Airdrop Scan - Discover Verified Crypto Airdrops. Fast

Almanak, one of the year’s most heavily promoted “AI quant” DeFi projects, got off to a rough start on launch day.

During today’s $ALMANAK airdrop claim window, the team reported a combination of operational missteps and a DDoS attack targeting its infrastructure. The claim interface, scheduled to open at 12:15 UTC, did not become functional until roughly 12:35 UTC. Over the same 24-hour period, ALMANAK’s price fell by approximately 80%, trading near $0.034 as early claimants and secondary market participants reacted to the unfolding issues.

What Almanak Aims to Be

Almanak positions itself as a DeFi platform where AI agents design, test, and execute quantitative trading strategies on-chain.

According to its marketing materials, the protocol relies on AI-driven “strategists” and “optimizers” that:

Build and backtest automated DeFi strategies across multiple protocols
Manage risk and rebalance positions without human intervention
Allow retail users to access complex, quant-style strategies through a simplified interface

The project is backed by a notable roster of investors, including Delphi Labs, HashKey, BanklessVC, NEAR Foundation, RockawayX, and Shima Capital. Funding trackers indicate that Almanak raised several million dollars across multiple rounds.

In the months leading up to its token generation event (TGE) and airdrop, Almanak was heavily promoted across X, Telegram, exchange blogs, and airdrop aggregators, often framed as a flagship example of how AI agents could transform DeFi.

What Went Wrong During the Airdrop

Based on Almanak’s own updates and third-party reporting, the sequence of events appears to be as follows:

Delayed launch: The claim interface was scheduled for 12:15 UTC but only became usable around 12:35 UTC.
DDoS and infrastructure issues: The team reported a DDoS attack affecting backend systems responsible for wallet creation and claim processing, compounded by internal deployment errors.
Stuck wallets: Around 1,100 users saw their newly created Almanak wallets stuck in a “PENDING” state, preventing them from completing the claim process.
Team response: Almanak stated that infrastructure has since stabilized, no tokens were lost, and the problems were limited to off-chain systems rather than smart contract vulnerabilities.

Despite these issues, trading proceeded. As claims and early exchange activity unfolded under strained conditions, ALMANAK’s price declined sharply, closing the day roughly 80% below its early trading levels.

Retail Experience: From Anticipation to Frustration

For many retail participants, the contrast was stark.

Months of marketing emphasized seamless AI-driven strategies, gamified points, and a polished user experience. The pre-launch campaign, amplified by platforms such as Bitget, MEXC, and airdrop-focused sites, positioned launch day as a major event.

Instead, users encountered a delayed frontend and a claim process that left over a thousand wallets in limbo. For airdrop participants, the experience was largely one of frustration: qualifying tasks were completed, users arrived on time, and then watched the claim flow stall as the token’s price moved sharply lower.

The gap between the project’s “quant AI precision” narrative and the reality of launch-day infrastructure problems is likely to linger in users’ memories.

Tokenomics, Expectations, and the 80% Decline

ALMANAK’s steep drawdown in its first 24 hours raises questions that extend beyond a single DDoS incident.

Several factors likely contributed:

Pre-launch expectations: Months of points farming, pre-market speculation, and influencer coverage may have pulled demand forward, leaving limited incremental buying pressure at listing.
Listing dynamics: Early access via centralized exchanges and pre-market venues allowed traders to speculate on price before the broader airdrop claim opened.
Airdrop supply overhang: Once claims became possible, many recipients sold into available liquidity, accelerating downside pressure.
Narrative shock: Infrastructure issues at launch likely reduced confidence among new entrants, discouraging holding through volatility.

Taken together, the price action resembles a familiar pattern where expectations exceed what day-one liquidity and demand can support.

How This Fits Into a Broader Pattern

Almanak’s launch joins a growing list of high-profile airdrops and TGEs that struggled on day one.

Past cycles have seen:

Congested or failing claim portals for major airdrops
Disputes over eligibility criteria and last-minute rule changes
Sharp price declines as large portions of supply unlock simultaneously

What distinguishes Almanak’s case is that the failure stemmed primarily from off-chain infrastructure rather than smart contract flaws. A relatively small but visible group of users absorbed most of the friction, making the incident feel particularly personal to those affected.

It serves as another reminder that, even in crypto-native projects, Web2 infrastructure can be a critical point of failure.

Does This Undermine the Almanak Thesis?

Whether this episode becomes a minor setback or a defining moment depends on what follows.

Reasons the project could recover:

No on-chain exploits occurred, and the team reports that no tokens were lost.
Almanak retains backing from well-known investors.
Sustained product performance could eventually outweigh early launch issues.

Reasons the damage could linger:

Retail users who felt disadvantaged on day one may be slow to re-engage.
An 80% drawdown crystallizes losses for early buyers and leveraged traders.
The promise that AI improves efficiency is harder to sell after a visibly chaotic launch.

While the launch does not invalidate the broader idea of AI-driven DeFi, it has reinforced skepticism and highlighted the gap between branding and operational execution.

Conclusion

Almanak’s airdrop was intended to showcase data-driven, AI-assisted DeFi. Instead, it exposed how fragile heavily marketed launches can be when off-chain infrastructure falters and expectations run high.

A delayed claim portal, roughly 1,100 stuck wallets, and an 80% price decline in 24 hours were enough to turn launch day into a damage-control exercise—even without any loss of funds at the protocol level.