LUNA Countdown to Death: The "Prophetic Trade" Mystery Before the Evaporation of 40 Billion

比推Publicado a 2026-02-25Actualizado a 2026-02-25

Resumen

Summary: In February 2026, Terraform Labs' bankruptcy liquidator filed a lawsuit against quantitative trading giant Jane Street in Manhattan federal court, alleging insider trading related to the May 2022 collapse of Terra (LUNA) and UST, which erased $40 billion in value. The complaint centers on a private chat group called "Bryce's Secret," through which Jane Street allegedly obtained non-public information. Specifically, it is claimed that Jane Street was tipped off about Terraform's plan to withdraw $150 million UST from the Curve liquidity pool. Ten minutes after the withdrawal, a wallet linked to Jane Street removed $85 million UST. Additionally, as UST crashed, Jane Street reportedly offered to buy Luna at a steep discount. This case follows a separate $4 billion lawsuit against Jump Trading, which allegedly profited from earlier UST depegging events and received secret Bitcoin transfers. Jane Street dismissed the suit as a desperate money grab, arguing the collapse was ultimately caused by Terraform's fraud. The cases highlight ongoing concerns about information asymmetry and insider advantages in crypto markets, despite their decentralized ethos.

Written by: Universe Wave Naruto, Deep Tide TechFlow

Original Title: The Truth Behind LUNA's Collapse? Someone Predicted the Evaporation of 40 Billion Dollars 10 Minutes Early


In May 2022, 40 billion dollars evaporated within 72 hours.

It was the most devastating collapse in crypto history. UST, once hailed as the "crown jewel of algorithmic stablecoins," plummeted from 1 dollar to worthless in just a few days; Luna, once with a market cap nearing 40 billion dollars, fell from its high of 116 dollars to nearly zero.

Millions of ordinary investors lost their savings that early summer. They refreshed their screens, watching the continuously plunging K-line, unsure of what had happened or what to do.

The official explanation came quickly: flaws in the algorithmic design, Do Kwon lied, a natural market death. Most people accepted this answer, relegating that catastrophe to "another lesson in the crypto world," and moved on.

This answer held for nearly four years.

Until February 23, 2026, when Todd Snyder, the bankruptcy liquidator for Terraform Labs, filed a lawsuit in the Manhattan Federal Court. Jane Street, the world's most secretive and profitable quantitative trading giant, was thrust into the spotlight.

That question, silent for four years, finally has a new version of the answer.

Jane Street and LUNA's Secret Group Chat

To understand the weight of this accusation, one must first know who the defendant is.

To most crypto users, Jane Street might be an unfamiliar name. But on Wall Street, it is legendary—a firm that deliberately maintains a low profile yet quietly became one of the most important players in the global financial market.

Between 1999 and 2000, Tim Reynolds, Robert Granieri, Michael Jenkins—three former Susquehanna traders—alongside IBM developer Marc Gerstein, founded Jane Street in a windowless small office in New York. Starting out, they did ADR arbitrage, inconspicuous and unnoticed. But they soon set their sights on a then-niche market product: ETFs, and made it their core battleground.

This bet changed everything.

Today's Jane Street is one of the world's largest market makers, operating simultaneously in 45 countries and over 200 trading venues, holding about 24% of the primary market share for US-listed ETFs, with monthly equity trading volume reaching 2 trillion dollars. In 2024, its annual net trading revenue was 20.5 billion dollars, already on par with Bank of America and Goldman Sachs. In Q2 2025, its single-quarter net trading revenue刷新 (refreshed) to 10.1 billion dollars, with a net profit of 6.9 billion dollars, breaking the quarterly records of all major Wall Street investment banks.

3000 employees, no CEO, no traditional hierarchy, all employees compensated based on the company's overall profits. Jane Street describes itself as a "collection of puzzle solvers," while the outside world calls it an "anarchist commune"—flat, mysterious, and almost completely closed off to the media.

Its alumni list includes a familiar name: SBF (Sam Bankman-Fried) joined Jane Street in 2014 after graduating from MIT, honing his trading intuition here for three years before leaving in 2017 to establish Alameda Research and FTX. The people nurtured by this company have profoundly changed the face of the crypto world, in whatever sense.

Now, this company, known for being "low-key, precise, always on the side of information advantage," sits in the defendant's seat.

And the core of the accusation comes from a private group chat called "Bryce's Secret."

It was created by Jane Street employee Bryce Pratt. He was once an intern at Terraform, left and joined Jane Street, but his old network remained intact—both doors were open to him.

In February 2022, Pratt brought his old colleagues into this private channel, establishing an information pipeline connecting Terraform's interior with Jane Street, with the other end linked to Terraform's software engineers and business development heads. The complaint alleges that it was through this pipeline that Jane Street learned in advance about Terraform's plan to quietly withdraw funds from the Curve liquidity pool—a decision not yet announced to the public.

At 5:44 PM on May 7, 10 minutes after Terraform Labs quietly withdrew 150 million dollars in UST from the Curve 3pool, a wallet allegedly associated with Jane Street followed by pulling out 85 million dollars in UST, the largest single transaction in the pool's history.

By May 9, UST had fallen to 0.8 dollars, and signs of collapse were undeniable. At this point, Pratt messaged Do Kwon and the Terraform team via the group chat, suggesting Jane Street could consider "purchasing Luna at a significant discount."

While harvesting retail investors, they were also preparing to pick up bargains from the fire.

The defendants named in this case, besides Pratt, include Jane Street co-founder Robert Granieri—the only one of the four founders still active—and employee Michael Huang. The lawsuit cites the Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act, simultaneously raising charges of fraud and unjust enrichment, demanding a jury trial, and seeking compensation and disgorgement of profits.

Bloomberg, citing the core statement in the complaint, reported: Jane Street's operations allowed it to "close billions of dollars in potential risk exposure at the right moment, just hours before the collapse of the Terraform ecosystem."

Jump Trading and Deeper Darkness

The Jane Street lawsuit is not an isolated incident. Two months prior, the same liquidator, Todd Snyder, had already sued Jump Trading and its co-founder William DiSomma, along with former Jump Crypto president Kanav Kariya, in an Illinois federal court, seeking 4 billion dollars in damages.

Jump's story is, in a sense, even more shocking than Jane Street's.

The complaint reveals a picture never fully pieced together before: as early as May 2021, during UST's first de-pegging crisis, Jump secretly intervened, buying approximately 20 million dollars worth of UST to stabilize the price back to 1 dollar.

Later, the public believed the packaged algorithmic stablecoin story—the algorithm worked, the system was self-healing. Terraform借此 (took advantage of this) evade regulatory scrutiny, and Jump, in exchange, received over 61 million Luna tokens at a price of 0.40 dollars per token, when the market price was around 90 dollars—a discount of over 99%. Jump later sold these tokens, with the complaint estimating profits of around 1.28 billion dollars.

During the final collapse in May 2022, Luna Foundation Guard transferred nearly 50,000 bitcoins (approx. 1.5 billion dollars) to Jump without a written agreement, nominally for market support. The final whereabouts of these bitcoins remain unconfirmed to this day. The complaint states: "It is unclear whether Jump further enriched itself through this."

Notably: DiSomma and Kariya, during previous SEC investigative inquiries, invoked the Fifth Amendment hundreds of times to refuse to answer. Jump's subsidiary Tai Mo Shan settled with the SEC in 2024 for 123 million dollars, admitting it "misled investors." Kariya himself resigned as president of Jump Crypto the same year, citing the CFTC investigation.

More crucially, according to the Jane Street complaint, it was through Jump's information channels that Jane Street obtained some "non-public key information." The two cases are connected by an invisible thread.

But there's another half to this story.

Jane Street's response was direct: this is a "desperate lawsuit," a "transparent attempt to extract money from the company." They added that the losses of Terra and Luna investors stem from the "multi-billion dollar fraud" created by Do Kwon and Terraform management themselves, and they will vigorously fight back.

This statement is not wrong. Do Kwon pleaded guilty to fraud and was sentenced to 15 years in prison; Terraform also paid a 4.47 billion dollar fine. Luna's death spiral was destined from the mechanism's design: algorithmic stablecoins are, in essence, a system that requires continuous buy-side support and confidence maintenance. Once panic triggers, the arbitrage mechanism operates in reverse, destroying itself at an exponential rate.

But "Do Kwon is guilty" and "others are innocent" are not mutually exclusive propositions.

A building has a fatal structural flaw—that is a fact. During its collapse, whether someone took the opportunity to empty it of its most valuable items before the firefighters arrived is a separate legal and ethical question.

Another detail is worth noting. On the same day the Jane Street lawsuit was exposed, on-chain tracking researcher ZachXBT announced he would release "a major investigation into one of the crypto industry's most profitable institutions on February 26, 2026, regarding multiple employees long using internal data for insider trading." He did not name names. But the微妙 (subtle) timing made the entire crypto Twitter hold its breath in anticipation.

This story isn't over yet. But one thing is already certain: in this market that touts "decentralization," true asymmetry never disappeared; it just moved from bank trading desks to behind on-chain smart contracts, continuing to exist in a more隐蔽 (hidden) form.

The Luna incident might just be the most violent tear in that crack, and those standing on the other side of the crack had already evacuated safely long before the wall collapsed.

"The gentry's money is returned intact, the common people's money is split thirty-seventy," as in the movie, so it is in the crypto world.


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/7614333

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the core allegation against Jane Street in the Terra (LUNA) collapse lawsuit?

AThe lawsuit alleges that Jane Street used non-public information obtained through a private chat called 'Bryce's Secret' to learn about Terraform Labs' plan to secretly withdraw $150 million UST from the Curve liquidity pool. This allowed a Jane Street-associated wallet to withdraw $85 million UST just 10 minutes later, enabling them to avoid massive losses before the ecosystem's collapse.

QWho is Bryce Pratt and what role did he allegedly play in the events?

ABryce Pratt was a former Terraform Labs intern who later worked at Jane Street. He allegedly created the 'Bryce's Secret' private chat, which served as an information pipeline between Terraform insiders and Jane Street, facilitating the transfer of material non-public information.

QWhat connection does the lawsuit draw between Jane Street case and the earlier case against Jump Trading?

AThe lawsuit suggests a connection, stating that Jane Street obtained some of its 'non-public key information' through Jump Trading's information channels. This links the two cases, with Jump Trading also facing a separate $4 billion lawsuit for its alleged role in the collapse.

QHow did Jane Street respond to the allegations in the lawsuit?

AJane Street dismissed the lawsuit as a 'desperate litigation' and a 'transparent attempt to extract money from the company.' They argued that the losses were fundamentally caused by the '$10 billion fraud' manufactured by Do Kwon and Terraform Labs' management themselves.

QWhat was the alleged role of Jump Trading during UST's first depegging crisis in May 2021?

AThe lawsuit against Jump Trading alleges that during UST's first depeg in May 2021, Jump secretly intervened by buying approximately $20 million worth of UST to stabilize its price back to $1 dollar. In return, they reportedly received over 61 million Luna tokens at a massive 99%+ discount, later selling them for an estimated profit of $1.28 billion.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbitHace 29 min(s)

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbitHace 29 min(s)

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbitHace 48 min(s)

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbitHace 48 min(s)

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbitHace 57 min(s)

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbitHace 57 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片