How crypto futures markets are feeding ‘scam coin’ insider pump and dumps

De-fi

How crypto futures markets are feeding ‘scam coin’ insider pump and dumps – Crypto News

Published

2 days ago

April 22, 2026

Dripp

Make preferred on

RAVE briefly crossed a $6.7 billion valuation on Apr. 18 before collapsing nearly 95% in hours. The market infrastructure surrounding the token, consisting of thin float, concentrated supply, and a live perpetual market, drove the scale of both the rally and the destruction.

ZachXBT alleged that insiders controlled more than 90% of RAVE’s supply, with roughly 75% in a single wallet and approximately 10% more spread across two connected wallets.

Binance and Bitget both publicly acknowledged they were investigating, and OKX’s Star Xu stated that his exchange’s risk engine registered no disruption and added a $25,000 bounty to support ZachXBT’s investigation.

RaveDAO publicly denied responsibility.

RAVE rise and collapse through perpetual markets — RAVE’s market cap surged from approximately $1.2 billion to a peak of $6.7 billion on Apr. 18 before collapsing nearly 95% within hours.

The mechanism

What traders call “scam coins” is often a repeatable derivatives structure.

The loop runs when a token with concentrated supply and a tiny effective float receives a perpetual market listing. Bearish traders pile into shorts, and a small push in thin spot liquidity triggers forced buying that sends the price vertical.

When the token’s valuation increases severalfold, concentrated holders sell into that forced bid.

Binance’s own Mar. 25 market maker red flags guide explicitly warned about coordinated sell-offs across platforms, volume that does not match price behavior, price spikes in thin liquidity, and shallow order books that make prices easier to push artificially.

CoinGlass data from the post-crash period shows approximately $3.36 billion in 24-hour futures volume versus $138.9 million in spot volume, a 24.7x derivatives-to-spot ratio. Open interest of roughly $105.7 million represented about 67.3% of the market cap.

If roughly 85% of supply could not realistically trade, RAVE’s open interest exceeded the mark-to-market value of its effective float.

Using CoinGlass’ post-crash price of approximately $0.625, 15% of a one-billion-token supply yields an effective float of approximately $93.8 million, which is lower than the $105.7 million in open interest sitting on top of it.

That data point falls short of proving manipulation, but it describes a market in which derivative exposure had outgrown the cash market beneath it.

The same structure for three different tokens

On Mar. 23, SIREN’s open interest climbed to approximately $105 million before retreating to $65 million as short positions faced liquidation. Binance and Bybit together recorded roughly $7.1 million in liquidations during that period.

More than 59% of positions still leaned short once the initial squeeze concluded, leaving the market structurally exposed to another round of forced covering.

Phemex reported that one wallet cluster controlled roughly 88% of SIREN’s supply and flagged a funding rate of -0.2989%, one of the clearest visible signs of a crowded-short setup. CoinGlass now places SIREN’s futures-to-spot turnover at approximately 40.5x.

A deeply negative funding rate means short-position holders pay longs to maintain their trades. When that condition coexists with concentrated spot supply and thin real float, price discovery effectively moves to the derivatives layer, and whoever controls the cash market can choose when to squeeze.

ARIA illustrates the exit side, as the token addresses suspected of manipulating ARIA sold 45.64 million tokens for approximately 5.42 million USDT. The token fell 91%, with market cap collapsing from roughly $315 million to $38.5 million.

Even with that collapse behind it, CoinGlass shows ARIA’s futures-to-spot turnover at approximately 12.0x, with open interest at roughly 77.7% of remaining market cap.

RAVE, SIREN, and ARIA map the same investigative structure, the squeeze in progress, and the post-dump residue at three different moments.

Token	Stage in the loop	Supply concentration	Futures/spot ratio	OI / market-cap signal	Key squeeze/dump evidence	Outcome
RAVE	Investigative structure / scandal phase	~75% in one wallet; ~10% in two connected wallets; ~85% estimated out of public circulation	24.7x	OI ~$105.7M vs. effective float ~$93.8M — derivatives exceeded the tradable cash market	ZachXBT alleged insider control of 90%+ of supply; pre-rally exchange deposits; 32M-token withdrawal during rally; Binance and Bitget launched investigations	Peaked at ~$6.7B valuation; collapsed ~95% in hours
SIREN	Squeeze in progress	One wallet cluster controlling ~88% of supply	40.5x	OI reached ~$105M at squeeze peak; fell to ~$65M after liquidations	Funding rate of -0.2989% (extreme crowded-short signal); ~$7.1M liquidated across Binance and Bybit; 59%+ of positions still short post-squeeze	Squeeze executed; market remained majority-short and structurally exposed to repeat
ARIA	Post-dump unwind	Not publicly disclosed	12.0x	OI ~77.7% of remaining market cap after collapse	On-chain analysts identified wallets that sold 45.64M tokens for ~5.42M USDT into the forced bid	Fell 91%; market cap dropped from ~$315M to ~$38.5M

The infrastructure enabling the most effective moves in each episode runs through venues that had already published guidance explicitly describing those very moves.