From February 2 to February 26, 2026, Eastern Eight Time, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin continued to execute a structured ETH sale plan through his public address, planning to sell a total of 16,384 ETH. On-chain tracking shows that as of February 26, he had completed sales of approximately 15,479 ETH, accounting for 94% of the total plan, with various data sources reporting a total cash-out of about 30.94 million USD, translating to an average price of about 1,999 USD/ETH. During these 24 days, a significant sell-off that could have quietly concluded was brought to the spotlight in real-time by tools such as Onchain Lens, also drawing the market's attention to a sensitive question: when a key figure of a project significantly liquidates their holdings at a certain price level, does this signal the onset of a next round of “crash,” or indicate that bearish sentiment has already been released ahead of time, suggesting that selling pressure is nearing its end?
The Starting Point of Perspective Disputes
● Timeline and Rhythm: According to the research report, Vitalik's sale officially started on February 2, and occurred in batches over 24 days. Public information mentions that in the first 4 days, about 4,326 ETH were sold (this periodic data is still subject to verification), and by February 25, on-chain statistics showed that total sales had reached 11,284 ETH (also a point for verification), close to two-thirds of the total plan. Around the close of trading on February 26, Onchain Lens tracked that the overall completion rate had risen to 94%, displaying a structured characteristic of “initial probing + mid-stage acceleration + closing,” rather than an impulsive one-time clearance.
● On-chain Confirmation Mechanism: Several key data points from this sale derive from monitoring and aggregating analysis of Vitalik's known address 0xfeb0...203b2. Tools like Onchain Lens track the outflow paths of that address in real-time, along with interactions with trading platforms or intermediate addresses, aggregating to conclude a total planned amount of 16,384 ETH, with 15,479 ETH sold, and 905 ETH remaining unsold, expected to be completed within the next few hours. It is important to emphasize that there is currently no public confirmation regarding the precise execution timing and pricing for this final portion, and related statements can only remain at the level of “expected to be completed.”
● Volume and Market Weight: From an absolute amount perspective, a large sale of 30.94 million USD is enough to become a narrative focal point, but relative to the daily trading volume of ETH on mainstream exchanges and overall market capitalization, this scale remains within a range that can be absorbed and digested by the market. In a liquidity-rich phase, such structured sell-offs resemble an amplified “psychological threshold,” where the real impact depends on the concurrent hedge buying, derivatives positions, and macro sentiment, rather than the quantity alone.
Imaginations and Realities of “Selling at High Prices”
● Emotional Labels of High-Stage Sentiment: One of the most eye-catching statements surrounding this sale is that Vitalik “basically sold at a high stage.” This viewpoint is primarily based on the average transaction price of 1,999 USD/ETH, which partially aligns with recent local price highs in some observers' subjective impressions. However, there is currently a lack of rigorous interval comparisons and statistical support; such statements should be viewed as emotional commentary, unverified viewpoints, rather than conclusions that have been disproven or validated by data, making it overly hasty to reinforce the “masterful sell-top” narrative.
● Intuitive Bias of “Confidence Voting”: In both traditional and crypto markets, significant liquidations by founders or key executives are often intuitively interpreted as “casting a vote of no confidence” regarding future prospects. When this logic is simply applied to Vitalik, it tends to glide into emotional accusations of “he is bearish on Ethereum.” However, the reality is more complex: personal asset allocation, charitable donations, project funding, risk hedging, and other factors could all be reasonable and diverse driving forces behind the selling behavior; a one-dimensional mapping of “selling = bearish” is obviously limited and overlooks the boundaries between individuals and protocols in decentralized networks.
● Differences Between Structured Plans and Emotional Crashes: From the time span (24 days in batches), execution ratio (94% completion), and on-chain paths, this appears more like a planned, structured reduction arrangement, rather than a panic “crash” emerging from extreme volatility. However, at present, there are no public documents or detailed explanations from Vitalik to extrapolate whether he aimed to “pump,” “dump,” or reach a specific price target, all of which entails conjecture unsupported by facts. In the absence of confirmed motives, maintaining a neutral stance of “behavior known, purpose unknown” would be a more responsible interpretive approach.
The New Normal of Large Holder Actions Under On-chain Spotlight
● Real-time Tracking Turns Transactions into “Live Broadcast”: The reason this event rapidly gained attention largely stems from the popularity of tracking tools like Onchain Lens. They automatically label well-known addresses including Vitalik’s, and any significant transfers or transactional on-chain behaviors are aggregated into pushes or dashboards, reaching public visibility at almost “second-level” speed. Previously, insights into large holders’ adjustments required quarterly reports or insider information; now, such activities on-chain have been transformed into an open, traceable “live broadcast”.
● Transparency Amplifies Panic and Digestion: The high transparency of on-chain data makes it easy for any significant outflow to be perceived as a potential bearish signal, while social media further accelerates the spread of emotion; on the other hand, the rhythm and scale of selling pressure can also be more easily priced in by the market ahead of time. In this incident, critical information, such as planned totals, completion ratios, and remaining chips, was quickly disclosed, providing certain participants with a psychological anchor of an “already known ceiling,” transforming the sell-off from a black-box behavior into a measurable risk, thus helping the market complete digestion and redistribution in a shorter time.
● Long-term Constraints on Large Holder Actions and Project Image: In the new normal of “founders’ every move exposed on-chain,” large holders, especially symbolic figures of projects, increasingly find it challenging to execute any large-scale adjustments without being noticed. This transparency imposes higher reputational cost constraints on their personal actions: every sale is not only an asset movement but also viewed as an indirect expression concerning the project's image and community sentiment. In the long run, this may push large holders to prefer advance disclosure, structured execution, or even third-party custody to arrange for reductions, in order to mitigate the trust fluctuations caused by “surprise sell-offs.”
The Blank of Fund Direction and Space for Imagination
● Multiple Speculations on Fund Flow: Surrounding the direction of the approximately 30.94 million USD funds, the market has seen various speculations including “will be used for donations” and “support privacy technology projects.” These statements are mostly based on Vitalik’s past public records in philanthropy and research funding, but to date, there has been no clear on-chain or official channels providing definite guidance, therefore these inferences should be categorized as unverified market speculations and not treated as conclusions about the use of funds from this sale.
● Narrative Amplification Due to Opaque Usage: In the absence of a clear flow of funds, the public often connects this reduction to Ethereum's future technology trajectory, Vitalik's preferences on certain issues, and more. For instance, some linkage it with privacy enhancements, layer-two scaling, or even larger social technology experiments, attempting to read his long-term judgment on the entire ecosystem from a single asset action. This “money indicates stance” deduction space is broad, yet verifiable information is extremely limited, making it easier to lead to over-interpretation under the influence of emotion.
● Cautious Links with Political and Public Issues: The research report noted that a related background is that the Fellowship PAC political action committee account has zero funds (according to FEC documents), and this fact has been mentioned in some discussions alongside this sale. However, in the absence of clear transfer paths and official statements, directly equating the two and inferring that Vitalik is fundraising for a specific political or public issue exceeds the current factual framework. The broader networks of political funding and lobbying are also far from what this article can cover; hasty expansions will only add information noise rather than enhance understanding depth.
Narrative Tension of Whether Bearish Sentiment Has Fully Unfolded or It Is a Prelude to a Downturn
● Emotional Version of “Bullish Post-Dump”: From a bullish perspective, a typical viewpoint is—that with 94% of the chips already sold, the market has already endured and digested the main selling pressure from the founder in advance, with a limited 905 ETH remaining, and once sold, it may actually constitute a short-term bullish signal. This line of argument is highly similar to the traditional narrative of “bearish sentiment has fully unfolded,” but essentially remains a emotional judgment and trading assumption, the effectiveness of which depends on subsequent supply-demand structures and broader macro environments, and cannot be taken as a given price guide.
● How Both Sides “Leverage the Topic”: This reduction event provides an excellent narrative canvas for both the bulls and the bears. Bulls tend to emphasize that this is a redistribution of holdings from symbolic large holders to the market, believing that the risks of concentrated holdings have been reduced, which will benefit Ethereum's decentralization in the medium to long term; bears, on the other hand, seize on the emotional point of “founder sells,” packaging it as a signal of “key figures weakening future expectations,” and along with macro or regulatory uncertainties, construct a more deterrent bearish story. Both narratives selectively amplify segments favorable to themselves, yet are built on the same premise: motivations and complete information are not transparent.
● Risks of Over-Interpretation Due to Lack of Information: Current discussions have already seen figures like “Vitalik still holds 6% of the global ETH” without sufficient verification. The research report clearly indicates that the total remaining holding amount and global proportion lack publicly accurate data, and such ratio calculations fall under the category of verification. In the absence of disclosed motives and complete holding data, filling in the gaps based on imagination not only risks exaggerating the impact of individual behavior on the network but may also mislead ordinary participants into making extreme decisions driven by emotion. The best attitude toward such unverified “precise figures” is to retain caution and prudence, rather than cite and disseminate.
In the Era of Founder Reductions: Ethereum Must Learn to Distinguish from “Personal”
This structured reduction event once again exposed a core tension within the Ethereum ecosystem to the spotlight: on one hand, Vitalik, as a co-founder and representative of the technical vision, has long been viewed as the spiritual symbol of the network; any action concerning his assets tends to be magnified as a metaphor for the protocol's prospects; on the other hand, Ethereum emphasizes a governance design of decentralization and multi-party collaboration, trying to ensure that the network's security and development path do not rely on any individual. On this tension line of “personal symbolism—protocol autonomy,” the balance between market emotion and rationality will inevitably be pulled and calibrated repeatedly by similar events.
From a longer-term perspective, whether for the diversification of personal asset allocation or continuous investment in public welfare and research funding, the structured reduction of founders and early large holders will become normalized. For a mature crypto market, shifting the primary focus from “watching individuals” to examining network fundamentals, protocol upgrade paths, ecosystem application activity, and real usage demand is key to avoiding being swayed by the emotions of single events. Large holders' entries and exits will persist, but whether they can rewrite long-term trends ultimately depends on Ethereum's actual value creation capacity as an infrastructure.
It is foreseeable that as on-chain transparent tools become more widespread, structured pricing around events increase in prediction markets, and more regulatory cases delineate the boundaries of insider and manipulative behaviors, the narrative space of each large holder's reduction in the future will be gradually compressed: information will be clearer, and room for speculation will be reduced. However, during this process, short-term emotional fluctuations, the amplification effects on social media, and even the instinctive reaction of “founder sells = disaster” will continue to frequently occur. How to maintain respect for facts, sensitivity to data, and humility toward uncertainty amidst such high-frequency noise may be the real question Vitalik leaves the market with after his 30.94 million USD ETH sell-off.
Join our community to discuss and strengthen 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。
