On the night of September 23, as the market was still grappling with the future direction of ETH, the FTX and Alameda bankruptcy liquidation team dropped another "big stone." According to on-chain analyst "Yujin," they transferred a total of 27,372 ETH through 6 wallets to the market maker Wintermute, estimated to be about 75.32 million dollars at that time's price. In the past two years, similar large transfers have almost always been interpreted as “forthcoming selling pressure,” and this time, there was a key role added to the address label—well-known market maker Wintermute, making the sentiment more inclined to the path of "selling on behalf of."
However, so far, neither the FTX liquidation team nor Wintermute has provided a public explanation for this transfer. On-chain, we can only see that funds have left the account, but we cannot see how they will be allocated between spot selling, market-making inventory, or other uses. For users participating in various airdrop paths and funds trying to make long-term allocations, this information incomplete "large movement" can easily be equated in their minds to "already sold" or "about to dump," thus amplifying expectations of selling pressure on ETH. This article will unravel the distance between "large on-chain transfers" and "real selling behaviors" along this transfer incident, discussing how to identify which signals are just noise and which are substantive signals requiring adjustment of risk exposure in scenarios covered by the airdrop radar.
27,372 ETH Transferred: An Overview of On-Chain Trajectory
The 27,372 ETH targeted this time is not a transfer made on a whim by some giant whale, but rather another "procedural action" in the bankruptcy asset liquidation process of FTX and Alameda Research. On September 23, 2026, according to on-chain analyst "Yujin," the liquidation team transferred a total of 27,372 ETH in batches to the address recognized by the market as the market maker Wintermute through 6 independent wallets, amounting to about 75.32 million dollars at that time's price. In terms of visible information on-chain, this is a large-scale dispatch from the bankruptcy asset pool flowing to a professional market-making institution, rather than a short-term test from an ordinary speculative account.
If we were to pull this financial path into a timeline, what could be seen is a clear design of splitting and segmenting: instead of a massive amount of ETH being directly dumped from the "FTX/Alameda labeled address" to a single recipient, it is first flowed out by multiple wallets and then converged at the address labeled as Wintermute. Each transfer itself has no additional notes; whether on the sending or receiving end, there are no explanations such as "liquidation" or "sale" visible on-chain. The outside world can only piece together this channel from the bankruptcy asset pool to the market maker through address historical relationships and labels. The coordinated action of 6 wallets seems more like a structured arrangement executed by the liquidation team following a preset plan of "reconciliation—splitting—transfer," reflecting a structural arrangement on the execution level rather than an impulsive selling pressure button.
It should be emphasized that the basis of the above path description comes solely from a public tracking account "Yujin," belonging to a整理 of visible on-chain data, and not an official announcement version of "event documentation." The on-chain facts stop here: on which day, how many were transferred, from which addresses to the address labeled as Wintermute; as for whether these ETH are going to be listed, hedged, or temporarily stored for future arrangements, there is currently no authoritative disclosure. For users using the airdrop radar to observe the overall risk environment, it is crucial to separate "what happened" from "what it may mean": the former is a verifiable on-chain trajectory, while the latter is a secondary interpretation of market sentiment over these trajectories, and conflating the two is one of the biggest sources of risk in such events.
Wintermute's Takeover: Selling Pressure or Liquidity Service?
When 27,372 ETH flowed from the FTX/Alameda liquidation wallet to Wintermute, the market almost reflexively interpreted it as a prelude to "selling on behalf." This habit is not without basis: in past cases, large assets transferred to well-known market maker addresses often closely followed with more organized selling behavior, or at least actions of "stocking" on the order book, reinforcing the emotional path dependence that "the liquidation team handing over chips to the market maker = about to sell off." For participants who are already highly sensitive to FTX liquidation, such an on-chain movement needs no more evidence to ignite associations with potential selling pressure.
However, from the market maker's perspective, such a transfer does not necessarily translate to "immediate selling." Institutions like Wintermute inherently assume multiple functions: on one hand, they can provide smoother liquidity for subsequent sales, breaking down a large one-time order into a more refined matching process; on the other hand, they may just be temporarily taking over this batch of ETH, incorporating it into their inventory for subsequent quotations, hedging, or over-the-counter matching. Under this premise, the same amount of 27,372 ETH, approximately 75.32 million dollars at the time of monitoring, can impact the market ranging from "almost imperceptible" to "short-term emotional pressure," especially under the background where the overall daily trading volume can absorb this batch of chips in absolute numbers.
The key lies in the fact that currently neither the FTX liquidation team nor Wintermute has provided a public explanation for this transfer. The airdrop radar, when organizing such events, can only build a scenario tree based on visible on-chain facts and cannot directly treat any scenario as already occurring reality: one scenario is that the liquidators commission market makers to reduce their holdings at a relatively gentle pace, another is that they first take on the assets and then adjust the disposal plan based on subsequent markets and judicial arrangements, and another leans more toward pure liquidity service. In the absence of official statements, all judgments about "how far the selling has gone" should not be written as conclusions; they can at most only help participants calibrate the assumptions of their expectations. For users assessing risks using the airdrop radar, it is essential to remember that, in an environment of incomplete information, treating assumptions as conclusions is a more probable latent risk source for investment decisions than the 27,372 ETH itself.
The Shadow of Liquidation Rises Again: How ETH Sentiment Is Ignited
Since FTX and Alameda Research entered judicial liquidation proceedings, the market has been racing against an invisible "selling pressure timeline." Assets have been disposed of in batches, with each large on-chain dispatch instantly becoming the focus of community discussion, repeatedly chewed over in the narrative of "liquidation progress." On September 23, 2026, on-chain analyst "Yujin" recorded the liquidation team transferred 27,372 ETH to market maker Wintermute through 6 wallets, amounting to about 75.32 million dollars at that time’s price. Such a number inherently possesses the material to ignite sentiment: on one side is the still un-cleared historical huge pit, and on the other is the perceptible amount of a single transfer, combined with the past memory of similar actions being interpreted as potential selling signals; the path dependence of "liquidation equals selling pressure" is repeatedly reinforced.
However, there is still a whole disposal path separating on-chain transfers from real selling. The known fact here is only that the FTX/Alameda liquidation team moved this batch of ETH from its own address to a market maker like Wintermute. The market habitually views it as a potential prelude to either selling on behalf or providing liquidity but lacks official guidelines to confirm whether or how it actually sells, and how the rhythm is arranged. Panic arises more from imagined futures rather than actual realized selling; relative to the overall daily trading volume of ETH, this scale of over 27,000 ETH remains within a range absorbable by the market. What truly determines the impact degree is whether to opt for concentrated selling, dispersed clearing, or slowly absorbing in a more market-oriented manner. For users laying out projects via the airdrop radar, such FTX liquidation events are more like background noise of risk preferences rather than direct signals altering a project's airdrop status or task paths. What is worth continually tracking is whether the liquidation team will repeat similar operations in the same scale and rhythm, thereby changing your overall position and rhythm judgment in airdrop participation.
Interpreting Liquidation Signals in the Airdrop Radar
For those screening projects with the airdrop radar, this transfer of 27,372 ETH from FTX and Alameda Research to Wintermute in the liquidation process resembles a footnote written on the backdrop. This large transfer amount, amounting to about 75.32 million dollars captured by on-chain analyst "Yujin," will instinctively be interpreted by the market as a potential prelude to selling or providing liquidity, but it will not directly rewrite any project's airdrop status, task path, or claiming phase in the airdrop radar. Rather, it will be incorporated into the narrative of overall risk preference changes concerning the market environment.
Therefore, when airdrop participants screen tracks and projects in the airdrop radar, they need to treat such liquidation events as macro variables: when the FTX asset liquidation progress frequently triggers large transfers like this, the emotional level of "selling pressure expectations" may impact the fund preferences for different sectors, causing some tracks to heat up while others quietly decline. The airdrop radar focuses on a project's own airdrop status, task path, funding information, and changes in popularity; it does not give price predictions based on a single fund transfer, nor is there any public information indicating that this ETH is directly tied to any specific airdrop task, point rules, or claiming arrangements, which means your operational strategy should still revolve around the project's own data.
What truly helps reduce noise in such an environment is sustained observation of popularity and progress: when macro disturbances like FTX liquidation emerge, the airdrop radar can help you capture whether the direction of fund interest has shifted through changes in project popularity, and adjust your involvement intensity and timing in different tracks based on each project's task complexity, phase progress, and funding background, rather than being emotionally driven by a single on-chain transfer.
The Liquidation Is Not Over: How to Coexist with Long-Term Selling Pressure Expectations
What this transfer of 27,372 ETH reveals is not a one-time "bad news drop," but a prolonged liquidation curve: assets have been placed under judicial framework and move in batches on-chain, with each visible transfer automatically translated by the market into a new round of discussions about "potential selling pressure." Transparent liquidation progress does not bring about a definitive endpoint but instead an expectation that is constantly refreshed and difficult to price—especially given that so far neither the FTX liquidation team nor Wintermute has provided explanations for the use, the only thing the outside can do is construct scenario assumptions based on on-chain flows and past experience, rather than treating any deduction as an already realized result. Panic largely remains at the level of "might sell" or "might depress prices," whereas the actual disposal path remains in an information incomplete gray area.
In this context, whether participants around projects are laying out airdrop strategies or long-term investors holding ETH and related assets, their consensus bottom line should be similar: acknowledge that liquidation is not yet over and recognize that similar large transfers will surface in the future, while using verifiable data to constrain their emotional reactions. The airdrop radar treats such liquidation events as macro variables affecting overall risk preferences, observing how they feedback through changes in project popularity, sector rotation, and task participation to specific projects; users can thus adjust their positions and rhythms instead of completely rewriting their airdrop plans with each fluctuation of the FTX wallet. In a phase marked by a lack of official disclosures, focusing attention on subsequent on-chain trends and authoritative information updates and using position sizes, participation frequency, and project diversification to hedge expected errors is a more prudent way to continue participating in the market amidst long-term selling pressure expectations.
Join our community, let’s discuss together, and become stronger together!
Exclusive Hyperliquid benefits for AiCoin: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
Exclusive Aster benefits for AiCoin: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
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。
