Your JPGs won't stop anyone from taking the font, the pixels are still clear because there's so much contrast. Just reducing your image to 2 colours gets back the original:

Saving as a JPG only works when there is subtle information that can be lost, such as AA or fine, low-contrast details like what you'd get in a drawing. Don't bother with that kind of protection for your fonts. People who want to steal your work will find a way to do so, and it probably won't even be that difficult.
To make money, focus on the font's features - e.g. accented letters (of which preview only a small subset), including multiple sizes and weights of the same face (which is more challenging for a pixel font), and perhaps features like ligatures. Also, while pixel fonts often have standard spacing, some of these look like they would benefit from some kerning work, so that's something else you can include in your fonts without it being steal-able from an image.

I'm also not sure it' a good idea to sell that Star Wars font. It's not technically illegal, but typically people distribute fonts like that for free both to be on the safe side, and because that's just the non-jerk thing to do since they're so heavily based on someone else's work.

Bottom left is hard to read, but I suspect increasing the letter spacing to 2px instead of 1 would help a lot.
The big example in the middle doesn't really feel like a "pixel" font, it feels a bit rough, like a decently-hinted font being rendered at a small resolution with no AA, rather than something hand-made. Also, the long tails on Щ and Ц aren't very readable at that size, and don't quite feel like they belong because they don't have the same style of weight variation as the rest of the letters.

All in all, the fact that you're doing 10+ fonts per week shows. These fonts look nice, but some could benefit from taking some extra care to make them more cohesive and more usable, especially if you're planning to sell them.

Also, since they're pixel fonts, you may have made some clones of existing fonts unintentionally, especially in the smaller sizes. The top left and the 2nd from top on the right in particular look like things I've seen frequently elsewhere, simply because there are only so many ways you can use that space and even fewer ways to make it look good. I would avoid selling those fonts. Even though you put all the same work in, it might not go over well with customers and other font designers. However, it would be fine if they're included as additional sizes of other fonts that have the same general look.

The lock/gem/center-metal-thing bits are off-center on them.
I think the silver bits are too light, they "shine" more intensely than the gold parts, so the chest doesn't really read as "lesser" to me. If I saw the two together, I'd guess the silver chest is the fancier one, perhaps platinum.

These look very flat. They're full of texture, but there aren't shadows. Where is the light coming from?
To help the chest look more interesting, you should change its silhouette. For example, make the metal bits stick out a pixel. That would both break up the silhouette, as well as give you more areas where you can have shadows that show the form of the chest better.

The water's edge doesn't change its shape or opacity at all, which makes it look like a solid object. Water isn't solid, different parts of it move at slightly different speeds and in different directions, because the beach isn't a perfectly flat surface and there is turbulence in water.

Since the water is liquid and doesn't move as a single sheet, the previous wave will be moving back out as the next wave comes in. Your animation doesn't have that at all.

Here's a gif I find very useful, it has all the key features:

- The shape of the wave changes as it moves inland
- The wave goes over the previous wave pulling back
- The waves spread and cover a larger area as the sand blocks the path and there's nowhere for that water to go but outward
- As it moves further inland and gets flattened by the sand in the way, the water gets shallower and therefore more transparent.
- The sand doesn't dry so quickly xP
- The wave motion isn't perfectly smooth. Each new wave "trips over" the previous wave as it goes out, this causes the breaking wave and foamy white bits.
- The tripping doesn't always occur at the same spot on the beach, it's random-ish (depends on water consistency, wind, etc). For a looping animation having it always be the same wave is fine, just make sure that the wave break doesn't occur in a perfectly straight line, have it vary. You don't even have to have the wave-break be a single line, it can and probably should be broken!

Your PNGs still have JPG noise in them. What is your process for working on and saving your art that this happens? it's bizarre, and it's ruining what otherwise would probably be some good graphics!

These cloud shapes are better, though the interior shadows don't follow those stylised blocky shapes as well, and the blockiness doesn't always read as intentional. Try building the clouds out of squares and rectangles and rounding the corners only a little. The top part of the top right cloud has the most interesting stylization, everything else feels wishy-washy. This could be a cool style, but you have to commit to it if you want it to work.

An outline is fine, the problem isn't the outline, but the shading.