In depth: Magnetix
This is an on-chain in depth token analyis report.
Last updated
Was this helpful?
This is an on-chain in depth token analyis report.
Last updated
Was this helpful?
This report is based purely on on-chain data analysis and does not classify or label any token as a scam or legitimate project. We aim to present raw blockchain insights in a simplified and accessible format. Readers are encouraged to interpret the data critically and draw their conclusions. Nothing in this analysis should be considered financial or investment advice. Additionally, the information reflects the state of the blockchain as of the report's publication date. Given the rapidly evolving nature of the crypto space, we recommend always checking the date and verifying if conditions have changed since.
Many tokens can share the same or similar names — always verify the contract address referenced in this analysis to ensure you're reviewing the correct asset. This report focuses solely on the specific token contract(s) mentioned; do not assume other tokens with similar names are related.
Token under investigation: : HPm64oG8eoCKuPj2MaHc1ruqdZ4Pe71UEGiUET1MtJAu (Solana)
Token report date: main analysis on 6.4.2025 if not specified differently
The report is divided into multiple sections:
The Magnetix (MAG) token is a Solana-based token with a fixed supply of 1 billion.
Token Description from the token's webapge:
Magnetix is a neo-religion culture coin, meaning it is more than a digital asset—it is a symbol of belief, manifestation, and shared success. The coin allows members to contribute to a collective energy field that fuels both personal development and financial growth. By participating in the Magnetix movement, individuals align their energy with abundance principles, using the power of spirituality and blockchain security to shape their financial future. Additionally, Magnetix operates on the idea that mindset and belief influence financial reality, making it the first crypto-based ecosystem built on spiritual and economic alignment.
We begin our token analysis with a chronological overview of key on-chain and off-chain events. This timeline highlights notable moments in the token’s lifecycle — from its initial creation and pool launch to early swaps, announcements, and unusual market activity. Understanding the sequence of events is crucial for identifying potential red flags, coordinated actions, or community momentum.
Main Events:
January 2025: We can assume the token planning was already being done.
A Twitter account was created in January.
First YouTube video published on 27.1.2025
2025-01-30 12:49:16 UTC — Domain registered for the website.
Early February: Start of bigger promotion
2.2.2025 - Created a Telegram channel with the first message sent.
4.2.2025 - First post on Instagram
4.2.2025 - First post on Twitter.
2025-02-27 20:12:14 UTC — Token deployer wallet created
2025-02-27 21:05:47 UTC — Token minted
2025-03-01 14:15:03 UTC — Liquidity pool launched
2025-03-01 14:15 UTC — Tweet about the token launch
2025-03-01 14:16:02 UTC — First swap executed
2025-04-02 16:30 UTC — 75% price dump
The data in this section is based on blockchain activity up to April 7, 2025. We begin by reviewing the token's price performance, which has been relatively stable and respectable compared to the broader market, except for a significant dump on April 2. Next, we’ll examine the liquidity metrics to understand the token's trading environment better.
The total liquidity for the MAG token currently stands at approximately $889,006.45, a solid level for a token of this size and age. The pool ratio appears balanced, with 38,127,761.5 MAG paired against 4,168.77 SOL, offering sufficient depth for most trades.
When it comes to liquidity provider distribution, the situation is less ideal. Currently, only three wallets are providing liquidity to the pool. One wallet holds the overwhelming majority, while the other two contribute only minimal amounts.
It’s worth noting that the main liquidity position has been burned, meaning it has been sent to an address with no access, and therefore cannot be withdrawn. This adds a layer of security by ensuring that the core liquidity cannot be pulled suddenly — a common tactic in rug pulls. But the rug pull can still be committed differently, so much more analysis is needed.
The token is deployed on Solana using the standard token program, which means the core functionality follows a widely audited and commonly used framework.
Our analysis did not identify any honeypot behavior, and the transfer hook, minting, freezing, and account permissions are all non-upgradable, reducing the risk of malicious changes after deployment. Additionally, the token is not mintable or closable and has no transfer fees.
The deployer wallet has only created one token, which has no signs of prior scam activity based on automated checks. The metadata is also immutable, providing further confidence in the token's static configuration.
Overall, from a smart contract perspective, the token appears secure and non-malicious, with no indicators of rug-pull mechanisms or backdoors.
The token has reached a market capitalization of $11.6 million.
The growth of Smart Money participation has been modest.
1 new wallet joined over the past 7 days
2 new wallets in the past 30 days
No new entries in the past 24 hours
In terms of experience, the token has attracted:
293 Experienced Buyers
294 Experienced Sellers
Resulting in a Net of -1 Experienced Traders, suggesting a balanced inflow and outflow from more seasoned participants.
The token has seen:
11,956 unique buyers and 10,665 unique sellers
101,364 buy trades vs. 90,186 sell trades
Total Buy Volume: $37.1M
Total Sell Volume: $36.6M
Total Unique Makers: 12,507
Total Holders: 5,913
Of all participating wallets, 10,929 had previously interacted with other tokens, which suggests a healthy share of older users. Many new suspicious wallets can indicate fake volume bots, but in this case, it seems ok.
Notably, 15 wallets previously flagged as confirmed scammers have interacted with this token. When compared to 12,507 unique makers, the number is pretty low.
Next, we turn to Off-Chain Social Analysis to assess the token's presence, engagement, and sentiment across social platforms and communities.
Group Members: 5082
Chat Creation: The first message was posted on 2.2.2205.
Link: The Discord link is on the website but is currently not functional.
Followers: 1,309
Posts: 707
Account Creation Date: January 2025
First Tweet Date: February 4, 2025
Understanding the behavior and history of the token creator is critical to any on-chain investigation. This section analyzes the wallet that minted the token, including its funding source, activity patterns, and interactions with other addresses or contracts. By tracing wallet behavior before and after token creation, we aim to uncover potential signs of coordination, suspicious movement, or connections to other projects.
Everything started with funding a deployer wallet on 27.2.2025 at 20:12:14 (UTC) with 19.22 SOL from the address: 67nCgRsBckLxaSApdEuB84NdDJMLe7xermeRqduCHruh (We will call it Funder 1)
The next step was getting more funding to create the liquidity pool on Raydium. So a new address: 9xy3cQqAgSV2hwXjSes2thpQUoQpFQguW3YQT6xFBc8B (let's call him Main Funder 2) sent 181 SOL at 03-01-2025 12:02:32.
This money was then used to create a liquidity pool at 03-01-2025 14:15:03 with 179.64 SOL and 600,000,000 MAG (60% of the supply). So this is the moment when trading was enabled for the token. A few minutes later, the liquidity was burned, preventing the creator from removing the liquidity from the pool.
After that time, besides some minor transfers, the account was mostly inactive with a remaining 3% of MAG on the account. So at the time of the launch of the token, the supply distribution was as follows:
3 % of MAG on the Token Deployer wallet
37% of MAG on the Deployer Sub Wallets (insiders)
60% of MAG in the public liquidity pool is available for trading
After checking the theoretical distribution of the whitepaper, we can see that it mostly aligns.
We can present the described situation in the following flowplot:
Now we have collected 32 insider wallets connected to the token deployer. The next step involves a deeper analysis of these wallets to see if any suspicious patterns are found.
Then (on 02-26-2025 - one day before the MAG mint) we can see the account created a new token I'm Fucking Rich (IMFR) - 5qiGv8Vbvr2GABd1Bj5fxLDzrknG7y27dRXVgEmd6tTd with a liquidity pool. We suspect this was a process to test and learn how to create a token on Solana.
The next day, the wallet completed the already mentioned transfer to the Token Deployer account:
Then for more than 10 days, there was no new activity in the wallet. On 03-09-2025, a bunch of new transfers and swaps happened:
An input transfer of 0.9 SOL from the Deployer Sub Wallet 23 (3F1hfZrV8NSZg2fJU9KwEe6PpRtVxzBXzsG8QdBkQ1kT)
An input transfer of 389 SOL from the Deployer Sub Wallet 28 (5bucYz8myutcFBXUwUwKPSDULDPSy3Sc7EK9juxiGSgB)
A swap of 389.6 SOL to USDC and then back to SOL a few minutes later (not very clear what was intended to be achieved here)
A transfer of all remaining SOL to the Main Funder 2 address (9xy3cQqAgSV2hwXjSes2thpQUoQpFQguW3YQT6xFBc8B)
After the analysis, we have a current situation between the connected insiders' wallets:
It was created on 21-01-2025 at 06:35:48 by sending 0.69 SOL from Binance—some other funding from exchanges also accrued.
All the summaries in this section are from its creation to the time of writing this post on 6.4.2025. Let's first look at the inflow from exchanges. In total, 998 SOL was transferred to the wallet in this time from multiple exchanges (Revolut, Binance, MEXC):
Significant attention was drawn to the swapping activity of AWR, which generated over $500,000 in trading volume. Alongside this, various unrelated meme tokens were observed being transferred between different wallets. Due to the unclear intent and lack of meaningful correlation, that data was excluded from the summary for clarity.
Another thing is trading the MAG token with over 1.1M in volume. We will look at this event in a separate section.
For now, just mentioning a big buy of MAG just after the token's launch (more on that later).
MAG transfer: Deployer Sub Wallet 28 -> Main Funder: moved 1168420 MAG at 2025-03-09T19:29:14.000Z
SOL new inlow transfers:
From Deployer Sub Wallet 7 284 SOL at 2025-02-17
From Deployer Sub Wallet 6 109 SOL at 2025-02-17
From Main Funder 2 Sub Wallet 4 51.9 SOL at 2025-03-27
SOL new outflow transfers (aggregated totals with wallet destination):
The wallet was activated on 03-03-2025, just 2 days after the MAG token launch. There were multiple deposits from different sources almost every day or two, and no outflow; it looks like a cold wallet.
We summarized the transfers (on 6.4.2025):
9xy3cQqAgSV2hwXjSes2thpQUoQpFQguW3YQT6xFBc8B (Main Funder 2) deposited a total of 1455 SOL
DwT6odXyTra4qno3f9rFHZX4LG1tbYhCruzhfrgZ97hs (new wallet - named Insider wallet 1) deposited a total of 96 SOL
5Dojf6nDskYQLgRhCbdExwFi2UF7yj2wCx9MHVyfrCNh (new wallet - named Insider wallet 2) deposited a total of 33 SOL
7ZeVk3Rq1uPr5X3w4YWABHkZu4boXX1usTzzuMeFvsbM (Deployer Sub Wallet 4) deposited a total of 977 SOL
So the current situation is as follows:
Through this analysis, we identified several wallets likely associated with insiders. While further investigation could uncover additional related addresses, we believe the primary wallets involved have been captured. Although some minor transfers between wallets may be missing, they are not critical to the broader scope of this report. With this foundation in place, we can now analyze MAG trading activity from these wallets to assess potential signs of market manipulation.
Let’s examine the trading behavior of the identified insider wallets. Most of these wallets received tokens directly from the deployer or wallets closely linked to the deployer. We analyzed their trading activity using on-chain data as of April 6, 2025, and compiled the following summary:
By analyzing the volume distribution across insider wallets alongside the token’s price action, we can identify potential patterns that suggest whether insider trading may have influenced or manipulated the token’s market price. The chart below shows insider wallets' daily buy and sell volumes, from the token’s launch to the report date (April 6, 2025).
We observed notable correlations between insider trading volume and price movements:
On the first day, when buying pressure from the broader market was high, insiders were also actively trading, contributing to significant volume.
On March 23, 2025, a sharp price drop coincided with a spike in insider sell volume.
A similar pattern appeared again on April 2, 2025, with increased insider selling aligned with another price dip.
In contrast, the price rose during the last two days of the observed period, and insider selling activity ceased entirely.
To validate these observations, we’ll analyze the trades leading up to and during the price drops to identify which wallets contributed the most to the sell pressure. We will focus on the biggest dump that happened on 2.4.2025.
Our analysis shows that several insider wallets participated in selling during the price dump. Let’s look at the wallet that contributed the most to the sell-off during that period.
We observed that Deployer Sub Wallet 6 recorded the highest sell volume among all wallets. It was followed by several other wallets that, while not yet confirmed as insiders, exhibited significant selling behavior. Let’s now examine the timing of sell activity from the top three wallets to understand their impact on the market better.
8QasjDtMZNftBk1CzG12HaLcLNqN16gCmtjh7f3ASAC5 This wallet doesn’t appear to be directly connected to the main team, as it only shows transfers from Binance and Bitstamp. It was created around the same time as other insider wallets and traded the same AWR token as the main MAG deployer wallet, which raises some suspicion.
5tTtd432WJDkRzjKPahPkHAPmpgyfLwJjbSCJSvreJ4hThis wallet, created at a similar time as other insider wallets, only interacted with exchanges like Bitstamp and Gate.io, with no direct transfers observed.
5GcYEgijHfGDkRcWQJa2oEfejVzYLEpVFH7fz4DicJsR created on 2025-02-28 at 17:17:21, was funded by GRJA5DriaXffw2DvN5w1NCZCZmBCHPkKvHkGSpj1W5ef. Although there doesn’t appear to be a direct connection to team wallets, it holds a significant amount of MAG.
HAMMfHd54V1sKo4qonSLZs2HgUWJDTuWQ5JfA93fdVxK This wallet was created just before the launch and was likely waiting to snipe. It was funded through an exchange.
The combined selling pressure from several large wallets significantly affected the token’s price decline. Understanding what triggered these wallets to offload large amounts of tokens could provide valuable insight into the dynamics behind the drop — profit-taking, insider coordination, or a reaction to external events.
To better understand the motives behind the large sell-offs, we can investigate how these wallets acquired such a significant amount of tokens and whether any suspicious behavior occurred during the early stages of trading. It's possible that a large portion of tokens were sniped immediately after the token launch.
In cryptocurrency DEX (decentralized exchange) trading, a sniper is a bot or wallet that automatically buys a newly launched token when liquidity is added, often within the first few seconds or even milliseconds. These bots are designed to front-run other buyers by detecting liquidity events and executing ultra-fast transactions, usually with higher gas fees to ensure priority. The goal is to acquire tokens at the lowest possible price and sell quickly for profit, often before the average user even has a chance to trade.
This section’ll analyze the initial swaps that occurred at the start of trading. We will focus on the number of tokens acquired during these early moments and identify the wallets that purchased the largest shares right after the token launched.
The first swap occurred on 2025-03-01 at 14:16:02. There were no suspicious activities in the first 20 swaps. Let's now check if any insider purchased within the first 5 minutes.
Main Funder 2 purchased nearly 3% of the total supply just one minute after the token launch, while other wallets acquired smaller amounts.
Top 10 purchases by supply accumulated in the first 1000 swaps:
This plot shows individual token purchases (green dots above zero) and sales (red dots below zero) over time (for the first 1000 swaps), with their size representing the percentage of total supply moved. The blue step line tracks the net cumulative supply held by wallets, starting at zero and adjusting instantly with each transaction to reflect current holdings.
Let’s focus on the distribution of the MAG token and examine the total supply held by insider wallets and other major wallets.
We can see that the top 50 wallets hold more than 50% of the total supply. Let’s look at the biggest holders, including those tagged as insiders.
Let's check the biggest wallets that we didn't classify yet, if they are connected with the insiders:
BT23YGxByoXtRrTVVvBJDSPSf5bjacLnZM8KWKVWDh3f and HJJJraKM6X4Xoj1YJJ83x67KNGdkn9MEh3QqcG3C1irZ After a deep analysis, we can see that this is an insider wallet and the tokens were transferred there by the Deployer Sub Wallet 19 and 29. We can also identify another insider wallet at the address BvuV5ESxMmZMbRi3rGenSkDAN3j2UrEjLbXj5t4GDQAE funding the wallet with SOL. After a longer investigation, we created a picture like that:
4KCEkGdVQNEYeXAgHWqSMXTtxbdQDRUECAEf6B7CgfsG (tag: Holding Wallet 3) The graphic below shows how they deployed the tokens from the tokon deployer via the Deployer Subwallets to this wallet.
2khK9ai74F5XE6NvovtxJJRFGUFK3RVPzDFJwxDFAUXt We have not found any direct evidence linking the wallet to MAG insiders; however, it has been involved in significant trading volumes of MAG. Additionally, the wallet was created on April 2, 2025, and has also conducted large trades involving AWR, which raises some suspicion.
G6eYDftHMJDpfMZyAd2X7AWZ4j7kwH8gW3HFA9fUaKe1 The wallet received transfers from Bitstamp in February and, shortly after trading began, acquired a large supply of MAG through multiple transactions within minutes. This supply is still being held. While there is no direct link to known insider wallets, the timing and volume of these trades are notable.
DhSoKjSYE2YfZcNXAnxD5BHJV41QjS1RcywbxVTVkuMK (tag: Holding Wallet 4): The graphic below shows how they deployed the tokens from the tokon deployer via the Deployer Subwallets to this wallet.
CPN4JvjmYxzyMpRHfLsL7XpYYx1DHvQi8YfGGwaTvUbt Created on 02-06-2025 10:09:18 and traded MAG and AWR.
HkBwptTMecs5YSVXn7MNjEHe4ocMT8DvTRGKdotYJg3H Created 01-27-2025 11:00:49 and traded MAG and AWR.
Continuing down this rabbit hole could take days, as most other wallets exhibit similar patterns. While checking every wallet is impossible, our analysis indicates many show signs of insider activity. Based on the data reviewed, we can reasonably estimate that wallets likely linked to insiders hold at least 31% of the total supply.
In the following days, we continued our analysis to identify all wallets connected to the MAG token. We discovered 94 wallets that appeared to be linked to the MAG deployer wallet through on-chain transfers. For each of these wallets, we examined their MAG and SOL holdings, as well as their MAG buying and selling activity, and calculated their trading profits. Our investigation revealed that these wallets collectively generated over $500,000 in net profits from trading the MAG token.
Using the collected wallet data, we created a plot comparing the sell volume of internal wallets against the token's price. This helped us investigate whether internal selling activity was correlated with the token's price dumps events.
Let’s begin by analyzing the price dump that occurred on April 2nd, 2025:
Dump on 16.4.2025:
Although the mentions some basic uses like event access or community perks, no clear revenue model or meaningful real-world demand exists. At this stage, MAG comes off more like a memetoken, driven largely by speculation and hype rather than solid fundamentals or lasting utility.
Webapge:
Telegram:
Twitter:
YouTube:
A total of 6 Smart Money wallets have interacted with the token. Our internal system flags these wallets for consistent profitability and sharp entry timing. (Learn more about how our Smart Money identification works ).
Website URL: Domain Registration: January 30, 2025, 12:49:16 UTC
Link:
Link:
: 5xvRBSGJ6EqUN21WxfDyuQ3VYHkSWN4EheJ8ttPg4o6h (It will be called deployer wallet from now on)
Then, almost an hour later, he minted a MAG token (27.2.2025 at 21:05:47) with a supply of 1,000,000,000, which aligns with the data from their .
The next activity was the distribution of the minted MAG tokens to newly created wallets (and some old ones). 370,000,000 (37% of the supply) of the tokens were transferred to over 30 different wallets (we will call them Deployer Sub Wallet 1-30). took on for almost a day (from 27-2-2025 21:14:07 to 28-2-2025 21:01:41)
Let's first analyse the behavior of the wallet (67nCgRsBckLxaSApdEuB84NdDJMLe7xermeRqduCHruh). The wallet was created on 02-26-2025 by being funded by the Main Funder 2 wallet (9xy3cQqAgSV2hwXjSes2thpQUoQpFQguW3YQT6xFBc8B) with 21.4 SOL.
This looks like one of the (9xy3cQqAgSV2hwXjSes2thpQUoQpFQguW3YQT6xFBc8B) behind the token launch and has much more activity. It will be presented in summarized terms because it would be too long to explain everything in detail.
Most of the money was used to swap tokens or was transferred to other wallets. The wallet performs multiple swaps in different memecoins for the following days and weeks. The :
Now we can check the between the connected wallets:
Another big find is that after some successful trades, the Main Funder 2 wallet deposited the profit into another . This wallet looks like a final deposit wallet where all profits from the deployer are sent. We will call the DE2mo8HPB4DNwF6pf9833W4Acc61KNCB57zQZq8H1N9B wallet Final Deposit Wallet. This wallet had more than 2,500 SOL on 6.4.2025.
