$LIFTOFF

Groups of wallets that keep buying the same coins: launch crews (they buy launch blocks together) and holder guilds (they sit among the top holders of the same coins). Only groups with 2+ wallets in this coin.

The 5 wallets that bought in the launch block (the first two blocks, under a second) took 6.01% of the supply. Grouped by the wallet that first funded them: 2 linked groups hold 5.85% of it.

Grey = a wallet with no funding link to the others. Taken out = sales minus buys plus liquidity out minus in, from the money-out measurement above.

The dev, the wallets that bought the launch block, and holders the dev funded: how they're connected and how their earlier coins did. The launch map below draws the connections.

Groups of wallets that keep buying launch blocks together, across coins we checked. A crew is a buying pattern; it doesn't say who runs it.

3 of the wallets that bought this coin's launch block also bought the launch block of other coins we checked. Sniper bots and launch groups both look like this.

Creator wallet CjNpovjKrbodp6E7kT67ab6qLUjUfLufuUxD6vf3Qicf (from GeckoTerminal). 1 other coin from it in our records: Open the wallet ›

$GPRINT GHOSTPRINTNot scanned yet. – 21h ago

Who each of the biggest holders is to this launch, from the launch block, first funding, insider flags, known groups and each wallet's first trade.

Source RugCheck, read 54 min ago.

The 20 biggest holders (bigger bubble = bigger share). Grey: pools and known services. Pink: wallets RugCheck flags as insiders. Same colour with a line to an outer dot: first funded by the same wallet.

Holders, insider flags, labels and liquidity locks: RugCheck. Shared funders: our own read of each wallet's first transaction.

The creator in the middle, the wallets that bought in the launch block around it (bigger bubble = bigger share of supply), and the wallets that funded them on the outside. Buyers with the same colour were funded by the same wallet.

What we find when we compare the coin's website, code, token, launch timing, liquidity, ticker and wallets against each other and against public address labels.

• Cabals in this coin1 known group of wallets is in this coin. The largest, launch crew #1cc6b0, has 3 of its 304 wallets here: 3.43% bought in the launch block. 142 of the 149 coins it was in with an outcome fell 80%+ within a day. source
• The teamThe dev and 4 early buyer/holder wallets; 3 connected to the dev (funding or crew), holding 3.4%; their 5 earlier coins with an outcome: 3 fell 80%+, 1 went 2x+ within a day. source
• Website doesn't show this token's addressThe token's address doesn't appear on its website or in the site's code; the site shows other addresses (B7in…xQVk, 9XSe…eQvW, 9tEh…ZNSV). source
• On-chain features in the codeThe site's code contains wallet or contract code. source
• Website age vs launchThe Internet Archive had no saved copy of the site (asked 53 min ago): it is probably as new as the coin.
• Same ticker elsewhere2 other coins trade as $LIFTOFF. None of them has real liquidity and trading behind its price. source
• Contract permissions (GoPlus)GoPlus finds none of the risky permissions it checks for. source
• Creator's earlier coinsThis creator launched 1 other coin we checked.

How earlier coins with the same signals did: the share that fell 80% or more within 24 hours of our check, against coins without the signal. It describes past coins; it doesn't predict this one. All signals

• Checked isn't the same as safe: these checks describe what the token allows and what the website runs, not what anyone will do.
• "Nothing found" means not visible on the public page; servers and private code are invisible to us. Not financial advice.