A long-dormant Ethereum wallet identified as 0xb5a…168d6 has reactivated and moved a significant portion of its holdings to the Gemini exchange, marking one of the larger single-wallet outflows in recent on-chain activity. On-chain trackers and reporting described an 85,000 ETH transfer executed in just over a day, a movement that market coverage valued at roughly $250 million. The reactivation drew attention because the address had been inactive for about nine years before the recent transfers, making the event notable for both its size and the gap in on-chain activity.
Blockchain sleuths trace the wallet’s origin to a 2017 accumulation of 135,000 ETH, reportedly acquired via the Bitfinex exchange at an average price near $90 per ETH, which places the initial outlay at about $12.17 million. Coverage from on-chain analytics and reporters cited a realized profit estimate of roughly $381 million for the address, a roughly 32× return by dollar value over the nine-year holding period. That profit and return multiple were presented as metrics by observers tracking the wallet’s lifecycle from accumulation through the recent withdrawals.
Different analytics providers reported slightly different breakdowns of the recent transfers. Arkham Intelligence was cited for identifying discrete tranches, including a 50,000 ETH movement on a Monday and a separate 25,000 ETH transfer earlier in the week, and the platform was also noted for reporting a 60,283 ETH parcel to Gemini valued at about $175.23 million. Other outlets characterized the flows as a consolidated 85,000 ETH outflow to Gemini concentrated in just over a day. These figures come from on-chain reporting and commentary tracking the same wallet activity but using different aggregation windows and valuation snapshots; for coverage of the consolidated transfer and the broader narrative see FX Leaders and for a separate on-chain summary see CryptoRank.
Market context around the transfers showed short-term price sensitivity. Reporting recorded a dip in Ether’s intraday price below $2,800 before a rebound to about $2,934 at press time, moves that corresponded with the timing of the whale activity. Analysts attributed part of the recent price pressure to ETF-related selling, which had cooled momentum in recent sessions and kept ETH under the $3,000 threshold during the reporting period. Daily active Ethereum addresses were also noted as approaching roughly 1.3 million around the same time, a network activity metric referenced alongside the on-chain transfer data.
The coverage contrasted the dormant-then-active ETH wallet with other long-inactive crypto addresses becoming active, mentioning a separate case in which a Bitcoin wallet moved 909 BTC after more than a decade of dormancy. That comparative example was presented to show a broader pattern of long-term holders occasionally re-entering tradable markets, though the available sources do not provide further detail about motives or subsequent disposition beyond the recorded movements.
Institutional staking activity provided a contemporaneous backdrop to the whale transfers. Reporting highlighted BitMine, associated with Tom Lee, as holding and staking a substantial ETH position: sources cited a staked balance of about 2,218,771 ETH, a figure described as representing over half of BitMine’s total ETH holdings and valued in coverage at roughly $6.52 billion. Incremental staking activity was also noted, with a recent report describing 209,504 ETH having been staked from BitMine on the reporting day; for the on-chain staking summary see Coinspeaker.
Commentary from market strategists was included alongside the on-chain and staking metrics. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Mike McGlone was quoted warning that Ethereum had been drifting toward the lower end of a $2,000–$4,000 trading range since 2023 and that he saw “greater risks of it staying below $2,000 than above $4,000, especially when stock market volatility rebounds.” That view was presented as part of the broader set of market perspectives referenced in coverage rather than as an explanatory cause for the specific wallet movements.
Taken together, the reporting framed the 0xb5a…168d6 transfers as a sizeable reallocation from a long-term holder that coincided with intraday price volatility and broader staking and institutional flows. The on-chain data furnished transaction-level detail while market commentary and staking figures supplied context about liquidity and institutional positioning. The available sources do not provide confirmed information on the wallet owner’s identity, the ultimate destination of the transferred funds beyond Gemini, or the owner’s motivations for moving the ETH.
