X
Campaign documented
Xeno
A public GitHub repository and a Bitdefender report. The profile compares the loader the repository describes with the loader the fake installer replaced.
sUNC
100%
86 of 86 standard functions pass . Measures coverage, not safety.
Detection
Detected
ScriptBunker marks the build Detected . Anti-cheat recognition, not malware.
Team
Changed
"Not the same developers from 2025" . A continuity question, not a version question.
Downloads
28.6K
Rscripts counter . Measures popularity, not payload integrity.
What 100% sUNC actually proves
The sUNC suite tests whether an executor implements a specific list of standard functions. Wave passes 86 of 86 . A script that calls those functions will not throw a missing-function error. That is a compatibility guarantee.
The suite does not inspect the loader. It runs inside the Lua environment and reports which functions work.
What "team changed" actually means
ScriptBlox's editorial notes state that Wave dates back to KRAMPUS.GG, and that "a different team now develops Wave" compared to 2025. The same notes say the new developers "have at least proven they are able to keep updating" .
A team change is not a malware signal. It is a question about who is responsible for the binary you run.
Sources: Rscripts Wave page · ScriptBlox Wave profile · ScriptBunker Wave profile . Four signals, four different measurements.
The four signals, read separately
sUNC 100%. Rscripts and ScriptBlox both record 86 of 86 functions passing . This means Wave supports the full standard function set. A script that needs Drawing.new or hookfunction will find it. This is the strongest compatibility signal available from a third-party tracker.
Detected. ScriptBunker marks the same build as Detected . That means the anti-cheat recognizes the executor. It does not mean the executable contains malware. It means using it carries a ban risk. The two are separate consequences: a detection flag is about the game, a malware flag is about your machine.
Team changed. ScriptBlox's editorial notes are unusually direct: "a different team now develops Wave (not the same developers from 2025)" . The notes also say the interface "is the same as Fusion, though it is said that it was sold to them." A team change is a trust question. It does not answer itself.
28.6K downloads. Rscripts records the count . A download counter measures how many people took the same action. It does not measure whether the action was safe. A high count can reflect popularity, not verification.
The version trail, as recorded
ScriptBlox records a dense release cadence for Wave. The dates are tracker timestamps, not a developer changelog. They show the project is active. They do not show what changed inside each build .
| Version | Approx. age | Roblox build | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5.7 | 1 day | 7a0c6d10fcb3 | ScriptBlox |
| 1.5.6 | 1 week | cec3ad5889b4 | ScriptBlox |
| 1.5.5 | 2 weeks | 02c37bc51a38 | ScriptBlox |
| 1.5.4 | 3 weeks | 4310300497aa | ScriptBlox |
| 1.5.3 | 4 weeks | 4310300497aa | ScriptBlox |
Version numbers and dates are recorded by ScriptBlox. This page does not claim any build is safe or undetected.
What this page does not claim
- This page does not claim Wave is malware-free. A 100% sUNC score measures function coverage. It does not audit the executable.
- This page does not claim Wave is undetected. ScriptBunker marks the build Detected . "Detected" means the anti-cheat recognizes it, not that your antivirus will.
- This page does not claim the team change is a red flag or a green flag. It records what ScriptBlox says and leaves the judgment to the reader .
Wave questions, separated from the marketing
If Wave passes 100% of sUNC, does that mean every script works?
No. It means every function in the sUNC test suite is implemented. A script that uses those functions will run. A script that uses a function outside the suite, or one that depends on a specific Roblox API behavior, may still fail. The score is a floor, not a ceiling .
What does "Detected" mean for Wave specifically?
ScriptBunker records the detection status from a third-party source and explicitly notes that "not marked detected" is not a guarantee of safety . The same logic applies in reverse: "Detected" means the anti-cheat recognizes the executor. It is a ban-risk signal, not a malware verdict.
Is the new team less trustworthy than the old one?
ScriptBlox does not say that. Its notes say the new developers "have at least proven they are able to keep updating" . The tracker records a continuity change. It does not assign a trust rating to the change.
Why does ScriptBlox say $5.99 in the notes and $4.99 in the listing?
ScriptBlox's main listing says $4.99 Weekly, but the editorial notes say $5.99 weekly . Rscripts says $4.99 Weekly . The discrepancy is in the trackers, not in this page. Prices change; the trackers have not synced.
Can I download Wave from this page?
Not yet. The Download button is a placeholder. When you have a confirmed source and choose to link it, replace the href. Until then, this page serves no file.
Why does this page look different from Solara's?
Because the evidence is shaped differently. Wave has four distinct tracker signals that are easy to conflate: coverage, detection, team, downloads. The layout puts them side by side as separate panels. Solara's page focused on a single partial score. The composition follows the evidence.