Bubblemaps trace Polymarket accounts linked to Iran strike bets

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-03-05Last updated on 2026-03-05

Abstract

Blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps has uncovered a network of connected wallets that profited from highly accurate bets on U.S. and Israeli military strikes involving Iran on the prediction market Polymarket. The investigation identified multiple accounts, including one named “nothingeverhappens911,” which moved profits off-platform and was linked via a shared Binance deposit to another account called “Skoobidoobnj.” This second account reportedly earned around $100,000 from bets placed just before strikes on 13 June and 21 June 2025. Two additional connected accounts made approximately $65,000 and $10,000 from bets on a 28 February U.S. strike and a 13 June Israeli operation, respectively. In total, four accounts generated about $240,000 from these trades. These findings follow earlier reports of six wallets making $1.2 million from the 28 February strike, raising concerns about potential use of non-public information. The activity has intensified scrutiny over whether prediction markets incentivize trading on privileged geopolitical knowledge.

Blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps says it has identified a network of connected wallets that profited from betting on military strikes involving Iran on the crypto prediction market Polymarket.

In a thread published on X, Bubblemaps said it traced funds between several Polymarket accounts that placed highly accurate bets on U.S. and Israeli strikes. This raises questions about whether traders may have had advance knowledge of geopolitical events.

The findings follow earlier reports that six wallets collectively earned about $1.2 million by betting that the United States would strike Iran on 28 February, with many of the positions reportedly opened only hours before the attack.

Wallet tracing links Polymarket accounts

According to Bubblemaps, a wallet identified as 0xa4eb, operating under the Polymarket username “nothingeverhappens911,” recently moved profits off the platform.

Tracing those funds led to another Polymarket account called “Skoobidoobnj,” with the connection established through a shared Binance deposit address.

The second account allegedly made about $100,000 betting “yes” shortly before two separate military developments involving Iran in 2025.

Those events included:

  • 13 June 2025: Israel launched an operation targeting Iranian assets.
  • 21 June 2025: The United States reportedly joined the conflict with strikes on nuclear facilities at Fordow.

Bubblemaps said the on-chain links suggest the accounts may be part of a broader cluster of traders using connected wallets.

Additional accounts identified

The analytics firm said the Polymarket account “Skoobidoobnj” is also linked on-chain to two additional accounts suspected of placing trades at similarly timed intervals.

According to Bubblemaps:

  • One account allegedly earned about $65,000 betting on a U.S. strike on 28 February.
  • Another reportedly made around $10,000 on predictions related to the 13 June Israeli strike.

In total, the firm said four connected Polymarket accounts generated about $240,000 from bets predicting U.S. and Israeli military actions involving Iran.

Earlier $1.2M betting activity raised scrutiny

The latest findings build on the earlier discovery that six recently funded wallets made roughly $1.2 million from the 28 February U.S. strike market.

Many of those wallets were reportedly funded within 24 hours of the event. They placed bets specifically on a strike occurring on that date.

The timing of the trades drew scrutiny from analysts and policymakers, with critics suggesting the activity could indicate traders acting on privileged information.

Prediction markets face growing attention

Crypto-based prediction platforms such as Polymarket allow users to trade on the likelihood of real-world events ranging from elections to geopolitical conflicts.

While supporters argue that prediction markets can aggregate information efficiently, critics warn that they may create incentives for trading on sensitive or nonpublic information.

The Bubblemaps findings add to the ongoing debate over whether blockchain analytics could help identify suspicious trading behavior in decentralized prediction markets.


Final Summary

  • Bubblemaps says on-chain tracing linked several Polymarket accounts that profited from betting on U.S. and Israeli strikes involving Iran.
  • The findings follow earlier reports that six wallets earned about $1.2M from bets predicting a 28 February U.S. strike on Iran.

Related Questions

QWhat did blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps identify regarding Polymarket accounts and bets on military strikes involving Iran?

ABubblemaps identified a network of connected wallets that profited from betting on military strikes involving Iran on the crypto prediction market Polymarket, with some accounts placing highly accurate bets shortly before the events.

QHow much did the six wallets collectively earn from betting on the U.S. strike on Iran on 28 February, and what was notable about the timing of their bets?

AThe six wallets collectively earned about $1.2 million from betting on the U.S. strike on Iran on 28 February, with many positions opened only hours before the attack.

QWhich Polymarket username was associated with wallet 0xa4eb, and how was it linked to another account called 'Skoobidoobnj'?

AWallet 0xa4eb operated under the Polymarket username 'nothingeverhappens911' and was linked to another account called 'Skoobidoobnj' through a shared Binance deposit address.

QWhat were the two military events in June 2025 that the account 'Skoobidoobnj' reportedly bet on, and how much profit did it make?

AThe account 'Skoobidoobnj' bet on an Israeli operation targeting Iranian assets on 13 June 2025 and U.S. strikes on nuclear facilities at Fordow on 21 June 2025, making about $100,000 in profit.

QWhat is the total amount that the four connected Polymarket accounts generated from bets predicting U.S. and Israeli military actions involving Iran?

AThe four connected Polymarket accounts generated about $240,000 from bets predicting U.S. and Israeli military actions involving Iran.

Related Reads

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

NEAR Returns to AI Origins: From Payroll Struggles to Blockchain, Now Focusing on AI Agents and Privacy NEAR Protocol's journey began not with grand blockchain ambitions, but from a practical hurdle: its AI startup founders, including Transformer paper co-author Illia Polosukhin, couldn't efficiently pay international developers in 2017. This led them to pivot and build a high-performance, scalable blockchain. After years navigating various crypto narratives like sharding and cross-chain interoperability, NEAR is now leveraging its AI roots to re-enter the AI arena. A key driver is its "NEAR Intents" layer, which abstracts complex cross-chain transactions. Users simply state their goal (e.g., swap BTC for ETH), and a solver network finds the optimal route. This system has processed over $20B in cross-chain volume, generating significant fee revenue. A major growth area is private transactions via "Confidential Intents/Swaps," which hide trade details until settlement to protect against MEV and front-running. Remarkably, private swaps recently accounted for over 40% of NEAR's transaction volume, highlighting strong demand but also potential regulatory scrutiny. With its AI-founder pedigree, NEAR is positioning itself at the intersection of blockchain, AI agents, and privacy, aiming to become infrastructure for the emerging agent economy while navigating the challenges of its rapid adoption.

marsbit34m ago

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

marsbit34m ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

In recent discussions, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," a framework defining core values for Ethereum's development. CROPS stands for Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. Initially outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's "EF Mandate," it represents a commitment to user sovereignty, ensuring that the network resists external control, remains open, protects privacy, and prioritizes security. The relevance of CROPS extends beyond Ethereum's foundational principles, becoming crucial in the context of AI integration. As AI agents begin handling wallet operations and automated transactions, the risk increases that users may cede control over their digital assets, privacy, and intentions to centralized AI service providers. A "CROPS AI" would therefore emphasize local execution where possible, privacy-preserving remote model calls (e.g., using zero-knowledge proofs), and transparent, verifiable processes to maintain user agency. Vitalik highlights a significant convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layer" and "CROPS AI." Both address the same fundamental challenge: how users can access powerful services—be it blockchain data via RPCs or AI models—without exposing sensitive information or relinquishing ultimate control. This intersection points toward a future digital entry point that is more private, secure, and user-controlled. Ultimately, CROPS is not merely an abstract ideal but a practical guidepost. It steers development—from protocol resilience and wallet design to AI agent safety—towards a future where users retain self-sovereignty even as digital systems grow more complex and powerful. In an era of accelerating AI adoption, these "slow variables" of censorship resistance, openness, privacy, and security may define Ethereum's enduring value.

marsbit44m ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

marsbit44m ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit2h ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit2h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit2h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片