The crypto world rarely stays quiet for long, but last Friday brought a sudden, sharp jolt. A massive trade on Hyperliquid, a decentralized exchange, saw one account make a fortune. We are talking about over $150 million in profit. The timing of this trade, right before President Trump announced new tariffs on Chinese imports, sparked a flurry of accusations.
- A significant trade on Hyperliquid, netting over $150 million, coincided with President Trump’s tariff announcement, leading to insider trading accusations. The account placed short bets on Bitcoin and Ether, profiting from the price drop.
- Onchain sleuth Eye linked the trade to Garrett Jin, former CEO of BitForex, who denied insider trading and stated the fund belonged to his clients. Binance co-founder CZ retweeted the allegations, adding public scrutiny.
- Jin criticized exchanges for offering excessive leverage on volatile crypto assets, suggesting stabilization funds similar to US equities to mitigate risks and restore trust in the market.
Whispers of insider trading began to circulate. The account had placed significant short bets on Bitcoin and Ether, meaning it profited handsomely as prices tumbled. It was a move that caught the attention of many, including some of the sharpest eyes in the onchain analysis community.
The Whale, The Doxxing, and CZ’s Retweet
On Sunday, an onchain sleuth known as Eye, or @eyeonchains on X, published a detailed post. This post linked the lucrative Hyperliquid trade to Garrett Jin, a name familiar to some as the former CEO of the now-defunct exchange BitForex. Eye’s data included wallet addresses and biographical details, even alleging Jin holds over $5 billion in Bitcoin. It was quite the reveal.
Then, the plot thickened. Changpeng Zhao, better known as CZ and a towering figure in crypto as Binance’s co-founder, retweeted Eye’s post. CZ’s post, which garnered over 2 million views, added a layer of public scrutiny. He wrote, “Not sure of validity. Hope someone can cross check.” It was a classic CZ move, both sharing information and maintaining a cautious distance.
Jin himself soon responded. Early Monday, he took to X to address the swirling rumors. His tone was direct, pushing back against the idea he had any privileged information. He also had a rather pointed message for CZ.
“Hi CZ, thanks for sharing my personal and private information,” Jin stated. He then clarified, “To clarify, I have no connection with the Trump family or Donald Trump Jr. — this isn’t insider trading.” It was a bold denial, delivered with a touch of irony that perhaps only crypto veterans could truly appreciate.
Other analysts, like ZachXBT, have since expressed some doubt about Jin’s exact involvement. ZachXBT suggested, “It seems more likely to be a friend of Jin,” hinting that the alleged whale might not have acted alone. Still, Jin has not denied the core claims about the trade itself. He did offer a somewhat cryptic explanation: “The fund isn’t mine — it’s my clients’. We run nodes and provide in-house insights for them.”
This suggests Jin manages funds for others, rather than trading solely with his own capital. It is a distinction that matters in the world of finance, especially when large sums are involved. It also means the spotlight now shines on his clients, whoever they may be.
Adding another twist to the tale, the Hyperliquid account tied to Jin opened a fresh position on Sunday. This new bet involved over $16 million in a 10x leveraged short on Bitcoin’s price. That is a trade with a notional value exceeding $160 million. It seems the high-stakes game continues, even under intense public scrutiny.
The Peril of High Leverage and Market Chaos
With more eyes on him than ever, Jin used his platform to weigh in on a broader issue plaguing the crypto market: excessive leverage. He did not mince words, criticizing exchanges for offering such high leverage on assets that, in his view, lack intrinsic value. He believes this practice exists mainly to meet user demand and boost exchange profits.
Jin drew a comparison to the forex market, where high leverage is also common. However, he pointed out a key difference. In forex, the underlying assets have value support, lower volatility, and liquidity provided by established banks. Crypto, he argued, often lacks these foundational elements, making high leverage particularly risky.
Friday’s market conditions certainly illustrated this risk. Following President Trump’s tariff announcement, the crypto market experienced a chaotic downturn. Liquidations quickly soared, reaching at least $10 billion. Some estimates suggest the total figure swelled to nearly $20 billion overnight, with some even speculating it could be four times that amount. It was a historic event, a wake-up call for many.
Over 1.6 million crypto traders saw their positions liquidated on Friday, according to CoinGlass data. Think about that number for a moment. It represents a vast number of individuals caught in the sudden market shift, losing significant capital. The scale of this event underscores Jin’s concerns about the dangers of unchecked leverage.
A Call for Stabilization
Jin did not just criticize; he also offered a potential solution. He believes that if exchanges insist on offering extreme leverage, they should at least implement a stabilization fund. This mechanism, he suggested, would be similar to what is seen in US equities markets. Its purpose would be to provide liquidity support during crises, acting as a buffer when the market goes into freefall.
“Only this way will trust be restored, capital flow back in, and the market grow healthily,” Jin asserted. It is a compelling argument. Imagine a safety net, a collective pool designed to absorb some of the shock during extreme volatility. It could prevent the kind of cascading liquidations that wipe out millions of traders in a single day.
The idea of a stabilization fund touches on a deeper conversation about market structure and investor protection in crypto. Is it enough for exchanges to simply offer tools, or do they have a responsibility to build in safeguards against the very risks they enable? Jin’s proposal certainly invites us to ponder that question.
This whole episode, from the massive trade to the doxxing, the denials, and the call for market reform, highlights the wild west nature of crypto. It shows us the immense profits possible, the intense public scrutiny that follows, and the ongoing debate about how to make these markets more resilient. What kind of safeguards will the crypto world ultimately embrace to temper its inherent volatility?
