How the floor works

What it is

The contract holds a reserve of ETH. It fills with 3% of every buy, and nothing can empty it except a seller coming to draw from it.

When a seller draws from it, the contract burns the tokens it has just bought back, in the same transaction. The buyback price is simply the reserve divided by the remaining supply, and because both fall together and in exactly the same proportion, that price does not move by a single wei.

Buys raise it. Burns raise it. Buybacks leave it flat. It has no downward movement.

floor = reserve / supply

That is the whole product. The rest of this page exists so you can check it instead of believing it.

The proof

Round starting numbers, so you can follow without a calculator.

Reserve   E = 100 ETH
Supply    S = 1,000,000,000 tokens
Floor       = 100 / 1,000,000,000 = 0.0000001 ETH per token

A buy of 100 ETH

3% goes to the reserve. The supply does not move.

E : 100 -> 103          S : unchanged
Floor : 0.0000001 -> 0.000000103          +3%

A sell of 10,000,000 tokens on the curve

1% is burned, so 100,000 tokens. The reserve does not move.

E : unchanged          S : 1,000,000,000 -> 999,900,000
Floor : 0.0000001 -> 0.00000010001          +0.01%

The burn is tiny at the scale of a single sell. That is deliberate, and it is said here before anyone else measures it: the burn is the finish, the ETH is the engine.

A sell of 100,000,000 tokens at the floor

The seller does not go through the curve, they draw from the reserve. They sell 10% of the supply at once.

They receive   100,000,000 × 0.0000001 = 10 ETH
The contract burns their 100,000,000 tokens

E : 100 -> 90           S : 1,000,000,000 -> 900,000,000
Floor : 90 / 900,000,000 = 0.0000001          identical

Identical to the wei. Someone just removed 10% of the supply and the floor of everyone else did not move.

And without the burn

E : 100 -> 90           S : 1,000,000,000 (unchanged)
Floor : 90 / 1,000,000,000 = 0.00000009          -10%

Without the burn, the first large seller takes 10% off everyone's floor. That is exactly what happens to every project that announces a backing: it publishes a ratio that melts on every exit.

The two parameters, and why they are inverted

3%   on buys, in ETH, to the reserve
1%   on sells, in KLIK, burned

Both immutable. There is no function to change them. Everyone else does the opposite, and there are three reasons for this one.

It is the buy that builds the floor. The ETH is the engine, the burn is the finish, and section 2 puts numbers on it. Taxing the exit would tax the wrong side to fund the wrong lever.

The cheapest possible exit is the one argument that cannot be argued with. A project that announces a floor and takes 10% to reach it announces a floor it partly confiscates.

It inverts the honeypot signature. A large exit tax plus talk of a floor is the exact shape of every scam in the sector. Publishing 3 / 1 puts the project on the other side of that pattern by construction, and the contract has no function to change either number.

The cost of this choice is real and goes in the copy rather than in a footnote: at equal volume, the reserve fills more slowly than it would with 5 / 5.

Coverage

coverage = reserve / market cap = 3% × turnover

Turnover is cumulative buy volume divided by market cap. Coverage is three percent of turnover. That is the entire economy of the project in one line, and it tells the holders exactly which lever they are pulling.

The second reading of the table is the right one. The numerator is cumulative, the denominator is instantaneous. A token that gets sold does not lose coverage, it gains it, and it keeps gaining until 100%, where by construction the fall stops.

Above 100% the market does not hold: when the price drops below the floor it becomes profitable to buy on the curve and sell back to the contract, and those round trips push the price back up to the floor. 100% is an asymptote, not a target to beat.

This is a conversion table, not a projection. No real launch was used to calibrate the left column.

Why there is no cap

A cap on buybacks, a cooldown, a max wallet, a decaying anti-dump tax: these are the sector's reflexes and all of them are absent here. Only the cap deserves an explanation.

The reflex says: limit buybacks to 2% of the reserve per block, so a whale cannot drain it. That reflex is wrong here.

A floor that stops working during the event it exists for is not a floor. It is a screenshot.

What the contract cannot do

Verification by absence. Each of these is a function that is not in the contract, and a missing function can be checked by reading verified code rather than by watching a team.

The hook address is written into the pool key. A Uniswap v4 pool cannot change its hook. There is no upgrade path, so there is no future version that adds a door.

Once the contract is deployed, every entry above will link to the exact place in the verified source where you can see it is not there.

Limits

This section is called Limits, not Risks and certainly not Disclaimer. The limits are written into the tool, not into an annex.

The floor protects against selling. Against nothing else.

It is denominated in ETH. In dollars it moves with ETH, and a fall in ETH lowers what the floor is worth to you even though the floor itself has not moved.

It can stop rising. A counter that does not move describes, honestly, a project where nothing is happening.

It can be lost to a bug in the contract. This is a contract that holds ETH: a bug in the reserve, and the one number said to be unable to fall goes to zero.

The published supply counts every unburned token, including those sitting in the pool. That gives a lower floor than the flattering variant someone will compute on day two. Both are published, and the conservative one is the one shown large.

The mechanism has never been proven on a testnet, no audit has been ordered, and no legal opinion has been requested. None of that is hidden on another page.