27.06.2025 09:10
Across Protocol's native token, ACX, experienced a significant 11% price drop within a 24-hour period, plummeting to a critical support level of $0.13. This sharp decline follows serious allegations of misappropriation involving approximately $23 million worth of ACX tokens by the protocol's team. A co-founder of Across Protocol, however, vehemently dismissed these accusations on X as "lies."
The accusations, originating from internet sources, paint a picture of insider misconduct within the cross-chain intents platform. Market analysts observed a dramatic fall in ACX's price, coinciding with claims that the team manipulated governance proposal votes to siphon off the substantial sum of ACX tokens for their own benefit. This alleged manipulation, occurring despite Bitcoin's relatively stable position above $107,000, has exerted considerable downward pressure on Across Protocol's valuation. The impact extends beyond the immediate price drop; experts warn that such allegations severely undermine investor confidence, posing a risk not only to Across Protocol but also to the broader decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) ecosystem.
These damaging claims emerged on X, courtesy of Ogle, co-founder of Glue Network and advisor to World Liberty Financial (WLFI). In a post published on June 27th, 2025, Ogle detailed the accusations, alleging that the Across Protocol team executed a carefully orchestrated plan to misappropriate $23 million in ACX tokens. The scheme, according to Ogle, involved manipulating governance votes to funnel 150 million ACX tokens to Risk Labs through two separate proposals.
The first proposal, submitted in October 2023, transferred 100 million ACX tokens under the guise of supporting future development. The specifics of the second proposal and the ultimate destination of the remaining 50 million ACX tokens were not initially detailed in the internet sources. The core allegation remains the blatant misuse of the Across DAO's treasury for the private gain of the protocol's team, raising serious concerns about transparency and governance within the DAO structure.
