 
 
Sandeep Nailwal, the co-founder of Polygon, a layer-2 network atop the Ethereum blockchain, has sparked a public debate on social media after asking members of the crypto community whether the network should revert the POL token ticker back to its original MATIC name.
Should POL Token Transition Back To Its Original MATIC Ticker?
In a Tuesday post on X, Sandeep Nailwal said he personally thinks that the Polygon network should stick with POL as enough people know about it. However, he continues to hear feedback that MATIC, unlike the newly adopted POL, was a much stronger and familiar ticker especially among retail users who are now confused about the token’s whereabouts.
The counter-argument I keep getting is: “the guy in the Philippines running a sari-sari store, or an Uber driver in Dubai, knew MATIC… and now he has no idea where it went,” Nailwal wrote.
As such, he asked his X followers whether they think they should change the token back to MATIC. “I’m genuinely curious what the broader community thinks, because this feedback keeps coming up,” he said, calling it a “thought experiment”.
Polygon developers changed the token’s ticker from MATIC to POL in September 2024 as a crucial component of the project’s network upgrade under the “Polygon 2.0” roadmap. POL maintained MATIC’s existing tokenomics and supply of 10 billion tokens. The changeover aimed to transform the network into a zero-knowledge Ethereum Virtual Machine (zkEVM) system and consolidate liquidity across multiple chains, with POL becoming the native gas and staking token for Polygon’s main proof-of-stake chain.
 
An X user going by the name Mo Ezeldin believes the ticker should be reverted to MATIC as most early adopters associate the project with that name and retail familiarity is a crucial factor.
“We haven’t really seen a new wave of retail entrants into the markets, so going back to Matic might actually be the play here,” Ezeldin opined.
Meanwhile, others, like martijnde_boer, suggested that Polygon should stick to POL and instead focus on building because fundamentals matter more than tickers.