$LOOM

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 16 wallets that bought in the launch block (the first two blocks, under a second) took 23.83% of the supply. Grouped by the wallet that first funded them: 2 linked groups hold 22.21% 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.

11 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 E3PdGxyYucCHEVjPpTGjATeh4Mf9s9oBi3RfMyLVWLQK (from GeckoTerminal). No other coins from this wallet in our records yet. Open the wallet ›

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: 100%.

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. Linked buyers took 21.47% of the supply.

• 4 launch buyers (21.47% of supply) were first funded by 5aK4…MuwQ.

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 9 of its 838 wallets here: 0.76% bought in the launch block. 596 of the 752 coins it was in with an outcome fell 80%+ within a day. source
• The teamThe dev and 16 early buyer/holder wallets; 8 connected to the dev (funding or crew), holding 0.7%; their 330 earlier coins with an outcome: 262 fell 80%+, 6 went 2x+ within a day. source
• The story behind itThe coin's story is an X post by @ace67_x (verified) with 2 likes. It was posted 1 min before the coin's first pool. The post names this coin. source
• Liquidity depthPool liquidity is $1.4K, 100.1% of the $1.4K market cap. Selling 1% of the supply (about $14) would get roughly 2.0% less than the quoted price (estimate for a standard pool). source
• Same ticker elsewhere16 other coins trade as $LOOM. The biggest is Loom on Robinhood Chain ($78.4K, first pool 59d ago). It is older and bigger than this one, so check you have the address you meant. 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.