Coinbase recorded an unusual series of Shiba Inu (SHIB) transfers that surprised the market and raised questions about potential whale activity. Between October 22 and 23, 1,265,207,242,406 SHIB, worth approximately $12.7 million, were moved in several large blocks instead of a single massive transaction. The tokens passed through empty addresses and returned to the exchange without any change in ownership, suggesting an internal restructuring process rather than activity by external investors.
Internal Restructuring at Coinbase
The blocks were distributed across five movements: 551.6 billion, 414.8 billion, 240.5 billion, 238.6 billion, and 220.4 billion SHIB. In each transfer, Coinbase appeared as the counterparty on both the outgoing and incoming sides, maintaining full control over the flow of assets. The addresses used to receive the SHIB had no prior transaction history and were emptied after a single use. The likely explanation is that these were temporary routing addresses used internally by the exchange.
Market Impact Was Minimal
From a market perspective, the movements did not affect SHIB’s supply or demand. The memecoin was trading at $0.0000101 after falling to $0.0000090 earlier in October. Although the absolute volume was significant, its impact on SHIB’s market capitalization was minimal. However, these transfers distorted liquidity visibility within Coinbase and created the false impression of massive outflows, misleading on-chain analysts about the actual distribution of tokens.
The episode highlighted how memecoin liquidity is concentrated within centralized exchanges and how internal balance management can mimic whale activity when viewed without context. It underscored the complexity of tracking real liquidity on platforms handling high volumes. Analysts note that internal restructuring within exchanges can be misinterpreted as market manipulation if operational details and temporary token control transfers are not considered.
The SHIB movements at Coinbase do not reflect changes in ownership or market trends but represent the exchange’s internal logistics for managing large volumes. The operation illustrates how misinterpretations about holder activity and token price stability can arise from routine internal processes.