Data Inflation, Is ETH's Fundamental Still There?

比推Published on 2026-03-06Last updated on 2026-03-06

Abstract

The report by Culper Research argues that Ethereum's fundamentals have been severely damaged following the December 2025 Fusaka upgrade. The upgrade increased the gas limit, causing a 90% drop in gas fees—far more than the 10-30% predicted—and led to a surplus of cheap block space. This has enabled a surge in "address poisoning" or "dusting" attacks, which now account for 95% of new wallet creation and over 22.5% of all ETH transactions. The authors claim these attacks artificially inflate on-chain activity metrics, such as active addresses and transaction volume, which are mistakenly cited by bulls like Tom Lee as evidence of organic growth. Additionally, the report states that lower transaction fees have reduced validator earnings, weakening staking incentives and undermining Ethereum’s token economics. It highlights that Vitalik Buterin has been selling significant amounts of ETH, suggesting insider awareness of these issues. The authors also note competitive threats from Solana, which is gaining developer momentum and institutional adoption. Culper Research concludes that Ethereum’s economic model is broken and maintains a bearish outlook on ETH.

Author: Culper Research(@CulperResearch)

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Original title: Culper Research: Why We Are Firmly Shorting ETH


Deep Tide Introduction: Culper Research is a well-known short-selling institution on Wall Street that has accurately targeted several high-profile companies. This report directly addresses the core issue: the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025 brought a large amount of cheap block space, but real organic demand has not kept up—the "prosperous" on-chain data is actually fabricated by address poisoning attacks. Vitalik himself is selling a large amount of ETH, while Tom Lee, Ethereum's most staunch bull advocate, is still defending it with incorrect data. This article is not a prediction; it is a short-selling thesis with data and verification, worth reading carefully for every ETH holder.

We are shorting Ethereum and ETH-linked securities, including BMNR.

We believe that the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025 has severely damaged Ethereum's token economic model. Vitalik himself knows this and is continuously selling; while Tom Lee, ETH's most steadfast bull, is pouring good money into a bad bet.

$ETH will continue to fall.

Tom Lee's Defense: Active Addresses and Transaction Volume Are Rising

Tom Lee's $BMNR defends ETH, claiming that "ETH is not entering a death spiral because utility is rising." He cites the surge in ETH active addresses and transaction volume after Fusaka as evidence of "strengthening fundamentals" and institutional adoption.

Lee's logic is wrong.

By his own logic, if ETH's on-chain activity does not reflect real utility value growth, then ETH is heading toward a death spiral.

Our research shows that this is exactly what is happening.

The full report and disclosure information are now available at culperresearch.com.

The Truth About On-Chain Data: 95% of New Wallets Are Poisoning Attacks

Our comprehensive analysis of on-chain data from January 2025 to February 2026 shows: The "institutional adoption" data cited by Tom Lee is actually explained by large-scale low-value address poisoning/wallet dusting attacks triggered by the block space surplus brought by Fusaka.

Specific data after Fusaka:

  • 95% of new wallet growth is explained by newly created "poisoned" wallets

  • Address poisoning attacks have increased by more than 3 times

  • Poisoning attacks explain more than 50% of ETH transaction volume growth

  • Poisoning attacks now account for 22.5% of all ETH transactions

Fusaka Upgrade: Gas Fees Collapsed by 90%, 3-9 Times Worse Than Expected

Fusaka increased the gas limit from 45 million to 60 million, aiming to scale Ethereum L1. Vitalik and PTG estimated that gas fees would drop by 10-30%.

Reality: Gas fees dropped by about 90%.

Vitalik and the validators severely underestimated L1 demand elasticity, with an error of 3-9 times—using outdated mathematical models from before EIP-1559 and before L2s emerged.

Vitalik Is Selling Like Crazy

This is why we believe Vitalik is selling ETH heavily. On January 30, he announced he would sell 16,384 ETH to fund the Ethereum Foundation's "austerity period." Since then, he has sold over 19,300 ETH and is still continuing.

He knows what Tom Lee does not: ETH's token economic model has collapsed.

We Personally Verified the Address Poisoning Attack

We documented the ETH address poisoning process firsthand: We created two new wallets, initiated a transfer between them, and were targeted by a poisoning attack within 5 minutes.

We encourage readers to verify this themselves.

Losses from poisoning attacks have grown at a rate more than 8 times faster than before Fusaka.

The Validator Flywheel Is Reversing

Additionally, the gas limit increase has severely hit ETH validators, who now see a 40-50% drop in tips per unit of gas. Lower returns reduce staking demand and high-value activity, thereby weakening the foundation for institutional adoption.

The flywheel is now spinning in reverse.

Ethereum Is Losing to Solana and Its Own L2s

Meanwhile, ETH continues to cede share:

  • Solana developers grew by 29% in 2025, while Ethereum only 6%; talent is draining away

  • Visa and Citigroup chose Solana to build DeFi applications

  • Solana DEX trading volume is now more than double that of Ethereum

Conclusion: The Next Nokia

During the internet bubble era, Netscape and Nokia dominated the market for over a decade, but ultimately, Google and Apple reaped the rewards.

We view ETH in the same light.

We believe the token economic model has collapsed, Tom Lee is in over his head, and $ETH will continue to decline.


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

Bitpush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

Bitpush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7617441

Related Questions

QWhat is the main argument of Culper Research's report on Ethereum?

ACulper Research argues that Ethereum's tokenomics have been severely damaged by the Fusaka upgrade, which the increased block space led to a 90% drop in gas fees, but real organic demand did not keep up. They claim that the apparent surge in active addresses and transactions is largely due to address poisoning attacks, not genuine adoption, and that this has broken Ethereum's economic model.

QHow does Culper Research explain the increase in Ethereum's active addresses and transaction volume post-Fusaka?

ACulper Research attributes the increase in active addresses and transaction volume to address poisoning (wallet dusting) attacks, which account for 95% of new wallet growth and over 50% of the transaction volume increase. They argue that these attacks exploit the cheap block space created by Fusaka, creating artificial activity rather than reflecting real utility or adoption.

QWhat evidence does Culper Research provide to support their claim that Vitalik Buterin is selling ETH?

ACulper Research states that Vitalik Buterin announced on January 30 that he would sell 16,384 ETH to fund the Ethereum Foundation during a 'tightening period,' and has since sold over 19,300 ETH. They interpret this as evidence that he is aware of the broken tokenomics and is divesting accordingly.

QHow did the Fusaka upgrade affect gas fees and validator incentives according to the report?

AThe Fusaka upgrade increased the gas limit from 45 million to 60 million, intended to scale Ethereum L1. However, gas fees dropped by approximately 90%, far more than the estimated 10-30% decline. This reduction in fees decreased validator tips by 40-50%, undermining validator rewards and potentially reducing staking demand and high-value activity.

QWhat competitive threats to Ethereum does Culper Research highlight in their report?

ACulper Research highlights that Ethereum is losing market share to Solana and its own L2 solutions. They note that Solana developer growth was 29% in 2025 compared to Ethereum's 6%, that Visa and Citigroup are building DeFi applications on Solana, and that Solana DEX trading volume is now more than double that of Ethereum.

Related Reads

If Hyperliquid Is the New Nasdaq, Which Projects Are Playing the Role of Brokers?

Amidst sluggish market conditions, several crypto startups are pivoting towards building on the Hyperliquid ecosystem, positioning it as a potential "on-chain Nasdaq." These projects are developing trading frontends, strategy platforms, AI Agents, and custom markets using HIP-3, aiming to capture value by acting as "brokerages" that interface with users. The core idea is that while Hyperliquid provides the foundational liquidity and matching engine (like an exchange), these upper-layer applications handle user acquisition, product design, and experience optimization (like brokerages such as Robinhood). Their primary revenue models include transaction fee sharing and the potential appreciation of the HYPE token required for deployment. Key projects highlighted include: * **Trade.xyz**: Dominates the HIP-3 space by bringing traditional finance assets (indices, commodities, stocks) onto Hyperliquid. * **Dreamcash**: Focuses on mobile user growth with a simplified, gamified interface to lower the barrier to entry. * **Ventuals**: Targets the Pre-IPO market, creating perpetual contracts for unicorn company valuations. * **Based**: Aims to be a "super app" combining trading, prediction markets, and crypto payments, introducing yield-generating collateral via its HyENA protocol. * **Minara AI**: Explores an AI Agent future, allowing users to execute trades on Hyperliquid via natural language commands to AI tools. The article concludes that this open, composable ecosystem is Hyperliquid's key competitive advantage. It is evolving from a user-facing platform into a financial operating system (Financial OS). This creates a symbiotic network where each new application brings more users and liquidity to Hyperliquid, while the applications benefit from its robust infrastructure. This network effect could define the next phase of competition among decentralized financial networks.

Odaily星球日报16m ago

If Hyperliquid Is the New Nasdaq, Which Projects Are Playing the Role of Brokers?

Odaily星球日报16m ago

Different Choices After the Plunge: Institutions Buy the Dip, Traders Shift to US Stocks

Title: Diverging Strategies After the Crash: Institutions Buying the Dip, Traders Shifting to US Stocks Following a sharp decline where Bitcoin briefly fell below $60,000 on June 6th, market sentiment remains "extreme fear" despite a partial recovery. This has led to varied responses from major market participants. Several institutional figures and analysts present a cautiously optimistic long-term view for Bitcoin. Glassnode's co-founder identifies $46k-$54k as a probable key bottom range based on historical on-chain models, while a Standard Chartered executive suggests the bottom is nearly formed. Strive's CEO points to Bitcoin touching its 200-week moving average as a historically reliable buy signal. Analysts highlight metrics like MVRV ratio and the "Power Law" model indicating Bitcoin is in an extremely undervalued zone. Conversely, some traders are exiting the crypto space. One trader cited a more attractive risk/reward profile and deeper research opportunities in US stocks, particularly with AI-related equities outperforming and capital rotating away from crypto. This shift is partly attributed to perceived ongoing risks, including those related to Strategy's Bitcoin sales. Market prediction data suggests a high probability (72%) of Bitcoin falling below $55,000, but lower odds for a deeper crash below $35k-$40k. The overall picture is one of division: institutions and long-term analysts see a accumulating opportunity, while some active traders are seeking alpha elsewhere amidst the volatility and shifting capital flows.

marsbit1h ago

Different Choices After the Plunge: Institutions Buy the Dip, Traders Shift to US Stocks

marsbit1h ago

Tech Stocks in the Midst of Deleveraging: Rather Than Rushing to Buy the Dip, Wait for the Macro Environment to Stabilize First

"Technology Stocks in Deleveraging Phase: Wait for Macro Stability Before Buying the Dip" The current sell-off in tech/AI stocks is primarily driven by macro headwinds, not a breakdown in AI fundamentals. After a parabolic rise, the market faced a perfect storm: an overcrowded trade, a massive SpaceX IPO draining liquidity, pre-CPI/PPI/FOMC hedging, and strong jobs data renewing "higher-for-longer" rate fears. This triggered a concentrated deleveraging in hot tech names. Key historical context: Unlike the December 2023 sell-off focused on AI capex returns, the current correction centers on the "denominator" – rising concerns over rates, inflation, the Fed, geopolitics, and liquidity. Leading memory stocks like Micron have seen ~20% pullbacks, significant but not yet at panic levels seen in March. The intense selling wave may be largely over, but a quick V-shaped recovery is unlikely. The market will likely churn in high volatility, awaiting clarity. The immediate catalyst needed for a sustainable reversal is a "stop-bleeding" signal from macro conditions. This doesn't require a major positive shock (like the April Iran ceasefire), but simply a halt to further deterioration: CPI not surprising hotter, Treasury yields stabilizing, the Fed not turning more hawkish, and post-SpaceX IPO liquidity easing. Once macro pressure plateaus, the intact AI investment thesis – centered on persistent compute/memory shortages and accelerating commercialization – can quickly regain market focus. The strategy is clear: prioritize monitoring macro stabilization over rushing to bottom-fish individual AI stories. Patience is key.

marsbit1h ago

Tech Stocks in the Midst of Deleveraging: Rather Than Rushing to Buy the Dip, Wait for the Macro Environment to Stabilize First

marsbit1h ago

South Korean Stocks Plunge, Global Funds Liquidate: Has the Semiconductor Fundamentals Really Changed?

South Korean stocks experienced their sharpest decline of the year, with the KOSPI index plunging nearly 9% on Monday, triggering a market circuit breaker. Leading semiconductor firms Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix were heavily sold off, raising questions about whether the AI-driven bull market has reached an inflection point. This sell-off was largely triggered by a significant drop in the U.S. semiconductor sector late last week. Concurrently, NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang visited Seoul over the weekend, meeting with top executives from SK Group, Samsung, LG, and NAVER. He announced a new multi-year partnership with SK Hynix to co-develop next-generation memory products for AI data centers. Huang emphasized that AI infrastructure build-out remains in its early stages, creating a stark contrast between market panic and ongoing, strengthened industry collaboration. The article argues that South Korea has become one of the most sensitive markets for global AI-related capital flows, functioning like a large AI memory ETF due to the heavy weighting of its chipmakers. The current market turmoil reflects a shift in investor focus: from simply betting on overall AI growth to scrutinizing which companies will actually capture the profits from that growth. This "profit pool reassessment" phase is causing high volatility based on supply chain news and earnings guidance. Ultimately, the direction of the Korean market will be determined by external factors—NVIDIA's orders, HBM supply-demand dynamics, and capital expenditures from cloud service providers—rather than domestic conditions. The disconnect between sharp price corrections and continued strong signals from the industry core leaves the market at a crossroads, awaiting clearer data on the durability of AI infrastructure demand.

marsbit1h ago

South Korean Stocks Plunge, Global Funds Liquidate: Has the Semiconductor Fundamentals Really Changed?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片