Huma Token Dips to $0.0073 After Hacked Wallet Sold 12 Million Tokens

Huma's HUMA token briefly traded at $0.0073, or 0.0073 USDT, on Nov. 12, and co-founder Richard Liu used the same session to disclose that roughly 12 million airdropped HUMA tokens were sold after an early liquidity provider's wallet was hacked on Oct. 22.

Liu described the sequence in remarks shared Nov. 12: the compromised wallet held an airdrop allocation, and that inventory was sold once the attacker gained control. He included the sale in his discussion of the recent volatility, tying the Nov. 12 print to supply reaching the market from a single compromised address rather than to a change in protocol fundamentals.

The scale deserves attention. At the Nov. 12 reference price of $0.0073, 12 million HUMA equates to roughly $87,600 in notional terms. Measured against the derivatives book that formed around it, the quantity is small: about 1.9% of the 620 million HUMA in open interest on Nov. 2, and about 1.1% of the 1.1 billion recorded by Nov. 7.

• Nov. 12: HUMA briefly touched 0.0073 USDT.
• Oct. 22: an early liquidity provider's wallet was hacked, per Liu.
• Roughly 12 million airdropped HUMA tokens were sold from that wallet.
• Nov. 2 to Nov. 7: open interest rose from about 620 million HUMA to 1.1 billion, an increase of roughly 77%.
• Nov. 4: funding rates turned negative.
• Perpetual trading volume reached seven to 10 times spot volume.

What does the hacked wallet change for token holders?

The Oct. 22 breach is a supply-structure story before it is a price story. Airdrops push tokens into a small number of early wallets, and those wallets become single points of failure for the float. When one was compromised, the allocation it held turned into sellable inventory without the holder's consent, and the disclosure offers no mechanism for separating compromised sales from ordinary distribution.

The operational consequence for practitioners is direct: treat a large airdrop allocation as security exposure rather than idle collateral. Move it, or hold it in custody that a single key compromise cannot drain.

The disclosure also carries a verification gap worth pricing in. Liu's account names no wallet addresses, no venue where the tokens were sold, and no exchange-level confirmation. Until those details surface on chain or in venue reports, the 12 million token figure rests on a founder-side statement rather than on a public record.

Why does the derivatives data matter more than the print?

Open interest measures committed size rather than direction, and it is the cleanest number in the disclosure. Between Nov. 2 and Nov. 7 it moved from about 620 million HUMA to 1.1 billion, roughly a 77% increase across five sessions, while funding rates turned negative on Nov. 4 and stayed there.

Negative funding means short positions pay long positions, the signature of a short-crowded book or heavy hedging demand. Paired with perpetual turnover at seven to 10 times spot volume, it describes a market whose price discovery has migrated away from spot quotes. Liu said market activity "appeared concentrated in perpetual markets."

That read-through matters for anyone providing liquidity in HUMA. Where perpetual turnover runs at nearly an order of magnitude above spot, the marginal price setter is a leveraged trader rather than a resting bid. Crowded shorts also absorb spot supply as they cover, which is one reason the sale Liu described did not produce a deeper break in the token.

One gap remains open. Liu did not date the sale itself, leaving three weeks between the Oct. 22 compromise and the Nov. 12 disclosure. Whether the tokens changed hands during the Nov. 2 to Nov. 7 window, when open interest was expanding, or earlier and were absorbed before it, remains undetermined.

What should traders and liquidity providers do next?

• Price airdropped float as hostile inventory. Treat sales from a compromised address as available supply until addresses and amounts are published.
• Watch funding and open interest rather than spot prints. With perpetual volume at seven to 10 times spot, a flip to positive funding while open interest holds would show the short book unwinding.
• Discount founder-reported figures where no on-chain record supports them, including both the 12 million token figure and the Oct. 22 compromise date.
• Separate the one-time flow from the positioning. A hack-driven sale does not repeat, while an expanding open interest book with negative funding can reverse inside a single session.

The next checkpoint is the first full week after the Nov. 12 disclosure. If open interest holds near 1.1 billion HUMA while funding stays negative, the derivatives market has absorbed the reported sale. If open interest contracts and funding flips positive, more of the remaining airdropped inventory is likely still reaching venues, and price discovery in HUMA stays with leveraged traders rather than spot liquidity providers.