In November 2025, Eastern Eight Time, as global market risk aversion rapidly intensified, the price of Ethereum significantly retreated from its highs, bringing the risk games of two types of massive funds on-chain into the spotlight. On one side are the whale accounts known as the "7 Siblings" by the community, which are leveraging positions through lending protocols to buy ETH at lower prices; on the other side is institutional fund Trend Research, which is making large directional bets on the price movement of ETH. Both types of funds not only have substantial volumes but also have entry prices significantly higher than the current market price, leading to continuous expansion of unrealized losses and heightened market attention to their subsequent actions.
From the data, the "7 Siblings" deposited approximately 596,800 ETH in the Spark protocol, which, based on the price at the time of the report, is about $1.765 billion. They then borrowed about $193 million in stablecoins like USDT/USDC for operations, during which they bought approximately 49,287 ETH at an average price of about $3,531, currently facing an unrealized loss of about $27.7 million. In contrast, Trend Research holds about 651,300 ETH, valued at approximately $1.92 billion based on the price at that time, with an average entry price of about $3,180, and its unrealized loss has expanded to about $163 million. Against the backdrop of a continuous decline in ETH prices and rising global interest rates and geopolitical risks, the combination of high leverage and heavy spot positions makes the unrealized losses, defense lines, and potential passive liquidation of these two major entities a key focus of market concern regarding a potential chain reaction of liquidations.
On-chain Signals of Concentrated Leverage Exposure
● Funding Pathways and Structure: On-chain data shows that the "7 Siblings" locked approximately 596,800 ETH as collateral in the Spark lending protocol, valued at about $1.765 billion. Based on this, they borrowed about $193 million in USDT/USDC stablecoins, which were then used to buy ETH, forming a cycle of "spot collateral + stablecoin lending + re-buying ETH." This model can amplify profits during price increases but also magnifies risk exposure during rapid price corrections.
● Bottom Buying Costs and Unrealized Losses: In this round of operations, the "7 Siblings" accumulated approximately 49,287 ETH at an average price of $3,531, resulting in an unrealized loss of about $27.7 million based on the market price at the time of the report. Although the overall leverage multiple has not reached extreme levels, the collateral scale of nearly 600,000 ETH is sufficient to push the liquidation line closer to the current price range if prices continue to decline.
● Quantifying Leverage Levels: With approximately 596,800 ETH as collateral corresponding to a market value of $1.765 billion, combined with a borrowing scale of $193 million, the leverage level is roughly in the "low multiple but extremely large absolute volume" range. This means that while the nominal leverage multiple is not exaggerated, if ETH prices continue to fall sharply, the shrinking collateral value and unchanged borrowing will quickly compress the safety margin, sharply increasing liquidation risk in a short time.
● Impact Pathways on Lending Protocols: If prices continue to decline and the "7 Siblings" fail to continuously supplement collateral or actively reduce leverage, the nearly 600,000 ETH collateral position on Spark will face pressure for partial or total liquidation. For lending protocols, such a large-scale liquidation would quickly flood the market with a considerable amount of ETH, impacting the depth of the spot market and potentially amplifying bearish sentiment through oracle prices, liquidation bots bidding, and discounted sales.
● Amplification of Systemic Risk: Since these on-chain collateral and lending positions are fully transparent, market participants can track collateral rates, borrowing scales, and liquidation price ranges in real-time. As ETH prices approach sensitive ranges, the sentiment and trading behavior surrounding these positions will be rapidly amplified, forming a feedback loop of "anticipated liquidation—early shorting or reduction—price pressure—increased liquidation risk," posing potential impacts on the health of lending protocols and overall market stability.
The Interconnected Logic of Leverage and Protocol Risks
The operations of the "7 Siblings" essentially transform ETH from a regular price asset into a high-leverage collateral asset. During a phase of unilateral price decline, the value of collateral shrinks while the scale of liabilities remains rigid, eroding the safety buffer. When the collateral rate falls below the threshold set by the protocol, the liquidation mechanism will be automatically triggered, converting what was originally a static large position into a dynamic source of selling pressure. For lending protocols like Spark, the risk exposure of a single large collateral position means that deviations in oracle prices, liquidation discount settings, and liquidation bidding behavior could all concentrate and amplify volatility in a short time. If the scale of liquidation becomes too large, the liquidity pool within the protocol may experience short-term imbalances, further raising market risk pricing for similar lending models and spreading through confidence to other DeFi protocols. In other words, high-leverage bottom buying is not just about the profits and losses of a single whale but is closely tied to the robustness of the entire on-chain credit system.
Institutional Profile of Directional Heavy Positions
● Position Size and Cost: Unlike the leveraged play of the "7 Siblings," Trend Research's exposure to ETH more typically reflects large directional spot bets. The report shows that Trend Research currently holds about 651,300 ETH, valued at approximately $1.92 billion based on the price at that time, with an average entry price of about $3,180, corresponding to an unrealized loss of about $163 million. In an environment where prices have fallen significantly below the entry cost, this unrealized loss directly reflects the pressure and resilience of the institution's long-term bet on ETH.
● Differences in Leverage Structure: Compared to the "7 Siblings," which leveraged through Spark, Trend Research's holding of approximately 650,000 ETH does not show a similar large-scale on-chain lending structure in public information, reflecting more of a "heavy spot, low visible leverage" configuration path. This means that its risk is more concentrated on price direction rather than directly from the lending liquidation line. However, in a context of amplified volatility, such a large unrealized loss will also compel it to consider reducing positions or hedging in critical ranges due to risk management and funding cost requirements.
● Institutional Bets and Market Sensitivity: When risk aversion rises and volatility increases, market attention to large institutional positions often heightens. The 651,300 ETH held by Trend Research not only exceeds the 49,287 ETH newly bought by the "7 Siblings" through leverage in absolute terms but also has an entry price closer to the current price center, meaning that every downward price test will be seen as a test of its risk tolerance. The market's pricing of ETH's downside risk will actively incorporate the potential passive adjustments of such institutional positions.
● Unrealized Losses and Behavioral Constraints: The unrealized loss of about $163 million highlights Trend Research's firm bet on ETH direction; on the other hand, it also means that under internal risk control, client funding, and compliance scrutiny, it must continuously assess whether to hedge through derivatives, reduce positions, or structurally adjust holdings. These potential actions, whether or not they actually materialize, will be interpreted and amplified by the market, turning into an additional source of uncertainty for ETH prices.
● The Overlay Effect with Leverage Positions: When large spot bulls like Trend Research and high-leverage collateral positions like the "7 Siblings" are simultaneously in an unrealized loss state, the market's sensitivity to every downward movement in ETH prices will be amplified. This is because the price not only relates to whether a single entity will face liquidation or stop-loss but is also seen as a joint stress test on institutional confidence and the on-chain credit system.
The Interweaving of Directional Funds and Volatility Expectations
The composition of Trend Research's positions and the leverage structure of the "7 Siblings" together outline another important clue about the current funding landscape for ETH: high leverage and heavy spot positions are both bearing the pressure of downward volatility but are transmitting risks to the market through different pathways. Institutional bets are more constrained by unrealized loss volumes, potential maturity matching pressures, and investor expectation management. When prices breach key psychological and cost ranges, whether to initiate hedging or reduce positions is often continuously interpreted at the news level. This interpretation itself will prompt other holders to react in advance, thereby amplifying volatility expectations and risk premiums before prices reach extreme ranges.
ETH Repriced as a High Beta Macro Asset
● QCP's Asset Attribute Judgment: According to the report citing QCP analysis, Bitcoin has not exhibited traditional "safe-haven asset" characteristics in the current global environment; rather, it resembles a type of high beta macro asset that is highly sensitive to interest rates, geopolitical issues, and cross-asset volatility. As the mainstream asset with the second-largest market capitalization and liquidity after Bitcoin, Ethereum is highly coupled with BTC in narrative and funding structure, and its price volatility often follows macro risks in direction while reflecting higher sensitivity in magnitude.
● Amplifying Effect of Rising Interest Rates: Rising interest rates in Japan are seen as one of the potential triggers for global volatility. An increase in interest rates means a rise in risk-free returns and higher liquidity costs, which directly compresses the valuation space for crypto assets that rely on funding environments and risk appetites. When ETH is repriced by the market as a "high beta macro asset," rising interest rates not only suppress its spot demand but also, by increasing the cost of leveraged financing, force collateralized leverage positions like the "7 Siblings" to face a harsher holding environment.
● Linkage of Geopolitical and Trade Tensions: The intensifying global trade tensions suppress risk appetite, leading funds to flow more into traditional safe-haven assets like cash and government bonds rather than expanding risk exposure in high-volatility assets. In this environment, ETH and assets like BTC are no longer viewed as "safe-haven alternatives" but are classified as high-risk positions that need to be actively reduced. The macro-level migration of risk aversion, combined with the expansion of unrealized losses in large on-chain leveraged positions and institutional heavy holdings, will create a compounding effect during price declines.
● Dual Acceleration of Unrealized Losses and Passive Liquidation: As macro headwinds and risk aversion push ETH prices to continue declining, leveraged positions like the "7 Siblings" will first face liquidation risks due to the shrinking value of collateral; at the same time, institutions like Trend Research holding billions of dollars worth of ETH may evaluate whether to moderately reduce positions or hedge exposures through derivatives for risk control and liquidity management considerations. This dual acceleration of "on-chain liquidation pressure + institutional risk management actions" will create a series of passive selling pressures and expected selling pressures during price declines.
● Reshaping of Risk Sentiment and Price Elasticity: Under the intertwining of the aforementioned macro and on-chain factors, the elasticity of ETH prices to external shocks has been significantly weakened. On one hand, any negative news related to interest rates, geopolitical issues, or trade could be quickly reflected in the market's repricing of ETH demand and financing conditions; on the other hand, the on-chain monitoring of large positions like the "7 Siblings" and Trend Research further tightly binds price volatility to individual liquidation lines and unrealized loss scales, causing ETH's market performance to exhibit high beta characteristics far exceeding those of traditional assets.
Testing the Limits of Volume and Liquidity Capacity
● On-chain concentration of over 1.2 million ETH: From an on-chain perspective, the ETH involved in the collateral and accumulation operations of the "7 Siblings," along with the 651,300 ETH directly held by Trend Research, totals over 1.2 million ETH. In any mainstream asset market, a directional exposure exceeding one million units means that adjustments in positions by a single or a few entities can significantly impact liquidity, depth, and order book structure in the short term.
● Potential impact on liquidity and depth: Under normal volatility conditions, such a volume of ETH is mostly locked or held long-term, having limited impact on daily trading. However, should passive liquidations, concentrated position reductions, or large-scale hedging demands occur, even a small percentage of these positions exiting could amplify substantial selling pressure on the order book. When active buying is insufficient to absorb this, the market depth can be quickly consumed, leading to increased slippage and a risk of a rapid "flash crash" in a short time.
● On-chain "radar effect" amplifying sentiment: The current market tracking of whales and institutional addresses has become highly normalized. Any on-chain behavior regarding the migration, collateral changes, or borrowing adjustments of the "7 Siblings" or Trend Research will be instantly disseminated across social media and data platforms. Investors are no longer passively accepting prices; instead, they react in advance to these "radar signals," often creating a feedback loop where "any slight movement from whale addresses prompts the entire market to follow suit," generating volatility and panic before any substantial selling occurs.
● Reprocessing of large unrealized loss information: In an environment dominated by risk aversion, specific figures like "the '7 Siblings' unrealized loss of $27.7 million" and "Trend Research's unrealized loss of $163 million" are easily reiterated, amplified, and even emotionally interpreted by market participants and media. Unrealized losses do not necessarily lead to position adjustments, but through repeated mention, comparison, and dramatization, they can be reprocessed into narrative symbols of "potential selling pressure" and "systemic risk," dragging down not only the valuation of ETH itself but also spilling over into a broader range of crypto assets.
● Transmission chain of systemic concerns: When the combined unrealized losses and positions of the two major entities exceed 1.2 million ETH, and this is layered onto the narrative of macro headwinds and a shift towards market risk aversion, the market tends to frame the current cycle in terms of "on-chain credit contraction" and "institutional confidence being tested." Once this narrative dominates, other assets highly correlated with ETH—including DeFi tokens, L2 projects, and even a broader range of altcoins—may encounter passive discounts in terms of funding and sentiment, with systemic concerns spreading from point to area.
The Next Step in Leveraged Betting: Key Watershed of Price and Behavior
Surrounding the ETH positions of the "7 Siblings" and Trend Research, a clear risk coordinate has formed: the former has leveraged approximately 596,800 ETH on Spark and borrowed $193 million to buy near 50,000 ETH at an average price of about $3,531, facing an unrealized loss of about $27.7 million; the latter holds about 651,300 ETH at an average price of about $3,180, valued at approximately $1.92 billion, with an unrealized loss of about $163 million. These two sets of numbers not only reflect the extent of damage to large funds in this round of decline but also, invisibly, constitute an "invisible support and pressure zone" for short-term ETH price behavior, as the market will continuously use changes in price and unrealized losses to speculate on their next funding actions.
Looking ahead, there are several key observation points worth tracking. First, what price range will approach the "7 Siblings'" safety margin on Spark, significantly amplifying liquidation expectations and actual passive position reductions? Second, as prices further deviate from Trend Research's average entry price, will their internal risk control and funding parties drive larger-scale hedging or phased position reductions? Third, under the premise that interest rates and geopolitical risks have not eased, will any marginal changes at the macro level—whether policy shifts or risk event mitigations—trigger these two types of funds to replenish positions, increase leverage, or simply choose to cut losses and exit?
For ordinary investors, closely monitoring the movements of large on-chain positions can indeed help understand potential selling pressure and sentiment turning points, but it is also essential to be wary of being led by these "whale radars." In practice, on one hand, the changes in large addresses like the "7 Siblings" and Trend Research can be viewed as reference indicators for assessing overall risk appetite and liquidity environment; on the other hand, it is more critical to establish one's own risk budget and cycle awareness, avoiding excessive focus on a single address, a single liquidation line, or a single unrealized loss figure, which could lead to frequent chasing of highs and lows under the pressure of short-term volatility and amplified sentiment. What truly helps navigate through volatility is maintaining independent position management and rhythm control based on an understanding of the logic of large capital games, rather than completely surrendering one's trading plan to the on-chain "whale script."
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
