PEPE Whale Activity Jumps 60%, Among Highest In Market

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-03-20Actualizado a 2026-03-20

Resumen

According to on-chain data from Santiment, PEPE has experienced a significant increase in whale activity, with its Whale Transaction Count surging 61% week-over-week, ranking it eighth among cryptocurrencies with market caps over $500 million. This metric tracks transfers exceeding $100,000, indicating heightened interest from large investors. Such spikes in whale activity often precede market volatility, as these substantial transactions can impact asset prices. PEPE’s price was around $0.00000334 at the time of writing, down 3% in 24 hours, following a period of recent pullback. Other notable assets on the list include Mantle (MNT), which saw a 600% increase, and stablecoins like USDT and USDC, which also recorded significant jumps in large transactions.

On-chain data shows Pepe is among the cryptocurrencies that have seen the largest week-over-week increases in the Whale Transaction Count.

Pepe Whale Transaction Count Has Witnessed A 61% Jump

In a new post on X, on-chain analytics firm Santiment has shared the top 10 list of digital assets that have seen the largest jumps in the Whale Transaction Count over the past week.

The Whale Transaction Count here refers to an indicator that keeps track of the total number of transfers occurring on a given network that involve a value of more than $100,000. Generally, only the whale entities are capable of making such large moves, so the metric represents the activity of these big-money hands.

When the value of the Whale Transaction Count rises, it means whales are ramping up their activity. Such a trend may be a sign that the large investors have increased their interest in the cryptocurrency.

On the other hand, the indicator going down suggests big-money attention may be moving away from the asset as large entities are lowering their number of transactions.

Now, here is the table shared by Santiment that shows how the assets with a minimum market cap of $500 million compare based on the weekly percentage change in the Whale Transaction Count:

Looks like Mantle topped the list this week | Source: Santiment on X

As displayed above, Mantle (MNT) was the cryptocurrency that saw the strongest jump in the Whale Transaction Count over the last seven days: an increase of 600%. The BNB version of Dai (DAI) ranked second with an indicator rise of 340%, while Maker (MKR) came third with 200%.

Another prominent coin on the list is the memecoin Pepe (PEPE), which ranks eighth with a Whale Transaction Count of more than 60%. Earlier, the asset gained popularity due to the widely-known internet frog meme it’s associated with, but lately, the coin hasn’t been making much rounds in the news. As such, it’s interesting that whale interest in the memecoin has seen a sudden spike.

In the past, whale activity spikes have tended to proceed market volatility, as these humongous entities can create ripples big enough to shake the asset. Pepe and other assets have seen some sharp price action over the past few days, so it’s possible that the elevation in whale activity could be a factor behind it.

The largest assets by market cap on the list are USDT (on Optimism) and USDC (on BNB), garnering Whale Transaction Count jumps of 58% and 57%, respectively. Investors store capital in stablecoins when they want to avoid the volatility associated with the wider market, so these spikes could correspond to big-money hands either preparing capital for deployment into Bitcoin and other volatile assets or stashing it away in safety.

Pepe Price

At the time of writing, Pepe is floating around $0.00000334, down 3% in the last 24 hours.

The price of the memecoin seems to have pulled back over the last few days | Source: PEPEUSDT on TradingView

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat does the Whale Transaction Count measure in the context of cryptocurrency?

AThe Whale Transaction Count is an indicator that tracks the total number of transfers on a network involving a value of more than $100,000, representing the activity of large investors or 'whales'.

QWhich cryptocurrency saw the largest percentage increase in Whale Transaction Count over the past week, and by how much?

AMantle (MNT) saw the largest increase in Whale Transaction Count over the past week, with a jump of 600%.

QWhat was the percentage increase in Whale Transaction Count for the memecoin Pepe (PEPE)?

AThe memecoin Pepe (PEPE) saw a 61% jump in its Whale Transaction Count over the past week.

QAccording to the article, what has historically tended to follow a spike in whale activity for an asset like Pepe?

AHistorically, spikes in whale activity have tended to precede market volatility, as these large entities can create significant price movements.

QWhat was the price of Pepe (PEPE) at the time the article was written, and how much had it changed in the last 24 hours?

AAt the time of writing, Pepe was trading around $0.00000334, down 3% in the last 24 hours.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Dialogue with Jia Hang | Looking Back at Two Decades of Chinese Payment Going Global

**Summary: A Conversation with Jia Hang on Two Decades of China's Payment Globalization** Jia Hang, a veteran with over twenty years in payments, reflects on China's attempts to build a global payment network through three key phases: UnionPay (card networks), Alipay+ (digital wallets), and now, stablecoins. His journey began at UnionPay International, aiming to establish China's card network abroad. While successful in following Chinese tourists ("where Chinese go, UnionPay goes"), it struggled to achieve true global scale. The core lesson: card networks like Visa/Mastercard's unassailable advantage isn't just technical standards, but their deeply entrenched **governance and profit-sharing models** that create powerful network effects. Competing as the "same species" is nearly impossible. At Ant Group, he led Alipay+, a strategy to bypass card networks by interconnecting local e-wallets worldwide. While innovative, it faced a similar ceiling. Mobile QR payments and card swipes were essentially **the same species competing for the same pie**, lacking a disruptive value proposition for users or a sustainable new incentive model to replace the card networks' established flywheel. Today, at Singapore's DCS, Jia focuses on stablecoin-based payments. He argues stablecoins represent a fundamental shift. They are not competing with Visa for consumer payments but challenging the **traditional banking and account system for value movement**. Products like "U Cards" (stablecoin-linked payment cards) are transitional, leveraging existing card networks for acceptance while building new rails. The real potential lies in stablecoins enabling seamless, low-cost global value transfer, potentially reorganizing the financial infrastructure around **accounts rather than cards**. Jia believes stablecoin adoption for local retail payments, cross-border transactions, and as high-yield savings vehicles is becoming irreversible. This could gradually reduce reliance on traditional fiat channels, especially in regions with weak currencies or capital controls. The quest for the "next global payment network" continues, now centered on whether stablecoins can successfully bridge Web2 and Web3, establish new governance, and create compelling user value beyond mere cost reduction.

marsbitHace 2 min(s)

Dialogue with Jia Hang | Looking Back at Two Decades of Chinese Payment Going Global

marsbitHace 2 min(s)

Circle's Stock Price Plunges 76%, Hong Kong Dollar Stablecoin Set to Launch Within Two Weeks

Circle's stock price has plunged approximately 76% from its 2023 peak, reflecting a major market revaluation. Despite this, Circle President Heath Tarbert emphasized the company's focus on long-term execution and its dominant position with USDC's $73 billion circulation across 34 blockchains. The competitive landscape is intensifying. A new consortium-backed stablecoin, Open USD, is attempting to challenge incumbents by sharing reserve yields with partners. More significantly, Visa's new stablecoin platform, initially supporting Open USD while also being compatible with USDC, could erode Circle's network effects. In response, Circle is expanding into real-world payments through partnerships like the one with Japan's JCB. Separately, Tether (USDT) faces a two-year compliance window under new U.S. regulations, requiring it to adjust its reserve composition away from assets like Bitcoin and loans towards cash and U.S. Treasuries. Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, Standard Chartered-backed fintech firm Dian Dian is poised to launch a licensed HKD-pegged stablecoin (HKDAP), moving the industry into a phase where the real test is integrating licensed stablecoins into actual payment flows and corporate treasury systems. The sharp decline in Circle's stock underscores a broader shift: the stablecoin market is moving from a winner-takes-all dynamic to a multi-player competitive arena where execution, compliance, and real-world utility are becoming paramount.

marsbitHace 3 min(s)

Circle's Stock Price Plunges 76%, Hong Kong Dollar Stablecoin Set to Launch Within Two Weeks

marsbitHace 3 min(s)

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

In a landscape dominated by power and profit motives, the author argues that decentralization is not merely one desirable feature among many in blockchain design—it is the singular, non-negotiable defense against corporate and capital capture. The article adopts a Machiavellian, realist perspective on human institutions, positing that businesses will inevitably attempt to co-opt any valuable network to protect their profits and dominance. While external attacks like 51% forks are often discussed, the greater existential risk is internal capture—the gradual erosion of a protocol’s neutrality by vested interests, as seen historically with platforms like Visa and Google. The piece critiques permissioned chains, highly centralized “permissionless” layer-1s, and layer-2s without sufficient decentralization (e.g., single sequencers) as inherently vulnerable. These compromised systems, promoted by established financial players, are framed as delaying tactics to stifle truly open networks that threaten existing high-fee, inefficient business models. Real-world examples, such as closed enterprise consortiums that exclude competitors, illustrate how such systems cement oligopolies rather than foster innovation. The author concludes that while decentralized protocols like Ethereum are imperfect and costly to operate, they represent the only viable long-term equilibrium. In a market where value naturally flows to the most secure and neutral settlement layer, only maximally decentralized public blockchains can resist being subsumed by capital and powerful incumbents.

Foresight NewsHace 13 min(s)

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

Foresight NewsHace 13 min(s)

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Bitcoin's governance is once again at the center of a heated debate, this time ignited by BIP-110, the "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork." This proposal aims to curb non-monetary data (like inscriptions and Runes) by introducing seven new consensus-layer restrictions over a year, such as limiting new output scripts to 34 bytes and restoring the OP_RETURN cap to 83 bytes. The controversy stems from BIP-110's fundamental shift: it moves the battle against "spam" from node relay and miner policies to the consensus layer, rendering currently valid transactions invalid. Supporters, arguing that default policy governance has failed (highlighted by Bitcoin Core v30's relaxation of OP_RETURN limits), see this as necessary to protect node resources and Bitcoin's monetary focus. Opponents, led by figures like Michael Saylor and Adam Back, warn it dangerously centralizes governance. Saylor listed 110 reasons against it, criticizing its low 55% miner activation threshold and potential for chain splits. Back emphasized Bitcoin's "permissionless" ethos, arguing no single group should impose value judgments via consensus rules. Further complicating matters, technical critiques suggest BIP-110 may be technically circumventable, and a "BlockSlop" vulnerability in its upgrade path poses a consensus risk. The debate has drawn in diverse stakeholders: miners (with pools like Ocean signaling support and Foundry polling clients), node operators (like Bitcoin Knots), and new players like corporate treasury holder MicroStrategy (Saylor), whose market influence adds a novel dimension. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a governance stress test, exposing the unresolved question: who decides Bitcoin's rules? It pits the authority of miners, node operators, developers, and capital holders against each other, with each side claiming to defend Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and security.

marsbitHace 30 min(s)

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

marsbitHace 30 min(s)

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Title: Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate A new technical proposal, BIP-110 (Reduced Data Temporary Softfork), has sparked a fundamental governance debate within the Bitcoin community. It aims to impose new consensus rules for one year to limit non-financial data (like inscriptions and Runes) on-chain, moving beyond simple node and miner policy filters to invalidate currently valid transactions. Supporters argue that default policies have failed due to workarounds, necessitating consensus-layer changes to protect Bitcoin's core monetary function from data spam. Critics, including Michael Saylor and Adam Back, contend this dangerously centralizes judgment, undermines permissionlessness, and sets a risky governance precedent. They advocate for market-based solutions like fees or Layer 2s instead. The debate exposes deeper tensions: miners are divided on activation; node operators assert their sovereignty; Bitcoin Core developers influence defaults without direct accountability; and large corporate holders like MicroStrategy now wield narrative influence. Technically, BIP-110 may not fully block data and carries a disclosed consensus bug risk. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a stress test, forcing the community to confront the unresolved question: who legitimately decides what Bitcoin is and how it evolves, amidst competing claims from miners, nodes, developers, and capital holders.

链捕手Hace 42 min(s)

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

链捕手Hace 42 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片