Blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps has pushed back against viral claims alleging that a high-profile Polymarket trader had insider ties to a cofounder of World Liberty Financial. The firm said the on-chain logic behind the accusations relies on weak assumptions and misleading analysis.
In a Jan. 5 post on X, Bubblemaps addressed speculation surrounding a prediction market on whether Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro would be removed from power by a set deadline. The market drew intense scrutiny after reports of Maduro’s capture emerged, shortly after several newly created accounts placed large “Yes” bets.
Why the insider narrative gained traction
All of it began with the revelation that ahead of the news surrounding the ouster of Maduro, some new accounts on Polymarket made extreme bets that cumulatively increased $60,000 to over $630,000 in a matter of hours. This came after some accounts placed bets on a wallet that doubled $32,000 to around $400,000, an action that led to rising suspicions of insider trading.
The on-chain traces indicated the wallet was funded via Coinbase transactions on Solana and Ethereum. Later, an on-chain analyst showed the funding was indicative of a separate Coinbase transfer allegedly connected with WLFI-related wallets. The assertion relied greatly on the 250 SOL payment, as well as the ENS/SNS domain naming, which was the name “Steven Charles.”
When the news went viral, the social media users saw this trade as a case where the political and cryptographic insiders colluded.
Bubblemaps calls the evidence misleading
Bubblemaps flatly disagreed with the conclusions. The company stated that finding similar wallets based on matching exchange times and similar amounts of deposits does not prove ownership or any connection. A one-day time difference between withdrawal amounts from an exchange and corresponding amounts deposited into an exchange holds little significant value in analysis, particularly if it involves only one asset, Bubblemaps argued.
When Bubblemaps expanded the analysis to include other assets such as USDC and ETH, it identified around 20 wallets that fit the same timing and value assumptions used in the viral claims. What this means is that the same pattern could be applied to many unrelated crypto wallets.
The company also pointed out that exchange deposits can come from bank transfers, piecemeal funding sources, or old balances that were merged after initial deposits. Analysts who do not account for this may find themselves making misleading correlations.
“Calling this a 99% match is clickbait,” Bubblemaps stated, pointing out that it does not prove anything about wallet control simply because both exchanges share common paths for exchanging money and use similar naming conventions.
Separating evidence from narrative
Though Bubblemaps acknowledged that some features of the Polymarket trades are peculiar regarding timing, it cautioned that “extreme storytelling” can moderate good on-chain analysis. The company said that one can easily single out suspicious pockets if one uses extreme language.
Bubblemaps called on the cryptocommunity to apply its standards in assessing politically charged events and prominent projects. Lack of analytical rigor, it said, was eroding trust in on-chain analysis.
As of now, neither Polymarket nor World Liberty Financial has reported internal findings related to the incident. Authorities have not announced any formal investigation, and no direct evidence links the trader to WLFI or its founders.
Highlighted Crypto News:
Bitcoin (BTC) Reloads Its Bullish Streak: How Close Is It to Cracking $95K?
