XRPL ACCOUNT INVESTIGATION · 20 OCTOBER 2026

A new wallet.
A history reaching back to 2020.

rUtNWvY8c1YUMB8rtFeMBhs2emBD68Aa8i bought 2.139 billion FUZZY for 125,000 XRP on 20 October. Strong on-chain links connect it to an earlier FUZZY trading wallet that exited in September, and to an XRP funding lineage beginning in November 2020.

Snapshot: ledger 107,786,250 · 20 October 2026, 17:14:31 Europe/Berlin (15:14:31 UTC). Report times use Europe/Berlin, including historical daylight-saving changes. Ownership and intent are inferences; amounts and transactions are ledger observations.

What the evidence supports

This is a returning FUZZY buyer with substantial pre-existing XRP capital. The present account has only 15 indexed transactions and was activated on 5 October 2026. Its history becomes meaningful when linked to rLwVpDMt…ahmmb (the immediate funding predecessor), rLKyvnqg…rhCYX (the previous trading wallet), and rKvP4yni…4qCjZ (the oldest wallet examined).

The strongest links are the same signing public key used by the current and previous trading wallets, direct account-deletion destinations, and repeated use of Binance tag 413741915 and Nexo tag 1330768. These support common or closely coordinated control. They do not establish the operator’s name, the number of people behind the keys, or membership of the FUZZY team.

The inspected accounts show XRP holding and transfers, FUZZY trading, NFTs, repeated changes to signing arrangements, and wallet migrations. No AMM liquidity-deposit/withdrawal transactions appeared in these 13 histories. This is a scope-limited observation, not a claim about every wallet the operator may use.

Historical timeline

The funding lineage

This table follows observed transfers. Repeated balance migrations and deletion remainders strengthen the connection, but a transfer alone is not proof of common ownership.

Why the earlier trading wallet is strongly connected

The earlier FUZZY round trip

Across rnmy7629…wyHnw and rLKyvnqg…rhCYX, the first observed FUZZY purchase was 850 XRP for 62,623,132.97667287 FUZZY on 22 January 2026. That holding was transferred into rLKy… on 24 January. Later purchases included 1,000 XRP on 26 January, 771.326735 XRP on 7 February, approximately 4,001.398037 XRP on 17 March, and 25,000.398270 XRP on 19 March. Numerous other fills were very small.

Sales slightly exceeded purchased tokens because these wallets also received approximately 43.685030 FUZZY in tiny incoming transfers. Inter-wallet FUZZY transfers were excluded from buy/sell totals. The inventory was fully cleared, including a final 0.0000001 FUZZY sent to the issuer.

This is an XRP-denominated result for the inspected FUZZY round trip. It excludes separate wallet/service/network fees, NFTs, exchange trading and any unobserved accounts. It is not a USD return or a statement of the person’s overall profit.

The September exit averaged 32.103770 XRP per million FUZZY. Today’s purchase averaged 58.437561 XRP per million, approximately 82.03% higher in XRP per token. This establishes a higher-priced re-entry; the motive is unknown.

The new account, transaction by transaction

Two incoming 0.000010 XRP payments on 5 October are omitted from this narrative table but included in the appendix. Four failed attempts by the predecessor to transfer its remaining balance are in the predecessor history; they did not transfer XRP to the target. Total target-indexed transactions: 15; transactions submitted by the target: 7.

Today’s purchase and market impact

The swap carries SourceTag 10011010 and a memo naming xmagnetic.org. It is an XRP-to-FUZZY payment to the same account. The actual delivered amount was used; the requested amount of 2,153,912,668.092443 FUZZY was higher and must not be mistaken for the fill.

The AMM’s reserves changed from 661,385.178520 XRP / 13,194,340,083.80731 FUZZY to 762,372.498808 XRP / 11,456,796,134.05422 FUZZY. Its raw XRP-per-FUZZY reserve ratio increased 32.75% within this transaction. This is an immediate pool-price effect, not the token’s daily return or a claim about prices on every venue. No post-trade return or realizable liquidation value is calculated here.

The separate 1,000 XRP payment equals 0.8% of the 125,000 XRP trade. Including that payment, the entry cost was 58.905062 XRP per million FUZZY, before negligible ledger fees. All seven transactions submitted by the target together burned 0.000180 XRP in ledger fees.

How control changed

The target currently requires 3 of 4 equal-weight signing keys, with the master key disabled and no regular key set. This is not evidence of four different people: one person can hold several keys.

On 20 October, three signers authorized the regular key rFxaEbK6VsSd6nNFDhwYqzCZ9StyjdGpj at 09:31:50. The trust line, purchase, service-fee payment and removal of that regular key were then single-signed with its public key. The temporary authorization lasted 43 minutes, until 10:14:50. During that interval the regular key provided an alternative authorization route; the purchase itself did not carry three multisignatures. XRPL explicitly permits multiple authorization methods to coexist.

The predecessor made eight successful SignerListSet changes between April 2025 and September 2026. Its configuration moved through 2-of-2, briefly 1-of-1, and several 3-of-3 key sets. The trading wallet also repeatedly changed regular keys, signer lists and master-key settings. These are observable key-management patterns; they do not prove compromise, concealment or any particular motive.

XRPL authorization documentation

NFTs and other activity

The previous trading wallet’s history includes NFT offers, cancellations, acceptances, mint-related transactions and a burn. Six NFT settlements changed its XRP balance: two outflows totalling 2,050 XRP and four inflows totalling 169.188133 XRP. This is settlement cash flow, not a matched NFT profit calculation; transfers and different NFTs prevent treating the difference as a verified trading loss.

The current account holds no NFTs at the snapshot. The latest indexed event is an NFT offer created by another wallet, not an NFT purchase or accepted receipt by the target. Current owned ledger objects are one FUZZY trust line and one signer list. There are no open DEX offers or LP-token trust lines in the snapshot.

Tiny incoming XRP transfers and unsolicited promotional memos were not treated as evidence of counterparties cooperating with the operator. A memo can be written by its sender; it is not an authoritative identity claim.

Limits and interpretation

• Confirmed: the transfers, actual swap amounts, current holdings, signing-key reuse, destination-tag matches, account deletions, and inspected trading cash flow.
• Strong inference: the main wallets were operated by the same person or closely coordinated operators.
• Not established: a real-world identity; FUZZY team membership; beneficial ownership of every related address; the reason for wallet changes; whether exchange withdrawals came from deposits, trading proceeds, interest, or borrowing.
• Not visible: trades and balances inside Coinbase, Binance or Nexo, other chains, and unlinked accounts. A deposit into an exchange is not proof of a sale.
• Coverage: complete histories for the 13 selected addresses, not a complete account census for a person. Historical balance reconstruction reconciled the target and the four principal deleted accounts. Exchange histories were not exhaustively audited.

Sources and reproducibility

Primary evidence is the validated transaction JSON and metadata retrieved directly from the XRPL public JSON-RPC server at https://s1.ripple.com:51234. Queries were pinned to ledger 107,786,250. Account histories were read from earliest available ledger to this snapshot until no pagination marker remained. The target was queried in both chronological directions with matching transaction hashes. Public explorer labels provide service attribution; these labels are distinct from protocol facts.

• Nexo incoming sender — Bithomp reports “Xaman Account: Nexo”
• Nexo deposit destination
• Binance deposit destination
• Coinbase source
• Coinbase activation source
• Coinbase additional source
• Binance 2024 funding source
• Binance 2022 funding source
• FUZZY issuer and stated supply
• XRPL account_tx API

Appendix · reviewed accounts

Appendix · every executed prior FUZZY trade

Positive XRP inflow with negative FUZZY change is classified as a sale; the opposite is a purchase. Ledger fees are removed from XRP changes before classifying. Unfilled offers and unsuccessful transactions are excluded.

Appendix · all account-indexed records

484 records across 13 histories represent 447 distinct transactions. A transfer between reviewed wallets appears once in each wallet’s history, with the respective balance change. XRP changes here include ledger fees. Search by wallet prefix, transaction hash prefix, date, type or amount.