One wallet, 208 throwaway wallets, 59% of a launch
Every first buyer of $LAUNCH seemed to have its own funder, and our first check called it clean. Following the money up ten layers showed one wallet behind the creator and the four biggest first buyers. This is how the trick works, why it fooled us, and what we changed.
The addresses
Coin
$LAUNCH
AhBidGAgv6QbKSWfrSCegGrzFLcBx4E5FNYTKHNQQj6CRaydium LaunchLab coin (Token-2022), created 2026-10-25 11:34:19 UTC
Run the bundle check →Creator (signed the creation)
HgKfkiGWeToD…
HgKfkiGWeToDfhMBjfniZvg2KhHhyw6CdqWQtz6mxVdkBought 1.01% inside the creation transaction; its own funding came out of the same tree
Open the cluster report →Source wallet (tree root)
GU93MxGDeTyc…
GU93MxGDeTycGPbJoJPMtA7aMZuEuqr79ujFcpXHaBTjSeeded the creator and all four buyers between 11:30:41 and 11:30:43 UTC
Open the cluster report →Creation-block buyer
5oTeyqhFcdAT…
5oTeyqhFcdATnXiPbHsXRkpDc5NTeAqyqgmJVg1XCC7L30% at position 49, right behind the creation; sold it all one second later
Open the cluster report →First buyer
DLN4zjRq4U6M…
DLN4zjRq4U6Mtx8esNfiomEZU88ko1pXU1KPXRyr3StT10.02% at position 132 of the block one second later
Open the cluster report →First buyer
BZk5nJkciQxg…
BZk5nJkciQxgr1nCZjhaeXcWXuV69kpvuJdTbL5mUs3y9.91% at position 133
Open the cluster report →First buyer
9SQRyCCniML5…
9SQRyCCniML5Eb9SBszuZrYdChwZnk63SFuVC4j6YgE79.22% at position 134
Open the cluster report →What the data shows
30% bought right behind the creator, in the creation block
The creator made $LAUNCH at position 48 of Solana block 461242059 and bought 1.01%. Position 49, the very next transaction, bought 30% of supply. Regular buyers cannot land directly behind a creation: it takes a bundle sent together with it.
One second later, the 30% was split across three more wallets
In block 461242061 the creation-block wallet sold its entire 30% at position 131. Positions 132, 133 and 134, back to back, are three other wallets buying 29.15% between them (10.02%, 9.91%, 9.22%). On a holder list this looks like four separate buyers. It is one position moved into three wallets.
Each buyer had its own funder, which is the point
Look one step back and every buyer was funded by a different brand-new wallet. That is what made our first check say "funded independently". Those funders were themselves funded by other brand-new wallets, ten layers deep, passing the same odd amounts over and over: 0.0100015 SOL 120 times, 0.3755389 SOL 40 times, 0.040001 SOL 30 times in the part we read. Each transfer was paid for by a different wallet, so not even the fee payer links them.
All five trees start at one wallet, within two seconds
Following the biggest payment upward from each wallet, the creator and all four buyers reach the same wallet, GU93…aBTj. It sent the first payment into each tree between 11:30:41 and 11:30:43 UTC, three and a half minutes before the coin was created. The four buyer trees alone used at least 208 throwaway wallets and finished in 19 seconds (11:30:42 to 11:31:01). Together the four buyers took 59.2% of supply.
The source was hidden too
The source wallet holds nothing today and, in the transfers we read since August 26, sent money out in 219 separate bursts. The 176.47 SOL it used here came from a wallet created on October 23 that pulled the money out of stake accounts and was never used again. Staking accounts are a known way to break a money trail.
Why our checker first said clean, and what we changed
Two things. First, it found the creation block by time, and on busy seconds it landed six blocks late, so it never saw the creator or the buy right behind it. It now reads the coin’s very first transaction directly. Second, it traced each buyer’s funding only one or two steps back, which is exactly what these trees are built to defeat. It now follows fresh pass-through wallets upward, for the creator and recently funded buyers, and links wallets that meet at one source within two minutes after three or more layers. The page for $LAUNCH now says: the creator and 4 first buyers were funded from one wallet through layers of throwaway wallets.
How to spot it yourself
1. Open a big early buyer and look at how it was funded: several identical, oddly precise amounts (like 0.040001 SOL) from brand-new wallets within seconds is the tell. 2. Open one of those senders: if it was also created minutes earlier and received the same kind of odd amounts, you are inside a tree. 3. Do the same for the creator. Or paste the coin into the unbundle Bundle Check, which now walks these trees for you and links every step.
The launch, block by block
Re-read from mainnet on 2026-11-02; every signature is finalized. Positions are the transaction order inside the block. Shares are of the launch supply.
Where each tree starts
The first payment from the source wallet into each tree, and how many brand-new pass-through wallets the money crossed on the way down.
Limitations
- •This shows the creator and the first buyers were funded from one source, not who controls them. On-chain data cannot establish identity.
- •The source wallet sent money out in many bursts over two months. It may belong to a funding tool used by more than one person; the burst that funded this launch, though, paid the creator and four buyers within two seconds.
- •The walk follows the biggest payment into each wallet. The relay counts and the 208-wallet figure are what we read (six layers of the four buyer trees), so they are a minimum.
- •A 16.71% buy in the creation block came from an older wallet with separate money and is not counted here.
- •We do not quote a price peak or losses: those depend on market data we did not verify. At the time of writing the coin was valued at about $24,000.
- •Nothing here is a legal conclusion or an accusation of unlawful activity.
Check it yourself
Open the six launch signatures on Solscan and compare block and position. Then open each seed transfer and walk down: every wallet in between was created minutes earlier and passes the money on. Paste the coin into the unbundle Bundle Check to see the same result. If something does not match the chain, tell us and we will correct it.