On the weekend of May 10-11, 2026, the blockchain suddenly experienced two "loud noises": on one side, an old Bitcoin address that had been dormant for about 12 years, 1KAA8GGhVjjUjVTz1HKAjCyGNzAKQd882j, was activated, transferring all 500 BTC from an early purchase at once. At the time's price, this was estimated to be about 40.62 million USD, compared to a historical cost of around 914 USD per coin, resulting in an almost 40.17 million USD profit, approximately 88 times the initial investment; on the other side, a whale in Ethereum, identified on-chain as "Garrett Jin," transferred a total of 577,896 ETH to Binance in just 4 days, with reports estimating the total scale at about 1.35 billion USD, including one single transaction of 225,627 ETH worth about 528.19 million USD. The timing of these significant transfers nearly coincided: from a single source timeline, the transfer of 500 BTC from the OG address occurred less than half an hour before Garrett Jin's last deposit of over 220,000 ETH to Binance. Lookonchain first disclosed these two on-chain records on social media, which were subsequently relayed by Chinese media such as Planet Daily, Golden Finance, and PANews, with claims like "12-year OG liquidation" and "1.3 billion USD-level ETH could crash the market" rapidly gaining traction on social platforms, leading to heated discussions about whether "whales are collectively exiting." However, based on currently available on-chain information, we can only confirm that these 500 BTC have left their original address, and over 570,000 ETH have entered Binance; whether these were truly sold or if there are off-exchange or derivatives hedging arrangements still cannot be directly verified on-chain. The drastic movements from a single or few addresses are still quite distant from representing the overall attitude of whales, making it evidently premature to interpret it as a signal of "whales collectively exiting."

500 BTC that has been dormant for 12 years awakened at once

This Bitcoin OG address marked as having a "historical level action," 1KAA8GGhVjjUjVTz1HKAjCyGNzAKQd882j (hereinafter referred to as "starting with 1KAA"), received 500 BTC all at once approximately 12 years ago and had no significant on-chain transfers since, maintaining a full position that gradually came to be regarded as a typical sample of early holders who "would not easily move their holdings." Roughly estimating at a price of about 914 USD per coin at that time, the initial cost of this position was less than 500,000 USD, yet it was all transferred out in one go around the night of May 10, 2026, corresponding to a total value of about 40.62 million USD at market price, with an estimated profit of approximately 40.17 million USD, amplifying the investment return to about 88 times, which can be considered as a highly symbolic realization in any cycle context.

Even more striking is that these 500 BTC were not moved in batches as a test but were completely cleared out of the original address; the 1KAA8 started with "zero," equating to a declaration that this OG holding pattern that had been dormant for 12 years was thoroughly rewritten. Historically, scenarios where such old addresses are activated, especially with entire positions being transferred out, are often instinctively interpreted by the market as signals of "early chip realizations or potential selling pressure rising," and social media sentiments tend to amplify accordingly. However, based on currently visible on-chain data, we can only confirm that funds have flowed from the 1KAA8 address to a new address; publicly available materials have not tracked authoritative evidence of further inflows to exchanges, which leaves the true intention of this move—whether it was a simple security migration, asset reorganization, or preparation for a sale—still undecided.

Garrett Jin's 577,896 ETH sent to Binance

Almost simultaneously with the awakening of the 500 BTC that had been dormant for 12 years, another on-chain story unfolded on the Ethereum side. Multiple media outlets cited Lookonchain's investigation stating that in the past 4 days, on-chain entity Garrett Jin transferred a total of 577,896 ETH to Binance in batches, estimated to be worth about 1.35 billion USD at that time. The last transaction was for 225,627 ETH, approximately 528.19 million USD, occurring around the night of May 10—less than half an hour away from the time when the Bitcoin OG address was offloaded; within the same time window, old money from both assets nearly simultaneously pushed their chips towards the exchange or new addresses.

More dramatically, this batch of ETH concentrated in Binance was widely pointed by the media towards a position shift from about 8 months ago: single-chain analyses suggest that Garrett Jin had previously exchanged a large amount of Bitcoin for Ethereum, and most of the ETH currently entering Binance stems from that operation. Some estimates even claim that if compared with peak prices during that period, this position shift might be bearing a paper loss of about 1.3 billion USD, but both specific position shift costs and precise loss scale currently lack publicly verifiable data. Another unverified claim is that in the total replenishment over the past 4 days, about 352,268 ETH had first entered Binance in the initial 3 days, with about half already sold in the market, alongside three related new wallets withdrawing a total of around 700 million USD in USDT from Binance. However, based on the parts verifiable on-chain, we can only confirm that over 570,000 ETH have already entered Binance; discussions about actual sale ratios and USDT whereabouts remain at the level of conjectures from a single source rather than settled conclusions.

Contrasting fates of whales on the same day

Returning to the night of May 10, two entirely different financial curves appeared on the same timeline: the Bitcoin address that had been dormant for about 12 years, 1KAA8..., was activated, transferring out the entirety of its previous holding of 500 BTC at once. This chip had an initial cost of approximately 914 USD per coin when it was first received, and now, based on the then price, is estimated to be worth about 40.62 million USD, with a paper profit of approximately 40.17 million USD, corresponding to roughly 88 times return. Almost simultaneously within a half-hour, on-chain entity Garrett Jin completed the last deposit of 225,627 ETH to Binance—adding to the cumulative from the previous 3 days, over 577,896 ETH entered Binance in 4 days, roughly calculated at around 1.35 billion USD. Several media outlets citing on-chain analysis stated that this batch of ETH mostly originated from a large-scale conversion of Bitcoin into Ethereum that Garrett Jin performed about 8 months prior, with a single source even estimating that at the current price, this position shift might be facing a paper loss at the level of about 1.3 billion USD, although this number has not received multi-party independent verification.

Within the same cycle, one chose to quietly hold onto the earliest BTC for 12 years, ultimately cashing out tens of millions of dollars in profits at high levels; the other, during the mid-late cycle, conducted an asset rotation, concentrating his original BTC exposure into ETH but now finds himself continually having to supplement chips to the exchange as prices weaken. These two paths outline vastly different risk preferences and position management philosophies. It is important to emphasize that what we can see publicly on-chain is only the changes in address balances, the 500 BTC transferred to a new address, and over 570,000 ETH entering Binance, while whether these two holders have done any hedging off-chain or whether there are other wallet or derivatives positions supporting overall assets cannot currently be directly restored from on-chain data, making it impossible to determine who the true "winner" or "loser" is. These two stories are more individual samples illuminated by the spotlight, reminding us that the fate contrasts of a few large addresses cannot be simply extrapolated as a collective portrait of all market participants.

Whales' actions magnified under on-chain microscope

In today's "on-chain microscope" era, the movements of large addresses are almost impossible to be completed quietly. Public blockchain data is first captured by monitoring accounts and data platforms, and then amplified through social media. This time, the Bitcoin OG address and Garrett Jin are typical cases: the two anomalies were first pointed out by Lookonchain on social media, providing clear BTC address, ETH amount, destination to Binance, time nodes, and approximate sums, after which media such as Planet Daily, Golden Finance, and PANews quickly followed up with reports, turning what originally belonged only to a few on-chain observers' "raw pictures" into stories visible to all investors.

In such a flow of information, "watching whales" has gradually become a popular narrative: actions from a single large address are easily interpreted as directional signals for the entire cycle—OG transferring out is seen as "old players top selling"; and a giant whale entering Binance indicates "preparing to crash the market" or "chips loosening." However, on verifiable factual levels, what we can really ascertain now is only that the 500 BTC have left the original 1KAA8... address and that over 570,000 ETH have entered Binance; whether Garrett Jin has fully sold or significantly sold at Binance, or whether he will buy back at lower prices, there are still only a few conjectural claims from single sources, with the 500 BTC from Bitcoin OG even lacking any authoritative record of entering an exchange. Historically, many instances of "large transfers" or "old address activations" have stirred emotional fluctuations on social media but did not correspond to clear price inflection points, and such precedents are not uncommon. For readers, the more important point is not to avoid paying attention to whales but to draw a clear line when seeing on-chain transfer screenshots: which are objective records already etched in blockchain data, and which are imaginations surrounding intent and consequences. One should not hastily equate short-term correlations with the causal chain of the market itself.

What follows must be the on-chain follow-ups rather than emotions

What is truly worth tracking are the specific variables on-chain in the coming weeks: that dormant Bitcoin OG address, after the 500 BTC left the old address, whether it will enter clearly marked exchange distribution addresses, whether it will continue to be split and transferred, or simply parked long-term at the new address; and regarding Garrett Jin, one should watch whether he continues to add ETH to the exchange, whether he further sells based on existing replenishments, and if USDT in his associated addresses consistently withdraws from exchanges. As of May 11, 2026, publicly available information only covers transfer and some replenishment actions, while subsequent transaction details and overall asset-liability situations remain blank, meaning any qualitative claims of "having cleared positions" or "having liquidated" are currently just speculation. Multiple individual cases also cannot automatically extrapolate into a grand conclusion that "all whales are on the same side." Historical experience has repeatedly shown that among whales, there is also considerable disagreement and competitive pressure. For ordinary investors, these two on-chain stories are more like educational samples on risk: one side showcases the fragility of highly concentrated, high-leverage positions under pressure, while the other reflects another kind of outcome of extreme long-term holding in an extended cycle. However, both paths carry strong individual nuances and almost no replicability. What can be borrowed from is self-restraint in questions such as how large of a position to take, what level of volatility to endure, and whether to use leverage, rather than gambling on when the next "12-year OG" will wake up or when the next Garrett Jin will bet their chips on the table.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
AiCoin on-chain: https://aicoin.com/hyperliquid
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2

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。