Crypto investigator ZachXBT has accused the team behind LAB of using opaque over-the-counter (OTC) deals, insider-controlled token supply, coordinated market-making activity, and hidden unlock structures to help drive the token’s rapid ascent to a nearly $6 billion fully diluted valuation.
In a recent post on X, ZachXBT described LAB as emblematic of the problems plaguing centralized exchange tokens, where retail investors often lack clear visibility into token allocations and behind-the-scenes agreements. The token plunged more than 30% in a single 24-hour period after the allegations surfaced.
LAB Faces Fresh Scrutiny
According to ZachXBT, LAB was launched in October 2025 by Vova Sadkov and Mark, following their prior project Eesee (ESE), which reportedly left many investors disappointed when the team moved on. He noted that there remains no consistent public breakdown of LAB’s token distribution: CoinGecko, RootData, and CoinMarketCap show different circulating supply figures, and LAB’s own documentation does not, he claims, provide a detailed allocation schedule.
On-chain analysis, ZachXBT says, suggests insiders likely control more than 95% of the token supply. He also alleges the team unilaterally changed vesting conditions for Legion public sale participants, extending a three-month cliff to nine months, citing an email screenshot shared by a user as evidence.
The investigator referenced separate complaints from creators who claim they have been waiting months for promised marketing payments. He also published details from a draft private loan contract linked to The Lab Management Ltd., a British Virgin Islands company that is reportedly connected to Vladimir Sadkov.
That draft loan agreement purportedly offered loans with 7.5% monthly interest over six months, stipulating repayment in LAB tokens at market price in the event of default. ZachXBT says the wallet tied to the contract was later used for public LAB buybacks and is on-chain linked to another wallet involved in a different Wildcat loan arrangement.
Hidden OTC Deals and Insider Activity
ZachXBT further alleges that LAB-related funds were transferred to exchange accounts connected to Sadkov, which had previously received deposits tied to Eesee. He claims multiple OTC and private loan arrangements were offered as early as January 2026.
Shared screenshots and reported terms reference deals that included heavily discounted OTC allocations with lockups, guaranteed discount structures recalculated monthly, and influencer-focused allocations with discounts reportedly as steep as 80%. Some agreements are said to have required influencers to publicly promote LAB before their allocations would unlock.
These private arrangements, the investigator argues, introduced supply and market-manipulation risks that retail traders could not observe on-chain. He further links a signer associated with LAB multisig wallets to an insider who is alleged to have been involved in earlier token manipulation surrounding RIVER.
According to the findings, insiders deposited 226 million LAB tokens into addresses tied to Bitget between March and April 2026, and roughly 100 million LAB tokens were withdrawn between May 11 and May 12 to ten separate wallets. ZachXBT reports that most spot trading activity for LAB appeared concentrated on Bitget, while Binance and Gate were used for derivatives and Alpha market trading.
The investigator urged exchanges including Bitget, Binance, and Gate to investigate, freeze alleged insider profits, or delist the token if wrongdoing is confirmed.
ZachXBT has previously raised similar concerns: earlier this year he sounded the alarm on the SIREN token after it surged from around $0.40 on March 10 to an all-time high of $3.65 on March 22, before crashing back down to $0.53. That episode is cited as another example of rapid token inflation followed by sudden collapse amid questions over insider activity and opaque market mechanics.