Jane Street Sued: Suspected of Using Telegram Insider Information to Exit and Short Before Terra Collapse, Profiting $134 Million

marsbitPublicado a 2026-05-22Actualizado a 2026-05-22

Resumen

Wall Street trading giant Jane Street Group is facing a lawsuit alleging it used insider information from a private Telegram channel with a former Terraform Labs intern to avoid losses and profit from the collapse of the Terra ecosystem in May 2022. According to newly unsealed court documents, Jane Street allegedly sold nearly $192 million worth of the UST stable币 before its depeg, and then established short positions, netting approximately $134 million in profits. The suit, filed by Terraform's bankruptcy estate, claims the firm gained a critical "information advantage" through these private communications, allowing it to execute large sales, including an $85 million UST transaction on Curve Finance minutes after Terraform quietly withdrew liquidity. Jane Street has denied the allegations as "baseless" and moved to dismiss the case. A 2023 court ruling that classified UST and Luna as securities bolsters the legal basis of this suit.

Author:CoinDesk

Compiled by: Deep Chao TechFlow

Deep Chao Introduction: Wall Street's top trading firm, Jane Street, is accused of using a private Telegram chat to obtain insider information before the Terra collapse, precisely exiting their position and shorting to profit $134 million. This lawsuit not only exposes the information advantage of traditional finance giants in the crypto market but also gains stronger legal footing due to a 2023 court ruling that recognized UST and Luna as securities. It holds significant reference value for investors understanding institutional behavior and market manipulation.

Jane Street Group, one of Wall Street's largest trading firms, is accused of selling $192 million worth of the TerraUSD (UST) stablecoin just before the Terra collapse in May 2022, allegedly through a private Telegram channel with Terraform Labs insiders, according to newly unsealed court filings in Manhattan federal court.

The lawsuit, brought by the administrator liquidating Terraform's bankruptcy estate, was amended last week to reduce redactions and reveal new details about how Jane Street allegedly obtained non-public information as the Terra ecosystem crumbled.

Jane Street denied the initial allegations when they were filed in February, calling them "desperate" and "baseless," and asked the court to dismiss the case.

According to the suit, Jane Street's alleged informational edge came from a private Telegram backchannel between former Terraform intern Bryce Pratt (then working at Jane Street) and his former Terraform colleagues.

The bankruptcy administrator claims this access helped Jane Street unload its UST position near its face value before the algorithmic stablecoin's implosion and then establish short positions, profiting approximately $134 million during the collapse of Terra's $40 billion ecosystem.

In one internal exchange cited in the suit, Pratt allegedly joked that colleagues should be "slightly happier" about having an "information advantage."

With that advantage, Jane Street allegedly sold its entire UST position on May 7, 2022, unloading roughly 193 million tokens. Its single largest trade was an $85 million UST sale on the decentralized exchange Curve Finance, which occurred just nine minutes after Terraform quietly withdrew $150 million in UST liquidity from the same pool.

This trade is significant because public post-mortems of Terra's collapse have long focused on a large swap on Curve that helped push the token off its $1 peg. The lawsuit now alleges that wallet belonged to Jane Street.

When a crypto analytics firm later told a Jane Street contact that the firm had "made a killing," internal communications cited in the case show traders worrying about how their wallet was identified and then discussing how to "deactivate" them.

"This lawsuit is a transparent attempt to extract money in the well-known context that losses suffered by Terra and Luna holders were the result of a multi-billion dollar fraud perpetrated by Terraform Labs management," a Jane Street spokesperson said. "As demonstrated by the motion to dismiss filed with the court last month, we will vigorously defend ourselves against these baseless, opportunistic claims."

The suit also names Jane Street co-founder Robert Granieri and trader Michael Huang. It alleges violations of federal securities laws and the Commodity Exchange Act and seeks to recover the profits to repay creditors.

A 2023 federal court ruling in a separate U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission case that found UST and Luna qualified as securities gives the new lawsuit stronger legal grounding.

The lawsuit states that on May 18, 2022, five days after UST bottomed, Jane Street offered a job to a Terraform research lead. He joined the firm two weeks later.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the core accusation against Jane Street Group in the lawsuit related to Terra's collapse?

AJane Street Group is accused of obtaining non-public insider information about Terraform Labs through a private Telegram channel with a former Terraform intern, allegedly using that information to sell off $192 million worth of UST stablecoin and establish short positions before Terra's collapse, profiting approximately $134 million.

QWho is Bryce Pratt mentioned in the article, and what role does the lawsuit allege he played?

ABryce Pratt is a former Terraform Labs intern who was working at Jane Street. The lawsuit alleges he provided Jane Street access to a private 'backdoor' Telegram channel with his former Terraform colleagues, giving the firm an information advantage.

QWhat specific transaction on Curve Finance is highlighted in the lawsuit as significant to the UST depegging?

AThe lawsuit highlights Jane Street's sale of $85 million worth of UST on the Curve Finance decentralized exchange, which occurred just nine minutes after Terraform Labs quietly removed $150 million in UST liquidity from the same pool. This transaction is alleged to have been a key event in pushing UST away from its $1 peg.

QHow did a 2023 court ruling in an SEC case impact the legal basis for this new lawsuit against Jane Street?

AA 2023 federal court ruling in a separate SEC case determined that UST and Luna were securities. This legal finding strengthened the foundation of the new lawsuit, which includes allegations of violations of federal securities laws.

QWhat action did Jane Street allegedly take regarding their trading wallets after an analytics firm noted their profits?

AAccording to internal communications cited in the lawsuit, after a crypto analytics firm informed a Jane Street contact that the firm had 'made a killing,' Jane Street traders expressed concern about how their wallet was identified and discussed how to 'deactivate' it.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Seeking Alpha's Hot Article: Why Might the U.S. Stock Market Crash in June?

In a recent Seeking Alpha article, financial professor and analyst Damir Tokic argues that the US stock market may be poised for a significant crash in June 2026. The core thesis centers on a "mega-bubble" in equities, particularly within the technology sector, which has driven the S&P 500 to near-record valuations, with a Shiller P/E ratio exceeding 40—a level comparable to the 2000 dot-com bubble. Tokic identifies two primary catalysts for a potential collapse. First, he points to unsustainable market exuberance fueled by what he terms the "Trump Stimulus"—massive AI capital expenditure by tech giants, which he believes is politically driven and cannot last. Second, and more urgently, he highlights the escalating Iran war as a critical threat. The ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz has created a severe global energy supply crunch. Strategic petroleum reserves are projected to hit critically low operational levels by June, potentially causing oil prices to spike above $200 per barrel and triggering a severe, supply-driven inflationary shock. This scenario, Tokic warns, would force the Federal Reserve's hand. Despite currently maintaining a dovish bias, the Fed would likely be compelled to officially pivot to a hawkish stance at its June FOMC meeting to combat soaring inflation and bond yields. He contends that such a shift—or even a failure to act, which would destroy Fed credibility—could be the trigger that punctures the market bubble. The resulting downturn, he concludes, could rival the bear markets of 2000 and 2008, advising investors to prepare for a major correction.

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

Seeking Alpha's Hot Article: Why Might the U.S. Stock Market Crash in June?

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

**Title:** The AI PC Battle: Don't Bet on Sides, Bet on the Tollbooth **Summary:** The AI PC competition is moving beyond simple "x86 vs. Arm" narratives. The core investment thesis should focus on identifying which players can sustain margins, cash flow, and pricing power throughout the upgrade cycle, rather than backing a particular architecture. The opportunity is analyzed in three layers: 1. **The Advanced Foundry Tollbooth:** TSMC is positioned to collect "tolls" regardless of which chip designer wins, due to its dominant ~70% share in advanced semiconductor manufacturing, which is essential for high-end AI PC chips. 2. **Compute & Platform Spillover:** AMD represents an offensive in the x86 CPU+GPU space, while NVIDIA leverages its GPU and CUDA software stack dominance. Both benefit from the demand for increased local AI compute. 3. **Architecture Diffusion & Turnaround Plays:** ARM and Intel offer potential for significant upside (elasticity), but investments here require stricter discipline due to higher execution risks and competitive challenges. The industry is transitioning from concept to shipment validation. While short-term forecasts for AI PC adoption have been revised down slightly due to tariffs and procurement delays, the long-term trend towards AI becoming a standard PC feature remains intact. The key driver for upgrade cycles will be whether compelling enterprise applications (e.g., privacy-sensitive computing, low-latency inference) emerge beyond consumer-focused features like meeting summarization. Investment strategy should prioritize companies with platform-level advantages and recurring revenue streams. TSMC offers high certainty as the foundational tollbooth. AMD presents a strong offensive play within the established ecosystem. ARM and Intel are higher-risk, higher-potential-reward turnaround bets. The report cautions against chasing short-term hype and emphasizes a disciplined, long-term approach focused on buying ecosystem strength and cash-flow certainty after market enthusiasm subsides. **Key Risks:** Underwhelming AI PC applications slowing upgrade cycles; slow improvement in Windows on Arm compatibility; macro/tariff impacts on PC demand; potential advanced node supply-demand mismatches affecting TSMC; high overall AI sector valuations making stocks vulnerable to a risk-off shift in markets.

marsbitHace 30 min(s)

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

marsbitHace 30 min(s)

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

Marvell Technology's stock price surged from under $10 in 2016 to a record $290 in June 2026, fueled not by making GPUs, but by dominating AI infrastructure connectivity. This analysis argues the market misvalues MRVL as merely a smaller Broadcom in custom AI chips, overlooking its true, unique position. Marvell's core strength lies in enabling high-speed data flow for AI clusters through three interconnected businesses. First, it holds a commanding ~70% market share in high-speed optical DSPs (essential for data center light modules), a deep-moat business with accelerating growth. Second, its custom AI chip design business serves hyperscalers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google, with a significant revenue pipeline despite lower margins. Third, stable cash flows come from Ethernet switch chips and enterprise storage controllers. Together, they form a full-stack "AI data movement" platform. CEO Matt Murphy's transformative leadership since 2016, involving strategic divestments, key acquisitions (like Inphi for optical DSPs), and securing long-term agreements with major cloud providers, repositioned the company. A pivotal $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA in 2026 underscored Marvell's critical role in the AI ecosystem, particularly through collaborations like NVLink Fusion. While Marvell faces risks—including client concentration (losing the Amazon Trainium3 design), lower-margin business mix, competitive threats, insider selling, and complex supply chains—its fundamentals remain strong. The optical interconnect moat is widening with the acquisition of Celestial AI (photonics fabric), and financial metrics show accelerating revenue growth and operating leverage. With a PEG ratio suggesting undervaluation relative to its growth, the thesis is that the market undervalues Marvell's monopolistic position in AI "plumbing" while overemphasizing its competitive custom chip segment. The story transcends investing, symbolizing how in any complex system—from the internet to AI—the value of "connection" ultimately surpasses that of individual "nodes."

marsbitHace 59 min(s)

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

marsbitHace 59 min(s)

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

A discussion on Zhihu about "AI relay stations" shifted the niche developer topic of "cheap tokens" into broader user awareness. Users moved beyond simply questioning the legitimacy of these services to focus on practical concerns: Where do cheap tokens truly come from? Is the model being accessed the real one? Can relay stations see prompts, code, and API keys? For occasional users, are the risks worth it? The core debate centered less on price and more on trust. A primary worry is model authenticity—the risk of "model swapping," where users paying for a premium model might be routed to a cheaper one, creating an information asymmetry. Others argued that cost comparisons matter; while cheaper than official pay-as-you-go APIs, relay stations may not be the lowest-cost option versus subscriptions, domestic models, or free tiers, making user needs assessment crucial. Speculation about token sources ranged from legitimate bulk discounts to gray-area methods like account sharing or exploiting regional pricing. This opacity makes risk assessment difficult for users. Data security emerged as a critical concern, especially for enterprise use. When processing sensitive information like code, contracts, or client data, the inability to verify a relay station's data handling, retention, or access policies poses significant compliance and confidentiality risks. The evolving consensus suggests relay stations can be used cautiously for low-sensitivity, disposable tasks (e.g., summarizing public info, simple translation). However, they should not be the default for sensitive, professional, or production workflows involving proprietary data, Agents, or automated systems. Recommendations include avoiding large prepayments, not relying on a single service, using test prompts to monitor quality, anonymizing data where possible, and keeping official channels as backups. Ultimately, the discussion framed tokens not just as a billing unit but as a measure of real cost encompassing price, model integrity, data security, and service stability. The popularity of relay stations highlights user demand for affordable access, but the debate underscores a key trade-off: the savings from cheap tokens may come at the price of trust, transparency, and control over one's data and AI experience.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片