The cryptocurrency market was rocked by an unprecedented collapse in the price of Mantra (OM), a token that had recently gained popularity in the Real World Asset (RWA) narrative. Within hours, OM plummeted from $6.30 to below $0.50, marking a staggering 90% loss in a single day and wiping out over $6 billion in market capitalization. The event has since fueled widespread outrage and accusations of manipulation involving centralized exchanges (CEXs) and market makers.

The sudden and severe nature of the crash has led many investors and analysts to question whether the market movement was natural or artificially engineered. Several industry voices have claimed that the incident bears all the signs of a coordinated pump-and-dump scheme, in which insiders inflate a token’s value through artificial demand and media hype, only to sell off their holdings at the peak, leaving retail investors to absorb the losses.

One vocal critic, crypto investor Anon Vee, compared the Mantra incident to past market manipulations such as the Tellor (TRB) token surge and subsequent crash. He pointed out that OM surged from a modest $0.013 to a peak of $9, raising its fully diluted valuation from $20 million to an eye-watering $11 billion—before it came crashing back down. Vee suggested that this price movement could only happen when insiders control most of the token supply and coordinate the timing of the sell-off.

Adding to the controversy, prominent crypto influencer Leonidas accused centralized exchanges, including Binance, of playing an active role in driving the hype. He claimed Binance promoted OM heavily—through 11 separate social media posts—before its collapse. According to Leonidas, this strategy was used to attract retail investors into the market before insiders offloaded their holdings, crashing the price.

Other industry insiders echoed these concerns. Arthur, the founder of DeFiance Capital, warned that such manipulation tactics, involving low liquidity and opaque relationships between projects and market makers, are becoming more common. He criticized the current market environment for its lack of transparency, arguing that this makes large portions of the crypto sector “uninvestable” for serious investors.

The damage caused by OM’s collapse has been substantial. One investor revealed they had lost over $3.3 million, with their OM holdings dropping in value from $3.5 million to just $200,000 in less than 24 hours. Another trader, Duo Nine, speculated that the crash was triggered by a major insider—either a market maker or early investor—who decided to exit their position abruptly, overwhelming the available liquidity and causing a domino effect of selling pressure.

In response to the growing criticism, John Mullin, co-founder of Mantra, issued a public statement denying the allegations of insider trading or market manipulation. Mullin claimed the sharp decline was caused by “forced closures” on certain centralized exchanges during a low-liquidity period late on a Sunday evening. While he stopped short of naming any specific exchange, he explicitly stated that Binance was not responsible. Nonetheless, his explanation has done little to reassure the community, with many viewing it as an insufficient justification for such a massive price drop.

Despite the turmoil, some investors have seen the crash as an opportunity. Carl Moon, founder of Moon Capital, declared that he had purchased $100,000 worth of OM following the price collapse, betting on a recovery. However, for most, the event has become a symbol of the risks facing retail investors in an unregulated and often opaque crypto market.

Mantra’s crash has reignited calls for greater transparency, better regulatory oversight, and industry reform. As the community processes the aftermath, many are asking whether this will be just another scandal—or a turning point for how crypto projects and exchanges operate in the future.