Recently, someone has again brought me a screenshot of a “coincidental transfer” and asked whether there’s insider information involved. To be blunt, don’t rush to put the blame on someone. On-chain, it may look like A is sending to B, but often the pattern is: A first sends funds into a router/aggregator → gets rerouted through a few hops in the middle → then the funds are split into multiple new addresses → and only at the end do they land on the exact point you’ve been watching. If you extend the path a little and cross-check the timestamps and the fund flows that appear together in the same block, many “coincidences” can be explained as moving funds around, market-making replenishment, or the deposit/withdrawal gateway channels adjusting positions. With compliance tightening recently, people have become more sensitive to expectations around deposits and withdrawals, so funds are even more inclined to take these detours, which makes it look more, visually, like “someone is secretly working in the background.” My own habit is to first see whether there’s any return flow and where it returns to, then check whether it’s the same batch of gas/nonce techniques. Don’t let me draw conclusions from just one screenshot—that’s too easy to be led by the narrative.