Home / Methodology / Wallet sets
The addresses behind every claim
Publish the set, or don't make the claim.
Several numbers on this site are computed over a set of addresses: what share of agent payments travelled on the x402 rail, how concentrated agent signing authority is, where agent money lands, how much of the registry one address minted. A claim like that is only checkable if you can see the set. So here is every one of them, with how it was built and how complete it is.
We were breaking this rule ourselves until this page existed. Four live metrics rested on sets that appeared nowhere a reader could inspect. The fix for an unverifiable claim is not to soften the wording — it is to publish the set and let somebody disagree with it.
Sets published
—
Each one names its provenance, its true size, and the metrics that depend on it. All fully public — a set behind a paywall is a set nobody can check.
loading…
Addresses across all sets
—
The registers are capped in the published document for page weight; the size given for each set is always the true total.
/api/wallet-sets
Sets curated by hand
1and it is empty
The EIP-7702 trusted-implementation allowlist. An unknown implementation is not evidence of a god key, so it ships empty and the detector that depends on it stays inert until a human reads a contract and can say why it belongs.
curated · argue with the human
How to read provenance.
Every set is labelled with one of three words, because it is the only thing that matters when judging whether to trust it.
- Read from the chain — we derived it ourselves from on-chain data. Anyone with an RPC endpoint can reproduce it, and if we are wrong you can prove it.
- Harvested from a cited index — somebody else's list, taken with the source URL stored against every member. Our claim inherits their coverage, so the set is a floor rather than a census, and we say so.
- Curated by hand — a human decided. That is sometimes the only honest option, and it is the weakest kind of set, so it is labelled loudest.
What a set does not license us to say.
Knowing that a set of addresses receives agent payments does not tell us who runs them. Naming an operator is a separate claim that needs its own evidence — a published disclosure, a signed message, an explorer tag with a source — and we do not make it from a set alone. This is why the homepage carries no volume attributed to a named company: the claim would be about somebody's business, and we have not measured it.
It also does not license a total. Every set here is a sample of a larger world, and each one states its completeness in its own words. Read the definitions for what each dependent metric asserts and, more usefully, what it refuses to assert.
