Solana token market making.
Built around execution.

Is Astrum a fit for your project?

Start a conversation if your team has a defined liquidity problem and wants to agree what a provider will actually deliver. We can assess the following needs:

• A token launch: venue options, initial inventory, trading assumptions and launch readiness.
• An existing market: executable prices at meaningful order sizes, quoting availability and inventory constraints.
• A provider review: a clearer fee breakdown, reporting method, operating scope or transition plan.

We need an identifiable project contact and enough information to assess the token and intended markets. We do not offer guaranteed volume, a token price floor or exchange admission. Liquidity services cannot create independent demand for a token.

Choose the right liquidity structure

Searching for a Solana liquidity provider can mean funding a pool, operating a market-making strategy or arranging RFQ execution. These are different services, with different controls and costs.

RFQ execution

In Jupiter’s webhook RFQ model, market makers respond to quote requests and process accepted swaps. Astrum’s current live operation uses Jupiter RFQ. A proposed token still needs suitable pricing inputs, inventory and technical validation; there is no promise of request flow or fills.

Pool liquidity

A pool-based scope concerns deposited assets, the pool’s pricing mechanics and how positions are managed. A limited pool setup with scheduled reviews is different from a continuously operated quoting mandate. Pool or other venue work is assessed separately from our existing RFQ operation.

Additional venues

If your token needs CEX coverage or another on-chain route, we identify the access, integration and operational work before quoting that scope. Planned connectivity is not presented as an existing live integration.

For the protocol mechanics, see the official Jupiter RFQ overview and supported-token interface. These describe Jupiter’s system, not an endorsement of Astrum or eligibility for a particular token.

Agree what good execution means

Metrics must fit the route: order-book depth, pool price impact and RFQ response quality are not interchangeable. Our proposal comparison checklist gives your team specific questions to ask.

How an engagement starts

01 / Share your market and constraints

Send the token mint address, existing or planned venues, launch status, timeline and the execution problem you want to solve. Tell us which details are provisional.

02 / Establish feasibility and scope

We review fit and identify the information or technical work needed. Where a separate paid assessment is appropriate, its deliverables, price and decision criteria are agreed before it starts.

03 / Agree commercial and operating terms

The proposal separates setup, recurring services, trading inventory and external costs. It also defines permissions, risk limits, reporting, acceptance and exit. Implementation begins only after the relevant stage is commissioned.

04 / Validate, launch and review

For an agreed mandate, validate the execution path, balances, controls and reporting before launch. Review the service against the measurements and coverage specified in the agreement.

See our market-making cost guide for the budget structure and an illustrative limited-pilot example. That example is not a universal Solana market-making tariff.

Read the evidence before the pitch.

Our monthly execution record covers Astrum’s own-capital operation. It includes the measurement window, capital denominator and known limitations. Settled activity is evidence of execution; it does not establish a complete portfolio return or predict results for another token.

Astrum is developing its issuer-services business. The published own-capital record is not a completed client case study. For the company, founder and investment context, visit our investor page.