In the past roughly four days, multiple wallets tagged on the blockchain as being associated with early Bitcoin supporter Erik Voorhees have suddenly accelerated their activity during the market pullback phase. According to monitoring by Lookonchain, this batch of suspected associated wallets collectively purchased approximately 48,647 ETH, with an investment of about 97 million dollars, at an average purchase price of around 1,994 dollars, uncovering a typical counter-trend accumulation path. Notably, after completing this round of purchases, these addresses still retain about 78.68 million dollars worth of dollar-pegged assets on-chain, indicating they did not "all-in" their entire available funds, leaving ample flexibility for further accumulation or flexible adjustments. Almost synchronously with this clue of "smart money buying Ethereum," Greeks.Live and its macro researcher Adam pointed out that the current options structure for BTC and ETH has fallen into a profoundly negative gamma zone. In this state, market makers need to passively sell when prices drop and passively buy when prices rise, maintaining an overall neutral direction through pro-cyclical hedging. Negative gamma means this hedging behavior amplifies the volatility between spot and derivatives, with BTC marked in the negative gamma zone between approximately 58,000 and 72,000 dollars, almost seeing no obvious positive gamma buffer below the current price, making it easier to experience rapidly amplified fluctuations during downturns. Thus, a tense scenario has formed over these days: on one side, suspected Erik Voorhees affiliated wallets are accumulating sizable amounts of ETH on-chain, while on the other side, BTC and ETH are both in the negative gamma zone, with structural volatility risks rising. The counter-trend layout of smart money and the passive amplification of options market-making coincide in the same time window, making this potential counter-strike both an opportunity and one that inevitably comes with non-negligible risks.
Buying 48,000 ETH in Four Days: Suspected Whale Activity
According to Lookonchain's monitoring, in the past approximately four days, several wallets marked on-chain as suspected to be associated with Erik Voorhees have gradually purchased about 48,647 ETH during the pullback, with a total investment of about 97 million dollars, calculating an average purchase price roughly around 1,994 dollars. This is not a one-off isolated trade, but rather several addresses consistently accumulating during the same time window, with amounts and quantities approaching a mid-sized institutional level of positions. More critically, the ownership of these addresses is inferred solely based on blockchain tags and past interaction records, and has not been publicly confirmed by Erik Voorhees himself. Therefore, all actions at present can only be cautiously described as “suspected associated wallets buying the dip,” rather than being directly equated with a personal public bet.
After completing this round of approximately 48,000 ETH purchase, the on-chain data still shows that these addresses retain around 78.68 million dollars worth of dollar-pegged tokens, without putting all available funds at risk. This structure of “first place a big bet, while still leaving ammunition” allows for continued accumulation, staggered cost adjustments, or even last-minute strategy changes. As the founder of ShapeShift and an early Bitcoin supporter, Erik Voorhees's associated addresses have long been seen by the community as representatives of "early OG funds," and every significant on-chain operation often gets interpreted as a signal of some directional judgment. However, without established ownership, this round of suspected whale activity appears more like a variable that needs to be included in the observation framework, rather than a definite answer that can be simply replicated.
Market Makers Passively Chasing Gains and Losses: The Invisible Leverage of Negative Gamma
If the accumulation by suspected Voorhees associated wallets is a narrative of active betting on-chain, then the negative gamma in the options market represents a more concealed yet equally critical "structural plot line." In a negative gamma state, market makers hold a large number of options exposures. To ensure that the overall position does not lean towards a single direction, they can only passively adjust positions based on the underlying price: when prices fall, they must sell the spot or contracts to hedge risks; when prices rise, they must buy to prevent their exposure from continuing to expand. The result is that what might originally just be normal fluctuations become exacerbated by this "forced chasing gains and cutting losses" hedging action, amplifying the volatility between spot and derivatives.
Adam, a macro researcher at Greeks.Live, highlighted this structural risk point with his latest views: the current options positions for BTC and ETH are in a deep negative gamma zone, with BTC's negative gamma region falling between about 58,000 and 72,000 dollars, and below the current price, there’s almost no obvious positive gamma buffer zone. This suggests that if prices fall, the “dampening” from the options structure will be weak, and market makers' passive selling will more easily push the declines faster; similarly, passive buying when prices rise can also rapidly heighten rebounds. In such an environment, negative gamma is not just a one-sided "warning of a crash," but rather a market state that tightens all fluctuations; if either side moves too quickly, it could trigger chain liquidations on perpetual contracts, becoming a core variable influencing short-term market rhythms.
Spot Buying Against Options Hedging: Who is Dominating the Rhythm?
On one side, suspected Erik Voorhees associated wallets are incrementally purchasing about 48,647 ETH during the pullback phase, interpreted by the community as “buying the dip;” on the other side, Greeks.Live provides the reality of the options structure: BTC and ETH are simultaneously in a deep negative gamma zone. Under such a condition, the faster the price drops, the more aggressively market makers are forced to passively sell; the faster the price rises, the more forcefully they are compelled to buy. Adam also reminds that in a negative gamma environment, directional spot market trends often trigger large-scale liquidations of perpetual contracts, magnifying what would have been linear price movements into coarser fluctuations.
Within this framework, substantial spot buying is not merely a one-way "pull-up switch." If the suspected whale's purchase triggers a move upward in the market, the passive buying by market makers under negative gamma could push up volatility, transforming short-term upward moves into more intense pulls; however, once a retraction occurs halfway, high leverage positions on the perpetual contracts may be subject to concentrated liquidation, forcing market makers to increase selling during the downturn, and conversely amplifying the pullback, posing a secondary blow to early following bulls. Thus, the on-chain "buying the dip" seen does not automatically translate into a safe reversal signal; its ability to change the rhythm ultimately depends on the distribution of options positions within the price range, the strength of market makers' hedging power, and whether these structures support the same side as the suspected whale when volatility is amplified.
The Boundaries of Smart Money Signals: Suspected Addresses and Emotional Narratives
Beside the high volatility structure of negative gamma, the market easily packages every large on-chain purchase into a “smart money buying the dip.” However, regarding this batch of addresses, current public materials only infer their association with Erik Voorhees based on blockchain tagging and historical interactions, and there has yet to be a public confirmation from him regarding the ownership of addresses or specific operations. Therefore, a more prudent phrasing would only be “suspected associated wallets incrementally buying ETH,” rather than a direct assumption that a certain OG big shot is personally going all in with a huge bet.
In roughly the past four days, these suspected associated wallets have collectively bought about 48,647 ETH, invested about 97 million dollars, with an average price of about 1,994 dollars (according to Lookonchain monitoring). This information is sufficient to indicate “someone is buying up here with real money,” but it is not enough to support a more detailed story: we do not see specific mindsets and position adjustments for every transaction before and after, nor can we deduce clear timelines, pullback tolerance, and overall risk exposure from public data. In an unclear market environment, with the options structure at deep negative gamma, there arises a natural need for narratives like “the OG is stepping in” or “smart money is bullish” to stabilize emotions. This selective storytelling approach, which chooses a single sample while ignoring other silent addresses, inherently comes with strong selection bias and confirmation bias. A genuinely reasonable attitude is to acknowledge that the buying by these suspected associated addresses in the current range has reference value but, without more on-chain and personal disclosures regarding motives, holding patterns, and risk tolerance, it should only be regarded as a signal worthy of tracking rather than a simple replicable trading basis.
Opportunities and Risks Coexist: What to Watch for with ETH Next
Integrating the on-chain and options threads, what we currently see is a high volatility market game between bulls and bears: on one side, suspected wallets associated with Erik Voorhees have bought roughly 48,647 ETH amounting to about 97 million dollars, at an average price of about 1,994 dollars, and as of November 14, still retain about 78.68 million dollars worth of assets (according to Lookonchain monitoring); on the other side, BTC and ETH classified by Greeks.Live as deep negative gamma assets, with market makers forced to buy or sell in line with trends, potentially amplifying any directional volatility into more intense price ranges while compounding liquidation risks. Under this structure, the key variables to watch moving forward will not be whether "one particular buy the dip is successful," but rather whether this batch of suspected associated addresses continues to accumulate or reverse position at the same price zone, and how well their operational rhythm aligns with ETH volatility on the timeline; whether the negative gamma zone will alleviate or shift with the adjustment of options positions and the proximity of expiration, and whether changes in the gamma curve will reduce the “amplification factor” of spot volatility; whether the liquidation scale on the perpetual contracts will experience concentrated outbreaks in a short time, unintendedly validating the pressure of the options structure. For readers, the truly necessary habit to establish is to view large on-chain purchases as signals that require continuous tracking, while also considering the structural risks of options and contracts, instead of making one-dimensional judgments about their positions based solely on the “buying the dip narrative.”
Join our community, let’s discuss and become stronger together!
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
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。
