The cryptocurrency market is used to unexpected pumps, but what happened with MYX was an example of how a rapidly growing coin can turn into a symbol of distrust towards a new generation of “rising stars”.
MYX has shown dizzying growth in just a few days, sparking a heated discussion in the community. However, there was far from market magic behind this pump. Suspicions arose almost immediately: too sudden a rise, a weak user base, and opaque tokenomics. And then independent researchers got involved, and interesting details came to light.
Схема, которая оказалась слишком знакомой
MYX turned out to be more than just an “innovator in the market.” As the Bubble team’s investigation showed, the project actually created a huge capitalization for itself. At stake is $170 million tokens distributed among linked wallets.
It all started with tracking the address belonging to the creator of MYX. The researchers found a whole chain of transactions leading through several wallets on different networks. And eventually we reached one of the suspicious addresses — 0x4a31, which participated in the official MYX airdrop.
Как вскрыли подмену
Further analysis showed that the financing scheme of this wallet completely coincided with 95 other addresses that operated synchronously. Such a pattern is a clear sign of a sybil attack, when the same beneficiary creates dozens or hundreds of “fake” participants in order to inflate the volume of token distribution.
But that was just the beginning. $2.8 million in MYX tokens went from address 0x4a31 to the deposit wallet, which, as it turned out, was used in only two cases. The second case turned out to be related to another address, 0xeb5A. And this address is already directly associated with the wallet of the creator of MYX.
In other words, after the “aerial” airdrop, the money actually returned back to the hands of the team.
What does this mean for the market
Instead of honestly distributing tokens to the community, MYX actually conducted a “looped distribution”, where most of the funds ended up with the same people who launched the project. This scheme created the illusion of demand, allowed the price to be pushed up, and then — probably — to bring some of the funds to the market under the guise of real liquidity.
The result is a beautiful growth chart that attracted attention, but in fact turned out to be an artificial bubble.
Reputation and consequences
MYX risked becoming a new “dark horse” in the crypt, but instead the project is already associated with manipulation and schemes. This is not news to experienced players: in an industry where trust is built over the years but collapses in seconds, such cases once again remind of the importance of DYOR (do your own research).
The project may continue to exist, but the trail of “giving yourself $170 million” will drag on for a long time. And now any MYX activity will be perceived through the prism of this investigation.
Is it worth putting “on short”?
We can’t directly say “short urgent” or “not short,” but let’s take a look at the MYX situation from the facts.:
🟢 Arguments “for shorting”
- Negative background: the story of “giving yourself $170M” has already spread through the crypto media, and this is a strong reputational blow.
- The liquidity is fake: if most of the tokens are really under the control of the team, the market may turn out to be thin, and any sale from above will greatly pressure the price.
- FUD effect: investors often flee projects after such investigations in order not to become “bagholders.”
🔴 Arguments “against short”
- Manipulative: if the team has already managed the exchange rate, they can just as abruptly buy the price up and take out the shortters with liquidations.
- Low predictability: the token is still young, which means the volatility is huge. On such coins, the stops are demolished instantly.
- A hype counter-narrative is possible: sometimes, even after scandals, the coin temporarily grows on FOMO because people “play on the wave of noise.”
Conclusion
MYX now looks more like a tool for speculation than for investment. If you go into the short list, then:
- only with hard feet;
- for a small fraction of the depot;
- it is better to bounce up, rather than in a moment of panic.
This is not a story about fundamentals, but about a clean game against a team that draws a market for itself.
