Do Artificial Inu's biggest bags actually hold tokenized NVDA?

What’s actually in the bags?

The median share of priced value in each category, across the sample. Described, not graded — no category here is better than another.

• MEMES100%
• STOCK TOKENS0%
• STABLES0%
• ETH + MAJORS0%
• OTHER0%

Median of the 22 priced bags, of 60 sampled.

Who these wallets are

Archetypes under aura v0.2 · rules v0.3. Any group smaller than five wallets is merged into “other” so no individual can be picked out of it.

• THE DUST LORD · 19 of 60 wallets32%
• THE MID-CURVE · 15 of 60 wallets25%
• THE ONE-BAG MAXI · 10 of 60 wallets17%
• THE LOCKED-IN TRENCHER · 8 of 60 wallets13%
• THE MAILBOX · 7 of 60 wallets12%

How Baggy reacted

• ONE BAG MAXI21 · 35%
• DUST LORD16 · 27%
• EXHAUSTED11 · 18%
• SKEPTICAL9 · 15%

Bag Aura spread

Median 5,098 · mean 5,008 of 10,000. Wealth is never an input.

• LOW · 15 of 60 wallets25%
• MID · 40 of 60 wallets67%
• HIGH · 5 of 60 wallets8%

Most common badges

• LIQUIDITY ENJOYER · 56
• DUST LORD · 34
• DEGEN CARD · 27
• PACKED · 24
• FULL SEND · 12

Also holding

Share of this sample that also holds another reported community’s token.

• Cash Cat25%
• PONS17%
• Tendies13%

Method

Contract

0x2E8c31162b855A2ffa90F6F8634643Ad6F111e18

Chain

Robinhood Chain (eip155:4663)

Snapshot

2026-09-02T17:23:13.010Z UTC

Population

34,862 holders of AI (Blockscout, 2026-09-02)

Sampling frame

Blockscout token holder list for AI, ordered by balance descending, read 2026-09-02 (153 rows scanned).

Selection

The 3 largest holders are skipped — a deployer, a pool or a treasury sits at the top of every holder list and is not a bag. From the rest, smart accounts (EIP-7702) are counted as wallets; pools, routers and other contracts are excluded. The first 60 wallets that remain are checked, in holder order.

Sample size

60 wallets

Exclusions

The 3 largest holders. Contracts that are not EIP-7702 smart accounts: 6 of the 153 scanned rows. Selected wallets the providers could not read: 0 — excluded, never scored as zero. Any published category with fewer than 5 wallets is merged into "other"; badges and community-overlap rows below that floor are dropped.

Coverage

60 of the 60 selected wallets returned a scored check (0 unreadable). Concentration could not be priced for 38 of them; composition was scored for 22.

Method

Every wallet is checked by the same pipeline the site runs — the same Aura, the same archetype rules, the same confidence grades (aura v0.2 · rules v0.3) — against live chain data read on 2026-09-02. Holders come from the Blockscout holder list for the token, ordered by balance; smart accounts (EIP-7702) are counted as wallets; pools, routers and other contracts are excluded. Results are published as aggregates only: no per-wallet rows, no addresses, no ranks of individuals, and any category smaller than 5 wallets is merged into "other". Holder counts move fast, so every number here carries the date it was read.

Rules

aura v0.2 · rules v0.3

Next re-run

2026-09-30 UTC

Notes

• Aggregates only — no per-wallet rows, addresses or ranks are stored or published.
• Categories with fewer than 5 wallets are merged into "other"; badges and community-overlap rows below that floor are dropped.
• Cells below five wallets — including the "other" remainder — are not published.
• Composition rows are per-category medians across wallets and need not sum to 100.
• Holder counts move fast on this chain; every number is as of 2026-09-02.
• Concentration is scored over the 22 of 60 wallets whose positions could be priced.
• Composition medians are over the 22 of 60 wallets whose positions could be priced.

Previous runs

This is the first published run. Earlier numbers are left standing when it is re-run.

What’s in your bag?

Same check, same rules, one wallet. Read-only — paste the address, nothing to connect.