On January 22, 2026, a wallet address associated with Mirana Ventures transferred 13.65 million MNT to the exchange Bybit on the Mantle network, equivalent to approximately $12.2 million at the time's market price. This quickly attracted market attention under on-chain monitoring and media tracking. In terms of scale, this deposit was reported by media outlets like Planet Daily as one of the largest single exchange inflow records for MNT in the past three years, placing it in the institutional-level large amount range within MNT's overall exchange liquidity. The market's most immediate question surrounding this transfer focused on whether it indicates a potential release of selling pressure and whether MNT's price fluctuations will be significantly amplified in the short term.
A Sudden Large Deposit After Three Years of Silence
● Long-term holding background: Research briefs indicate that the associated wallet has held MNT for nearly three years, with on-chain behavior primarily characterized by "buying and long-term holding," showing almost no high-frequency rebalancing or frequent cross-platform migrations. This is relatively rare among institutional addresses where arbitrage and high turnover are the norm, reinforcing its "long-term capital" label and amplifying the signal significance of this sudden action.
● On-chain path and data sources: The transfer of 13.65 million MNT occurred on the Mantle network, with the relevant transfer path first captured by on-chain browsers and data services, then attributed by media like Rhythm, marked as "the wallet address associated with Mirana Ventures (0x129c…21d7, etc.) concentrated deposits to Bybit." On-chain records clearly show a one-way flow from historical holding addresses directly to the exchange deposit address.
● Statistical criteria for "largest single deposit in three years": Planet Daily cited public on-chain and exchange flow statistics, describing the deposit of 13.65 million MNT into Bybit as "the largest single exchange inflow record for MNT in the past three years." It should be emphasized that this is based on media statistics of visible large on-chain inflows, rather than an official on-chain protocol announcement, and there may still be small-scale or decentralized inflows not fully accounted for in the statistics.
Assessment of Bybit's Capacity to Absorb 13.65 Million MNT
● Volume and nominal value: According to brief estimates, the nominal value of 13.65 million MNT at that time was approximately $12.2 million, which clearly exceeds the scale of ordinary retail investors or small institutions in a single exchange deposit, approaching the single position adjustment range of medium to large funds. This means that if all were to be dumped into the secondary market in a short time, it theoretically has the capacity to significantly disturb short-term prices and market depth.
● Bybit's liquidity position: The brief pointed out that Bybit recently ranked in the top 3 for MNT trading volume, making it one of the main trading venues for MNT, with relatively ample daily trading and order book depth. Such liquidity conditions, on one hand, provide stronger capital absorption capacity, able to digest concentrated selling pressure of tens of millions of MNT to a certain extent; on the other hand, if large orders are dumped at market price, they may still impact short-term prices, although the extent of the impact will depend on the specific ordering method and splitting strategy.
● Comparison with typical institutional-level deposits: In terms of volume range, single exchange operations at the tens of millions level, or tens of millions of dollars, are typically classified as "institutional or fund-level" momentum, rather than ordinary high-net-worth individual behavior. From industry experience, while this scale may not be classified as an extremely large single order, it is already at a "large but theoretically digestible" level in the spot market for medium-sized tokens like MNT. The key variables shift to transaction rhythm and the degree of market sentiment resonance, rather than whether the technical aspects are absolutely difficult to absorb.
No Subsequent Actions on-chain; Selling Pressure Expectations Remain to be Verified
● Market viewpoint on "need to monitor selling pressure": A report from panews mentioned, "need to pay attention to whether selling pressure appears subsequently; current on-chain data has not shown further actions," which objectively reflects the current static state on-chain—only deposits have occurred, with no tracking of subsequent large-scale withdrawals or cross-address redistribution behaviors. Therefore, "whether it translates into real sell orders" remains an open question in the time dimension, representing a typical point of verification observation.
● Boundaries of facts and inferences: From known facts, the only thing that can be confirmed at present is that "the wallet associated with Mirana Ventures deposited 13.65 million MNT into Bybit." As for whether it has already or will soon be sold at market price, what the order prices are, and what the selling proportions are, these exceed the current verifiable range of on-chain and order book data. Based on compliance and prudence principles, it cannot be inferred that there is a necessary liquidation or reduction plan, nor can it be extended to specific capital strategies and decision details.
● Sentiment pricing and risk premium: In an information market dominated by on-chain intelligence, events like "large deposits into exchanges" are often viewed by traders as potential selling pressure signals, thus preemptively pricing in a certain discount or volatility premium, manifesting as short-term bearish sentiment, with funds more inclined to a right-side wait-and-see approach. However, such emotional responses are essentially pricing based on possibilities rather than established facts, more akin to paying insurance for uncertainty rather than a passive reflection of already occurred sell-offs.
Mirana's Associative Attributes and Institutional Wallet Behavior Patterns
● Limits of associative attributes: The current market's general labeling of this address is "the wallet associated with Mirana Ventures," a designation primarily derived from historical interaction relationships and media's on-chain portrayal, rather than an official confirmation from Mirana. Therefore, a more accurate description when referring to the subject should be "the address believed to be related to Mirana Ventures," rather than directly identifying it as Mirana's sole or official operational wallet without legal or official document support.
● Common patterns of institutional wallets: From industry experience, institutional or fund wallets typically exhibit several common characteristics, such as: long-term holding of core positions, periodically concentrating deposits into a single exchange to obtain liquidity; when selling, employing batch selling, time and price splitting methods to reduce single-point impacts on prices; and managing funds through multi-layer address structures, splitting functions like custody, trading, and yield aggregation across different addresses to enhance risk control and operational flexibility. This single large deposit behavior is not out of place within these typical patterns.
● Distinction between media labeling and legal entities: For readers, it is essential to deliberately distinguish between "media labels in on-chain tracing" and "legal entities in terms of responsibility." The former is based on technical attribution of transaction relationships, while the latter involves corporate governance structures and compliance disclosure obligations. Overly binding a single institution's name to all on-chain actions not only amplifies public pressure but may also mislead judgments about the institution's true intentions when information is incomplete.
From Single Transfers to Overall Liquidity Monitoring Framework
● Assessing net inflows and depth impact paths: To evaluate the actual market impact of similar large deposits, one cannot focus solely on a single on-chain transaction record; a more effective approach is to combine exchange net inflow/outflow data, order book depth, and order structure, observing whether there is a significant increase in active sell orders, or if the buy one and buy two price levels are quickly breached. Only by integrating on-chain flows with real-time order book changes can one restore whether this capital is "statically parked" or "actively participating in sell-offs."
● Tracking other large holders and fund addresses: The behavior of a single institutional address, if highly synchronized in time with other large holders or fund addresses, often indicates a potential consensus-driven shift in sentiment. Therefore, while monitoring the wallet associated with Mirana, it is also essential to simultaneously track the position changes and inflow/outflow actions of other tagged large holders and fund addresses in MNT to determine whether there is a broader "collective reduction" or "concentrated liquidity management" behavior.
● Data tracking prioritizes over news sentiment: In an environment where information can amplify instantaneously, a single piece of "large deposit" news can easily be exaggerated into a directional signal, while a more robust approach is to view it as a starting point for subsequent data tracking—continuously observing changes in Bybit's holdings, transaction structure, price volatility, and on-chain flows, rather than making extreme emotional reactions at the first moment the news appears. A rational decision-making framework should focus on verifiable data as the main thread, rather than anchoring on the interpretation of a single event.
A Huge Deposit and the Next Observational Coordinates for MNT
Currently, the wallet associated with Mirana Ventures has concentrated a deposit of 13.65 million MNT into Bybit, suddenly taking action after three years of relative silence, which indeed introduces new uncertainties into MNT's short-term market and naturally becomes a focal point of market attention. It is positioned in the institutional-level large amount range and is marked by media as "the largest single deposit record in the past three years," interpreted in sentiment as a potential source of selling pressure, which is an understandable initial reaction.
Within the boundaries of compliance and prudence, it needs to be emphasized once again: based solely on the fact of "depositing into the exchange," it is not legally or accurately possible to extrapolate specific selling plans, target price levels, or strategic motives; any statements about "liquidating" or "inevitably reducing holdings," if detached from subsequent on-chain and order book corroboration, belong more to subjective inference rather than data conclusions. What can be done now is to construct several scenarios based on observable information and continuously adjust judgments as new data emerges.
For the subsequent market, several key indicators worth closely tracking include: first, whether the associated address continues to have MNT transfers out to exchanges or other addresses, splitting and aggregating actions; second, the total MNT holdings and net inflow/outflow changes on the Bybit platform, as well as structural changes in large orders and transaction details; third, whether the price volatility and volatility rate of MNT during this period have significantly increased and corresponded with large order book behaviors. Incorporating these dimensions into ongoing monitoring is more helpful for making informed risk and opportunity judgments during uncertain periods than amplifying a single piece of news itself.
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
