mintguardian ~/research/case-dogerss
mamita ($doge) on Solana: 62% of supply in one wallet on day zero, a $500 sell quoted at 79% impact eight days later
- contract
- 7wnHrfZRcaExiY2bvxftdDhMmfMRL385fhexA96rpump
- scanned
- 2026-08-30 07:18 UTC → 2026-09-07 14:34 UTC
- verdict
- RISKY 48 → RISKY 62
- sell impact
- 79.15% on $500
limits
This is one token, so it says nothing about the scanner's accuracy in general. Every number below is ours: two scans of the same mint, eight days apart, each with a timestamp and a record id. The first was run from a development build before the app was released. It is excluded from our aggregate statistics and included here because it was the first look. We did not measure price at any point, and we did not track who bought or sold. Any percentage you may have seen on a chart for this token is not in this post.
what the first scan said
Scanned on 2026-08-30 at 07:18 UTC, the day the token's only trading pair appeared, from live chain data. The outcome was not known at scan time. Verdict RISKY, score 48.
The largest wallet held 61.86% of supply. The top ten held 77.77%. Both figures exclude liquidity pool accounts, which held 22.23%; the twenty largest accounts covered the entire supply.
Mint authority: none. Freeze authority: none. Token-2022 mint with no transfer hook and no permanent delegate. Nothing in the contract could block a sale.
Not measured in this scan, and not in the score: how much liquidity backed the pair, whether it was locked, and whether the token could actually be sold.
what the second scan said
Scanned again on 2026-09-07 at 14:34 UTC from the released app. Verdict RISKY, score 62. This scan ran a sellability check the first one could not: a quote for a $500 sell came back with 79.15% price impact, and a $500 buy with 99.85%. Freeze authority still absent, no transfer hook. Eight days after launch, a five-hundred-dollar order would have moved the price by most of its value.
what this does and does not show
A single wallet holding most of the supply was visible on-chain on day zero, from one scan. That check is deterministic. The second scan shows the market never became one a normal-sized order could pass through. Neither scan shows intent: a founder who forgot to distribute tokens and a founder waiting to sell look the same on-chain. And the same concentration check flags plenty of tokens that go on to trade for months.
data
Scan records 2552 and 2769 and sellability observation 88, as JSON: case-doge.json · addresses only, no user data.