SSD: Does frequent powercycling / high number of power on count reduce lifetime?

Frequent power cycling on rotating HDDs decreases lifetime, I know that.

Since on SSDs there are no moving parts I would expect that powercylcing them wouldn't reduce their lifetime. So you can easily put your PC to sleep without worrying about your drive dying earlier.

However CrystalDisk info shows be for a SanDisk SSD (S-ATA) and a WD SN750 (NVMe) Power On Count number which is increased every time after PC wakes up from sleep. So I wonder if it does impact drive life time. If this attribute wouldn't affect drive lifetime then why should it be recorded?

PS: I know putting PC into StandBy is nowadays on Windows by default hybrid standby which means writing a hibernation file to disk. On hybrid sleep a smaller hibernation file is saved than on normal hibernation mode, see https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/exchange/en-US/01793f78-aedd-4f9d-941f-e410b5bf2121/what-data-is-not-saved-in-emergency-hinbernation-file-hybride-standby-mode On rotational disks you notice that because resuming with cut power, so from emergency hibernation file takes significantly longer than from a normal/full hibernation file. So putting you PC to (hybride) sleep increases lifetime writes / TB written and thus puts a additional wear on your drive and reducing lifetime thus a little bit. However in this question I focus solely on the power on count if this will impact/reduce lifetime of your SSD.

If this attribute wouldn't affect drive lifetime then why should it be recorded?

Because it can. SSDs use the same SMART reporting as HDDs do. The field for power on count is there (maybe even mandatory, I don't know). There's no harm in using it.

So putting you PC to (hybride) sleep increases lifetime writes / TB written and thus puts a additional wear on your drive and reducing lifetime thus a little bit.

Don't worry about it. Modern flash and wear leveling techniques are so good that even QLC drives are good enough for majority of users.