Data Inflation, Is ETH's Fundamental Still There?

比推Pubblicato 2026-03-06Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-06

Introduzione

The report by Culper Research argues that Ethereum's fundamentals have been severely damaged following the December 2025 Fusaka upgrade. The upgrade increased the gas limit, causing a 90% drop in gas fees—far more than the 10-30% predicted—and led to a surplus of cheap block space. This has enabled a surge in "address poisoning" or "dusting" attacks, which now account for 95% of new wallet creation and over 22.5% of all ETH transactions. The authors claim these attacks artificially inflate on-chain activity metrics, such as active addresses and transaction volume, which are mistakenly cited by bulls like Tom Lee as evidence of organic growth. Additionally, the report states that lower transaction fees have reduced validator earnings, weakening staking incentives and undermining Ethereum’s token economics. It highlights that Vitalik Buterin has been selling significant amounts of ETH, suggesting insider awareness of these issues. The authors also note competitive threats from Solana, which is gaining developer momentum and institutional adoption. Culper Research concludes that Ethereum’s economic model is broken and maintains a bearish outlook on ETH.

Author: Culper Research(@CulperResearch)

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Original title: Culper Research: Why We Are Firmly Shorting ETH

Deep Tide Introduction: Culper Research is a well-known short-selling institution on Wall Street that has accurately targeted several high-profile companies. This report directly addresses the core issue: the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025 brought a large amount of cheap block space, but real organic demand has not kept up—the "prosperous" on-chain data is actually fabricated by address poisoning attacks. Vitalik himself is selling a large amount of ETH, while Tom Lee, Ethereum's most staunch bull advocate, is still defending it with incorrect data. This article is not a prediction; it is a short-selling thesis with data and verification, worth reading carefully for every ETH holder.

We are shorting Ethereum and ETH-linked securities, including BMNR.

We believe that the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025 has severely damaged Ethereum's token economic model. Vitalik himself knows this and is continuously selling; while Tom Lee, ETH's most steadfast bull, is pouring good money into a bad bet.

$ETH will continue to fall.

Tom Lee's Defense: Active Addresses and Transaction Volume Are Rising

Tom Lee's $BMNR defends ETH, claiming that "ETH is not entering a death spiral because utility is rising." He cites the surge in ETH active addresses and transaction volume after Fusaka as evidence of "strengthening fundamentals" and institutional adoption.

Lee's logic is wrong.

By his own logic, if ETH's on-chain activity does not reflect real utility value growth, then ETH is heading toward a death spiral.

Our research shows that this is exactly what is happening.

The full report and disclosure information are now available at culperresearch.com.

The Truth About On-Chain Data: 95% of New Wallets Are Poisoning Attacks

Our comprehensive analysis of on-chain data from January 2025 to February 2026 shows: The "institutional adoption" data cited by Tom Lee is actually explained by large-scale low-value address poisoning/wallet dusting attacks triggered by the block space surplus brought by Fusaka.

Specific data after Fusaka:

95% of new wallet growth is explained by newly created "poisoned" wallets
Address poisoning attacks have increased by more than 3 times
Poisoning attacks explain more than 50% of ETH transaction volume growth
Poisoning attacks now account for 22.5% of all ETH transactions

Fusaka Upgrade: Gas Fees Collapsed by 90%, 3-9 Times Worse Than Expected

Fusaka increased the gas limit from 45 million to 60 million, aiming to scale Ethereum L1. Vitalik and PTG estimated that gas fees would drop by 10-30%.

Reality: Gas fees dropped by about 90%.

Vitalik and the validators severely underestimated L1 demand elasticity, with an error of 3-9 times—using outdated mathematical models from before EIP-1559 and before L2s emerged.

Vitalik Is Selling Like Crazy

This is why we believe Vitalik is selling ETH heavily. On January 30, he announced he would sell 16,384 ETH to fund the Ethereum Foundation's "austerity period." Since then, he has sold over 19,300 ETH and is still continuing.

He knows what Tom Lee does not: ETH's token economic model has collapsed.

We Personally Verified the Address Poisoning Attack

We documented the ETH address poisoning process firsthand: We created two new wallets, initiated a transfer between them, and were targeted by a poisoning attack within 5 minutes.

We encourage readers to verify this themselves.

Losses from poisoning attacks have grown at a rate more than 8 times faster than before Fusaka.

The Validator Flywheel Is Reversing

Additionally, the gas limit increase has severely hit ETH validators, who now see a 40-50% drop in tips per unit of gas. Lower returns reduce staking demand and high-value activity, thereby weakening the foundation for institutional adoption.

The flywheel is now spinning in reverse.

Ethereum Is Losing to Solana and Its Own L2s

Meanwhile, ETH continues to cede share:

Solana developers grew by 29% in 2025, while Ethereum only 6%; talent is draining away
Visa and Citigroup chose Solana to build DeFi applications
Solana DEX trading volume is now more than double that of Ethereum

Conclusion: The Next Nokia

During the internet bubble era, Netscape and Nokia dominated the market for over a decade, but ultimately, Google and Apple reaped the rewards.

We view ETH in the same light.

We believe the token economic model has collapsed, Tom Lee is in over his head, and $ETH will continue to decline.

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/7617441

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main argument of Culper Research's report on Ethereum?

ACulper Research argues that Ethereum's tokenomics have been severely damaged by the Fusaka upgrade, which the increased block space led to a 90% drop in gas fees, but real organic demand did not keep up. They claim that the apparent surge in active addresses and transactions is largely due to address poisoning attacks, not genuine adoption, and that this has broken Ethereum's economic model.

QHow does Culper Research explain the increase in Ethereum's active addresses and transaction volume post-Fusaka?

ACulper Research attributes the increase in active addresses and transaction volume to address poisoning (wallet dusting) attacks, which account for 95% of new wallet growth and over 50% of the transaction volume increase. They argue that these attacks exploit the cheap block space created by Fusaka, creating artificial activity rather than reflecting real utility or adoption.

QWhat evidence does Culper Research provide to support their claim that Vitalik Buterin is selling ETH?

ACulper Research states that Vitalik Buterin announced on January 30 that he would sell 16,384 ETH to fund the Ethereum Foundation during a 'tightening period,' and has since sold over 19,300 ETH. They interpret this as evidence that he is aware of the broken tokenomics and is divesting accordingly.

QHow did the Fusaka upgrade affect gas fees and validator incentives according to the report?

AThe Fusaka upgrade increased the gas limit from 45 million to 60 million, intended to scale Ethereum L1. However, gas fees dropped by approximately 90%, far more than the estimated 10-30% decline. This reduction in fees decreased validator tips by 40-50%, undermining validator rewards and potentially reducing staking demand and high-value activity.

QWhat competitive threats to Ethereum does Culper Research highlight in their report?

ACulper Research highlights that Ethereum is losing market share to Solana and its own L2 solutions. They note that Solana developer growth was 29% in 2025 compared to Ethereum's 6%, that Visa and Citigroup are building DeFi applications on Solana, and that Solana DEX trading volume is now more than double that of Ethereum.

Letture associate

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.

marsbit9 min fa

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit9 min fa

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

A zero-knowledge proof tool can help modern Bitcoin wallets migrate assets before quantum attacks in milliseconds. However, approximately 1.1 million bitcoins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto before 2012 are fundamentally unprotected by such solutions, as they reside in older P2PK addresses lacking the hierarchical structure required for this cryptographic rescue. This exposes a critical divide: post-2012 HD wallets can potentially "upgrade" signatures using tools like Project Eleven's, while early coins are cryptographically isolated. The community faces a political, not technical, dilemma with four contentious options: 1) Let quantum attackers seize the coins, risking market instability; 2) Hard fork to freeze vulnerable addresses, seen as violating property rights; 3) Implement extreme spending limits to slow any attack; 4) Redistribute "orphaned" coins, breaking immutability. Each solution threatens a core Bitcoin tenet. The market is already pricing in this governance risk, as evidenced by institutional divestment citing uncertainty. The true crisis isn't the arrival of quantum computing, but the community's inability to reconcile its foundational principles with an existential technological shift.

marsbit17 min fa

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

marsbit17 min fa

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Matt Hougan, Bitwise's CIO, identifies the fusion of traditional finance and on-chain finance as the core driver for the next crypto bull market. He expects this cycle, propelled by real-world utility and global finance adoption, to be the largest yet, centered on stablecoins, asset tokenization, 24/7 trading, instant settlement, and institutional DeFi growth. The article outlines two primary investment approaches tied to this trend. The first focuses on native crypto applications with strong revenues and sustainable tokenomics, exemplified by Hyperliquid (HYPE). Its Layer-1 chain is gaining significant trading volume from traditional assets like oil and equities. Its model of using 99% of revenues for token buybacks is a key strength. The second approach targets established traditional firms building at scale on crypto rails, like Robinhood. The launch of its Robinhood Chain, enabling global trading of tokenized stocks and DeFi activities, represents a major move towards this fusion. The author also notes other serious contenders like Coinbase, Figure, BlackRock, and JPMorgan. Ultimately, the thesis is that the most profound success will come when blockchain technology seamlessly integrates into finance, becoming invisible to end-users. Investors are advised to position ahead of this convergence.

Foresight News21 min fa

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Foresight News21 min fa

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.

marsbit29 min fa

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

marsbit29 min fa

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.

marsbit37 min fa

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

marsbit37 min fa

Trading

Spot