Wall Street Shorts ETH: Vitalik Knows and Is Front-Running, Tom Lee Remains Deluded

marsbitPublicado a 2026-03-06Actualizado a 2026-03-06

Resumen

Wall Street short-selling firm Culper Research has disclosed a significant short position against ETH and related securities, including Bitmine (BMNR). The firm argues that Ethereum’s token economic model was broken following the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025. According to the report, Vitalik Buterin is aware of the issue and has been selling ETH, while prominent bull Tom Lee continues to invest despite what the report describes as clear signs of decline. Culper claims that the surge in on-chain activity post-Fusaka—cited by Lee as evidence of adoption—is largely driven by address poisoning and dust attacks, not genuine usage. Their analysis indicates that 95% of new wallet growth comes from dust addresses, poisoning attacks have tripled, and such transactions now account for 22.5% of all Ethereum activity. The upgrade increased the gas limit from 45M to 60M, aiming to expand capacity, but gas fees fell by ~90% instead of the projected 10–30%. Culper attributes this to a miscalculation in Layer-1 demand elasticity by Vitalik and developers, using outdated models. The report also notes declining validator earnings and a shift of developers and institutional activity to Solana, which it says is outperforming Ethereum in key metrics. The firm draws a parallel to past tech giants like Netscape and Nokia, suggesting Ethereum may face a similar decline absent structural changes.

This article is from:Culper Research

Compiled | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina); Translator | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

Editor's Note: On March 6, Wall Street short-selling firm Culper Research suddenly published an article announcing that it is shorting ETH and related securities such as BMNR. Culper Research's logic is that Vitalik and other developers miscalculated Ethereum's demand elasticity before the Fusaka upgrade, leading to the upgrade damaging ETH's token economic model. Culper Research also mentioned that Vitalik is well aware of this and is actively front-running with practical actions, while the deluded Tom Lee is heading toward a dead end.

In response to the firm's massive shorting, Vitalik himself and Tom Lee have not yet responded, but Vitalik's father, Dmitry Buterin (dima.eth), responded by saying: "When you see the phrase 'Vitalik knows this and is selling,' you don't need to read further. They are clowns craving attention, not researchers."

Below is the original content from Culper Research, compiled by Odaily Planet Daily. Compiling this article does not mean we agree with Culper Research's views, but rather to present the perspective of some Wall Street institutions on ETH and their market煽动.

Latest disclosure: We are shorting ETH and ETH-related stocks, including Bitmine (BMNR).

We believe that after the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025, ETH's token economic model has been broken. Vitalik knows this and is selling; while ETH's staunchest bull, Tom Lee, continues to add ineffective investments. ETH will continue to fall.

Tom Lee's Bitmine has been defending ETH, claiming that "ETH is not in a death spiral due to increasing utility." He cited the surge in active addresses and transaction numbers on Ethereum after the Fusaka upgrade as evidence of so-called "improved fundamentals" and institutional adoption, but he is completely wrong.

According to Tom Lee's own logic, if Ethereum's on-chain activity does not reflect real usage growth and fundamental improvement, then ETH is indeed in a death spiral.

And our research shows that this is exactly what is happening.

We conducted a comprehensive analysis of on-chain data from January 2025 to February 2026, and the results show that what Lee calls "institutional adoption driving Ethereum's activity growth" can actually be explained by a large number of low-value address poisoning and wallet dusting behaviors. These behaviors were triggered by the excess block space after the Fusaka upgrade.

After the Fusaka upgrade:

  • 95% of new wallet growth comes from newly created dust addresses;
  • Address poisoning attacks increased by more than 3 times;
  • Poisoning behavior explains over 50% of Ethereum's transaction growth;
  • Poisoning transactions now account for 22.5% of all Ethereum transactions;

The Fusaka upgrade increased the gas limit from 45M to 60M, aiming to expand Ethereum Layer1's capacity. Vitalik and the protocol team previously predicted that gas fees would drop by 10%–30%, but the reality is that gas fees dropped by about 90%.

Vitalik and the validators made a serious miscalculation regarding Layer1 demand elasticity. They used outdated mathematical models (based on assumptions from before EIP-1559 and before Layer2 emerged), thereby overestimating Layer1 demand by 3 to 9 times. This is also why we believe Vitalik is selling large amounts of ETH. On January 30, Vitalik announced in advance that he would sell 16,384 ETH to fund the Ethereum Foundation's "austerity period," but since then, he has sold over 19,300 ETH and is still selling.

Vitalik understands what Tom Lee does not — ETH's token economic model has been broken.

We personally documented Ethereum network address poisoning. We created two new addresses and transferred between them. Within 5 minutes, we were hit by an address poisoning attack. We encourage readers to verify this phenomenon themselves. Currently, the rate of losses due to poisoning attacks has increased by more than 8 times compared to before the Fusaka upgrade.

<极速赛车开奖结果查询官网div>

Additionally, the increase in the gas limit has hit Ethereum's validators群体, as validators now see a 40%–50% decline in tip income per unit of gas. Falling yields will weaken staking demand and high-value transaction activity, further undermining institutional adoption. This flywheel has now started to reverse.

Meanwhile, Ethereum continues to lose market share to Solana and its own Layer2 networks.

  • Solana developer count grew by 29% in 2025;
  • Ethereum developer growth was only 6%;
  • Talent is leaving the Ethereum ecosystem;
  • Institutions like Visa and Citigroup have chosen Solana for DeFi applications;
  • Solana DEX trading volume is already more than double that of Ethereum.

During the dot-com bubble era, Netscape and Nokia dominated the market for over 10 years, but the real winners were Google and Apple. We believe Ethereum is in a similar situation — we think Ethereum's token economic model has collapsed, Tom Lee is trapped in his own position, and ETH's price will continue to fall.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main argument presented by Culper Research for shorting ETH?

ACulper Research argues that the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025 broke Ethereum's token economic model. They claim the upgrade created a massive oversupply of block space, leading to a 90% drop in gas fees and a surge in spam activities like address poisoning and dusting attacks, which artificially inflate on-chain metrics. They believe this has triggered a death spiral for ETH.

QAccording to the report, what evidence does Culper provide to dispute Tom Lee's claim of 'improving fundamentals'?

ACulper disputes Tom Lee's claims by presenting on-chain data analysis showing that 95% of new wallet growth comes from dust addresses, address poisoning attacks have tripled, and these spam activities account for over 50% of transaction growth and 22.5% of all Ethereum transactions post-upgrade, rather than genuine adoption.

QWhat role does the article claim Vitalik Buterin is playing in this situation?

AThe article claims Vitalik Buterin is aware that the token economic model is broken and is 'front-running' the market by selling his ETH. It cites that he has sold over 19,300 ETH since announcing a sale of 16,384 ETH on January 30th to fund the Ethereum Foundation's 'austerity period'.

QHow did the Fusaka upgrade allegedly impact Ethereum validators?

AThe Fusaka upgrade's increase in the gas limit led to a 40-50% decrease in tip revenue per unit of gas for validators. This decline in yield is predicted to weaken staking demand and high-value transaction activity, further damaging institutional adoption.

QWhat broader market trend does Culper Research compare Ethereum's situation to?

ACulper Research compares Ethereum's situation to the internet bubble era, drawing a parallel to how former market leaders like Netscape and Nokia dominated for over a decade but were ultimately surpassed by new technologies like Google and Apple. They suggest Ethereum is losing its dominance to competitors like Solana.

Lecturas Relacionadas

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Survive?

If the AI Bubble is Bursting, Who Will Remain? The debate over an AI bubble is intensifying, with figures like Ray Dalio warning of high levels and Jensen Huang seeing immense, early-stage opportunity. Both views hold truth: a speculative bubble in capital markets likely exists, mirroring the dot-com era, but the underlying technological shift is real and transformative. History shows that while bubbles burst—wiping out overvalued companies and speculative capital—they often leave behind critical physical and digital infrastructure. The dot-com bust, for instance, eliminated many firms but left the global fiber optic networks and data centers that enabled the rise of Amazon, Netflix, and cloud computing. Today's massive AI infrastructure investments (projected at trillions by 2030) in data centers, power, cooling, and GPUs may follow a similar path, creating the foundation for future applications. A key divergence from past bubbles is the "Jevons Paradox" effect in AI. As the cost of AI inference has plummeted by over 99.7% since 2023, enterprise spending on AI has skyrocketed. Cheap "tokens" have unlocked vast, previously uneconomical use cases, moving AI from simple chatbots into core business workflows—code generation, legal document review, scientific simulation, and financial analysis. The market is now in a phase of self-correction, weeding out superficial "API-wrapper" startups, but this cleansing process strengthens the ecosystem. The long-term trajectory is clear. The value is gradually shifting from capital expenditure (CapEx) on hardware to operational expenditure (OpEx) on transformative applications. As AI becomes a utility, the winners will be firms that deeply integrate it to solve vertical industry problems in law, healthcare, finance, and manufacturing. The泡沫 will recede, but the foundational shift towards an AI-powered era across all sectors is irreversible. The underlying productive force of AI contains no bubble.

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Survive?

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Remain?

**Summary: If the AI Bubble is Bursting, What Will Remain?** The debate around an AI bubble is intensifying, with figures like Ray Dalio warning of high valuations while Jensen Huang sees immense opportunity. This echoes the dot-com bubble, which saw massive wealth destruction but ultimately left behind critical infrastructure like undersea cables and broadband, enabling future giants like Amazon and Netflix. Similarly, today's AI boom involves trillions invested in data centers, power, cooling, and GPUs, while application-layer revenue remains comparatively modest. This investment-disparity signals a bubble. However, the core technological progress is real and accelerating. AI inference costs have plummeted by over 99.7% since 2023, making intelligence increasingly cheap and accessible. This cost collapse is unlocking vast new demand. Instead of reducing spending, enterprises are tripling their AI cloud expenditure. Cheap "tokens" enable AI to move beyond simple chatbots into complex workflows—automating code writing, legal document review, financial analysis, and scientific research. This follows "Jevons's paradox": improved efficiency leads to greater total consumption. The market is now undergoing a necessary purification, weeding out "API-wrapper" startups with no real moat. The deeper evolution involves a shift from capital expenditure (CapEx) on infrastructure to operational expenditure (OpEx) on value-creation in applications. While hardware vendors currently profit most, long-term value will migrate to AI-native firms solving vertical industry problems. Ultimately, a market correction will cleanse speculative excess but will not reverse the AI+ trend. The massive physical and algorithmic infrastructure being built will endure, becoming a cheap, utility-like foundation. Just as the internet became indispensable to all industries post-2000, AI is poised to empower and redefine every sector, moving society irreversibly toward an intelligence-augmented era. The bubble may burst, but the underlying productive momentum is solid.

链捕手Hace 32 min(s)

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Remain?

链捕手Hace 32 min(s)

Microsoft CEO: In the AI Era, How Do You Define a Company's Moat?

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella argues that in the AI era, a company's true competitive edge, or "moat," is not determined by choosing the single most powerful model, but by its ability to build a continuous "learning loop." This system integrates and evolves by connecting human workflows, domain expertise, organizational judgment, and employee experience. He posits that future companies will accumulate two types of capital: Human Capital (employee knowledge, judgment, creativity) and "Token Capital" (a firm's own built and owned AI capabilities). Importantly, AI amplifies rather than devalues human capital. Human direction is essential to guide progress, as computational power alone is aimless. The core opportunity lies in creating a closed-loop system where human and token capital reinforce each other in a compound, self-improving cycle. A company must be able to preserve its unique institutional knowledge—its "company veteran" expertise—even if it switches underlying general-purpose AI models. This requires private evaluation benchmarks, reinforcement learning environments based on internal data, and queryable knowledge bases. Nadella warns against a future where economic value is concentrated by a few dominant models that commoditize entire industries' knowledge. Instead, the priority should be building a broad "frontier ecosystem" where every company, industry, and nation can own its learning loop. This allows organizations to retain control of their intellectual property, amplify employee capabilities, and ensure the economic value created by AI is captured within their own businesses and communities. True corporate sovereignty in the AI age comes from turning organizational knowledge into a compounding system that creates enduring, defensible value.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Microsoft CEO: In the AI Era, How Do You Define a Company's Moat?

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

ETFs Are Just the Ticket: The True Institutionalization of Bitcoin Is Happening Where You Can't See It

Beyond the Bitcoin ETF spotlight, a deeper institutionalization is underway, leveraging Bitcoin as a foundational financial primitive. Institutions are using Bitcoin for purposes long reserved for assets like U.S. Treasuries and gold: as collateral for loans, insurance reserves, and the backbone of rated bonds. Examples include a Barbados-based insurer capitalizing with $40M in Bitcoin reserves and Ledn's $188M securitization of Bitcoin-backed loans, which received the first-ever investment-grade rating (BBB-) from S&P for a digital asset-backed security. This structure was stress-tested during a 27% price drop in early 2026, triggering automatic liquidations that functioned as designed but revealed the systemic risk of synchronized selling across leveraged positions. Infrastructure is evolving to support this, with platforms like Anchorage Digital's Atlas network enabling secure, institutional-grade settlement and collateral management. Strategies like basis trades and corporate treasuries (exemplified by companies like MicroStrategy issuing billions in equity and debt to fund Bitcoin acquisitions) further integrate Bitcoin into financial mechanics. While ETFs solved "how to own" Bitcoin, these developments answer "what to do with it," embedding the asset into the working machinery of finance—as collateral upon which loans, derivatives, and structured products are built. The real, enduring institutional shift is happening in these largely invisible plumbing and financing systems.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

ETFs Are Just the Ticket: The True Institutionalization of Bitcoin Is Happening Where You Can't See It

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

ZEC Co-Founder Responds to Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Orchard Pool to Be Sealed

ZEC Co-Founder Addresses Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Plans to Sunset Orchard Pool A security vulnerability was recently discovered in Zcash's Orchard shielded pool, raising key concerns. The primary questions are whether the flaw was exploited, if user funds are safe, whether users can verify the total ZEC supply, and if other similar vulnerabilities exist. Analysis suggests the vulnerability was likely not exploited prior to its discovery. It was found proactively by a researcher using specialized tools, not due to an active breach. The development team and mining pools acted quickly to contain the issue. Typical financially-motivated attacks would likely have left visible on-chain evidence, which has not been observed. User funds in Orchard are considered safe and should be recoverable, assuming no prior exploitation. If the flaw was never used, all legitimate funds can be withdrawn. The article outlines risks associated with moving funds to transparent addresses or other pools, but concludes that leaving assets in place is a reasonable option. Currently, users cannot independently verify that the total ZEC supply hasn't been inflated due to this bug. However, the planned Ironwood network upgrade is designed to resolve this. It will permanently close the Orchard pool to new deposits and internal transfers, allowing only withdrawals. This mechanism will cap total withdrawals at the amount of legitimately deposited funds, enabling anyone to cryptographically verify the supply post-upgrade. Multiple teams, including Shielded Labs, have conducted extensive audits focused on counterfeiting vulnerabilities, assisted by advanced AI tools. No additional flaws of this type have been found so far, increasing confidence that no other similar undisclosed vulnerabilities exist. In summary, evidence indicates the Orchard bug was probably not used, user funds are secure, and no other counterfeiting flaws are currently known. The upcoming Ironwood upgrade will restore users' ability to independently verify the total ZEC supply, closing this chapter.

Foresight NewsHace 1 hora(s)

ZEC Co-Founder Responds to Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Orchard Pool to Be Sealed

Foresight NewsHace 1 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片