---
name: openzaps-zaps
description: Full screen of OpenZaps / 0xZAPS on Robinhood Chain, 31 Aug 2026, re-verified. The falsified "Hookr is powered by 0xZAPS" premise, the HOOKR buy/burn leg that does not exist on chain, the corrected fee multiple, and the live phishing campaign. Read before any 0xZAPS sizing or re-screen.
sources: [cowork]
aliases: [0xzaps, zaps, openzaps]
---

# 0xZAPS screen, 31 Aug 2026, verified pass

Token 0xDd90bFa4adC7F4401E611AbaC692D939F9F4CB07, Robinhood Chain (4663). Related: [[hookr-token]], [[rh-chain-thesis]], [[gem-hunter-doctrine]].
[stated] Ben asked to check it, noting the hookr.fun founder is co-founder here and that hookr.fun displays "powered by OX Apps".

## Snapshot at end of screen
mcap $1,917,284 (ran +19% during the screen itself, from $1,612,737). Price $0.00001917. Supply 100,000,000,000 (100B, not 1B). Aggregate liquidity $400,490; main v4 WETH pool quote side 78.5301 WETH = $191,463 one sided. Vol24 $1,045,624. 24h +139%, 6h +135%, 1h +16.8%. Holders 1,216 (was 1,189, rising). Pool created 21 Jul 2026, 40 days. ATH $0.0000222 set 31 Aug, now 13.6% below it. ETH $2,438.08.
Verified ClankerToken, launched via Clanker V4 21 to 22 Jul 2026, creator 0xD3f2cC1731b7Fd17f28798835C2E02f0a1839A94 (Clanker factory). GoPlus returns {}.

## CORRECTION MADE MID-SESSION. The number that misled was the fee stream.
First pass assumed the documented 50/50 split meant total fees = 2x the vault inflow, giving cap/fees 4.06x and "3.5x cheaper than HOOKR". THAT WAS WRONG.
- Every HOOKR burn since Campaign 2 opened (20 Aug 2026 21:00 UTC) comes from Hookr's OWN two flywheel burners: 0xb5f7d9d4269c897df70df26f7ba48c0d933be8db (137 txs, 2,268,559 HOOKR) and 0x8Cee20FA000aF3266AC2cD2cBeEFbcD19D98FD89 (5 txs, 447,242 HOOKR). ZERO burns from any OpenZaps contract.
- So the claimed "50% market-buys $HOOKR, burned to dEaD" leg is NOT OBSERVABLE ON CHAIN. The "2 million tokens burned" figure circulating on X (@illiquidpixel, 30 Aug) is Hookr's own flywheel misattributed to the 0xZAPS campaign. Lifetime HOOKR burned across all senders is 2,961,701 = 0.296% of supply.
- Corrected fee to holders = vault WETH inflow only, no doubling.

## THE FEE STREAM, MEASURED
Staking vault 0x7F57F7B760614e67D3B3887433fA124B4c9A09F9. UNVERIFIED contract, created by 0x5a52D4B820Ae7F02880d270562950918ACb14aA2, the same operator EOA that deployed every Hookr contract. Holds 15.81B 0xZAPS net (about 15.8% of supply).
- Funding source CONFIRMED on chain: it received exactly 50.0000 tf0xZAPS (contract 0x31d6787b7c2c347ffb5b58171e33e9c5132a7338) from the operator. That is 50 of 100 tokenised Clanker fee shares, exactly as the docs state.
- WETH IN 6.2475 over 78 txs since 3 Aug. WETH OUT only 0.8115 over 94 txs, so 87% of accrued rewards are unclaimed.
- Lifetime rate: 0.2231 WETH/day = $544/day = $198,559/yr. Cap/fees 9.66x.
- Pump week rate (24 to 30 Aug): 0.6996 WETH/day = $1,706/day = $622,586/yr. Cap/fees 3.08x.
- HOOKR benchmark measured same day: 259,077 HOOKR/day burned x $0.016434 = $4,258/day = $1,554,022/yr against $16,433,699 cap = cap/buyback 10.57x.
- SO 0xZAPS at 9.66x is only marginally cheaper than HOOKR at 10.57x, not 3.5x cheaper. The fee is also REFLEXIVE: it is 0.33% of 0xZAPS's own trading volume via the Clanker fee share, not product revenue.

## THE PREMISE IS FALSE
- hookr.fun/docs "Current live contracts" names 6 addresses: launchpad 0xa043caBE645636899dDe91Cce4693C00a015e660, hook 0xe7c3461A4c762fF9dB4F91BeE3Cf8deAaFc2E8CC, PoolManager 0x8366a39CC670B4001A1121B8F6A443A643e40951, router 0x644ac2e784059e1C01F24f99DF7795aE2be06ca0, $HOOKR 0x18E674231A58c239Dc7DaeDcffE15Ec3A24cff5c, burner 0x8Cee20FA000aF3266AC2cD2cBeEFbcD19D98FD89. ZERO OpenZaps contracts. Neither site mentions the other anywhere.
- "Powered by @0xzaps" originates only from accounts of 262 to 2,229 followers: @SuiLittleBrain, @Star__Gems, @B00MSH4K4L4K444, @WalkDog1984, plus @Crypto_peet (12,704f). @Cryptor_dot asked @NodarJ directly on 7 Aug 2026; no reply found.
- WHAT IS TRUE: same dev, Nodar Janashia / @NodarJ (9,284f), confirmed both sides. 0xZAPS shipped "Zap Hooks" ON hookrfun 12 Aug 2026, so it is a CUSTOMER of Hookr, not its infrastructure.

## Benchmark
Category: tooling and infra (intent plus execution automation), secondary agent/AI. Return bucket: INFRASTRUCTURE THE HOLDER MUST OPERATE, +29% 30d median on this chain, the worst bucket by 66x against "pays automatically" at +1,925%. Staking plus an unclaimed-87% claim step is not automatic.
Ring 1 same chain, measured 31 Aug: HOOKR $16,433,699 (cap/fees 10.57x); DELTA 0xe8ffd7e24187f72afb08d75b1bb13088a989a791 $30,171,648 ($0 to holders); PROLOGUE 0xb9972ca7188e511174947e3936a5315ac7073277 $5,311,241 ($0, ve not live); TWO 0x2A4a33A2163D005d8E7f1D9aC08d14c98db288d5 $2,731,906 (dilution only).
Ring 2 category comps: Across ACX $28,765,488 (backed, $20.3M TVL); Enso ENSO $18,125,447 (backed); Superfluid SUP $2,040,023; ODOS $1,143,892 mcap / $7,149,322 FDV (backed); FURUCOMBO COMBO $12,526, the graveyard receipt for the exact "compose DeFi legos into one transaction" thesis.
Ring 3 RH live-product floor: WTH $2.77M, TWO $2.73M, WIRE $1.97M, VAULT $1.73M, LUTE $1.71M.
IS THE CATEGORY TOKENISED? Yes, badly. Ceiling is $18M to $29M and it is BACKED, so category narrative alone will not carry it.
SAME-CHAIN COMPETITOR WITH NO TOKEN: Fusion by IPOR, $61,985,772 TVL, no token. Snuggle, $7,990,519, no token. Both 100x+ the measurable footprint of 0xZAPS, which is not one of DefiLlama's 133 Robinhood Chain protocols at all.

## Chain context, 31 Aug 2026
RH Chain TVL $719,397,080 (+21.2% 7d, +92.4% 30d). DEX volume 24h $1,402,529,587, 30d $16,496,661,766 (+287%). Chain fees 30d $100,039,747 (+525.8%). 133 protocols. 0xZAPS fee capture is 0.00024% of chain 24h DEX volume and comes from its own token.

## Slot ownership and toll booth
- ATTENTION RANK: LAST in its peer set. 32 posts from 15 unique authors in 7 days, vs HOOKR 123 authors, DELTA 120, PROLOGUE 123, TWO 97. LunarCrush interactions peaked 26,882 on 24 Aug, second peak 22,885 on 30 Aug, today 2,664. HOOKR's peak was 503,697, so 0xZAPS is at 5.3% of it.
- STRUCTURAL RANK: UNMEASURABLE, worse than low. No DefiLlama listing, no published Zap execution volume anywhere on site or docs.
- TOLL BOOTH TEST: FAILS. Take rate is 0.00001 ETH per Zap created (about $0.024) plus 1% of automated Zap output (80% executor, 20% lottery pot). It does not sit between chain flow and a counterparty; HOOKR does, at 0.3% of every eligible ETH-pair swap. A chain-growth scenario table is not applicable because chain volume does not touch its take rate. Only its own volume does.

## Flow and structure
24h 1,084 buys vs 2,520 sells at +139%: few large buyers absorbing many small sellers, accumulation not distribution. BUT the 5m print at end of screen was 0 buys / 14 sells, the first dead-bid tick. 1h 67/137.
Top 25 holders 59.5%, less PoolManager (11.74%) about 47.8% in 24 wallets. Largest EOA 0x79700D60A64382633C9C01f6Ca37d442171b748C at 4.56%, then a smooth ladder 2.08, 2.03, 2.00, 1.66, 1.50, 1.32, 1.31, 1.29, 1.15, 1.06, 1.05, 1.05, 1.02, 1.00, 1.00, 0.97%.
Deployer 0x5a52D4B820Ae7F02880d270562950918ACb14aA2 holds ZERO 0xZAPS. Dead address holds ZERO, no burn on this token itself.

## LIVE PHISHING, HEAVY. Flagged to Ben.
10+ posts in 7 days, all sub-300-follower accounts, all with the CORRECT contract address plus a t.co link: "claim portal opened", "holder eligibility is live", "check if your wallet qualifies", "limited supply, first movers eating". @solarlqc (5f), @NefWayne (39f), @djejejnf (19f), @geomungo_kitty (31f), @31NJPgflZ9JQpWZ (40f), @annisapt_ (207f), @AaronKnight91 (86f), @ITSYABOIRAZOR (182f), @bhumitbds (190f), @katelynbouche (265f). Never sign anything from a 0xZAPS claim link.

## Narrative ownership
Tier one arrived 30 Aug, one day before the run: @astekz (110,212f) "I like this for a slow cook, automation and AI narrative"; @graildoteth (75,598f) put it on his RH infra list (170 likes, 53,835 views) and named it one of only two on that list with a real doxxed team, alongside SCOOPL. Project account @0xzaps has only 847 followers.
NO founder interview exists. yt-dlp search returned zero results, so there is no independent review layer.

## VERDICT 31 Aug 2026
NO at this price. Fee multiple is 9.66x against HOOKR's 10.57x, so essentially no discount, and the headline "50% buys and burns HOOKR" leg cannot be found on chain. It ran +139% in a day into an ATH set the same day, 87% of its own staking rewards sit unclaimed, and it is in the worst return bucket on the chain.
WATCH, do not buy the spike. Re-screen on a base.
UPGRADE TRIGGER: 7-day average vault WETH inflow clears 0.5 WETH/day WHILE its own DEX volume is flat or lower, proving the fee comes from Zap usage rather than its own churn.
FALSIFIERS: (1) 0x7F57F7B760614e67D3B3887433fA124B4c9A09F9 sends 0xZAPS to a router or pool; (2) Campaign 2 ends 3 Sep with no Campaign 3; (3) holders fall from 1,216 for 5 straight days.
EXIT DEPTH at Ben's real sizes against $191,463 quote side: $2,400 about 2.5% round trip, $5,000 about 5.2%, $10,000 about 10.4%, $15,000 about 15.7%. $5,000 is the clean ceiling, not $10,000.
BOOK OVERLAP: RH Chain is $15,300, 9.7% of book (STONKBROKER $12,900, SESTRI $2,400). STONKBROKER is a launchpad, same correlated cluster as HOOKR and 0xZAPS.
SOURCES THAT FAILED: fomo.family rendered an empty SPA shell on the bridge, no thesis list retrieved. purealpha not checked. No founder interview exists to check.