Mantra's OM token collapsed by more than 90% overnight, and the crypto world can't agree on why

Mantra’s OM token collapsed by more than 90% overnight, and the crypto world can't agree on why. On April 13, OM's price plummeted from over $6 to below $0.50

The crypto world woke up on April 13 to a sight that sent shivers down the spines of even the most jaded traders. Mantra’s OM token had plummeted by more than 90% overnight.

The token, which was trading at over $6 in the early hours of the day, fell to as low as $0.52 by 15:00:00 (ET). In the process, it wiped out over $5 billion in market cap and triggered widespread panic across the industry.

The sudden crash drew comparisons to Terra’s LUNA implosion as traders scrambled for answers. Unverified rumors of insider dumping, forced liquidations, mislabeled wallets and exchange manipulation quickly spread.

However, Mantra insists it was caught in the middle of events that remain under investigation.

Its story began in February 2025, when the OM token hit an all-time high of nearly $9 on the Stellar blockchain. Backed by a $1-billion deal to tokenize Damac Group’s real estate and data centers in Dubai, Mantra had built a strong position in the real-world asset tokenization narrative heading into April 13.

Securing a Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA) license in Dubai and launching a $108-million ecosystem fund with support from Laser Digital, Shorooq, Amber Group and Brevan Howard Digital, Mantra was a rising star in the industry.

But on April 13, that momentum was violently interrupted.

24 hours of the Mantra OM fiasco

April 13 (16:00–18:00 UTC)

Mantra’s OM token was trading sideways throughout the day. It dropped from $6.14 to $5.52 during this two-hour window.

April 13 (18:00–20:00 UTC)

The token suddenly fell to $1.38 in the first hour, then to as low as $0.52 in the next — losing over 90% of its value in a single day. Social media erupted with theories, including a rug pull, insider dumping, forced liquidation or exchange manipulation.

April 13 (20:00–22:00 UTC)

Early speculation surrounded a rug pull, sparked by a screenshot of a deleted Telegram channel. This was later debunked, as the deleted group was not Matra’s official channel. Cointelegraph can confirm that the project’s Telegram is active at the time of writing.

Mantra shared its first statement on X, but the brief update was met with immediate backlash from the community.

April 13 (22:00–00:00 UTC)

In the days leading up to the crash, at least 17 wallets had deposited a total of 43.6 million OM (worth $227 million) into Binance and OKX, according to blockchain tracker Lookonchain.

Two of these wallets were labeled by blockchain data platform Arkham Intelligence as belonging to Laser Digital, a strategic Mantra investor. The label triggered further speculation and allegations against Laser Digital. At the time of writing, the accuracy of Arkham’s labels has not been confirmed, and the platform has not responded to Cointelegraph’s request to clarify.

Meanwhile, Mullin replied to community questions under his X post, suggesting internal findings pointed to one exchange as the main cause of the collapse while stating that it was not Binance.

April 14 (00:00–02:00 UTC)

Both Binance and OKX responded to the situation. Binance said, “Binance is aware that $OM, the native token of MANTRA, has experienced significant price volatility. Our initial findings indicate that the developments over the past day are a result of cross-exchange liquidations.”

OKX CEO Star Xu posted on X, “It’s a big scandal to the whole crypto industry. All of the onchain unlock and deposit data is public, all major exchanges’ collateral and liquidation data can be investigated. OKX will make all of the reports ready!”

OKX stated, “Following the incident, we have conducted investigations and identified major changes to the MANTRA token’s tokenomics model since Oct 24, based on both publicly available on-chain data and internal exchange data.

“Our investigation also uncovered that several on-chain addresses have been executing potentially coordinated large-scale deposits and withdrawals across various centralized exchanges since Mar 25.”

April 14 (02:00–05:00 UTC)

Laser Digital denied ownership of the wallets tagged by Arkham and reported by Lookonchain, calling them mislabeled.

“We want to be absolutely clear: Laser has not deposited any OM tokens to OKX. The wallets being referenced are not Laser wallets,” the company said on X, sharing three token addresses to