Polygon Rebuts Allegations of Involvement in MATIC Crash

Last Updated:
  • Lookonchain claims that Polygon has been involved in a massive transfer of MATIC to Binance.
  • Polygon executives Sandeep Nailwal and Marc Boiron dismiss the charges, claiming that the wallets do not belong to the company.
  • Lookonchain clarifies that the data was collected from the on-chain analytics tool Nansen.

Sandeep Nailwal, the co-founder of the Polygon Foundation, has denied allegations that wallets linked to the foundation were involved in a recent dump of MATIC on Binance. Nailwal’s denial came in response to a post on X by on-chain analytics platform, Lookonchain, showing that a wallet allegedly connected to Polygon had recently sold $3.35 million worth of MATIC on Binance, creating FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) in the community.

Earlier today, Nailwal took to X (Twitter) to dismiss Lookonchain’s report, asserting that the findings were “incorrect”. He claimed that this is not the first time Lookonchain has been guilty of sharing inaccurate information with its followers. Requesting the platform be vigilant to avoid any further unecessary FUD, Nailwal asked Lookonchain to be “careful about these tweets”.

On September 7, Lookonchain shared a Twitter thread posing an alarming question, “Is Polygon selling MATIC?”. The thread shared that an address identified as “Polygon Foundation 0x8d36” had been involved in a transfer of 6 million MATIC, worth $3.35 million, to the prominent exchange Binance, over the past 48 hours. The thread also pointed out that another address marked as “Polygon Foundation 0xf957” had preiouvsly moved 4.6 million MATIC, worth $2.57 million to Binance, in a single month.

Dismissing Lookonchain’s association between Polygon and the MATIC selloff, Marc Boiron, CEO of Polygon Labs, came forward to clarify that the addresses involved were not connected to Polygon. He tweeted that wallet has been “incorrectly labeled”, adding, “It is not a Polygon Foundation wallet”.

Subsequently, Nailwal also pointed out the faulty findings of the Lookonchain, in an attempt to assure the community. Lookonchain responded by pointing out that the wallet addresses had been labeled by fellow on-chain crypto analytics tool, Nansen.