$O.O

How the launch buyers and top holders traded this coin (which app, which fee settings) and where the top holders' money came from. Read from each wallet's first trade of this coin.

Trading apps

Where the top holders' money came from

Apps are named only when the trade itself shows it (an account or program carrying the app's name, e.g. GMGN, Axiom, Jupiter); otherwise we show the wallet the trade paid a 0.1–3% fee to, or the program it went through. Priority fee = transaction fee minus the 5,000-lamport base per signature; a fee seen in 20+ other coins is marked as a common default. Exchanges are named only from our label book; a funder with 1,000 transactions in under a day is a busy hot wallet (exchange, swap service or bot). Facts, not part of the light. Measured 8 min ago.

The 2 wallets that bought in the launch block (the first two blocks, under a second) took 19.9% of the supply. Grouped by the wallet that first funded them: 0 linked groups hold 0% 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.

1 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.

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 21 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. Liquidity locked: 0.0%.

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.

• The teamThe dev and 1 early buyer/holder wallet; their 20 earlier coins with an outcome: 20 fell 80%+, 0 went 2x+ within a day. source
• The story behind itThe coin's story is an X post by @gettindevvy (verified) with 3 likes. It was posted 1 min before the coin's first pool. The post names this coin. 3 other coins we checked use the same post. source
• Liquidity depthPool liquidity is $0, 0.0% of the $48.9K market cap. Selling 1% of the supply (about $489) would get roughly 100.0% less than the quoted price (estimate for a standard pool). source
• Same ticker elsewhere1 other coin trades as $O.O. 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
• Reused X postThe X post x.com/gettindevvy/status/2119884312648503361 is also listed by 3 other coins we checked: $O.O ×2, $AMD. source

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.