On May 1, 2026, Ethereum acted like a tightly wound gate, with all valves related to funds and power being opened simultaneously on the same day. On the same mainnet, Bitmine once again added a stake of approximately 162,088 ETH, raising the total stake to about 4,196,973 ETH, with a nominal value of about $9.5 billion, continuing the previous day's increase of 111,496 ETH, almost nailing institutional positions onto the chain in a "full speed ahead" manner; at the same time, the Arbitrum side of the community was engaged in another completely different digital entanglement - the Arbitrum DAO was voting on whether to release about 30,766 ETH that had previously been frozen by the Security Council, which concerns the DeFi United recovery effort, and this vote is expected to last until May 7, relating to whether rsETH has a chance to return to the symbolic anchor point of "1:1" after an attack. Surrounding the same recovery, Kelp has confirmed a donation of 2,000 ETH to the DeFi United fund to repair the reserve gap torn open by the attack; meanwhile, at the other end, the wallet associated with the Ethereum Foundation received about 22.92 million USDC from Coinbase Prime on that day, and on-chain analysts even speculated that this fund may be related to an OTC ETH transaction settlement from the foundation to Bitmine a week prior, but this link is still in the speculative stage and has not received any official confirmation.

On the same day, whales and the community took action: on one side, Bitmine continuously re-staked nearly 4.2 million ETH, treating Ethereum as a long-term locked asset liability; on the other side, a rescue plan assembled by DeFi United, Arbitrum DAO, and Kelp through donations and votes attempted to use about 2,000 ETH of self-rescue capital along with more than 30,000 frozen ETH potentially to pay for a security incident. Behind them, the large USDC dispatch by the Ethereum Foundation at this critical time seemed like an "invisible shareholder" in this capital reorganization, participating in the game that played out on the same day using an undisclosed funding route. This article will unfold along these two parallel main lines: one is long-term bets at institutional scale, the other is community-led governance relief. They overlapped on the time axis of May 1, reflecting the true outline of Ethereum in terms of capital allocation methods and governance resilience.

Bitmine's Bold Bet of 270,000 ETH

If May 1 was a turning point in Ethereum's funding narrative, Bitmine had quietly lit the fuse the day prior. On April 30, this leading institution added a stake of about 111,496 ETH in one go, raising its total on-chain stake to about 4,034,885 ETH, with an estimated nominal value of about $9.09 billion at that time. Without waiting for the market to digest this large order, Bitmine once again increased its stake on May 1, continuing to stake about 162,088 ETH, raising the total stake volume to about 4,196,973 ETH, with a nominal value nearing $9.5 billion. Within just two days, the newly added stake size exceeded 273,000 ETH; this was not a trickle of entry scattered across numerous retail addresses, but a highly concentrated chain reaction marked with clear institutional characteristics.

When a staking party already ranking among the top in Ethereum, with existing holdings approaching 4.2 million ETH, still chooses to amplify its chips over two consecutive days, the signal it releases is far more than just "bullish." On one hand, such a large-scale additional lockup objectively raised the weight of a single institution in the network's staking, further concentrating staking power on the chain among a few large players; on the other hand, continuing to increase its position on a nominal market value already in the tens of billions means taking on a larger proportion of assets to absorb future Ethereum returns and fluctuations - Bitmine is already sitting closest to the position of "consensus power" at the table while still pushing chips onto it.

In a not-so-stable macro and market environment, this choice appears particularly sharp. Bitmine could choose to realize some book profits and shift liquidity within a violently varying price range, yet it went against this path and locked more ETH into staking contracts, actively relinquishing short-term liquidity and exit options to trade for long-term network dividends. This represents a typical "heavy load, long line, volatility resistance" institutional risk preference: using concentrated exposure to exchange for potential higher returns, while also accepting the single-point risk it brings - if a systemic shock occurs in Ethereum’s technology, regulation, or narrative, Bitmine will find it difficult to withdraw quickly without tearing market sentiment apart. In a sense, this two-day series of 270,000 ETH staking materialized the "institutional scale's long-term bet" on the timeline of May 1 into a gamble, while also providing a stark capital counterpart to another community governance-centered rescue timeline on the same day.

30,000 Frozen ETH: Arbitrum Community Voting to Release

At the same time Bitmine locked hundreds of thousands of ETH into verifier nodes along the same timeline, another more "passive" huge position was forced to hit the pause button. After Kelp DAO was attacked, a large amount of ETH originally used to support rsETH was autonomously transferred by hackers to Arbitrum One. Before the funds could be further split on the second layer, the Arbitrum Security Council activated the highest level of emergency authority, freezing about 30,000 ETH worth approximately $71.1 million directly on the chain - preventing the attackers from accessing it and stopping anyone from pretending that this money "never happened."

The freeze did not bring an end but rather bought time for decision-making. As the risks and gaps were fully laid bare, the recovery action led by Aave took shape, with a very direct goal: to pull the reserves backing rsETH and the nominal exchange ratio back to where they should be. On May 1, the Arbitrum DAO officially put the asset frozen by the Security Council on the governing agenda: a proposal requested to release about 30,766 frozen ETH to the DeFi United recovery fund, with voting starting on May 1 and expected to continue until May 7. If the vote passes, these more than 30,000 ETH will become the main ammunition to fill the asset gap of rsETH, rebuilding user trust in this asset with real capital.

The fate of this money has thus been inscribed into Arbitrum's governance textbook: first by a small number of people making up the Security Council pulling the plug at the moment the incident broke, using concentrated power to prevent further losses; once the emergency phase ends, the power of life and death is handed back to the entire DAO, where token holders will determine by procedure whether to release it, to whom, and how to conclude the narrative. From freezing the ETH on the attacker's address to possibly directing this fund into a multi-party recovery pool, Arbitrum, after a layer of chaos, exhibited a kind of counterbalancing and recovery mechanism between security and decentralization on the second layer - first using centralization to buy time for the community, then using collective voting to find new homes for the funds.

22.92 Million USDC Influx: What Move is the Foundation Making?

On the same day that Arbitrum handed back the question of whether to "unfreeze" attacker's assets to DAO voting, the power center on the other end chose to quietly make a move. On May 1, a significant transfer of about 22.92 million USDC flowed from the centralized custodian Coinbase Prime into the wallet associated with the Ethereum Foundation; the on-chain markings were clear, and the direction was evident - it was not the project party putting assets into custody, but "redeeming" dollar-denominated caps from custody. Such large amounts flowing from institutional custodial accounts into the project party addresses are often interpreted as the project party actively increasing its dollar-denominated liquidity.

Also due to the subtle timing, this USDC was soon placed in a larger narrative frame. Some on-chain analysts noted that a week prior, the market captured signs of the Ethereum Foundation conducting OTC ETH transactions with Bitmine, speculating that this 22.92 million USDC might be part or all of the payment for that OTC transaction - Bitmine using dollar-denominated assets to acquire ETH, and the foundation cashing out on the other side. However, as of now, this speculation remains at the level of singular-source on-chain interpretation, with neither party providing any official confirmation, leaving the existence of a direct correspondence between the two an open question.

Regardless of whether it is directly linked to Bitmine, actions like "the foundation turning ETH into USDC" are sufficient to ignite the market's imagination. For some, a large influx of dollar-denominated assets means the project party is solidifying its safety cushion: operational expenses, R&D investments, and even potential risk reserves for the next few years now have a thicker cash buffer. For others, this is interpreted as another form of selling pressure - when Bitmine is incrementally increasing stakes on-chain and locking chips into the consensus layer, at the same time the foundation quietly expands its dollar position, seemingly laying the groundwork for some kind of "premature cash out" or "waiting for the right moment to invest in the ecosystem." The true use of this fund is currently unrevealed in any public information; whether it is for daily operations, next round of ecosystem funding, or simply defensive cash management remains unknown. This information vacuum makes the 22.92 million USDC not just a transfer, but a question that the market must complete on its own.

Institutional Lockup and Community Relief: Two Capital Scripts on the Same Stage

On one side is a methodical long-term bet: from April 30 to May 1, Bitmine added approximately 273,000 ETH in two consecutive days, pushing the total stake to about 4,196,973 ETH, holding an extremely high share within a single entity. This action of "withdrawing" positions from the circulating pool and locking them into the verification layer directly thickens the story of protocol layer security and "long-term bullish" - as long as nodes do not act maliciously and the network continues to operate, these ETH are backing the chain with computation and credibility, earning yield over years rather than relying on immediate liquidity.

On the other side is a temporary alliance to pay for past risks. After Kelp DAO encountered an attack, the support for rsETH's reserves was breached, pressing the nominal exchange ratio; this prompted the emergence of recovery action like DeFi United: first, the Arbitrum Security Council urgently froze over 30,700 ETH that had crossed from the attacker's address to Arbitrum One, holding the funds in place; then the question of releasing the frozen ETH was handed over to Arbitrum DAO to vote, extending the time until May 7 for the community to decide whether this money should go into the recovery fund. At the same time, as one of the parties involved, Kelp has contributed 2,000 ETH to DeFi United in response to accountability concerns with real capital. The use of these funds is not for leverage but to fill gaps - filling the asset shortfall of rsETH and also addressing the cracks in the entire DeFi credit system.

Two scripts played out on the same chain on the same day: Bitmine's lockup reduced the ETH in the spot pool, betting on the safety and returns of future years; DeFi United's fundraising served as a backstop for the holes left by a past attack, trying to pull the reserves and redemption confidence of rsETH back to the anchor point. One side reinforces Ethereum's image as an "asset generator": institutions are willing to entrust nearly $9.5 billion of nominal value long-term to this set of consensus machinery; the other side exposes it as a "risk transfer station": protocol errors and governance delays can be rapidly amplified by price, discounts, and expectations of a bank run. Betting on the future coexists with patching holes, forming a more complete depiction of financial infrastructure - security premiums are not just grand narratives, but need to be re-priced in every cycle of attack, freeze, vote, and fund dispatch: who funds the backstop, to what extent, and how long it takes to recover will all flow back into the long-term discounting of this chain’s yield, risk compensation, and governance credibility.

Starting from May 1: Where to Look for Ethereum's Next Act

From network security, DeFi credit to project party fund management, the simultaneous collision of several funds on May 1 has begun to redraw Ethereum's boundaries: Bitmine's continuous addition of over 270,000 ETH to its stake locks more mainnet assets within the consensus layer, strengthening the backing of economic security while also highlighting the issue of "top stakers' influence"; the 2,000 ETH donated by Kelp combined with the Arbitrum DAO's ongoing vote on whether to release about 30,766 frozen ETH to DeFi United will slowly repair the reserves and nominal exchange ratio of rsETH within this "attack - freeze - vote - donate" link; on the same day, the Ethereum Foundation wallet's receipt of about 22.92 million USDC from Coinbase Prime pushes the question of "who manages the protocol treasury and when funds are dispatched" into the spotlight.

Moving forward, several upcoming time points will determine the narrative this day ultimately enters into: first, the Arbitrum DAO vote until May 7 will directly determine whether the approximately 30,766 ETH enters the DeFi United fund pool, also deciding if the recovery progress for rsETH is "effective in weeks" or a "long-term tug-of-war"; second, whether DeFi United can substantively pull back the reserve support and nominal exchange ratio of rsETH after multiple parties complete their donations will reprice the credit transmission among DeFi protocols; third, whether Bitmine maintains this high-intensity staking rhythm after May 1 will become a key indicator for the market observing network security premiums and staking concentration; fourth, how this 22.92 million USDC from the Ethereum Foundation is used in the future - whether it is solidified as long-term reserves, invested in R&D and ecosystem funding, or aligns with previously speculated OTC trades - as well as the related on-chain flows and official communications will profoundly impact the community's judgments on its long-term funding strategies and potential sell-pressure risks. The simultaneous performance of institutional bets and community relief on the same day and chain serves as a footnote to Ethereum's move toward "being more like global financial infrastructure": safety is not only written in white papers but must be tested in real-time through every attack, freeze, vote, and fund dispatch, while governance and risk-sharing mechanisms will face stricter stress tests in every future round of price volatility and liquidity contraction.

Join our community, let's discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX benefit group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefit 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。