A whale that purchased 38,800 ETH during the 2015 ICO sold 1
An on-chain analyst Ai姨's monitoring shows that an address that participated in the 2015 ICO and subscribed 38,800 ETH at a cost of $0.31 sold 16,700 ETH in a single transaction on Nov 13, worth more than $32.3 million. Of this, the 8,630.71 ETH bought on Sept 21 at $2,742.41 lost $6.971 million, but overall it remains a profit drawdown.
Event Timeline
- [11-13 06:53] An ancient whale that subscribed 38,800 ETH in the 2015 ICO sold 16,700 ETH, worth more than $32.3 million (Odaily 星球日报)
- [11-13 06:53] An Ethereum ancient whale sold 16,700 ETH in a single transaction, worth more than $32.3 million (PANews)
Background and Impact
At 06:53 on Nov 13, 2026, Odaily 星球日报 and PANews reported successively that, according to monitoring by on-chain analyst Ai姨, an ancient whale address (0xBE4…a0c5F) that participated in the Ethereum ICO in 2015 and subscribed 38,800 ETH made a single large sale, selling 16,700 ETH worth more than $32.3 million. The two sources are consistent in their statements on the sale quantity, amount, address identifier, and monitoring source, and their publication times are exactly the same.
From the traceable timeline, the address's holdings are divided into two stages. First, during the 2015 Ethereum ICO stage, the address subscribed 38,800 ETH at a cost of $0.31 per ETH; second, on Sept 21, 2026, the address bought 8,630.71 ETH at an average price of $2,742.41. In this sale, this portion of tokens bought at September highs was sold at $1,934.63, which, per the source's calculation, results in a loss of $6.971 million. That is, the same sale simultaneously includes extremely low-cost tokens from more than a decade ago and added-position tokens from two months ago, and their profit and loss directions are opposite.
In terms of impact interpretation, the two sources give the same judgment: because the ICO cost was as low as $0.31, even though this sale price of $1,934.63 is far below the September average purchase price, the address overall still represents a profit drawdown rather than a principal loss. It should be noted that the above data all come from the same monitoring conclusion by on-chain analyst Ai姨; the reports by the two media outlets did not provide their own independent on-chain verification results; the material also does not disclose the address's remaining holdings and subsequent movements after this sale, so it cannot be determined whether this is a full-exit action. If readers want to verify quotes and address transaction history themselves, they would usually enter platforms through entry points such as Bitget registration APP download, Binance registration APP download, 芝麻Gate.io registration APP download, OKX registration APP download, and Huobi HTX registration APP download to view ETH quotes, but platform quotes and this on-chain monitoring data are from different sources and should not be mixed.
From the perspective of market implications, the reason transfers from such ancient addresses are amplified in interpretation is that their token cost is extremely low, and any size of sale is easily seen as a marginal change in long-term holder behavior. However, based solely on a single sale of 16,700 ETH, the material does not provide further estimates of Ethereum price, liquidity, or holder structure, and is not sufficient to support a directional conclusion. There is only one confirmable fact: an address that entered in 2015 and added to its position again in Sept 2026 sold most of the position involved in this transaction on Nov 13 at a price below its added-position cost.
FAQ
### Was this sale a profit or a loss for the address?
It depends on the calculation basis. The 8,630.71 ETH bought on Sept 21 at an average price of $2,742.41 was sold this time at $1,934.63, resulting in a loss of $6.971 million on this portion; but its ICO cost was only $0.31 per ETH, so the source judges that the overall result is still a profit drawdown.
### Do the two media reports differ?
There is no substantive difference. Odaily 星球日报 and PANews are consistent on the sale quantity, amount, average purchase and sale prices, loss amount, and analyst source, with the same publication time of 06:53 on Nov 13, 2026, and both cite on-chain analyst Ai姨's monitoring.
### What points can be watched next?
The material does not disclose the remaining holdings of address 0xBE4…a0c5F after this sale, so next, one can watch the address's on-chain transfer records and whether on-chain analyst Ai姨 releases updates; currently there is no public information about a full exit or continued reduction.