Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← MANTRA (OM Token)reviewed 2026-09-07 · 19 claims checked

Fact-check findings

What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read MANTRA (OM Token) against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.

Read this first

These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.

“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.

Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.

disputed 3partially supported 1confirmed 153 corrections pending · 0 applied

disputed

3 claims

The reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.

  1. #15[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Token Burn and Recovery Actions
    “Despite these measures, OM's price continued to decline and had extended its total 2025 loss to approximately 99% from its February 2025 all-time high of approximately $9.00 by later in 2025, trading at approximately $0.0134 as of available data.”
    reviewerDespite recovery measures, OM extended its total 2025 loss to approximately 99% from its ~$9.00 ATH, trading at approximately $0.0134 (Token Burn section) / as of December 2025 (Price History section)The page's own cited source for the Dec 2025 price contradicts the $0.0134 figure it prints; the source says $0.07. The 99% loss framing is otherwise accurate.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    Despite these measures, OM's price continued to decline and had extended its total 2025 loss to approximately 99% from its February 2025 all-time high of approximately $9.00 by later in 2025, trading at approximately $0.07 as of available data.
    citedambcrypto.com/mantras-om-extends-2025-lo…team-blames-okx/
  2. #16[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Price History and Market Context
    “By December 2025, the OM token had extended its total losses from the February 2025 all-time high to approximately 99%, trading at approximately $0.0134.”
    reviewerBy December 2025, OM had extended total losses from Feb 2025 ATH to approximately 99%, trading at approximately $0.0134Same underlying error as the Token Burn section; the cited AMBCrypto source states $0.07.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    By December 2025, the OM token had extended its total losses from the February 2025 all-time high to approximately 99%, trading at approximately $0.07.
    citedambcrypto.com/mantras-om-extends-2025-lo…team-blames-okx/
  3. #19[disputed][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
    “2025-12-01”
    reviewerOKX publicly stated in December 2025 (date_original 2025-12-01) that multiple litigations involving MANTRA remain activeMinor date precision issue: the underlying article date is Dec 15, 2025, not Dec 1. Low-impact since the timeline's coarse 'date' field is already month-level ('2025-12'), but the 'date_original' field asserts a specific day that is incorrect.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    2025-12-15
    citedprotos.com/okx-says-multiple-litigations…mantra-underway/

partially supported

1 claim

The cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.

  1. #9[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Alleged Insider Selling and Wallet Controversy
    “one Laser Digital-linked wallet (identified by the prefix '0x84EE7') sent approximately 6.5 million OM tokens to OKX in seven transactions beginning April 11, 2025, while another sent approximately 2.2 million OM to Binance in a series of transfers beginning April 3, 2025.”
    reviewerLaser Digital-linked wallet '0x84EE7' sent ~6.5M OM to OKX in seven transactions from April 11, 2025; another sent ~2.2M OM to Binance from April 3, 2025The page states the 0x84EE7 wallet sent OM directly to OKX in seven transactions; independent reporting (Cointelegraph/Lookonchain) describes an intermediate hop through an unlabelled wallet before reaching OKX. The core figures (6.5M OM, April 11 start) are correct but the transaction path is simplified/potentially inaccurate.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/business/2025/04/14/nom…-in-mantra-crash

confirmed

15 claims

The cited evidence supports the claim as written.

  1. #1[confirmed][no action needed]in the summary
    “Its native OM token collapsed approximately 90% in roughly one hour on April 13, 2025, falling from around $6.30 to under $0.50 and wiping out an estimated $5–6 billion in market capitalization.”
    reviewerOM token collapsed ~90% in ~1 hour on April 13, 2025, from ~$6.30 to under $0.50, wiping out $5-6B market capFigures corroborated by multiple tier-1 outlets; the page's hedged ranges are consistent with reporting.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/markets/2025/04/14/mant…ced-liquidations
  2. #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Project Background
    “Co-founder and CEO John Patrick Mullin holds a B.S. in Business Administration from Saint Louis University (2014) and graduate degrees from Tongji University and EBS Universitat fur Wirtschaft und Recht in Technology Economics and Management (2016).”
    reviewerJohn Patrick Mullin holds a B.S. from Saint Louis University (2014) and graduate degrees from Tongji University and EBS Universitat fur Wirtschaft und Recht (2016)Biographical detail confirmed via independent biography sources, though not directly cited in this section.
  3. #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Project Background
    “In March 2024, MANTRA Chain raised $11 million in a funding round led by Shorooq Partners, with participation from Three Point Capital, Forte Securities, Virtuzone, Hex Trust, and GameFi Ventures.”
    reviewerMANTRA Chain raised $11 million in March 2024 led by Shorooq Partners with named co-investorsMatches CoinDesk reporting.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/business/2024/03/19/man…middle-east-tint
  4. #4[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Project Background
    “On February 19, 2025, MANTRA Finance FZE became the first DeFi platform to secure a Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) license from Dubai's Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), authorizing it to operate as a Virtual Asset Exchange and offer Broker-Dealer, Management, and Investment Services.”
    reviewerMANTRA Finance FZE was the first DeFi platform to secure a VASP license from Dubai's VARA on Feb 19, 2025, authorizing Virtual Asset Exchange, Broker-Dealer, Management and Investment ServicesConfirmed by VARA's own register plus press coverage.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/policy/2025/02/19/defi-…ing-global-reach
  5. #5[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Tokenomics Concerns and Supply Changes
    “In October 2024, coinciding with the mainnet launch, MANTRA doubled the total OM token supply from approximately 888 million tokens to roughly 1.77–1.82 billion tokens by minting an equivalent number of new OM on the new chain.”
    reviewerIn October 2024, MANTRA doubled OM supply from ~888M to ~1.77-1.82B tokens by minting new OM on the new chain, coinciding with mainnet launchPrecisely corroborated by MANTRA's own documentation and multiple secondary sources.
    citedwww.binance.com/en-TR/square/post/17128986839105
  6. #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Tokenomics Concerns and Supply Changes
    “the airdrop was delayed multiple times, eligibility rules were altered on multiple occasions, and approximately 50% of eligible addresses were disqualified as alleged bots without detailed public justification.”
    reviewerMANTRA airdrop was delayed multiple times, eligibility altered repeatedly, and ~50% of eligible addresses disqualified as alleged botsMatches BeInCrypto reporting.
    citedbeincrypto.com/mantra-om-token-collapse-red-flags/
  7. #7[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Tokenomics Concerns and Supply Changes
    “with one analysis stating that 'OM appeared to be a top-25 asset by market capitalization despite less than 1% of the token supply being genuinely liquid.'”
    reviewerQuote: 'OM appeared to be a top-25 asset by market capitalization despite less than 1% of the token supply being genuinely liquid'Direct fetch of the CryptoSlate article confirms the exact quote and the CoinGecko/CoinMarketCap self-reporting exploitation narrative.
    citedcryptoslate.com/mantra-market-makers-all…token-liquidity/
  8. #8[confirmed][no action needed]in section: The April 13, 2025 Token Collapse
    “On-chain analytics firm Arkham Intelligence identified 17 wallets that deposited a combined 43.6 million OM tokens — valued at approximately $227 million at pre-crash prices — to Binance and OKX in the days preceding the April 13 collapse.”
    reviewerArkham Intelligence identified 17 wallets that deposited a combined 43.6 million OM (~$227M) to Binance and OKX in days preceding the April 13 collapseFigure independently corroborated across multiple outlets.
    citedcoinmarketcap.com/academy/article/invest…-arkham-findings
  9. #10[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Alleged Insider Selling and Wallet Controversy
    “A separate wallet linked by Arkham to Shorooq Partners — the lead investor in MANTRA's $11 million funding round — allegedly received 2 million OM tokens shortly before the crash.”
    reviewerA Shorooq Partners-linked wallet allegedly received 2 million OM tokens shortly before the crashTiming ('shortly before') is consistent with reporting of an April 13 receipt hours ahead of the crash.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/business/2025/04/14/nom…-in-mantra-crash
  10. #11[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Alleged Insider Selling and Wallet Controversy
    “Laser Digital issued a public denial stating that 'assertions circulating on social media that link Laser to investor selling are factually incorrect and misleading,' and shared wallet addresses they asserted were their controlled holdings, none of which showed exchange deposits or selling activity.”
    reviewerLaser Digital's public denial quote: 'assertions circulating on social media that link Laser to investor selling are factually incorrect and misleading'Quote verified verbatim via independent reporting quoting Laser Digital's X statement.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/business/2025/04/14/nom…-in-mantra-crash
  11. #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: OKX Allegations: Coordinated Price Manipulation
    “The exchange stated it had submitted 'extensive evidence to regulators and law enforcement agencies,' with multiple litigation proceedings underway as of December 2025.”
    reviewerOKX stated in December 2025 it had submitted evidence to regulators/law enforcement, with multiple litigation proceedings underwayConfirmed, though the Protos article is dated Dec 15, 2025, not Dec 1 as implied by the timeline's date_original field (see separate timeline finding).
    citedprotos.com/okx-says-multiple-litigations…mantra-underway/
  12. #13[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Token Burn and Recovery Actions
    “The 300 million burn was expected to reduce the total supply from approximately 1.82 billion OM to approximately 1.52 billion OM and reduce the bonded ratio from 31.47% to 25.30%.”
    reviewerMANTRA announced formal plan on April 22, 2025 to burn 300 million OM (~16.5% of 1.82B supply, ~$160M); 150M from Mullin, 150M from ecosystem/DAO; reduces supply from 1.82B to 1.52B and bonded ratio from 31.47% to 25.30%Figures precisely match CoinDesk's April 22, 2025 reporting.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/markets/2025/04/22/mant…g-90-price-crash
  13. #14[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Token Burn and Recovery Actions
    “MANTRA also announced a token buyback program: in August 2025, the project committed a minimum of $25 million to buy back approximately 110 million OM tokens (approximately 10% of circulating supply) on major centralized exchanges. Combined with a $20 million investment from Inveniam, total stated recovery commitments reached $45 million.”
    reviewerMANTRA committed a minimum $25 million to buy back ~110M OM (~10% of circulating supply) in August 2025; combined with $20M Inveniam investment, total stated recovery commitments reached $45 millionThe $45M combined framing is directly stated in the official announcement, not an inference by the page.
    citedwww.prnewswire.com/in/news-releases/mant…s-302540263.html
  14. #17[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Price History and Market Context
    “A token migration and rebranding to the ticker MANTRA at a 1:4 ratio was announced and supported by major exchanges including Binance, Upbit, and Bithumb.”
    reviewerToken migration: each OM exchanged for four new MANTRA tokens at 1:4 ratio; ticker permanently changes from OM to MANTRA, supported by Binance, Upbit, and BithumbConfirmed by multiple exchange announcements; migration executed in Q1 2026, after the crash period covered by this page.
    citedcryptorank.io/news/feed/5de60-binance-ma…-swap-rebranding
  15. #18[confirmed][no action needed]in the timeline
    “OM token reaches an all-time high of approximately $9.00, representing gains of over 3,000% year-over-year.”
    reviewerOM reached an all-time high of approximately $9.00 on approximately February 23, 2025Matches independent reporting closely; the 'over 3,000% year-over-year' framing is plausible for a token that started 2024 well under $1.
    citedambcrypto.com/mantras-om-extends-2025-lo…team-blames-okx/
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.