According to @rovercrc, Tom Lee bought another 15,427 ETH (~$69M), bringing alleged holdings to 2.17M ETH (~$9.71B) (source: Crypto Rover post on X dated Sep 20, 2025). The post provides no on-chain addresses, exchange execution evidence, or regulatory filing references to verify these figures (source: Crypto Rover post on X dated Sep 20, 2025). Traders should treat the claim as unverified and seek corroboration via identifiable wallet movements and labeled exchange flows on Etherscan or official disclosures such as SEC EDGAR before adjusting ETH exposure (source: Etherscan; SEC EDGAR). Until confirmed, monitor large ETH transfers, exchange netflows, and whale accumulation signals on major venues to assess real spot demand impact on ETH liquidity and price action (source: Binance, Coinbase, OKX public data dashboards).

According to @ai_9684xtpa, a large ETH holder who accumulated two years ago at an average entry of $3,912 transferred 3,711 ETH to Binance at approximately $4,294 (~$15.93M) about 10 minutes ago; if sold at that price, the realized profit would be roughly $1.417M. The wallet still holds 3,000 ETH with an unrealized gain of about $1.13M based on $4,294. Source: @ai_9684xtpa on X; Etherscan wallet 0x5fefafedd49a6099572f24747338193d8864a838.

According to @GracyBitget, traders should investigate Ethereum transaction hash 0x0230880850ae1daebdb1a9984f0f6b1601390bbe4738152556738aa901862d74 using Etherscan, DeBank, and Arkham Intel as a practical on-chain case study. Source: @GracyBitget on X, Sep 5, 2025. Etherscan can reveal from/to addresses, ETH value, gas metrics, input data, and decoded token transfers for this hash, enabling precise mapping of on-chain flows. Source: etherscan.io. DeBank can aggregate wallet portfolios and historical activity of addresses tied to the transaction to identify positions and cross-chain exposure. Source: debank.com. Arkham Intel can provide entity labels for counterparties, including exchange hot wallets and known funds, aiding counterparty risk assessment. Source: intel.arkm.com. Combining these outputs allows traders to monitor whether funds linked to this hash move toward exchanges or DEX routers, informing short-term ETH liquidity tracking and trade execution. Source: @GracyBitget and etherscan.io, debank.com, intel.arkm.com.

According to @ai_9684xtpa, moonmanifest47.eth transferred 100,000,000 WLFI to new address 0x6e7e6f4b73794321852993bf8f5524094e74d7c4 about 10 minutes before the post, with the transfer valued at approximately 18.24M USD, implying around 0.1824 USD per WLFI. Source: https://twitter.com/ai_9684xtpa/status/1963808726223089795 The WLFI token contract 0xda5e1988097297dcdc1f90d4dfe7909e847cbef6 on Etherscan shows the recipient address holding the transferred WLFI, confirming the on-chain movement. Source: https://etherscan.io/token/0xda5e1988097297dcdc1f90d4dfe7909e847cbef6?a=0x6e7e6f4b73794321852993bf8f5524094e74d7c4

According to @OnchainLens, World Liberty blacklisted an address associated with Justin Sun, freezing 540 million WLFI in unlocked tokens and 2.4 billion WLFI in locked tokens. Source: Onchain Lens X post dated Sep 4, 2025 and the Etherscan transaction https://etherscan.io/tx/0x0230880850ae1daebdb1a9984f0f6b1601390bbe4738152556738aa901862d74. According to @OnchainLens, World Liberty alleged that an exchange used customer tokens to sell and depress WLFI price. Source: Onchain Lens X post dated Sep 4, 2025. According to @OnchainLens, Justin Sun invested 75 million dollars to buy 3 billion WLFI across November 2024 and January 2025. Source: Onchain Lens X post dated Sep 4, 2025. For traders, the blacklisting event and the related allegations are material for monitoring WLFI liquidity and address risk, which can be checked via the referenced Etherscan transaction and related address activity. Source: Etherscan link provided by Onchain Lens.

According to @rovercrc, a whale purchased 53,740,000 dollars worth of ETH and the move was framed as smart money buying the dip, based on a post on X dated August 30, 2025; source: @rovercrc on X, August 30, 2025. The post shows a screenshot but does not disclose a wallet address, transaction hash, or exchange venue, so the transaction cannot be independently verified from the post alone; source: @rovercrc on X, August 30, 2025. Traders seeking confirmation can look for matching large ETH transfers and exchange flow prints using on-chain explorers and labeled-entity dashboards; source: Etherscan and Arkham Intelligence. Until a verifiable address or transaction hash is provided, risk management typically favors waiting for corroborating on-chain evidence or exchange inflow-outflow data before acting on the headline; source: Etherscan and Arkham Intelligence.

According to @AltcoinGordon, BlackRock just bought over $300M of ETH, posted on Aug 26, 2025, with no transaction details or regulatory filings provided in the post. source: @AltcoinGordon on X. Treat the claim as unconfirmed until supported by an official BlackRock press release or SEC filing, rather than assuming it as fact for positioning. source: BlackRock Pressroom; SEC EDGAR. For trading, monitor ETH spot price, 24h volume, and order-book depth to see if large buy-side flow is impacting liquidity and spreads. source: public exchange data from Coinbase and Kraken. Track ETH perpetual funding rates and open interest to detect leverage chasing any move potentially sparked by the rumor. source: CME Group and Binance Futures public metrics. Check on-chain large ETH transfers and exchange netflows for corroborating flows. source: Etherscan.

According to Lookonchain, Ethereum ICO participant address 0x7d03 reactivated after over 10 years and transferred 0.01 ETH about five hours ago as a test sale, as reflected by on-chain records. Source: Lookonchain on X; Etherscan address 0x7d03. The participant invested $15.5 in the ICO, received 49.93 ETH, and that allocation is now valued near $240,000, implying a 15,484x return. Source: Lookonchain. Etherscan confirms the specific 0.01 ETH outbound transaction from 0x7d03 and shows the address’s historical receipt of 49.93 ETH from the ICO era. Source: Etherscan; Lookonchain. Dormant-coin reactivations are tracked as revived supply signals that traders monitor for potential distribution flows. Source: Glassnode research.

According to @lookonchain, an early Ethereum ICO participant address 0x7d03 transferred 0.01 ETH about 5 hours ago in what the tracker described as a test sale after more than 10 years of dormancy; source: https://twitter.com/lookonchain/status/1959421665433260134. @lookonchain also reports the wallet invested $15.5 in the 2014 ICO and received 49.93 ETH, now valued at roughly $240,000 for a 15,484x return; source: https://twitter.com/lookonchain/status/1959421665433260134. Traders can monitor the 0x7d03 address for any additional outbound transfers using Etherscan to track on-chain balance changes for ETH; source: https://etherscan.io.

According to @OnchainLens, a dormant Ethereum ICO participant wallet that originally received 49.933 ETH for $15.5 sold 0.01 ETH about 5 hours ago, with the address activity verifiable on Etherscan. According to @OnchainLens, the wallet retains approximately 49.93 ETH valued around $239.5K, reflecting a 15,424x return on the initial outlay, and Etherscan shows the remaining balance. Based on figures reported by @OnchainLens and visible on Etherscan, the 0.01 ETH sale is roughly 0.02% of the wallet’s current holdings.

According to @rovercrc, Tom Lee’s Bitmine now controls roughly 1% of Ethereum’s circulating supply, but the post does not disclose wallet addresses or on-chain evidence for validation (source: @rovercrc on X). For trading decisions, treat this as unverified until the alleged holdings are confirmed via labeled addresses on Etherscan and validator or depositor share on beaconcha.in (sources: Etherscan, beaconcha.in). Traders seeking confirmation should review top holder distributions and staking concentration metrics only after verification to assess potential liquidity and staking decentralization impact (sources: Etherscan, beaconcha.in).

According to @lookonchain, Ethereum ICO participant address 0x61b9 transferred all 334.7 ETH after more than 10 years of inactivity, with the movement recorded on-chain today (source: @lookonchain; Etherscan). The holdings originated from a $104 ICO contribution and are now valued at approximately $1.48 million, reflecting a 14,269x return as reported (source: @lookonchain; Etherscan). Traders can monitor subsequent transactions from 0x61b9 on Etherscan to track any interactions with labeled entities or exchanges for potential market impact (source: Etherscan).

According to Lookonchain, Ethereum ICO participant wallet 0x61b9 transferred its entire 334.7 ETH after more than 10 years of inactivity on August 16, 2025, valued at about $1.48M for a 14,269x return on an initial $104 ICO allocation. Source: Lookonchain. According to Lookonchain, the post does not indicate that the funds were sent to an exchange, and the on-chain movement and amounts can be independently verified via the Etherscan address 0x61b9 with full transfer history and timestamps. Sources: Lookonchain, Etherscan.

According to @OnchainLens, the Ethereum Foundation address sold 1,100 ETH for 4.89M DAI. Source: @OnchainLens tweet and Etherscan address 0xf39d... Over the past three days, total sales reached 7,294 ETH for 33.25M DAI at an average execution price of 4,558. Source: @OnchainLens tweet and Etherscan address 0xf39d... Additionally, the address transferred 16,000 ETH valued at 71.45M and 6M DAI to a new wallet. Source: @OnchainLens tweet and Etherscan address 0xf39d... In aggregate, recent sales and transfers involve 23,294 ETH with reported notional of about 104.7M. Source: calculation from @OnchainLens reported figures

According to @rovercrc, 400,000,000 USDC was just minted and framed as a potential market pump, but the claim requires on-chain verification before trading decisions. Source: @rovercrc on X. The post does not provide a transaction hash or contract event reference, so the mint is unverified from the post alone at time of viewing. Source: @rovercrc on X. USDC is issued by Circle, and new issuance can be validated via Circle’s transparency disclosures and blockchain explorers tracking official USDC contracts. Source: Circle; Source: Etherscan. For trading confirmation, verify a USDC Mint event on the relevant chain and then monitor subsequent USDC net inflows to centralized exchanges, as these flows most directly impact spot and perpetual liquidity. Source: Etherscan; Source: Kaiko. Without confirmed exchange inflows, large mints can reflect treasury operations, redemptions, or cross-chain swaps rather than deployable buying power, so assuming a broad market pump is not warranted. Source: Circle. Actionable checklist: confirm the mint on-chain, track USDC exchange netflows, and watch stablecoin share of total crypto volume to gauge risk-on momentum before positioning. Source: Etherscan; Source: Nansen; Source: Kaiko.

According to @lookonchain, a wallet 0xF39d linked to the Ethereum Foundation sold 1,695 ETH for 7.72M DAI at an average execution price of $4,556 within the past 2 hours. Source: https://twitter.com/lookonchain/status/1955425305826562053 @lookonchain also reports the wallet originally received 20,756 ETH from the Ethereum Foundation wallet EF 1 in 2017, now valued at approximately $95.5M; based on those figures, the latest sale represents about 8.2% of that historical inflow. Source: https://twitter.com/lookonchain/status/1955425305826562053 The address and transaction history can be reviewed on Etherscan at 0xF39d. Source: https://etherscan.io/address/0xF39d

According to Omkar Godbole, blockchain networks face significant operational costs beyond transaction fees and validator rewards, including reliance on centralized services such as Etherscan, Tenderly, and Dune. This dependency introduces centralization risks that may affect network reliability and transparency, both of which are critical factors for traders assessing blockchain-based assets. Acknowledging these hidden costs and risk factors is essential for informed trading decisions in the cryptocurrency market (Source: Omkar Godbole).

According to EmberCN on Twitter, an investor or institutional address that received 9 million UNI tokens from Uniswap in September 2020 has transferred the entire holding, valued at $47.07 million, to Coinbase Prime within the last hour (source: https://twitter.com/EmberCN/status/1917379248953909689). This significant on-chain movement to a centralized exchange deposit address is often interpreted by traders as a potential signal for large-scale selling pressure, which could impact UNI's short-term price action. On-chain data from Etherscan confirms the transaction (source: https://etherscan.io/token/0x1f9840a85d5af5bf1d1762f925bdaddc4201f984). Traders should monitor UNI liquidity and order book depth on Coinbase for possible volatility spikes and adjust risk parameters accordingly.

According to MistTrack (@MistTrack_io), they are actively monitoring and tracking the stolen cryptocurrency funds in collaboration with the KiloEx team. The exploiter addresses identified are 0x00faC92881556A90FdB19eAe9F23640B95B4bcBd and 0x551f3110f12c763D1611d5A63B5F015d1c1a954C. Users are urged to flag these addresses on Etherscan to assist in the recovery of the stolen assets. This monitoring is critical for traders and investors to be aware of potential risks in the market.

According to MistTrack, the team is actively monitoring and tracking stolen cryptocurrency funds alongside KiloEx_perp. They have identified the exploiter's address as 0x00faC92881556A90FdB19eAe9F23640B95B4bcBd and urge users to flag this address on Etherscan. This incident highlights the importance of vigilance and real-time tracking in crypto trading to prevent further losses.