PI was violently rejected at $0.30 and it’s the poorest performer today from the larger-cap alts.

Although its vast community is preparing to celebrate the so-called Pi Day today, the ecosystem’s underlying token experienced one of its most painful corrections, driving it south by 30% in less than 24%.

This crash came even after reports that the Core Team had successfully implemented a crucial upgrade, whose deadline was March 12.

v20.2 Update Completed?

The team behind the controversial project announced its first protocol migration for the year to v19.6 on February 21. The next one, v19,9, was successfully migrated on March 4, and they explained that v20.2 will be implemented by March 14. However, they tightened the deadline to March 12 a few days later.

Although the second deadline passed on Thursday, there’s no official update from the team regarding its status. However, multiple reports from accounts designated to cover Pi news have asserted that it was successfully migrated. v20.2 is not a routine technical update; it’s a mandatory protocol adjustment designed to strengthen the network and ensure it can support rising demands and utilization.

The team promised that security, scalability, and reliability of the blockchain infrastructure should be enhanced following its completion.

PI Plummets

The project’s native token became the most significant gainer over the past few days. Yesterday alone, it skyrocketed by 30% to its highest price level since late November at almost $0.30. Perhaps a large portion of these gains was driven by the implemented updates and the promise of the following one. However, there was another big reason behind PI’s wild run – the official listing on the veteran US exchange Kraken.

Similar listings tend to boost the underlying token as it helps to legitimize it and increase liquidity. However, this significant rise in PI’s price has come to a halt as the asset has wiped out almost all recent gains and has plummeted to $0.21. In fact, it has even turned red on a weekly scale, dropping by over 11%.

You may also like:

Today’s crash appears to be a classic ‘sell-the-news’ moment, in which the underlying asset rockets as the hype builds and crumbles after the update/listing becomes official.

The upcoming token unlock schedule is quite high over the next few days, with 17 million and 16 million coins to be released on March 17 and 20, respectively, which could increase immediate selling pressure. However, the following three weeks are expected to be calmer, with the average number of tokens to be unlocked decreasing to under 4.5 million per day.

TLDR:

• Meta plans to cut over 20% of its 79,000-person workforce, potentially eliminating around 16,000 jobs.
  
• Meta’s Avocado model has missed its deadline three times and now trails Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic on benchmarks.
  
• Meta is reportedly exploring a temporary deal to license Google’s Gemini to power its own AI products.
  
• Meta has committed up to $135 billion in 2026 capex and $600 billion in data center spending through 2028.

Meta layoffs are under scrutiny after Reuters confirmed plans to cut over 20 percent of the company’s roughly 79,000 employees.

About 16,000 jobs could be at risk under the reported plan. The move comes as Meta ramps up AI spending to between $115 and $135 billion in 2026.

However, the company’s own AI model has faced multiple delays. Meta is also reportedly considering licensing a competitor’s technology in the interim.

Model Delays Cast Doubt on the AI Replacement Thesis

Meta’s next-generation AI model, internally codenamed Avocado, has been delayed from March to at least May 2026. Internal benchmarks showed the model falling behind Google’s Gemini 3.0, OpenAI, and Anthropic in key areas.

Those areas include reasoning, coding, and writing performance. The delay comes at a particularly sensitive time for the company.

The delay is not a one-off event. The model has slipped three separate times from its original 2025 release target. Each delay pushes back Meta’s ability to prove that AI can handle work previously done by large teams.

Social media analyst @shanaka86 captured the tension in a widely shared post. He wrote: “Mark Zuckerberg is about to fire 16,000 humans because he believes AI can replace them. His own AI cannot replace Google’s.”

He called this contradiction “the entire story of the 2026 tech economy.” Many investors and observers have since amplified the observation online.

Meta’s previous flagship model, Llama 4 Behemoth, was never released publicly at all. Now the company is reportedly discussing a plan to license Google’s Gemini temporarily. That would mean a competitor’s model running inside Meta AI products under Meta’s own branding.

CEO Mark Zuckerberg told analysts earlier this year that he was “starting to see projects that used to require big teams now accomplished by a single very talented person.”

However, the company’s AI technology has not demonstrated that capability in competitive benchmarks. The layoffs appear to be running ahead of the technology they are supposed to depend on.

Acquisitions and Capital Commitments Add Financial Weight to the Strategy

Meta’s capital expenditure for 2026 is projected between $115 and $135 billion. That is nearly double the roughly $72 billion the company spent on infrastructure last year.

Additionally, Meta has committed to $600 billion in total data center spending through 2028. The scale of that commitment makes the AI model delays all the more consequential.

The company has also moved aggressively on acquisitions in a short time. Meta paid $14.3 billion to bring in Alexandr Wang from Scale AI.

It then spent over $2 billion on Manus and an undisclosed amount on Moltbook. Both deals came within recent months, adding to the company’s growing cost base.

The integration of these acquisitions, however, depends on a model that is still unfinished. Manus processes 147 trillion tokens using third-party AI models, not Meta’s own. Moltbook’s agent systems run on a platform called OpenClaw, also external to Meta’s stack.

Meta hired Nat Friedman, the former GitHub CEO, as part of its talent push. The company also recruited top AI researchers with compensation packages reported to exceed $100 million each. Zuckerberg described the goal as building “the highest talent density lab in the industry.”

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone pushed back on the layoff reports. He called them “speculative reporting about theoretical approaches,” with no confirmed plans or timelines.

Meta’s stock still fell 3.83 percent when the news broke. The proposed cuts would be the company’s largest since the 2022–23 efficiency drive, which removed 21,000 positions.

BTC has remained relatively stable for now, but it tends to react once the futures and legacy markets open.

The US military forces launched a massive attack against one of Iran’s key regions, Kharg Island, which is reportedly responsible for 2% of the global oil supply.

Although the POTUS said he intentionally chose not to bomb any oil infrastructure on the island, he threatened that he might reconsider his decision should Iran “do anything to interfere with the free and safe passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz.”

The New Attack and BTC Reaction

Trump described the attack as the “most powerful bombing raids in Middle East history.” Although it’s a relatively small island, it is estimated that it manages around 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports and 2% of the global oil supply.

According to the analysts from the Kobeissi Letter, this is a “MAJOR escalation for oil markets.” However, the attack was carried out hours after (almost) all financial markets closed, so the damage has been limited so far. USOIL closed on Friday at just under $100, which is still lower than the Monday peak of nearly $120.

The consequences for bitcoin have also been rather negligible so far. The asset was rejected at $74,000 yesterday, but it remained relatively stable at around $70,000-$71,000 after the attacks. However, similar developments during previous weekends impacted BTC once all other financial markets opened on late Sunday or early Monday. As such, more volatility is probably expected tomorrow evening.

Sentiment Changes

The analytics company Santiment noted that the crowd optimism about the potential ending of the military conflict in the Middle East skyrocketed earlier this week when Trump claimed again that the US was “winning very decisively.” However, the subsequent actions, continued military operations, and new hits have evaporated this optimism.

The analysts said that social dominance around words like ‘war,’ ‘conflict,’ ‘battle,’ or ‘tensions’ is on the rise again, especially since the US and Israel have seemingly different scenarios on how they would like the situation to unfold.

You may also like:

🇮🇷🇮🇱🇺🇸 According to social media data, the optimism that the Iran, Israel, & US conflict would come to an end peaked on Tuesday after Trump’s speech about the US ‘winning very decisively’. But following continued images, videos, and news of retaliation, this hope considerably… pic.twitter.com/mPkSI8m1QO

— Santiment (@santimentfeed) March 13, 2026

Two weeks into a Middle Eastern war and bitcoin is higher than where it started.

The largest cryptocurrency was trading at $71,000 on Saturday morning, down 0.7% over the past 24 hours after the U.S. bombed military targets on Kharg Island, Iran’s main crude export facility.

The reversal from Friday’s $73,838 high was sharp but contained. Bitcoin gave back 3.5% on the Kharg headlines and stopped. A month ago, a comparable escalation would have triggered a much deeper sell-off.

The weekly numbers tell the resilience story. Bitcoin is up 4.2% over seven days. Ether gained 5.5% to $2,090. Dogecoin added 5%. Solana rose 4.2% to $88. BNB climbed 4.5% to $655. Every major is green on the week despite the war intensifying, not easing.

The market is adapting to the conflict in real time. Early in the war, every headline produced an outsized reaction because nobody could price the tail risk. Now, traders have a framework, where strikes happen, oil spikes and bitcoin dips only to recover again.

The pattern has repeated enough times that the reflexive sell-the-headline impulse has faded. However, the $73,000-$74,000 resistance level stays in place, and has now rejected bitcoin four times in two weeks.

Trump’s language on Kharg Island added a new variable in the markets.

In a Truth Social post late Friday, he said he spared oil infrastructure “for reasons of decency” but would “immediately reconsider” if Iran continued blocking the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran responded that any strike on energy infrastructure would trigger retaliatory attacks on U.S.-linked facilities in the region. That’s a conditional escalation threat that didn’t exist 48 hours ago. If oil infrastructure becomes a target, the supply disruption, which the IEA already called the largest in history, gets dramatically worse.

Meanwhile, the $371 million in liquidations over the past 24 hours reflected the two-way nature of Friday’s session. Short liquidations outpaced longs at $207 million versus $163 million, meaning the initial surge to $73,800 squeezed bears before the Kharg headlines squeezed the longs who had just entered.

Attention now shifts to the Fed meeting on March 17-18. Oil above $100, the largest energy supply disruption in history, and a war entering its third week with no resolution make the stagflation case harder to dismiss.

CME FedWatch still prices a 95%+ probability of a hold at 3.5% to 3.75%, but the dot plot and Powell’s press conference will matter more than the decision itself. Any hint that rate hikes are back on the table would hit risk assets hard, including a crypto market that has spent five months pricing in cuts that keep not arriving.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin saw macro relief as the PCE inflation print came in at ~2.8% YoY, matching expectations and easing pressure on risk assets.
• A U.S. 30-day oil sanction waiver cooled energy markets, reducing inflation fears and boosting investor risk appetite.
• Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded multiple consecutive inflow days, with BlackRock’s IBIT leading institutional demand signals.
• Dealer hedging near the $75K options strike amplified BTC’s upward move, accelerating the return to the $70K level.

Why Bitcoin just bounced back to $70,000 is a question many market watchers are asking this week. The recovery did not happen by chance, as several converging factors drove the price higher.

Easing inflation data, cooling energy prices, consistent ETF inflows, and strategic derivatives positioning all played a role.

Understanding each of these elements helps explain the mechanics behind this notable price recovery in the cryptocurrency market.

Cooling Macro Pressures Gave Bitcoin Room to Recover

The most immediate reason why Bitcoin bounced back traces directly to the latest inflation data. The Personal Consumption

Expenditures report printed at approximately 2.8% year-over-year, closely matching market expectations. A higher-than-expected reading would have pressured risk assets across the board.

Instead, the in-line result removed a key obstacle that had been weighing on investor sentiment toward Bitcoin.

Energy markets also shifted in a constructive direction around the same time. The U.S. government issued a 30-day waiver permitting select countries to purchase sanctioned Russian oil stranded at sea.

Coordinated global measures, including potential strategic reserve releases, helped stabilize oil prices further. Calmer energy markets reduced broader inflationary fears and encouraged investors to re-enter risk assets.

When both inflation data and energy prices ease simultaneously, risk appetite tends to return quickly. Bitcoin, being a highly sentiment-driven asset, responded swiftly to this improved macro backdrop.

Fewer macro headwinds meant investors faced less resistance in adding exposure to the asset. That clearing of obstacles was a direct catalyst for the move back toward $70,000.

Institutional Demand and Derivatives Positioning Accelerated the Bounce

Beyond macro factors, consistent ETF inflows helped explain why Bitcoin bounced back with such force. Spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds recorded multiple consecutive days of positive inflows during this period.

BlackRock’s IBIT led the way, reflecting persistent institutional demand through regulated investment vehicles. This steady buying created a reliable floor of support beneath the asset’s price.

Crypto analyst CryptosRus pointed directly to this institutional trend as a driving force. The analyst noted on social media that sustained IBIT inflows signal steady and growing institutional confidence in Bitcoin.

Unlike retail-driven rallies, institutional flows tend to be more deliberate and measured in nature. That consistency adds a layer of structural support that amplifies price recoveries when macro conditions also align.

The derivatives market then added fuel to an already improving situation. Dealer hedging around major options strike prices near $75,000 created additional buying pressure as BTC climbed.

CryptosRus described the overall setup clearly, stating that macro pressure eased while institutional flows stayed strong. Derivatives positioning then accelerated the upward move from there.

The analyst called this combination a classic recipe for Bitcoin momentum to restart. Market participants are now monitoring closely whether Bitcoin can sustain its position above the $70,000 level.

BlackRock’s head of digital assets, Robert Mitchnick, outlined a cautious but active posture toward crypto exchange-traded products as the asset manager debuted a staking-focused Ether ETF this week. Speaking on CNBC, Mitchnick acknowledged that some exotic ETF structures being piloted by peers may appeal to certain investors, but BlackRock intends to take a measured path—relying on liquidity, maturity, and well-defined use cases to guide expansion. The firm’s Ether-focused product, the iShares Staked Ethereum Trust (ETHB), arrived amid data showing staking yields and growing institutional appetite for yield-oriented crypto exposure.

Key takeaways

• BlackRock signals a measured approach to expanding its crypto ETF lineup, prioritizing durability and liquidity over rapid novelty.
• ETHB, BlackRock’s staking-focused Ether product, debuted with about $15.5 million in trading volume and roughly $43.5 million in inflows, underscoring investor demand for yield strategies on Ethereum.
• ETHB is BlackRock’s second Ether product after ETHA, which has amassed nearly $12 billion in inflows since its July 2024 launch.
• Investor interest in Bitcoin remains strong, but Mitchnick noted pockets of demand for assets beyond BTC and ETH, suggesting a broader menu could emerge over time.
• BlackRock is exploring a Bitcoin Premium Income ETF that would use covered call strategies on Bitcoin futures, aiming to generate yield while acknowledging potential upside trade-offs.
• BlackRock’s flagship Bitcoin product, IBIT, has drawn significant attention: investors have been disproportionately long-term buyers, with large inflows since January 2024.

Tickers mentioned: $BTC, $ETH, $IBIT, $ETHB, $ETHA

Market context: The push by BlackRock reflects a broader shift in the crypto ETF space toward yield-oriented and staking strategies, as institutions weigh liquidity, risk, and the evolving regulatory backdrop. While Bitcoin and Ether attract the most attention, managers are testing a spectrum of structures to serve different investor appetites, from pass-through yield to structured upside participation.

Why it matters

The rollout of ETHB marks a notable milestone in BlackRock’s iteration over crypto exposure, signaling that the asset manager still views staking yields as a legitimate allocation mechanism within a diversified crypto sleeve. The product’s early reception—substantial debut volume and inflows—suggests a growing appetite among institutional and sophisticated retail participants for yield-generating crypto access, not just price appreciation. As ETHB follows ETHA in BlackRock’s Ether lineup, stakeholders will be watching whether staking-based products translate into sustained inflows and how liquidity profiles evolve in a market that remains sensitive to macro signals and regulatory developments.

Mitchnick’s remarks also underscore a deliberate strategy around product design. While acknowledging interest in more exotic ETF structures, he framed BlackRock’s approach as cautious and purposeful, focused on liquidity, maturity, and clear use cases. The emphasis on “discerning” expansion implies that the firm views crypto ETFs as long-term vehicles rather than short-term experiments. In this light, ETHB’s debut and ETHA’s continued inflows could influence how other firms shape their own ether-related products, potentially shaping a more stable, yield-oriented subset of the crypto market.

Beyond Ether, the potential Bitcoin Premium Income ETF signals that yield-focused concepts are moving from novelty toward a more procedural framework in the eyes of asset managers and regulators. The concept—selling covered calls on Bitcoin futures to generate income—could create a regular payout stream for investors, but it may also cap upside exposure relative to a direct Bitcoin investment. That trade-off is central to the ongoing debate about how best to balance yield with capital appreciation in crypto portfolios, especially for investors seeking diversification within regulated vehicles.

On the demand side, BlackRock’s IBIT remains a case study in investor psychology. Data cited by the firm indicate that IBIT’s holders have tended to be long-term buyers, often dipping to capitalize on pullbacks rather than chasing short-term momentum. Since its launch in January 2024, IBIT has attracted more than $63 billion in inflows, reinforcing the notion that a core group of investors views regulated BTC exposure as a strategic, structural position within a broader crypto allocation. The contrast between these historical inflows and periods of market volatility elsewhere in the ecosystem suggests a segment of investors prioritizes risk management and regulated access over speculative timing.

We continue to evaluate those as conditions evolve and as maturity, liquidity scale and use cases develop, but we take a very discerning approach in terms of what we would put in an iShares ETF (EXCHANGE: ETHA).

What to watch next

• Monitoring ETHB’s ongoing performance and liquidity: weekly inflows, trading volumes, and any commentary from Farside Investors or other data providers.
• Regulatory and product milestones for the Bitcoin Premium Income ETF: any filings, approvals, or timing signals that could indicate a broader appetite for yield-based Bitcoin strategies.
• Continued flows into ETHA and the broader Ether ETF lineup, assessing whether ETHB complements ETHA without cannibalizing demand.
• IBIT’s inflow trajectory and investor base evolution: whether the long-term buyer pattern persists amid shifting risk sentiment and macro conditions.

Sources & verification

• CNBC interview with BlackRock’s Robert Mitchnick discussing ETF structures and expansion strategy.
• Farside data on ETHB’s debut trading volume and inflows.
• Historical inflows and performance metrics for ETHA since July 2024.
• Public announcements and coverage of BlackRock’s Bitcoin Premium Income ETF initiative.
• Performance and inflow history for IBIT since January 2024.

Market reaction and key details

BlackRock’s latest comments and the ETHB launch come at a time when the crypto ETF market is gradually expanding beyond first-mover products centered on spot Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH). The emphasis on yield-oriented exposure reflects a broader investor demand for regulated, income-producing crypto strategies that still offer upside potential tied to underlying assets. Mitchnick’s framing suggests that the firm aims to balance practical use with risk controls, a stance that could influence other asset managers as they navigate liquidity, regulatory scrutiny, and market readiness for more sophisticated crypto vehicles.

In practical terms, ETHB’s emergence as a companion to ETHA demonstrates that BlackRock is willing to operate more than a single-footprint approach to Ether exposure. ETHA’s strong inflows since its July 2024 debut underline a persistent appetite for Ether-linked vehicles, and ETHB’s early performance adds a yield-focused angle to the Ether narrative. The success or limitations of these products will likely shape how the market perceives staking-derived yields as a core component of regulated crypto investing, potentially drawing in more institutional money that seeks defined risk parameters and transparency in a rapidly evolving space.

On the BTC front, the IBIT product remains a focal point for investors seeking regulated, on-exchange exposure to Bitcoin’s price trajectory. Its long-term buy-and-hold cohort has withstood episodes of selling pressure elsewhere in the ecosystem, illustrating that a segment of the market remains committed to regulated access rather than pure price speculation. As BlackRock weighs further expansions, the industry will be watching how these products scale in terms of liquidity, custody arrangements, and track records, all while the regulatory environment continues to mature and provide clearer guardrails for institutional players.

TLDR:

• Boris Johnson labeled Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme in a March 13 Daily Mail opinion column.
• Michael Saylor argued Bitcoin lacks a central operator, a key requirement of Ponzi schemes.
• Social posts cited Bitcoin’s $1.42 trillion market cap and roughly $62 billion daily volume.
• Former Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng said politicians often misunderstand Bitcoin’s fixed supply design.

Bitcoin faced renewed political criticism after former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson labeled it a Ponzi scheme. 

Johnson shared the view in a March 13 Daily Mail opinion piece discussing digital assets and financial scams. His remarks compared Bitcoin unfavorably to assets such as gold and even collectible Pokémon cards. 

The column quickly circulated across social platforms and triggered a wave of responses from crypto leaders.

Boris Johnson Calls Bitcoin a Ponzi Scheme in Daily Mail Column

Johnson’s column described Bitcoin as a system that relies on new investors entering the market. He argued that the cryptocurrency lacks intrinsic value and clear accountability.

The former prime minister illustrated his argument with a personal anecdote from his village. He described a retired man who lost about £20,000 after trusting a stranger promising to double money.

According to the column, the retiree initially handed over £500 in a pub. Over several years he paid repeated fees while expecting a payout that never arrived.

Johnson used the story to argue that Bitcoin encourages speculation and deception. He also compared it with physical assets like gold and collectible items such as Pokémon cards.

The article circulated widely after publication and drew sharp reactions online. A post summarizing the argument attracted millions of views across social media platforms.

Bitcoin Advocates Reject Ponzi Claim as Crypto Debate Intensifies

Several prominent crypto figures rejected Johnson’s characterization of Bitcoin. MicroStrategy founder Michael Saylor addressed the claim directly on the social platform X.

Saylor argued that a Ponzi scheme requires a central operator promising guaranteed returns. He said Bitcoin operates without an issuer, promoter, or promise of profits.

According to Saylor, Bitcoin functions as an open monetary network driven by code and market demand. He noted that anyone can inspect the public blockchain and verify transactions.

Crypto publication TFTC also disputed the argument in a widely shared thread. The post stated that a scammer stole the retiree’s money rather than the Bitcoin network.

The thread added that Bitcoin currently holds a market capitalization of about $1.42 trillion. It also reported roughly $62 billion in daily trading volume across global markets.

Former UK Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng also weighed in on the debate online. He argued that many politicians misunderstand digital assets and their monetary design.

Kwarteng pointed to Bitcoin’s fixed supply model as a key difference from fiat currencies.
His comments referenced the long-term purchasing power decline of the British pound.

Meanwhile Bitcoin traded near $71,000 during the exchange of arguments. The discussion revived a long-running divide between crypto supporters and traditional finance critics.

TLDR:

• A wallet swapped $50M in aEthUSDT but received only $36K in AAVE due to extreme slippage losses.
  
• MEV bots and Titan Builder collectively extracted nearly $44M from the single swap transaction.
  
• On-chain analysts linked 13 wallets to one entity, all funded via Binance on February 16 and 20.
  
• The suspected trader sold $543M in ETH and $761M in BTC days before the controversial swap occurred.

A $50M AAVE swap has raised serious questions across the crypto community this week. A wallet swapped $50 million worth of aEthUSDT but received only approximately $36,000 in AAVE tokens.

Nearly $44 million was extracted from the trade by MEV bots and validators. On-chain analysts have since traced multiple linked wallets and pointed to a possible identity. The transaction continues to divide opinion between an accidental error and a deliberate financial strategy.

The Mechanics Behind the $50M AAVE Swap

The $50M AAVE swap originated from a wallet created on February 20 with no prior on-chain activity. Funds were deposited from a centralized exchange shortly before the trade.

The user supplied USDT to Aave’s protocol and received aEthUSDT as an interest-bearing token. That aEthUSDT was then swapped for AAVE via a mobile interface.

A 40–50% slippage warning would have appeared before the swap was executed. The trade only proceeds when the user manually confirms and accepts that warning.

The swap sought to acquire roughly 3% of AAVE’s total supply in a single transaction. AAVE carries a fully diluted valuation of approximately $1.8 billion.

An MEV bot captured 16,927 ETH, worth around $34.8 million, from the transaction. Titan Builder received 568 ETH while retaining 16,359 ETH, valued at roughly $33.6 million.

The MEV bot operator separately kept approximately $10 million from the event. Aave’s protocol collected around $600,000 in fees.

In total, roughly $44 million was extracted from the original $50 million swap. The initiating wallet received only 327 aEthAAVE tokens, equivalent to about $36,000.

That amounts to a near-total loss on the swapped value. Crypto analyst CryptoPatel publicly questioned whether this was a money-washing strategy.

The structure of the fund flow has drawn scrutiny from blockchain researchers. Unlike a standard failed trade, the extracted funds moved through a defined chain of recipients.

Each actor received a calculable share of the total value. That pattern is atypical for an unintentional slippage event.

On-Chain Investigation Traces Wallets to a Possible Identity

On-chain analysts identified 13 wallets potentially linked to the same entity behind the $50M AAVE swap. All of these wallets reportedly received USDC and USDT from Binance on February 16 and February 20.

After the swap, the wallets became active again and moved funds to two newly created addresses. One wallet reportedly shares a Binance deposit address connected to a user known as Garrett Jin.

Jin operates on X under the handle @BitcoinOG1011short, according to on-chain researchers. He reportedly sold 261,024 ETH worth $543 million on February 15.

A further 11,318 BTC, valued at $761 million, was sold on February 20. Those dates closely match when the traced wallets withdrew stablecoins from Binance.

These findings have not been officially confirmed by any authority or exchange. The tracing is based entirely on publicly available blockchain data and remains circumstantial.

No formal accusation has been made against Garrett Jin at this stage. Independent researchers continue to monitor the linked wallets for further activity.

The decision to use a retail swap interface rather than an OTC desk raises practical questions. Experienced participants managing hundreds of millions typically avoid standard market interfaces for large trades.

A $50 million market swap on a $1.8 billion FDV token is effectively guaranteed to cause severe price movement.

Whether the event was an error or a deliberate act remains unresolved. On-chain data provides transparency but does not confirm intent.

The crypto community continues to monitor wallet activity tied to the transaction. The $50M AAVE swap remains one of the most closely watched on-chain events of early 2025.

BlackRock’s digital assets head, Robert Mitchnick, said the $14 trillion asset manager won’t get too creative with the types of crypto exchange-traded funds it offers, even as it launched a staking-focused Ether ETF on Thursday.

Speaking on CNBC’s Crypto World segment on Friday, Mitchnick acknowledged that some of the crypto ETF structures that other asset managers are experimenting with may appeal to certain investors, but said BlackRock will continue to take a more measured approach:

“Will we see some more exotic structures coming into the space? I think no question,” Mitchnick said. “Some of those will be interesting. Some of them will resonate with investors.”

However, “We will take a discerning approach in thinking about where else we would expand in this.”

Mitchnick said that while overwhelming investor interest is in Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH), BlackRock is also seeing “pockets of interest in some of the other assets as well.”

“We continue to evaluate those as conditions evolve and as maturity, liquidity scale and use cases develop, but we take a very discerning approach in terms of what we would put in an iShares ETF.”

BlackRock launched the iShares Staked Ethereum Trust (ETHB) on Thursday, which saw over $15.5 million in trading volume and $43.5 million in inflows on debut, according to Farside Investors data.

ETHB enables investors to capture yield through Ethereum staking rewards on top of potential price appreciation in Ether’s price.