On February 8, 2026, at 10:49 (UTC+8), Yili Hua's organization Trend Research completed a widely noticed ETH liquidation operation on-chain. The organization transferred 534 ETH to Binance, in conjunction with previous continuous reductions, bringing the ETH holdings of the core address to nearly zero, leaving only 0.165 ETH, which was clearly recorded on-chain. Combined with historical data showing a cumulative sale of approximately 20,770 ETH, worth about $43.57 million, the market quickly framed this action within two narratives: "institutional retreat" and "active deleveraging," corresponding to amplified panic and self-regulating sentiments, laying the groundwork for subsequent market trends and risk preferences.
On-Chain Liquidation Path and Sale Volume Profile
● Fund Path Analysis: According to the transaction hash 0xe9484b7fd3ac938d9e3ced52fd7d712cdfd8876fd0e93c553aab58f1f89fe7d2 disclosed by Odaily, Trend Research transferred 534 ETH from its controlled address to Binance on February 8 at 10:49 (UTC+8). This single transfer is seen as the concluding act of this liquidation. Coupled with previous small batch transfer records, it is evident that they adopted a "multiple batches + final concentration" on-chain migration rhythm, rather than a single large volume sell-off, reflecting basic considerations of execution costs and market impact.
● Sudden Drop in Holdings: Arkham data indicates that after the transfer and sale of 534 ETH to Binance, the relevant address's ETH balance was only 0.165 ETH, which can almost be viewed as functional retention rather than substantial holdings. This change starkly contrasts with the previously considerable ETH inventory, providing intuitive evidence on-chain for the narrative of "completely liquidating ETH," and amplifying the market's perception of this institution's shift in attitude.
● Cumulative Sale Scale: According to Lookonchain statistics, Trend Research had previously sold approximately 20,770 ETH, with a total value of about $43.57 million (from a single data source). Overlaying this latest liquidation of 534 ETH with the historical sale scale shows that their reduction of ETH in this cycle is not an isolated event, but part of a continuous realization and risk contraction process. Although the single sale of 534 ETH has limited actual impact on overall market liquidity, it has a magnifying effect on sentiment.
Rhythm Shift from Heavy Holdings to Liquidation
● Timeline and Price Cycle Comparison: Multiple media outlets and on-chain data indicate that Trend Research has repeatedly transferred ETH from its own address to Binance around the beginning of 2026, showing a trajectory of "phased transfer + gradual reduction." Although the brief did not provide precise price points, it can be inferred that these transfers generally occurred during a significant price increase and into a high volatility phase for ETH, making their actions more aligned with a strategy framework of gradually exiting in a relatively overvalued range.
● Profit Taking or Defensive Downside: From behavioral representation, the cumulative sale of 20,770 ETH plus the recent liquidation of 534 ETH appears more like a systematic locking in of existing profits and a contraction of risk budget, rather than a panic sell-off at a single point in time. Considering that institutions often emphasize drawdown control and capital efficiency in position management, their transition from heavy holdings to liquidation likely encompasses both "phased profit realization" and "prevention against potential downside volatility," rather than a simple one-sided bearish stance.
● Reducing Holdings in Overvalued Conditions and Deleveraging in Crowded Markets: Observing the rhythm of publicly available historical holdings, Trend Research chose to strengthen transfers and sales to Binance during phases of greater market crowding and optimism regarding ETH, completing liquidation before volatility became completely uncontrollable. This pattern aligns with a typical institutional risk management style of "reducing holdings in overvalued conditions and actively deleveraging during crowded bullish phases." Although we cannot ascertain their internal decision-making logic, the outcome shows they did not wait until liquidity became extremely tight to passively liquidate.
The Tug-of-War Between Deleveraging and Institutional Retreat Narratives
● Chinese Media's Definition of "Deleveraging": Some Chinese media, including PANews and Odaily, describe Trend Research's recent liquidation as "deleveraging," emphasizing its proactive contraction of risk exposure against the backdrop of overall market volatility and derivative deleveraging. This characterization assumes that the core purpose is optimizing position structure and capital recovery, rather than a complete denial of ETH assets, intentionally downplaying the emotional color of "abandoning ship."
● "Institutional Retreat" and Amplified Panic: In contrast to the media's deleveraging narrative, some market participants view this near-zero ETH holding as a signal of "institutional retreat," fearing it may trigger a chain reaction leading more institutions to exit simultaneously, thereby amplifying negative sentiment towards ETH in the short term. Considering the symbolic significance of Trend Research's previous large holdings, this amplified interpretation primarily affects the emotional layer, rather than directly rewriting the supply-demand structure through a single sell-off.
● Evidence Gap and Interpretation Boundaries: Currently, on-chain and public information can only prove that Trend Research completed the liquidation of 534 ETH and the previous reduction of over 20,770 ETH, but cannot directly prove that it holds a "long-term bearish" stance on future ETH trends. In the absence of supporting evidence regarding subsequent position migration and risk asset allocation, absolutizing their actions as a "trend reversal starting point" carries significant over-interpretation risks. A more reasonable approach is to view it as one of many individual risk management decisions.
Leverage Amplification and Market Self-Regulation Window
● Derivative Amplification Effect: BitMEX founder Arthur Hayes has repeatedly emphasized that "Bitcoin derivatives themselves do not create market trends; they only amplify volatility in either direction." Applying this perspective to the ETH market, it can be understood that: spot supply and demand remain the foundation of trends, while high-leverage derivatives merely accelerate and amplify volatility in existing directions. When a spot liquidation like that of Trend Research coincides with high-leverage derivatives in the same phase, market fluctuations appear more severe, but the essential driving force still comes from marginal changes in capital preferences.
● Deleveraging and the Hypothesis of Returning to Uptrend: Hayes also proposed that "the market can quickly clear excessive leverage and then return to an uptrend," emphasizing the speed and resilience of self-clearing in the crypto market. If the current environment is viewed as a deleveraging process, then Trend Research's liquidation can be understood as a risk reduction behavior upstream in the leverage chain, working in conjunction with mechanisms like forced liquidations and margin increases in the derivatives market to accelerate the clearing of excessive leverage, leaving space for a healthier uptrend later, rather than merely forecasting a long-term bear market.
● Concentrated Risk Release Window: From a timing perspective, Trend Research's final liquidation point overlaps significantly with market discussions around leverage and liquidation, indicating that large spot reductions and derivative leverage clearing have some temporal overlap. However, whether this constitutes a "concentrated risk release window" still requires more data validation. Currently, it can be cautiously considered a phase where risk preference contraction and leverage downgrading intertwine, rather than a systemic collapse moment triggered by a single institution's actions.
Institutional Style Comparison and Divergence in Trading Frameworks
● Hayes' Cyclical Trading Framework: As a co-founder of BitMEX, Arthur Hayes has long engaged in crypto trading layouts from a macro narrative + liquidity cycle perspective, accustomed to building positions early in liquidity expansion and gradually reducing them during extreme optimism, viewing derivatives as tools for amplifying returns and hedging risks. This framework emphasizes grasping large cycles and monetary environments, tolerating medium to short-term volatility in exchange for cyclical returns and position flexibility.
● Two Interpretations of Liquidation Behavior: If we examine Trend Research's liquidation through Hayes' framework, one interpretation is that it utilized the previous crowded bullish sentiment and volatility amplification window to systematically realize profits and reduce exposure, fitting the narrative of "profit-taking in a crowded bullish market." The other leans towards "reducing leverage in anticipation of increasing macro uncertainty," prioritizing defense over profit. Due to the lack of subsequent asset allocation information, both interpretations cannot be completely falsified and can only coexist as possible trading intent paths.
● Differences in Risk Tolerance Among Different Factions: The concentrated holdings and liquidation rhythm of Trend Research do not contradict Hayes' emphasis on cyclical position management in principle, but there are significant differences in risk tolerance curves and execution styles. The former resembles an institutional faction focused on structural adjustments and account drawdown control, while the latter tolerates greater net value fluctuations over longer cycles. For ordinary participants, understanding these style differences can help avoid simply following a single institution's lead and instead choose suitable positions and leverage strategies based on their own risk tolerance.
The Choice Between Emotion and Data
● Emotional Impact and Supply-Demand Reality: Combining on-chain and public data, Trend Research's recent liquidation of 534 ETH to Binance, along with the previous cumulative sale of approximately 20,770 ETH, constitutes a relatively typical case of institutional reduction in this cycle. From an absolute scale perspective, this selling pressure is not sufficient to single-handedly reverse the medium to long-term supply-demand pattern of ETH, but its "liquidation" label combined with Yili Hua's market influence results in an emotional impact far greater than its decisive role in the spot market.
● Caution Against Equating Individual Cases with Trends: In the current information environment, directly equating an individual institution's position adjustment with a "bull-bear switch signal" carries significant misconceptions. Whether it is the "institutional retreat" or "deleveraging" narrative, both are different projections of the same on-chain fact, rather than deterministic predictions of future price paths. For ordinary investors, it is crucial to be wary of being driven by emotions during high volatility phases and making overly extreme position decisions in the absence of complete data support.
● Data-Driven Observation Framework: In responding to such events, a more feasible path is to return to the data itself: continuously tracking the overall market's leverage clearing progress, changes in liquidation scale, funding rates of major exchanges, and net capital flows, rather than repeatedly amplifying emotions around a single institution's narrative. Only when multi-dimensional data such as macro liquidity, derivative leverage, and on-chain capital migration show resonant signals is there more reason to make structural judgments about trends, while a single liquidation event should be viewed as just one piece of the larger picture.
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。
