Analysis of Swarms and other 6 major AI Agents Chips: 1647 Large investors hold 1.58 billion US dollars in tokens, and the trading conspiracy of high-level accumulation

Author: Frank, PANews

AI Agent has become a hot spot in current on-chain transactions. From ai16z to Virtual, and then to Swarms, in just one month, the AI ​​Agent track has once again spawned a new segmented ecosystem in the MEME field. In the face of the continuously derived AI Agent tokens, which ones can break through the siege, and which ones are just concepts? There may be multiple angles to consider, but the capital flow and main changes on the chain may still be the most important indicators to consider.

PANews took the recently popular Swarms token as the main analysis object, and conducted a comparative analysis of the large addresses of 6 AI Agent tokens with high market value, trying to "carve out a sword" again to get a glimpse of some passwords. The data scope of this analysis includes: the first purchase and first sale of the top 1,000 holding addresses of Swarms tokens (data time ends at 24:00 on January 6, 2025), Fartcoin, GRIFFAIN, Z Analyze the address overlap of 6 AI-related tokens with a market value of more than 100 million US dollars, including EREBRO, ai16z, arc, and Swarms (data time as of 14:00 on January 7, 2025), internal transaction records, etc.

Some people quietly make plans at low prices, while others follow suit

and enter the market.

First of all, judging from the timeline of the entry of large players, most of the large players started to enter the market after January 2, which was 12 days after the token was created. From a time point of view, many large investors in Swarms only started buying after the Swarms ecology became popular, but failed to complete the early layout.

But judging from the Swarms price curve, if you buy it before December 27, the price can basically remain below $0.02, which is nearly 30 times higher than the current highest price of 0.6. By analyzing the initial buying prices of these addresses, 202 addresses bought in the price range of 0.01 to 0.05 US dollars, followed by the largest number of addresses buying between 0.3 US dollars and 0.4 US dollars.

The distribution of these two data also means that the early adopters of Swarms bought at the lowest price in batches during the period when the price plummeted, and this kind of buying was also relatively scattered and not concentrated in a unified time period. . The advantage of this is that you can get chips at a lower price. Another group of large investors began to enter the market in large numbers after the Swarms discussion became more popular. However, the position prices of these large investors did not have much competitive advantage.

This kind of chip distribution may explain the reason why the Swarms board seems to fluctuate greatly in the short term. If the large investors who were ambushing in the early stage sell at high points, the cost for the new large investors will be higher. Once a sharp sell-off occurs, it is easier to touch the sensitive nerves of both parties and trigger a short-term sharp plunge.

However, judging from the chip distribution, Swarms’ main chip distribution is relatively scattered. In the analysis of the top 1,000 holding addresses, there are not many tokens originating from the same address. The source of the initial tokens of most addresses is mainly on-chain exchanges. Therefore, it is less common for early large players to obtain a large amount of chips and then disperse them to multiple addresses.

In addition, through comparison of internal trading addresses, it was found that addresses purchased early in the internal trading basically did not appear among the current top 1,000 holding addresses. Therefore, the early chips of this token have basically completed the rotation.

From the overall data, the average first purchase price of Swarms tokens is US$0.17, the average first sale price is US$0.23, the average initial purchase amount per address reaches US$37,600, and the average first sale amount is approximately US$28,200. Dollar. Comparing the sales and purchases of a single address, the average first selling price of these addresses was approximately 2.43 times the purchase price.

The largest investor made a profit of US$25 million without selling

Compared with other MEME tokens, the above-mentioned average initial purchase amount is significantly higher. The main reason here is that it is affected by some large addresses. Among them, the address with the highest initial transfer amount is Dsjzh2oj3HxyPefjQr. 5qqvbR5NrMnvBgptGLSQ3t8T5i, approximately US$4.13 million was transferred to this address from another address on December 31, and approximately US$500,000 was subsequently transferred to this address. The current position value is US$27.33 million.

The address it transferred to, 5HfrnyodRraAw63aRVPueD5Er4D1sRKMZBMx9LBbhUAs, started buying in large quantities as early as 8:22 on December 20. Since then, it has continued to buy, spending a total of US$1.89 million and purchasing 54.95 million Swarms. The average price is about US$0.034. The current profit is approximately US$25.44 million.

According to tracking, the earliest associated buying at this address started as early as 7:13 (Swarms’ opening time was approximately 06:45 on December 20). It is worth mentioning that the fund address associated with this address also started buying ai16z tokens as early as October 27, with a profit multiple of approximately 36 times.

In addition, another address, 5NQTp9jHbzS4N9yKMWxwm8pPZW3RFSFPze3Edwss7iLe, transferred Swarms tokens worth approximately US$3.63 million on January 4. According to traces on the chain, this address also purchased the tokens through several addresses around January 2, and finally transferred the tokens. Gathered into one address, the current holding value of this address is approximately US$5.26 million.

Another address, H1zFMUjYLzJwcfgXEtwiJ2ykvxmBr7JW6afW29PkcEAe, also used a similar technique, with a holding of approximately $2.27 million. However, the source of the tokens for this address initially came from the Bitget exchange, and subsequent purchases were made on the chain.

The combined initial transfer amount of these three addresses reached approximately US$10.53 million. From the perspective of the purchase process, in the early stage, multiple addresses were used to purchase dispersedly. When Swarms became more popular, all tokens were collected into several addresses and became smart money in the eyes of hunters on the chain.

27% of the addresses purchased multiple AI Agents. Who is driving the AI

​​Agents behind them?

In addition to analyzing the token addresses of Swarms, PANews also conducted a comparative analysis of the top 1,000 holding addresses of six addresses including Fartcoin, GRIFFAIN, ZEREBRO, ai16z, arc, and swarms. It can be seen in the analysis that among the 6,000 addresses participating in the analysis, 1,647 addresses appeared repeatedly, which means that about 27% of the addresses purchased multiple AI Agent-related tokens, among which ZEREBRO seems to be a major AI player. The most beloved token, 405 addresses purchased this token. Followed by arc (368), ai16z (334).

Among these addresses, the address with the highest holdings is DJnHztNmw1H56uYm98PNu5eVZ5yhi9482rZ9zA22TUUz. This address currently holds AI-themed tokens worth approximately US$49.86 million, of which ai16z alone holds approximately US$42.7 million. Moreover, this is not all the positions held by this address. As early as a month ago, this address had made tens of millions of dollars in profits by purchasing tokens such as ZEREBRO and GRIFFAIN.

In addition, 3xzTSh7KSFsnhzVvuGWXMmA3xaA89gCCM1MSS1Ga6ka6 also holds approximately US$42.84 million in AI-related tokens, and the address’s on-chain holdings are worth more than US$73 million. According to social media information, this address should be the wallet address of the early AI Agent address Truth Terminal.

In addition, there are many similar addresses. According to statistical data, the value of AI-related tokens held by these 1,647 large addresses exceeds US$1.58 billion. Among them, there are approximately 29 addresses with AI holdings exceeding US$10 million. These 29 The holding amount of each address is approximately US$690 million.

Rather than saying that AI Agent may be the hottest topic in 2025, it is better to say that AI Agent is essentially a better story subject in the eyes of big-fund investors.

Analyzing trading behavior is bigger than tracking smart money addresses

With the continuous in-depth analysis of on-chain data, tracking smart money seems to have become a prominent skill. However, from the perspective of large investors, when laying out chips in the early stage, they do not want too many retail investors to follow up and grab the low-price chips. Therefore, constantly changing new wallets and diversifying purchases have become the basic operations of big traders.

In this way, the blind pursuit of smart money will gradually become ineffective, and may instead be the target of malicious harvest. However, based on multiple analyzes of the operations of large position holders, even when using new addresses and dispersed purchases, there are management difficulties and problems with fund collection. Therefore, in most cases, large investors still need to collect the funds in each wallet into one or several wallet addresses for easy management. They can also stimulate more follower users to enter the market through small purchases during peak periods. Second, in order to quickly collect and buy in the early stage, these early layout makers have to focus on buying a large amount within a certain period of time. Although the amount is relatively scattered, this regular purchase may still become a sign. After all, their investment amount often ranges from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars, and they generally will not buy crazy without a certain determination to trade.

To sum up, for ordinary retail investors, if they insist on chasing smart money through on-chain tracking, perhaps the effect of paying attention to on-chain behavior is much higher than chasing smart money addresses. Of course, there is another important prerequisite, which is to think like a big player, what kind of subject matter will be a good story, otherwise, in the face of endless new tokens, blindly chasing them is tantamount to finding a needle in a haystack.