Analyst uncovers potential signs of insider trading during Infinex's public fundraising

According to an analysis published in early January 2025 by The Poly Nerd, a recognized figure in blockchain research circles, three wallets have been identified as suspected of insider trading during Infinex’s public fundraising event. The discovery has garnered significant attention in the crypto community, raising questions about transparency and the security of token distribution processes.

Initial Sale Slowed by Strict KYC Requirements and User Limits

The initial phase of Infinex’s public fundraising proceeded slowly, mainly due to rigorous identity verification procedures and a maximum investment limit of $2,500 per user. These restrictions posed substantial barriers to mass participation. Market analysts and active users on Polymarket, the prediction betting platform, had made conservative forecasts, estimating that total funds raised would be between $2 million and $3 million.

Sudden Shift in Betting Volumes on Polymarket

However, the scenario changed dramatically in subsequent events. The likelihood of reaching higher financial milestones increased sharply: the $5 million threshold went from an initial probability of about 20% to over 70% in a short period. At the same time, a significant concentration of orders focused on specific targets emerged: $3 million, $5 million, and even $10 million, indicating a clear change in trading behavior compared to initial predictions.

Three Suspicious Wallets with Coordinated Betting Strategies

The most notable aspect of the discovery concerns three particular wallets exhibiting unusual characteristics. These accounts were opened just one day before the surge in betting volumes. Additionally, their distribution of bets on the $5 million pool showed surprisingly similar proportions across the three wallets. All three employed the same tactic: reducing margins on smaller targets to concentrate capital and optimize returns on higher milestones. This coordinated strategy raises suspicion of possible insider trading, suggesting these accounts may have had privileged information about the actual expected fundraising volume.

The implications of these suspicions have intensified the debate on the need for stricter controls and more robust transparency mechanisms during token public fundraising phases, especially to protect retail investors from unfair advantages stemming from asymmetric information access.