According to @bubblemaps, trader Naseem turned $1.1M into over $100M on $TRUMP earlier this year (source: @bubblemaps, Aug 21, 2025). According to @bubblemaps, the same entity has been found again on $YZY, indicating the trader’s on-chain activity spans both tokens (source: @bubblemaps, Aug 21, 2025). According to @bubblemaps, this cross-token presence highlights a whale-level address that traders monitor for flow and concentration across $TRUMP and $YZY (source: @bubblemaps, Aug 21, 2025).

According to @ai_9684xtpa, about one hour before the post a trader referred to as 麻吉老哥 added again to a YZY 3x long position, bringing total holdings to 1.22 million YZY valued at approximately $1.16 million (source: @ai_9684xtpa on X, Aug 21, 2025). According to @ai_9684xtpa, the reported average entry price is $1.11 and the position shows an unrealized loss of roughly $193,000 at the time of reporting (source: @ai_9684xtpa on X). According to @ai_9684xtpa, these reported levels offer clear reference points for traders tracking YZY whale activity and liquidity during volatility (source: @ai_9684xtpa on X).

According to @ai_9684xtpa, OKB’s on-chain price on the Ethereum mainnet spiked as high as $342 amid extremely thin liquidity and concentrated control, with only $253,000 of OKB liquidity available on ETH at the time, source: @ai_9684xtpa on X, Aug 21, 2025. The source reports that most tokens were either burned or migrated to X Layer and there is no cross-chain support between ETH and X Layer, constraining arbitrage and depth on ETH, source: @ai_9684xtpa on X, Aug 21, 2025. Between 20:46 and 21:08, six addresses bought a total of 138.44 OKB, which was sufficient to push the on-chain price to that peak, source: @ai_9684xtpa on X, Aug 21, 2025. For traders, this indicates that OKB on ETH can register outsized moves on small order flow under these conditions, elevating slippage and reference price risk when trading on-chain, source: @ai_9684xtpa on X, Aug 21, 2025.

According to @EmberCN, Arkham Intelligence explorer data shows a wallet referenced in the post as tied to @CryptoHayes transferred 1,000,000 USDC into Binance about two hours ago and withdrew 7.66 million $BIO valued around $1.1 million roughly 30 minutes later, based on the linked address on intel.arkm.com (source: @EmberCN; Arkham Intelligence). The post characterizes this sequence as a $BIO purchase by @CryptoHayes, while only the on-chain transfers and amounts are directly verifiable from the Arkham explorer data linked by the author (source: @EmberCN; Arkham Intelligence). For trading, whale-scale stablecoin inflows to a CEX followed by token withdrawals can tighten near-term $BIO float and raise order book slippage risk on Binance; monitoring subsequent Binance netflows and the wallet’s on-chain $BIO balance can help gauge persistence of this flow-driven signal (source: on-chain flow reported by @EmberCN and address visibility on Arkham Intelligence).

According to @EmberCN, the Radiant Capital exploit address bought back 2,109.5 ETH at roughly $4,096 in the last hour using $8.64 million DAI, source: @EmberCN. A week earlier, the same address sold 9,631 ETH at an average price of $4,562 for $43.937 million DAI, source: @EmberCN. The address now holds 14,436 ETH and about $35.29 million DAI, source: @EmberCN. For traders, $4,096 and $4,562 represent the attacker’s latest executed ETH price levels on-chain and can serve as concrete reference points for flow tracking, source: @EmberCN.

According to Onchain Lens, a newly created wallet withdrew 450 BTC worth approximately 53.22 million dollars from Binance, with the receiving address bc1qvlmv2ut5sv6sz3ux95jm235vkw90qq794fmple, source: Onchain Lens on X, August 17, 2025. This on-chain transfer represents a 450 BTC outflow from Binance at the reported time, source: Onchain Lens on X, August 17, 2025. Traders can monitor subsequent movements from the disclosed address to assess holding versus redistribution behavior, source: Onchain Lens on X, August 17, 2025. The source did not provide additional details on owner identity or final custody beyond the destination address, source: Onchain Lens on X, August 17, 2025.

According to @MI_Algos, dollar cost averaging on dips is the safest way to start or add to crypto positions, making it preferable to chasing intraday moves during thin weekend liquidity, source: @MI_Algos. @MI_Algos also notes that weekend volatility driven by whale activity can present quick scalp opportunities, but cautions traders not to get caught in those whale games and to prioritize dip entries, source: @MI_Algos.

According to @rovercrc, a long-dormant Bitcoin holder transferred 3,000 BTC, approximately $353.16 million, to a new wallet after five years of inactivity, with the address still holding 23,969 BTC valued around $2.82 billion, source: @rovercrc on X, Aug 16, 2025. The source specifies the move was to a new wallet, with no exchange deposit cited in the post, source: @rovercrc on X, Aug 16, 2025. The 3,000 BTC moved represents roughly 12.5% of the wallet’s reported 23,969 BTC balance, highlighting a sizable but partial repositioning, source: @rovercrc on X, Aug 16, 2025. Traders focused on BTC liquidity can track follow-up on-chain movements from the new address to assess whether any portion flows to exchange-labeled wallets, as the only confirmed detail so far is a wallet-to-wallet transfer, source: @rovercrc on X, Aug 16, 2025.

According to @rovercrc, ARK Invest transferred 1,268 BTC valued at about $148.88 million into Coinbase, a large exchange deposit that traders may monitor for market impact, source: @rovercrc. Following this report by @rovercrc, traders are watching Coinbase spot order books, BTC price action, and the Coinbase premium versus other venues to gauge near-term liquidity and any emergent sell-side activity, source: @rovercrc. Based on the reported figures, the transfer-implied average value is roughly $117,500 per BTC (148.88M/1,268), which some traders use as a reference level for positioning and risk management after sizable inflows, following the report by @rovercrc.

According to @lookonchain on X (Aug 15, 2025), the address labeled hacker "0x17E0" sold 4,958 ETH at $4,463 during a market dip, totaling about $22.13M and locking in a $9.75M profit (source: @lookonchain on X). @lookonchain also raised the prospect of this address buying back at higher prices as before, making the wallet a key watch for traders tracking potential re-entry flows (source: @lookonchain on X).

According to @OnchainLens, an Ethereum Foundation-linked wallet sold 2,099 ETH for $9.61 million in DAI. Source: @OnchainLens; Etherscan Over the past 2 days, total sales reached 6,194 ETH for $28.36 million at an average execution price of $4,578. Source: @OnchainLens The same address also received 3,000 ETH valued at about $13.69 million roughly 11 minutes before the update. Source: @OnchainLens; Etherscan

According to @AltcoinGordon, an individual described as "Alex" at BlackRock has burned another 2% of the $SWIF supply valued at over $150,000, bringing the alleged cumulative burn to 6% (source: @AltcoinGordon on X, Aug 14, 2025). The post does not include a transaction hash, burn wallet, contract address, or official confirmation from BlackRock or the project, so the claim remains unverified at this time (source: @AltcoinGordon on X). Token burns permanently reduce circulating supply and can affect liquidity and volatility; traders should independently verify via the project’s official channels and on-chain explorers before positioning (source: Binance Academy — What Is a Token Burn; source: @sheepwifhatcoin on X for project updates). If confirmed, a 2% supply reduction could influence order book depth and slippage; monitor spot volume, spreads, and large-holder concentration around any verified burn event for trading signals (source: Binance Academy — Liquidity and Order Books; source: @AltcoinGordon on X).

According to @lookonchain, a newly created wallet 0xd537 withdrew 3,606 ETH valued at $17.06 million and 1.41 million WLD valued at $1.55 million about eight hours ago, totaling approximately $18.61 million with ETH accounting for roughly 91.7% of value and implying per-token estimates near $4,731 per ETH and $1.10 per WLD based on the source’s USD figures, and the source did not specify the originating platform (source: Lookonchain).

According to @rovercrc, Fidelity purchased $154.7 million worth of Ethereum (ETH) as reported in a post on Aug 14, 2025, source: @rovercrc on X. According to @rovercrc, traders can treat this reported institutional buy as a potential liquidity and momentum cue and monitor spot order-book imbalance, exchange net inflows, and derivatives metrics like funding and basis for confirmation, source: @rovercrc on X. According to @rovercrc, focus on ETH spot volume on major USD venues and short-term options skew to validate sustained buy pressure around the reported size, source: @rovercrc on X. According to @rovercrc, no official confirmation from Fidelity was provided in the post, so treat this as a single-source signal and seek corroboration via on-chain and exchange data before acting, source: @rovercrc on X.

According to @EmberCN, the hacker who stole about $53 million from Radiant Capital last October converted the proceeds first into BNB and then into roughly 21,900 ETH, holding until yesterday, with the position now worth around $100 million as ETH appreciated, source: @EmberCN on X, Aug 13, 2025. The same source reports the hacker began selling ETH from around 3 pm yesterday, creating an on-chain outflow event that ETH and RDNT market participants may track, source: @EmberCN on X, Aug 13, 2025.

According to Lookonchain on X on Aug 13, 2025, an Ethereum Foundation-linked wallet (0xF39d) sold another 1,100 ETH at $4,602 for a total of $5.06 million roughly 25 minutes before the post, based on on-chain data shared by the source. source: Lookonchain on X, Aug 13, 2025 The reported execution establishes a realized sell level at $4,602 for the EF-linked address, offering a concrete reference point for monitoring short-term ETH order flow and liquidity. source: Lookonchain on X, Aug 13, 2025

According to @ai_9684xtpa on X on Aug 12, 2025, Arthur Hayes reportedly accumulated approximately USD 9.801 million of Ethereum (ETH) ecosystem tokens after opening a new ENA position, with about USD 180,000 in unrealized profit, and the same post cites a public exchange with James Wynn to highlight whale activity that traders track for near-term ENA and ETH market momentum.

According to @rovercrc, Grant Cardone Capital plans to buy $1 billion worth of Bitcoin (BTC), as stated in a post on X dated Aug 12, 2025, source: @rovercrc (X, Aug 12, 2025). The post provides no timing, execution venue, funding source, or custody details, and includes no supporting documents or official confirmations, source: @rovercrc (X, Aug 12, 2025). From a trading perspective, the lack of specifics means there is no verifiable signal yet regarding order-flow or on-chain activity to monitor beyond the headline claim, source: @rovercrc (X, Aug 12, 2025).

According to @santimentfeed, crypto markets were thriving over the past week and the top 10 assets with the largest weekly increases in $100K+ on-chain transaction counts include MNT, WBTC, KCS, and ENS, signaling elevated whale activity (source: @santimentfeed). According to @santimentfeed, these are the biggest week-over-week rises in large-value transfers among tracked assets, spotlighting where big holders are most active right now (source: @santimentfeed).

According to @Pentosh1, a new 425–575 million USD wave of corporate treasury buying may target Ethereum (ETH), shared via an X post with a link and chart on Aug 12, 2025 (source: @Pentosh1 on X, Aug 12, 2025). The post provides no accompanying audited filings or labeled wallet evidence, so the claim remains unverified at the time of posting and requires independent confirmation (source: @Pentosh1 on X, Aug 12, 2025). Traders seeking validation can monitor ETH spot order books and block trades for persistent buy-side imbalance on major venues that publish real-time depth and prints (source: Binance and Coinbase public order books). On-chain and derivatives checks include large exchange outflows and labeled institutional wallets plus funding rates and open interest to detect positioning stress and potential accumulation (source: Etherscan and Nansen for wallet flows; Binance and Bybit for funding rates and open interest).