentrated liquidity adds out-of-range risk when ECAT and EMBER move apart, while memecoin exposure adds sharp price gaps, liquidity withdrawal, and rapid demand decay. If incentives are introduced or change later, emission decay can reduce the reason to remain before fee flow compensates.

tollECAT Context

ECAT is one side of this concentrated-liquidity pair, and the supplied pool data does not establish its liquidity depth across other venues. A sharp ECAT move against EMBER can push the position out of range or leave the LP holding more of the depreciating side, while a return toward the entry ratio can create impermanent loss relative to simply holding both tokens.

tollEMBER Context

EMBER is the other side of the pair, with no supplied measurement of its external liquidity depth. EMBER price shocks, thin exits, or a decline in market attention can reduce swap fees and make the LP inventory increasingly one-sided; its price path relative to ECAT determines range utilization and impermanent loss.

lightbulbSimple Explanation

Providing liquidity here means depositing ECAT and EMBER into a shared pool so traders can swap between them. You receive part of the trading fees, but large price differences between the tokens can leave you with a less valuable mix than if you had held the tokens separately.

token

Token Details

EC
ECATSolana
Explorer

ECAT is one of the two assets paired in this liquidity pool.

EM
EMBERSolana
Explorer

EMBER is one of the two assets paired in this liquidity pool.

info

Pool Details

Pool Address
D4WXdMxperGBik53V2MUjmAUzVFP3bXoML7T77bSXYtp
Protocol
Meteora DAMM v2
Chain
solana
Fee Tier
—
Pool Type
AMM
Token A
ECAT (AcLWggxm…)
Token B
EMBER (5dvXTZ5q…)
Created
9/14/2026
lock

Non-Custodial

Your funds are never held by WealthVille. All positions are on-chain.

source

Verified Data Sources

Raydium, Birdeye, DexScreener, CoinGecko, LlamaYield

psychology

AI-Powered Analysis

Proprietary scoring model trained on historical Solana DeFi data

⚠️ WealthVille AI analytics are for informational purposes only. APR, TVL, and AI scores are based on historical and real-time data and do not constitute financial advice. DeFi investments carry significant risk including impermanent loss and smart contract risk. Always do your own research.

quiz

Frequently Asked Questions

The current reward component is 0.0%, while fee income is 1.7% and 99% comes from trading fees. Because the pool is a MEMECOIN pool and reward duration is not established, any future emissions could decay without a reliable schedule; the displayed APR should not be treated as permanent.

The current reward component is 0.0%, while fee income is 1.7% and 99% comes from trading fees. Because the pool is a MEMECOIN pool and reward duration is not established, any future emissions could decay without a reliable schedule; the displayed APR should not be treated as permanent.

The reward portion would fall toward zero, leaving fee income of 1.7% as the relevant yield source. Since the current reward component is 0.0%, the main practical effect would be reduced incentive to provide liquidity unless swap volume and fee generation remain sufficient.

The reward portion would fall toward zero, leaving fee income of 1.7% as the relevant yield source. Since the current reward component is 0.0%, the main practical effect would be reduced incentive to provide liquidity unless swap volume and fee generation remain sufficient.

The pool carries a 100/100 risk score and a N/A verdict, with memecoin-specific risks including rapid price moves, thin exits, and declining attention. ECAT or EMBER can also move far enough apart to create out-of-range liquidity and impermanent loss; recent IL and range statistics are not established here.

The pool carries a 100/100 risk score and a N/A verdict, with memecoin-specific risks including rapid price moves, thin exits, and declining attention. ECAT or EMBER can also move far enough apart to create out-of-range liquidity and impermanent loss; recent IL and range statistics are not established here.

Use a rule based on deteriorating activity rather than the headline APR: consider exiting if volume falls materially below $54, TVL drains from $3K, or fee generation no longer compensates for monitoring and price risk. A sustained loss of market attention or a sharp ECAT or EMBER move is also an exit signal.

Use a rule based on deteriorating activity rather than the headline APR: consider exiting if volume falls materially below $54, TVL drains from $3K, or fee generation no longer compensates for monitoring and price risk. A sustained loss of market attention or a sharp ECAT or EMBER move is also an exit signal.

No defensible break-even period can be calculated because seven-day impermanent-loss history is not established and the pool's future fee flow is uncertain. In principle, cumulative fees at 1.7% would need to exceed the position's realized impermanent loss, while 1.7% is only an annualized estimate rather than a guaranteed recovery period.

No defensible break-even period can be calculated because seven-day impermanent-loss history is not established and the pool's future fee flow is uncertain. In principle, cumulative fees at 1.7% would need to exceed the position's realized impermanent loss, while 1.7% is only an annualized estimate rather than a guaranteed recovery period.

Latest insights

Research, Recaps & Solana Alpha

Data-driven yield analysis and weekly market wraps — written for active LPs.

All insights