On January 23, 2026, East 8 Time, a large on-chain transfer from wallet address 0x6b41 attracted market attention: this address transferred 1.8 million PENDLE to Bybit via an intermediary address, equivalent to approximately 3.83 million USD at current prices. This batch of tokens originated from the address's gradual unlocking from the token allocation contract between April 2022 and April 2023, and there have been no significant sell-offs for nearly three years, resulting in an unrealized profit of nearly 14 times. Meanwhile, Pendle is in a critical phase of upgrading from vePENDLE to sPENDLE, and the timing of these events has been amplified by the community's interpretation. It is important to emphasize that there is currently a lack of confirmed information regarding the identity of 0x6b41 and its motives for the transfer; it can only be regarded as a sample of large address behavior that is verifiable on-chain, rather than a confirmed project stakeholder or specific institution.
The On-Chain Trajectory of a Dormant Whale Suddenly Taking Action
● Unlock Timeline: On-chain data shows that the batch of PENDLE held by 0x6b41 came from the token allocation contract, gradually unlocking between April 2022 and April 2023, totaling approximately 1.8 million tokens. This indicates that the address acquired its share early in the protocol's life and obtained tokens through the allocation contract rather than the secondary market, exhibiting typical characteristics of an "early participant," although the specific role (team, advisor, or investor) cannot be confirmed from public data.
● Cost and Profit: According to a single source estimate, the estimated cost of unlocking this batch of tokens was about 266,000 USD, while the market value at the time of transfer to Bybit on January 23, 2026, was approximately 3.83 million USD, resulting in an unrealized profit of nearly 14 times. During the approximately three-year holding period, there have been no records of large-scale sell-offs from this address, making it a rare example of high multiple returns over a long holding period, which explains the market's heightened sensitivity to any actions taken by it.
● Transfer Path: From the on-chain trajectory, 0x6b41 did not directly send PENDLE to the exchange but first transferred it to an intermediary address, which then aggregated the tokens before transferring them to Bybit (the aforementioned path also comes from a single source). This "routing" operation is relatively common with large funds, possibly for aggregation, multi-signature management, or privacy considerations, but it can currently only be confirmed that 1.8 million tokens have entered the exchange wallet, and subsequent transaction details cannot be directly observed on-chain.
● Hodler Profile: Compared to frequently traded short-term funds, 0x6b41 only saw a large transfer after unlocking from 2022-2023 until 2026, showing a clear long-term time preference and higher risk tolerance. Choosing to hold through volatility over the past three years and endure drawdowns, rather than gradually taking profits during early multiple returns, aligns more closely with typical "hodler" behavior rather than that of high-frequency speculators, which amplifies the signal significance of its one-time action at a critical moment.
The Potential Impact of 1.8 Million PENDLE Flowing to Bybit
● Scale and Relative Size: Based on the current price of 3.83 million USD, the 1.8 million PENDLE's share in the total circulating supply and daily trading volume needs to be further quantified in conjunction with the market conditions on that day. If we reference the common daily trading volume of mainstream DeFi tokens, this amount could represent a significant proportion of daily trading, sufficient to create visible selling pressure on the order book, but the specific percentage and market absorption capacity need to be assessed with real-time depth data; this article does not make precise inferences based on missing data.
● Deposit vs. Sell: From an on-chain perspective, it can currently only be confirmed that the tokens have been transferred to Bybit, and it is still unclear whether they have been traded on the exchange or placed in batches as orders. True "real sell-offs" require verification through exchange order books, transaction details, and funding rates; the on-chain transfer itself only represents that the address has the option to liquidate liquidity at a CEX, so equating it directly with "dumping" is an overextension.
● Motivation for Choosing CEX: Compared to on-chain DEXs, centralized exchanges like Bybit typically have deeper order book depth, lower slippage, and higher execution efficiency, making them particularly suitable for disposing of multi-million dollar-sized tokens in one go. Additionally, through CEXs, one can flexibly hedge or structure positions between spot, leverage, and derivatives, and at the account level, there is stronger anonymity and financial management tools, which is a common reason many large addresses prefer to funnel tokens into exchanges.
● Selling Pressure Expectations and Neutral Statements: In terms of market sentiment, "large deposits into exchanges = potential selling pressure" has become a widely internalized experiential judgment, so this transfer will naturally be interpreted as a potential bearish factor in the short term. However, in the absence of transaction data, any definitive assertions about price consequences do not align with prudent principles; a more reasonable statement at this time is: this transfer increases the likelihood of concentrated selling pressure in the near future, but does not equate to a sale having occurred or being inevitable.
The Institutional Turning Point from vePENDLE to sP
● Model Upgrade Direction: Pendle has recently upgraded from vePENDLE to sPENDLE, with the overall direction focusing on adjustments to the locking mechanism, redistribution of governance weights, and optimization of profit distribution methods. In short, the new model aims to continue rewarding long-term participants while improving capital efficiency and flexibility, providing liquidity providers and protocol participants with a more competitive yield structure, but specific parameters and technical details are beyond the scope of this article.
● Time Sequence Yet to be Verified: The research brief mentions that the claim "the transfer occurred around the announcement of the sPENDLE upgrade" is still in a pending verification state, and there is currently no precise official timeline available to confirm the sequence of events. Therefore, attributing this transfer directly to "dissatisfaction with the sPENDLE upgrade" or "liquidation triggered by institutional changes" at this stage is an unverified inference, and this article avoids making causal judgments.
● Model Change and Behavioral Reevaluation: Generally speaking, significant changes in token economic models often prompt early holders to reassess their locking strategies, governance participation, and long-term yield curves: some may choose to continue deep binding due to optimized yield structures, while others may opt to realize some profits before and after the new mechanism is implemented to mitigate the risk exposure brought by institutional uncertainty. This "reevaluation-reallocation" cycle is very common in almost all DeFi protocols that have undergone major revisions.
● Possibility Framework Rather Than Qualitative: In this context, the behavior of 0x6b41 can be placed within a broader possibility framework: some old funds may choose to liquidate a portion of their tokens, adjust their portfolios, or temporarily wait and see during the institutional reconstruction window, to await further validation of the new mechanism's operational effects. However, this is merely a typological induction based on historical experience and cannot lead to qualitative conclusions about the true motives of this address; any narrative interpreting it as "voting with their feet" lacks solid evidence support.
The Community Amplifies the Narrative of the Whale as an Early Supporter
● Rumored Versions: Surrounding this event, some community voices believe that 0x6b41 "may be an early supporter of Pendle," including early team members, advisors, or strategic investors, but these claims currently remain at the level of market rumors and have not been publicly confirmed by the project or relevant parties. For unverified attribution speculations, it is necessary to clearly label their "unconfirmed" nature in the narrative.
● On-Chain Facts and Characteristics: From the source of the unlocking, 0x6b41 indeed obtained PENDLE through the token allocation contract between April 2022 and April 2023, which indicates that it belongs to the early distribution targets of the protocol, rather than being a simple secondary market retail buyer. This does endow it with certain characteristics of an "early participant," but in the absence of more off-chain information, it is still impossible to determine whether it is a team, advisor, institution, or specific individual.
● Attribution Boundaries and Taboo: On-chain analysis has significant advantages in tracing fund flows and behavioral patterns, but it inherently lacks the ability to directly map to real identities and organizational affiliations. Based on the current brief and public data, it is prohibited to directly equate 0x6b41 with a specific team entity, advisor, or institutional investor, nor should it be inferred that "the team is cashing out" or "institutions are retreating," as this would cross the boundary of data verifiability and slide into unfounded accusations and conspiracy theories.
● Distinguishing Data from Emotion: For readers, it is more important to learn to draw a clear line between verifiable on-chain data and community emotional narratives. A large transfer can easily be packaged into a "story" under the amplification effect of social media, thus having an excessive impact on sentiment trading, but these stories often mix truth, speculation, and imagination. The rational approach is to first anchor verifiable facts and then treat public opinion as an emotional variable, rather than allowing the narrative to dominate the interpretation of data.
Risk Repricing After the Whale's 14x Profit
● Behavioral Finance Perspective: From a behavioral finance perspective, when an investment achieves approximately 14 times unrealized profit, it is not unusual for investors to make some degree of position adjustments from a risk-reward ratio standpoint. Long-term holders reducing their positions in high-profit ranges is both a compensation for the uncertainty risk taken early on and a rational choice to lock in profits and prevent future severe drawdowns from eroding gains, so it should not be simply interpreted as a single signal of "bearish sentiment towards the project."
● Emotional Amplification Effect: However, in actual market operations, the actions of a single large address are often severely amplified by emotions, especially when they coincide with sensitive time windows such as protocol upgrades, making them more likely to be viewed as "evidence" of structural turning points. The fragmented dissemination of social media can amplify this association, driving extreme expressions like "whale retreat" to spread rapidly, thus having a magnifying rather than linear impact on short-term fund decisions.
● Placing in a Larger Funding Context: Therefore, when assessing this event, it is necessary to observe it within a more complete framework of fund flows and leverage structures: including whether other large addresses are taking similar actions, the overall net inflow/outflow situation of exchanges, changes in derivatives open interest and funding rates, etc. Focusing solely on a transfer of 1.8 million tokens while ignoring its relative scale and rhythm within the entire ecosystem's fund flow can easily lead to imbalanced conclusions.
● Distinguishing Fundamentals from Noise: From an analytical framework, it is necessary to distinguish between two levels: one is the structural fundamental changes of the protocol itself, such as the long-term effects of the sPENDLE upgrade, protocol revenue, and actual usage data; the other is the short-term emotional fluctuations and price noise brought about by localized token movements. The operation of 0x6b41 leans more towards the latter category—it may be a short-term reaction to the institutional change window or merely a phase of individual fund realization, which does not necessarily equate to the project's long-term competitive strength.
Beyond a Single Transfer: How to Read Whale Actions
● Summary of Known Facts: Based on currently verifiable information, it can be confirmed that on January 23, 2026 (approximately 7 hours ago), address 0x6b41 transferred 1.8 million PENDLE to Bybit via an intermediary address, with a market value of approximately 3.83 million USD; these tokens were gradually unlocked through the token allocation contract between April 2022 and April 2023, with an initial cost of approximately 266,000 USD (single source), held for about three years, during which there were no records of large on-chain sell-offs, resulting in an unrealized profit of nearly 14 times.
● Uncertainty of Identity and Motivation: Meanwhile, the brief clearly states that the true identity of 0x6b41 and the direct motivation for this transfer cannot be confirmed. Currently, all narratives regarding "team address," "institutional retreat," or "early supporters cashing out" can at most be regarded as unverified speculation. In the absence of more off-chain information, elevating a single action to a trend reversal or even a value judgment significantly amplifies the risk of misjudgment.
● A Multi-Dimensional Observation Approach: A more robust approach is to reference multiple-dimensional signals when interpreting similar whale actions: on-chain address behavior and net flow data, exchange order book and depth changes, progress of the sPENDLE upgrade, as well as community sentiment and public opinion structure. Only when these clues corroborate each other does a certain trend or risk signal possess higher confidence, rather than being led by a single large transfer.
● Subsequent Clues to Track: Moving forward, key observations should include: whether there is sustained selling pressure or orders on Bybit that match the scale of 1.8 million tokens, whether more early large addresses show simultaneous transfer or reduction actions, and the usage data and yield feedback after the actual implementation of the sPENDLE mechanism. Before this information gradually comes to light, this whale deposit is better viewed as an important but still ongoing observation sample, rather than a conclusive signal that has already provided an answer.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare 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。
