Onchain investigator ties $18.4 million in Robinhood Chain memecoin drainage to single rug pull ring

Blockchain data reveals that the creators of nine Pons V2 deployments identified by investigator Wazz bypassed the launchpad’s anti-bot penalty for specific addresses, which subsequently acquired every single launch in less than one second.

An onchain examination shared to X on Sunday by the pseudonymous researcher Wazz indicates that a single coordinated scheme drained no less than $18.43 million across 53 token debuts on Robinhood Chain over a span of roughly two months.

An evaluation of Robinhood Chain records by The Block verified the snipping mechanics for 10 of the tokens referenced in Wazz’s thread, alongside one of the transactional pathways utilized to connect the deployments. The Block did not independently verify the cumulative figure of $18.43 million.

During their X thread published at 8:59 a.m. Eastern Time, Wazz stated that virtually every rollout was targeted for 70 percent or more of its total supply by clusters consisting of 70 up to 200 addresses.

The majority of these cryptocurrencies debuted via Pons V2, the researcher noted. Pons functions as the foremost token issuance platform on the newly introduced Robinhood Chain network.

Wazz connected 45 of the rollouts by tracking capital transfers originating from the collection address of one token and moving to the financing wallet of the subsequent asset. The investigator linked four additional projects using private keys that signed batch funding transactions for multiple debuts, while another four were tied together through a common aggregation address.

"The returns from one issuance finance the private key that seeds the next," they noted.

Among Wazz’s compilation, CRUMBS—which aims to let consumers convert valid receipts into equity-token perks from familiar retail brands—recorded the largest extraction measured in fiat at $3.12 million, trailed by LEGS at $2.9 million and PINK at $1.44 million. Wazz mentioned spotting at least two additional recurring creators that could not be explicitly tied to this particular syndicate.

Because the bulk of the capital remains held in Ether, it cannot be frozen, according to Wazz. Wazz informed The Block that valuations for each launch were calculated based on the market price of Ether around the exact timeframe of its release or subsequent liquidation.

Creators exempted their buyers from Pons’ anti-sniping tax

Much like various alternative token launchpads, Pons V2 distributes fresh digital assets along a mathematical bonding curve. Official documentation indicates that the platform imposes a 99 percent anti-snipe levy on acquisitions occurring during the initial moments following release to discourage automated trading bots, with the fee tapering to zero after approximately five seconds. Project originators possess the capability to waive this charge for a team clustering its initial purchases across multiple addresses, supporting up to 32 recipient destinations.

Wazz’s publication featured a matrix containing 11 debuts, 10 of which occurred on Pons V2. The Block successfully authenticated all 10 on the blockchain.

The Block’s examination uncovered that an identical behavioral pattern manifests across the nine rollouts appearing from late August onward. The creator deployment transaction exempted between 15 and 25 wallets from the anti-bot fee, and one to three blocks later, a sole transaction executed purchases for all of them simultaneously.

Within every single one of these debuts, that unique transaction exhausted the bonding curve, automatically transitioning the digital asset into a Uniswap v4 liquidity pool. Following the opening transactions, the deployer and the excused addresses collectively controlled between 82 and 86 percent of the total supply, matching the exact proportions that Wazz determined were acquired via bot-like bundling.

All nine initial acquisitions were routed through a single unverified contract deployed on August 28. Wazz communicated to The Block that this script belongs to a commercial bundling utility utilized by numerous unrelated participants. Out of the 53 rollouts featured on Wazz’s inventory, 25 relied on it for their initial buys. The Block was unable to establish the identity of the utility’s operator.

EQUITY, which went live on August 12 prior to the existence of that specific contract, adhered to a less rigid version of this template. Its creator excused 31 addresses from the fee, and 21 of them acquired tokens approximately one second after inception through separate transactions, leaving those wallets and the founder in possession of 65.7 percent of the supply.

The compilation put together by Wazz incorporates three separate debuts named CRUMBS, PINK, and DEED that appeared within a roughly 24-hour window of each other, with the token appearing in Wazz’s ledger representing the final iteration of each series. Wazz asserted that the network orchestrated fraudulent rollouts of hyped assets to extract funds from purchasers prior to disclosing the legitimate contract destination.

From DRAFT to DEED

Wazz pointed to DEED—the deployment that reportedly triggered their inquiry—as a prime illustration, stating that capital derived from an earlier asset named DRAFT financed the operation. The Block mapped out the transfer route outlined by Wazz onchain and verified every individual transaction.

At 9:36 a.m. Eastern Time on September 14, 98 wallets that previously held DRAFT transferred ETH to the identical destination within a three-second window, totaling a combined 179.88 ETH. That receiving entity redirected the complete sum in a single transaction to a wallet starting with 0x9d06.

On September 21 at 7:09 p.m. Eastern Time, the 0x9d06 address dispatched 50 ETH to an alternative location. That subsequent entity then forwarded 20 ETH at 7:11 p.m. Eastern Time to a wallet beginning with 0xf268.

Sixteen seconds later, the 0xf268 address transmitted 15.98 ETH in a unified batch transfer across 50 recipients. The beneficiaries encompassed the creator of DEED, the address responsible for funding DEED’s initial purchase, alongside the 24 additional wallets excused from the anti-snipe fee by the creator.

DEED went live 40 minutes subsequent to this sequence at 7:51 p.m. Eastern Time, and its creator alongside the exempt addresses concluded the initial purchase controlling 86 percent of the supply.

The 0x9d06 address financed an alternative digital asset also called DEED on that exact date. At 5:53 p.m. Eastern Time, it routed 18 ETH to a distinct destination, which financed the funding wallet for that identically designated token’s opening acquisition in under a minute.

DEED’s payouts

The 92 addresses financed by 0xf268 accumulated 130.75 ETH by liquidating DEED into its respective Uniswap pool, according to blockchain records reviewed by The Block. These addresses initiated sales of the digital asset one second after its release.

Furthermore, DEED’s creator extracted 69.06 ETH worth of creator commissions out of the Pons fee escrow contract, ledger data demonstrates.

This aggregates to approximately 199.8 ETH, translating to roughly $535,000 based on prevailing valuations, compared against the 228.92 ETH tally cited by Wazz for DEED. Calculations by The Block exclusively account for addresses funded by 0xf268. Wazz noted that their computation encompasses 98 wallets, incorporating 67.55 ETH originating from creator commissions, which decreases to 212.94 ETH after discounting the 15.98 ETH distribution transfer.

On September 24, the 0x9d06 wallet deposited roughly 86.5 ETH into a smart contract managed by the cross-chain protocol Relay. Relay subsequently released around 86.3 ETH to an address on Ethereum, which exchanged it for approximately 231,000 DAI before transferring the stablecoins to a fresh location the following day, where the funds remained static as of Sunday’s publication.

Robinhood debuted Robinhood Chain, an Ethereum layer-2 network constructed using Arbitrum’s technology framework, on July 1, with memecoins and stock-pegged assets driving a substantial portion of the ecosystem’s transactional volume to date.

Revenue generated via Pons propelled Robinhood Chain toward a milestone of $6 million in daily fees earlier this current month. The Robinhood Chain analytics dashboard maintained by The Block monitors the network’s revenue metrics, trading throughput, and participant counts.

The Block has reached out to both Pons and Robinhood seeking official statements.