Marius

🧵 This investigation started somewhere I didn't expect: In a court case. While researching $WALLET, I came across Aspalathos Investments v. John Does 1–10. The case identified an Ethereum address now publicly labeled: 0xf70d...dbEF = Relay: Solver Circle was instructed, after communicating with Relay, to provide information about the wallet's function, ownership and control. That changed my approach. Instead of only following wallets, I started following the infrastructure: Relay → settlement → USDG → Paxos → Robinhood Chain That eventually led me to: 624c 1/ Before $WALLET existed, aa33 was already active inside Robinhood Chain's emerging infrastructure. aa33 is important for one obvious reason: It later deployed $WALLET. But on May 20, aa33 appears at the beginning of 624c's observed Robinhood Chain history. aa33 → 624c This happened before 624c's later significance was visible. And before $WALLET existed. 2/ Then F718 enters the picture. F718 had already appeared throughout Robinhood Chain's early funding environment. It later sends 624c a 3 ETH top up. 22m55s later, 624c begins funding Stock Token production role wallets. Eventually: 624c → 12/13 observed production roles + grantor 624c was clearly becoming operationally significant. 3/ Now for the independent check. SQD analyzed Robinhood Stock Token activity without starting from our $WALLET address graph. Their data independently leads to the same 624c address. The first TSLA Stock Token mint appears June 22. On June 26, 624c appears in early TSLA/USDG flows, including a DvP transaction involving: 0.0129 TSLA ↔ 4.9575 USDG 4/ Later that evening: 0.01 TSLA → 624c Tx: 0xc82f4251f3677088ddb2de26c2489087b7fbdd2ea345cc1dbb01dade9de67940 ~8 minutes later, 624c sends exactly 0.01 TSLA onward. SQD notes this may represent custody, settlement or operational rebalancing rather than a trade. 5/ Now put the two paths together. PATH 1 aa33 ↓ 624c ↓ Stock Token production roles PATH 2 Stock Token ledger ↓ TSLA / USDG ↓ 624c Two independent routes converge on the same address. 6/ And now the chronology: May 20 aa33 → 624c June 22 First TSLA Stock Token mint June 22 onward 624c involved in production role provisioning June 26 624c appears in TSLA/USDG flows July 10 aa33 deploys $WALLET $WALLET comes last. 7/ That's the key. aa33 didn't deploy $WALLET and then create connections to interesting Robinhood addresses. The connection existed first. 624c subsequently became embedded in Stock Token operations. Only afterwards did aa33 deploy $WALLET. 8/ This does NOT prove Robinhood created $WALLET or controls aa33/624c. But it makes the "random meme deployer manufacturing Robinhood connections afterwards" explanation much harder. So maybe we've been asking the wrong question. Not: "Can $WALLET be connected to Robinhood?" But: "What was the future $WALLET deployer doing inside this infrastructure before $WALLET even existed?" A court case led me to Relay. Relay led into the infrastructure. The infrastructure led to 624c. And 624c led straight back to aa33. Before $WALLET existed. $WALLET #WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodChain

🚨 Interesting update from today. Robinhood Wallet has now integrated Arcus directly as an RFQ/routing provider for Stock Token swaps. What makes this interesting for the $WALLET rabbit hole isn't Arcus itself. It's the architecture Robinhood is showing us: Robinhood Wallet → routing/execution layer → liquidity/market makers → onchain settlement And on top of that, there can be a separate economic/incentive layer. Trades routed through Arcus can earn Arcus Points. This is important because it shows that assets, rewards and economic mechanisms can sit at the application layer without being the gas token of Robinhood Chain. It doesn't prove anything about $WALLET, but it makes the idea of $WALLET being an application-layer asset or middleware component rather than gas technically much more interesting. And this was announced TODAY, October 1 👀 Another piece of the architecture is becoming visible. #WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodWallet #RobinhoodChain #StockTokens

After all the research, on chain digging and connections we've uncovered, this is the explanation that makes the most sense to me for what $WALLET actually is. I don't think it was ever meant to replace ETH as gas. My working theory is that $WALLET is a liquidity and routing primitive designed to sit underneath the Robinhood Wallet ecosystem, connecting users to Uniswap and other venues across Robinhood Chain, Stock Tokens, crypto and RWAs. The launch structure makes this especially interesting: no creator allocation, no additional minting, no token tax, and nearly the entire supply initially deployed into Uniswap V3 liquidity. If this theory is right, the interesting part isn't simply what $WALLET is called, but what happens if it becomes embedded in the liquidity and execution layer of a much larger Robinhood ecosystem. As Robinhood Chain grows across Stock Tokens, crypto and RWAs, more assets, more liquidity and more volume could potentially flow through that infrastructure. If $WALLET has a functional role inside that layer, its relevance wouldn't be defined by today's market cap, but by the scale of the ecosystem it could ultimately serve. That's the part I find bullish. The dump on September 17 shook confidence. Since then, uncertainty has taken over and it feels like a lot of people are sitting on the sidelines, waiting. Not necessarily for another breadcrumb. For the first real confirmation. With HOOD Summit almost here, we may finally be approaching the moment where the speculation meets the product. #WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodChain #HOODSummit #Uniswap

$WALLET has two layers of liquidity, and the second one is interesting. Layer 1 is the original NOXA launch liquidity: the locked foundation of the WALLET/WETH market. But on top of that sits a second, independently managed layer. On Aug 8, wallet 0xbB0033…5537Fd removed 21 concentrated-liquidity positions around $WALLET. Then, just ~20 seconds later, it created 21 new LP positions across new price ranges. And here's the interesting part: It removed ~1.6089 WETH It put back ~1.6185 WETH So this wasn't liquidity being pulled. The entire 21-range grid was repositioned , with slightly more WETH committed than before. In simple terms: Layer 1: locked launch liquidity — the foundation Layer 2: 21 actively managed price bands — dynamic liquidity around the market This looks much more like algorithmic market making than someone manually providing LP. And I think that's the part worth paying attention to: At least one actor is treating $WALLET as a market worth actively maintaining over time, not simply as a token that was launched and left to trade on its own. That adds another layer of infrastructure around $WALLET that goes well beyond the original token launch. Someone is committing capital and actively managing liquidity to keep this market functioning efficiently. The question is: who — and why? Tx 0xed4e…6776 → 21 positions removed Tx 0xd1fb…6931 → 21 new positions ~20 sec later $WALLET #WALLET #Robinhood

$WALLET Follow the transactions. June 6, 2025 — 17:26:24 UTC Robinhood: Deployer → d29A Factory → Demo 2 June 12, 2025 — 23:14:04 UTC aa33 → 0.000075391093466737 ETH → 4260 June 12, 2025 — 23:52:11 UTC 4260 → Robinhood: o Token / Demo 2 Nonce 0 June 12, 2025 — 23:54:42 UTC 4260 → Robinhood: o Token / Demo 2 Nonce 1 June 25, 2025 — 20:12:20 UTC 4260 → Robinhood: o Token / Demo 2 June 30, 2025 — 15:39:33 UTC 4260 → 2,304.837854656924885334 Demo 2 $WALLET #WALLET #Robinhood

The more I look at the $WALLET 1H chart, the more interesting the timing of this compression becomes. After the capitulation and violent recovery, the market is doing something very different now. Volatility is contracting. Volume is fading. The highs are getting lower, but importantly, the lows are getting higher. That doesn’t automatically mean accumulation. A symmetrical compression can break either way. But I keep wondering how much of this structure is being shaped by what happens next week. HOOD Summit is only days away. Bulls may not want to sell before seeing what Robinhood announces. At the same time, buyers may be reluctant to chase before knowing whether $WALLET has anything to do with Robinhood at all. That creates an interesting equilibrium: Sellers aren’t selling aggressively. Buyers aren’t chasing aggressively. The range gets tighter. In market terms, price is searching for equilibrium before the next piece of information arrives. The accumulation theory becomes more interesting if the higher lows continue and ~$0.022–0.0225 keeps getting defended. A break through ~$0.0255 with expanding volume would add another piece to that picture. A breakdown would tell a very different story. Maybe this is simply consolidation after an extremely volatile week. Maybe it’s pre-event positioning. Maybe the market is doing exactly what many of us are doing right now: waiting. Capitulation → Recovery → Consolidation → Compression → ? We’ll know more soon. $WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodChain #Crypto #TechnicalAnalysis

$WALLET 1H is getting technically interesting. 👀 After the capitulation wick around $0.005–0.006, price recovered to ~$0.029 and has spent several days building structure rather than revisiting the lows. What I'm watching: • Higher lows developing after the crash • ~$0.020 acting as an important support area • Fib from ~$0.0055 → ~$0.029: 0.236 ≈ $0.0235 0.382 ≈ $0.0200 0.500 ≈ $0.0173 0.618 ≈ $0.0145 Interesting how closely those levels line up with the actual reactions on the chart. There is also a potential inverse H&S / accumulation structure developing, but I wouldn't call it confirmed yet. The level that matters to me is $0.028–0.030. A clean 1H breakout + volume + successful retest would give us the first convincing higher high after the crash and could open the way toward ~$0.04, with the old $0.05–0.06 area above that. Lose ~$0.020 and I start watching $0.017–0.018 again. Lose ~$0.014–0.015 and the recovery structure is in real trouble. Capitulation → recovery → higher lows → compression. Now we wait to see which side breaks. 🐇 #WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodChain #Crypto #TechnicalAnalysis

I think we may be looking for $WALLET utility in the wrong place. Everyone is searching for transactions showing $WALLET being spent as gas. I was too. But what if $WALLET isn’t meant to be spent? What if it’s meant to be HELD? A wallet can simply check your $WALLET balance and unlock benefits based on what you hold. More $WALLET could theoretically mean: • sponsored transactions • lower swap fees • better rewards • premium wallet features • access to future onchain products The token wouldn’t need to move. ETH could remain the native gas token while the wallet simply checks whether you qualify for benefits. And technically, the infrastructure is already there. Robinhood Chain supports Alchemy smart accounts, gas sponsorship and ERC20 gas payments. Now here’s why I find this much more interesting than the “$WALLET is a gas token” theory. Gas creates usage. Holding creates demand for inventory. If users need to HOLD $WALLET to maintain benefits, those tokens stay in wallets instead of constantly being spent and recycled. And if there were multiple holding tiers? 10K → benefit A 25K → benefit B 50K → benefit C 100K → premium tier Suddenly users have a reason not only to buy $WALLET… but to KEEP it. And the strongest model could be both: HOLD $WALLET → unlock benefits USE $WALLET → pay for services or fees That creates two different sources of demand at the same time. And maybe the name has been telling us where to look all along: Not Robinhood Chain. Not Robinhood Gas. Robinhood WALLET. Maybe we shouldn’t be looking for where $WALLET is being spent. Maybe we should be looking for what happens differently to wallets that HOLD it. 👀 $WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodChain

NEW $WALLET FIND 🐇 I found another wallet funded by F718, the same wallet that funded aa33 before aa33 launched $WALLET. And this gives us an interesting comparison. The wallet is: 0x624c…17c4 On June 26, just 5 days before Robinhood Chain went public, 624c was already trading Robinhood Stock Tokens. It bought TSLA Stock Tokens with USDG in a real on chain trade. So now we have: F718 → 624c → pre launch Robinhood Stock Token trading AND F718 → aa33 → pre launch Robinhood Chain activity → launches $WALLET There's another similarity: Both 624c and aa33 use Alchemy's EIP 7702 smart account infrastructure. And F718 wasn't only funding ordinary wallets. We've also verified that it funded infrastructure such as Relay's Solver during the early Robinhood Chain rollout. This does NOT prove Robinhood controlled 624c or aa33. But it gives us something interesting: A second F718 funded smart account operating inside the Robinhood ecosystem before public launch, this one provably trading Robinhood Stock Tokens. Which makes the question around aa33 even more interesting: Why was the future $WALLET deployer being funded by the same early provisioning wallet? 🐇 #WALLET #Robinhood #RobinhoodChain #Crypto #OnChain

🐇 Looking for PRIMARY evidence on the Robinhood gas extension. I keep seeing claims that something related to gas on Robinhood Chain was extended from Sept 29 to Dec 31. But I want to establish exactly what Robinhood actually changed: • Was the covered gas / gas subsidy extended to Dec 31? • If so, what transactions does it cover? • What token is actually being used for the underlying gas during this period? • Does Robinhood still explicitly state ETH is the native gas token, with no end date? • Or has Robinhood announced any change to the gas/payment mechanism itself? I’m looking for primary evidence only: Robinhood website/terms, Wallet screenshot or screen recording, official X post, email or notification. No theories. No reposts. I want to know exactly what was extended and what Robinhood actually said. Drop the source below 👇🐇 $WALLET #RobinhoodChain

Something interesting changes today. 🐇 Alchemy makes its new EIP-7702 smart account implementation the default. More importantly: Alchemy now supports ERC-20 gas payments on Robinhood Mainnet. ETH remains the native gas token, but users can pay transaction costs with a configured ERC-20 while the paymaster handles the ETH underneath. So maybe we’ve been asking the wrong question about $WALLET. What if $WALLET was never meant to replace ETH as gas? What if it belongs to the wallet layer instead? User pays in $WALLET → account abstraction handles the ETH gas behind the scenes. And remember: aa33 was already using Alchemy’s EIP-7702 architecture on Robinhood Chain before launching $WALLET. No evidence yet that $WALLET is enabled for ERC-20 gas payments. But the infrastructure is now there. And aa33 was early. Very early. 🐇 $WALLET #RobinhoodChain #EIP7702 #ERC4337

Robinhood docs point beyond gas: programmable wallets, ERC-4337 + gas sponsorship. aa33 tested Alchemy/EIP-7702 pre-launch. What if $WALLET belongs to the wallet layer itself? 🐇 #WALLET #RobinhoodChain #ERC4337 #EIP7702