One of the checks
How much sits in one wallet?
If a single holder is sitting on a large share of the float, the chart is a description of their intentions. This check reads the largest accounts and asks how much the biggest human-controlled one holds — and the interesting half of it is what it excludes.
What it is
The thing being measured
getTokenLargestAccounts returns the twenty largest token accounts for a mint. Token accounts, not people: one wallet can hold several, and most of the largest ones on a healthy token are not wallets at all.
So the raw list is close to useless. A pool vault holding sixty percent of supply is the pool working correctly; the same number in a person's wallet is the float sitting on a hair trigger. Reading the first as the second is the mistake that makes automated holder checks worthless, and it is the one we made on our first two real tokens.
The fix is arithmetic rather than heuristic: resolve each account's owner, and drop every owner whose address is off the ed25519 curve. An off-curve address is program-derived — a vault, an escrow, a locker — and nobody holds its private key. Also dropped: the incinerator, and the known system holders.
And here is what this check does not see. The ceiling is tested against one wallet. A position split across fifteen wallets, each below the ceiling, holds the same share of the float and passes the arithmetic is per address, and an address costs nothing to create. On 29 August 2026, the team behind a Solana token sold 224,500,000 tokens through fifteen freshly created wallets (reported by Lookonchain). We did not run our checks on that token, and this is not a claim about what we would have found: it is a description of a hole in the rule above. Closing it means clustering addresses by how they were funded, which is a different measurement, and not one we run today.
Without taking our word for it
Check it yourself
Two calls: the largest accounts, then who owns them.
# 1. the twenty largest token accounts
curl -s https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com -X POST \
-H 'content-type: application/json' \
-d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"getTokenLargestAccounts","params":["MINT"]}' \
| jq '.result.value[] | {address, amount: .uiAmountString}'
# 2. who owns them — feed the addresses from step 1 back in
curl -s https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com -X POST \
-H 'content-type: application/json' \
-d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"getMultipleAccounts","params":[["ACCOUNT_1","ACCOUNT_2"],{"encoding":"jsonParsed"}]}' \
| jq '.result.value[].data.parsed.info.owner'
An owner that is a pool vault or locker
Exclude it. It is not a holder, and counting it invents a whale that does not exist.
A plain wallet holding a large share of supply
This is the number the rule tests, against the ceiling published on the rules page.
Several plain wallets, each under the ceiling
The rule reads them one at a time and finds nothing. Whether they are one holder is a question about how they were funded, which this check does not ask.
"too many accounts" from the RPC
The method refuses past a certain size. That is a limit of the call, not concentration — see below.
Whether an address is on the ed25519 curve is not something the RPC will tell you; it is a property of the bytes. Any Solana SDK exposes it as PublicKey.isOnCurve.
Our door policy
What we do with the answer
Over our ceiling in one wallet is a refusal. A smaller but still notable share is a flag printed under the seat. Holders we could not read at all assert nothing.
Every threshold on this site is published before it is applied. All of them, on one page.
Read this part
What this measurement does not establish
Twenty accounts is a sample, not a census. It catches one wallet sitting on the float, which is what the hard rule is for. It will not catch a hundred wallets holding one percent each, and we do not claim it does.
Past a certain number of holder accounts the RPC refuses the call outright. When that happens the mint is unmeasurable, not concentrated — and a token is never refused for being larger than the method used to read it.
A large holder is not necessarily an insider. It can be an exchange, a market maker, or a bridge. Our rule refuses the seat anyway, because from the outside those look identical and we would rather turn away a legitimate token than print a badge we cannot defend.
The Wall sells twenty-four advertising seats and screens every contract before selling one. It is a door policy, not a rating: we have no opinion on whether anyone should hold, buy or sell anything, and we are not qualified to have one.
Where this check gets used
Every refusal is published, with its measurement
A badge nobody can audit is a marketing claim. The ledger · what last night's round found, counted and unnamed.