checked 2026-09-20
valerarub.base.eth
0x2273d11720c89598e4e4d1f85825538c9b9151ed
#403 of 521 by verified x402 revenue top 77%|
Unknown
Basenamewhere the name comes from
This name is registered on-chain by the address itself. It is a record of what the address published about itself, not a claim by AQUIX about who operates it.
Most of what it received went back to the addresses that sent it — 41.2% returned to its own payers.
★ Whether any address is operated by an AI agent is not verified. On-chain records show that a payment settled, not who or what decided to make it.
Claimed vs observed
Nothing is claimed.
No ERC-8004 registration, no x402 authorization, and no listing in any public x402
directory was found for this address, so there is nothing to compare against what the chain shows.
The chain shows $101,671.30 received from 55 payers
across 2,417 payments, and $0.01 kept.
Measured
Received
$101,671.30USDC
lifetime, exact on-chain · 0.0% proven x402 by settlement record
Kept
≤ $0.01USDC
upper bound · USDC only
Payers
55
exact · every payer captured
Payments
2,417
exact total
Classification — what we decided from those measurements, never a rating
Verdict
behavioural evidence · no named rule was decisive · the base classifier decided
Verdict, every day we ran
Verdict each day
organic payments on all 40 measured days · current streak 4 days
Days we settled on chain
2026-07-072026-07-10
4 active of 4 days · a gap is a quiet day, not a missing measurement
How a verdict can change
Every change is adjudicated in public and logged with its date and reason. Nothing here
is edited silently, and no verdict is ever removed from this row.
Trends
money in (above the line)
money out (below the line)
no row that day
All USDC routes, rail or not ·
3 measured days between 2026-09-05 and
2026-09-19. In and out are opposite directions, drawn either side of zero and never summed. Kept, running total is received minus sent, accumulated, and floored at zero to
match the Kept figure above · which is why a conduit's line sits flat on zero for the
whole span: it forwarded everything. No per-day kept figure is stated, only the running
total, because money can arrive on one day and leave on another.
Every day in the span as a table (4 rows, 4 measured)
| day | settled USDC | settlements | average |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-07 | $0.02 | 24 | $0.00 |
| 2026-07-08 | $0.05 | 50 | $0.00 |
| 2026-07-09 | $0.10 | 98 | $0.00 |
| 2026-07-10 | $0.04 | 35 | $0.00 |
Read this chart with its coverage.
Cumulative settled is 0.0% of what this address received; the rest arrived by paths the settled
series does not reconstruct. It is not missing money — it is money this chart deliberately does not
contain. Read it as evidence, not as a verdict. The outbound-per-day layer began recording on
2026-08-05 and is forward-only, so days before it were never measured.
4 measured days from
2026-07-07 to 2026-07-10. Drawn from settlements only · a day we did not
measure is absent, never plotted as zero.
How it is trending
Every percentage is an average per measured day, never a window total. A total counts a morning AQUIX did not run as zero; an average simply has one fewer sample. A window needs 5 measured days on each side, and at least $1 a measured day to divide into, or it prints nothing at all.
Measured in total
$0.21
across 4 measured days
2026-07-07 to 2026-07-10
No 30-day percentage: fewer than 5 measured days on one side of it. No 7-day percentage: fewer than 5 measured days on one side of it. An absent number is a smaller claim than a wrong one.
Where it sends
0xd156…a3b647.4%
0xf504…e22226.5%
0x6e41…0ec63.5%
0xc7d3…1b293.1%
0xf70d…dbef2.6%
all others16.8%
Shares of every USDC dollar that left this address, for its
whole history. 53 destinations in total.
How it was paid
no authorisation we could read100.0%
x402 confirmed — 207 settlements on record. Every one is a USDC transfer whose transaction carried a matching EIP-3009 payment authorisation, reconstructed from public Base state. This is the proof, and it rests on all of them, not a sample. Separately, a sampler looked at 6 payments on 2026-09-19, 1 day ago, and found no authorisation it could read in that sample. That is an indication from a small sample, not a finding about this address, and where it disagrees with the settlements above, the settlements are what count.
Where the money went
destination
USDC sent
share
0xd156…a3b6
$48,186.85
47.4%
0xf504…e222
$26,989.59
26.5%
0x6e41…0ec6
$3,571.46
3.5%
0xc7d3…1b29
$3,198.65
3.1%
0xf70d…dbef
$2,683.06
2.6%
0x038b…d79f
$2,319.73
2.3%
0x3fb1…9205
$1,740.44
1.7%
0x27a1…5d26
$1,700.49
1.7%
Other 45 destinations below the top 8
$11,281.02
11.1%
These are addresses, not identities · we name one only where
a public source already does. 2 of them hold a verdict of
their own. This does not include the ETH reported below — the fold is USDC-only.
What we read off the chain measured
Facts, not judgements. Every figure below is USDC taken from Base settlements.
USDC received
$101,671.30
lifetime, all-route, exact on-chain
USDC sent on
$101,671.29
100.0% of received
Settled and attributed
$0.21
4 measured days
Distinct amounts
209
average $101.77
Volume processed · 30-day
$0.21
4 of 30 days measured · window ends 2026-07-10 · the rest are days AQUIX did not run
7 / 30-day trend
—
a trend needs 5 measured days on each side and at least $1 a measured day to divide into; this address does not clear both yet, so no percentage is printed
Not counted in retained
11.979 ETH
left this address in 446 transfer(s). Retained counts USDC only, so it is an upper bound · this movement is real and is not in it. No dollar value is assigned. Separately, at least 251 transfer(s) across 72 token contract(s) are attributed to this address for tokens it never received. A block explorer will show them; we do not count them as outflow.
What we concluded from them computed
Derived figures, each stating the arithmetic behind it.
Reality ratio
0%
retained — processed
Confidence
High
55 payers · 209 distinct amounts
Volume backing
Low
$101,671.30 backed by 55 payers and 209 distinct amounts
Sybil state
clean
first-funder measured
Average per active day
$0.05
4 days with settlements
Consistency
100%
of days since first settlement had activity
Why this verdict
No named rule was decisive
None of our named rules was decisive for this address. Separately, 41.2% of everything it received went back to the addresses that sent it — it kept 58.8%.
Our rules that promote an address to a verified service refuse it above 30% circulation. Because no rule fired here that test was never applied — so rather than call it a service that earns, this page says what the money actually did.
This is not an accusation. Money returning to the same counterparties is exactly what a trading agent, a settlement loop or a refund flow looks like. We publish the measurement and the fact that no rule decided it; we do not infer intent from either.
41.2% of everything it received went back to the addresses that sent it.
Kept of received0.00%
Distinct payers55
Distinct amounts209
In, out and kept — 2026-09-19
Not measured for this address on 2026-09-19. AQUIX builds this split from
two independent series and this address appears in neither on that day. That is an absence of
measurement, not a measurement of zero · the attribution is not claimed either way.
Who funded the payers
Sybil stateclean
First funder of the payers
0x2273…51ed · contract, treated as infrastructurePayers55 distinct paying addresses · 209 distinct payment sizes
Self-funded payers
2 of 55 ·
4% by count, 0.0% by value
A shared first-funder is a shared-funder pattern, so we name it.
The test treats it as a signal only when the funder is not infrastructure and covers 50% or more of payers
— most wallets legitimately get their first funds from one exchange, bridge or router.
Time and trust
First seen
Entered the register on 2026-07-04.
Final through 2026-07-10 · 4-day streak.
Verdict history
Every snapshot ever taken, never rewritten.
40 snapshots recorded · no verdict change: this agent has held the same verdict since first seen.
Corrections
No published correction affects this agent.
Late writes
4 completed day(s), disclosed · a day finished after it was first published, and we say so rather than quietly restating it.
Basis
Snapshot 2026-09-20 · methodology v3.2.
Retained and processed are never summed. Retained is clamped at zero, so it can overstate but never understate.
Check it yourself. Every figure on this page is reconstructed from public Base
chain state. No API key, no account, no trust required — open the address and compare the USDC
transfers against what we show.
Notes and limits
Paid through
No settlement in the 7-day window · 2026-09-14 to 2026-09-20 · is attributed to a named facilitator. That is not the same as saying no rail ever carried its money: the lifetime total above is all-route and covers the whole history, and this window does not.
Coverage of the daily series
0.00% of this agent’s money. The chart and the day strip are drawn from that series; the lifetime totals are not, and the two are never added together.
What this page cannot show for this agent
- Which rule fired no named rule was decisive; the base classifier decided
- Claimed vs observed no ERC-8004 registration and no x401 authorization exist to compare against
- 7 / 30-day trend a trend needs TWO measured periods; this address does not yet have an earlier window to compare against
How a rule works here
One sentence per rule, stating what the rule tests and citing figures already on this page. The threshold itself is not published, so it cannot be gamed. Rules are named so that a verdict which changes can be pointed at. The full set of rules
Everything else is measured, not inferred. A figure we do not hold is never rendered as zero.
