A network of token launches on Robinhood Chain has been linked to an alleged organised extraction operation that may have generated at least $18.43 million from 53 launches over roughly two months.
Pseudonymous on-chain analyst Wazz published the investigation on 27 September 2026, tracing links between wallets, funding transactions and proceeds across launches between 10 July and 21 September.
The full $18.43 million figure has not been independently reproduced, but checks of nine launches, one funding flow and several tax exemptions support parts of the pattern described by Wazz.
How 53 Token Launches Were Connected
The investigation began with the DEED token before expanding into a wider group of launches that appeared to share funding and wallet relationships.
Wazz linked 45 of the 53 launches through transfers in which proceeds from one project were used to fund another.
In some cases, the funds moved from one launch to a central wallet and were then sent to the funding wallet of another project just seconds before a new batch of wallets was funded.
Four additional launches were connected through private keys that signed funding batches, while another four shared a collector wallet that received proceeds from multiple launches.
Wazz wrote,
“What ties them together is money: the proceeds of one launch pay the key that funds the next.”
The pattern was particularly notable because most of the launches had a large concentration of tokens bought almost immediately after deployment.
Opening Wallets Took Most Of The Supply
Wazz found that almost every launch in the group had more than 70% of its supply bought through bundles containing between 70 and 200 wallets.
Many of the projects were launched through Pons V2, where creators can waive the platform's anti-sniping tax for selected addresses.
An independent check of nine late-August launches found that creators waived the tax for between 15 and 25 wallets.
One to three blocks later, a single transaction bought tokens for each exempt wallet, leaving the creator and those wallets with between 82% and 86% of the supply before the tokens moved into a Uniswap v4 pool.
The same bundling contract was used across those opening purchases.
However, its use alone does not establish that the launches were controlled by one group, as the contract also served unrelated users and appeared in 25 of the 53 launches identified by Wazz.
The stronger connection came from the combination of tax exemptions, bundled wallets, concentrated opening supply and the movement of funds between launches.
DEED Shows How The Funds Moved
DEED provided one of the clearest examples of the funding pattern.
About 40 minutes before the token launched, an address sent 15.98 ETH in a single batch to 50 wallets, including the creator, the wallet used for the opening purchase and 24 wallets that had received anti-sniping tax exemptions.
After launch, those wallets and the creator controlled about 86% of the token supply.
The funded wallets began selling one second after the launch, while the creator withdrew fees from Pons' fee escrow contract.
The available transaction flow amounted to about 199.8 ETH, worth roughly $535,000 at the time of the check.
That figure was lower than the 228.92 ETH listed in Wazz's investigation, and the difference has not been reconciled.
A linked address later bridged about 86.5 ETH to Ethereum through Relay on 24 September, swapped it for roughly 231,000 DAI and transferred the funds to a new address.
Fake Token Names Added Another Layer
The investigation also found instances where the same token name appeared across multiple launches before an official contract address was announced.
Wazz identified three PINK launches, three CRUMBS launches and three DEED launches within the wider network.
The analyst alleged that some of these earlier launches may have been used to create interest around a familiar token name before a separate contract was presented as the real project.
CRUMBS was estimated to have generated $3.12 million in extracted funds, while LEGS accounted for about $2.9 million and PINK about $1.44 million.
The three tokens later fell more than 99% from their respective peaks.
The Operation May Be Larger Than 53 Launches
Wazz also identified at least two other serial deployment operations that could not yet be directly connected to the 53-launch network.
Those operations allegedly generated millions of dollars across dozens of launches, suggesting that bundled token deployments may extend beyond a single group.
Much of the identified money remains in ETH across Robinhood Chain and Ethereum, meaning it cannot simply be frozen.
Wazz estimated that about $18.11 million from the wider operation remained unspent when the transactions were reviewed.
The findings do not establish that every Robinhood Chain launch using bundled wallets was part of the same operation.
The commercial bundling contract was used by unrelated users, while a high concentration of opening supply by itself does not identify who controls the wallets.
Robinhood Chain Revenue Rises As Launch Activity Grows
The alleged extraction comes as meme coins and tokenised stocks have become major sources of activity on Robinhood Chain, the Arbitrum-based Ethereum Layer 2 network launched in July.
Robinhood has reported around $50 million in revenue from the network to date.
Monthly revenue increased from roughly $3 million in July to about $7 million in August before reaching approximately $40 million in September.
Against that backdrop, the investigation adds another risk for traders assessing newly launched tokens on the network.
Bundled buyers, waived anti-sniping fees and a large share of supply being acquired within seconds do not by themselves prove wrongdoing.
However, the combination can provide useful on-chain clues for checking a token's creator wallet, funding source and early trading activity before buying.
Catherine
Anais
Kikyo
Weatherly