ENA Repurchase Mystery: The Truth Behind StablecoinX's Growing Holdings
- Core Thesis: Through two rounds of PIPE financing and a capital contribution in kind within one year, StablecoinX holds 20.3% of the total ENA supply. On-chain data suggests that its approximately $538 million public market buyback of ENA may not have been absorbed from the open market but was instead facilitated by inventory pre-positioned at trading venues from Ethena-affiliated wallets.
- Key Elements:
- Through two PIPE financing rounds (in July and September respectively) and a third capital contribution in kind, StablecoinX has accumulated approximately 3.04 billion ENA (representing 20.3% of total supply), with capital flows closely matching filings.
- The two PIPE rounds generated a net total of approximately $525 million in cash for open market ENA repurchases; on-chain data reveals execution clusters totaling around 1.44 billion ENA (approximately $538 million), with the scale consistent with announcements.
- During the execution of the first PIPE round (August-September), of the approximately $180 million in ENA withdrawn from Coinbase Prime, 89% of the inflows originated from Ethena's treasury wallet, indicating the supply may have been pre-positioned rather than directly acquired from the market.
- During the execution of the second PIPE round (November-February), the inventory for the $83 million in ENA withdrawn from Coinbase was likewise injected by Ethena's treasury into Coinbase Prime. After the transactions were completed, Coinbase's balance largely returned to its original state.
- Prior to the Bybit execution phase (November-February), the ENA balance on the platform surged, with the ratio to Binance rising from 1:3 to 1.1:1, implying inventory may have been concentrated in advance rather than accumulated naturally during the execution process.
Original Author: @gmnay_
Original Translation: AididiaoJP, Foresight News
StablecoinX, as Ethena's treasury tool, has grown from holding 0% of the ENA supply to 20.3% in less than a year. Based on the filing documents for two PIPE rounds, the structure can be summarized as:
- Investors contribute cash and physical ENA
- Cash is used to purchase locked ENA from Ethena at a discount
Ethena uses these cash proceeds to buy ENA on the open market ($~570 million, net ~$525 million after fees)
The core issue is not whether ENA was purchased through trading venues, but whether these purchases represent net absorption from the open market, or whether a significant portion of what appears to be open market execution was actually facilitated by ENA inventory previously supplied to these venues by Ethena-associated wallets.
On-chain, I identified clusters highly consistent in scale and timing with the announced plans. The execution footprint suggests that supply may have been staged across various trading venues prior to execution, rather than being sourced directly from the open market.
This analysis relies on entity-level attribution (via @inflecta_io). To ensure full verifiability, the referenced fund flows are accompanied by underlying wallets and transaction records (see footnotes).
This is a best-effort reconstruction based on public data. Attribution is probabilistic, and some interpretations may be incomplete.
Background
PIPE 1
On July 21, 2025, TLGY announced the StablecoinX transaction and an initial PIPE of approximately $360 million. This PIPE consisted of approximately $260 million (net) in cash and approximately $101 million in in-kind payments, including a $60 million contribution from the Ethena Foundation.
Simply put, Ethena sold locked ENA at the disclosed price of $0.21056 per token (a 30% discount at the time), funded by the cash portion of the PIPE.
A subsidiary of the Ethena Foundation, through an intermediary market maker, intends to use the proceeds from the token sale... to purchase ENA on public trading venues starting today, further aligning the Foundation's incentives with StablecoinX shareholders.
(Source: sec.gov)
PIPE 2
On September 5, 2025, the parties announced an additional PIPE of $530 million, split into approximately $265 million (net) in cash and approximately $248 million in physical ENA, with locked ENA priced at $0.29.
Similar to the initial PIPE, a subsidiary of the Ethena Foundation intends to use all cash proceeds... to purchase ENA on the open market starting today through an intermediary market maker...
(Source: sec.gov)
The company later stated that, including the additional PIPE, StablecoinX is expected to hold over 3 billion ENA at settlement.
StablecoinX Holdings
According to Inflecta data, StablecoinX currently holds 20.3% of the ENA supply (~3.04 billion ENA). Each large-scale accumulation corresponds to a corresponding decrease in treasury/insider balances, consistent with the structure described in the filing documents.
The three steps include:
- ~1.23 billion ENA (Batch 1) on July 23 – consistent with the initial discounted ENA sale disclosed in PIPE 1
- ~914.3 million ENA (Batch 2) on September 19 – consistent with the additional discounted ENA sale in PIPE 2
- ~885 million ENA physical batch (Batch 3) on March 14-18 – from Ethena and investors, consistent with the in-kind portion of the PIPE structure, including 284.95 million ENA / ~$60 million contribution from the Ethena treasury
StablecoinX In-Kind Contributions (Source: inflecta.io)
Overall, StablecoinX's fund flows closely match the structure described in the filing documents.
ENA Buybacks
Now, the most interesting part: open market execution.
Across the two PIPE rounds, approximately $525 million (net) in cash was allocated for purchasing ENA. The filings state that a subsidiary of the Ethena Foundation will use these proceeds to acquire ENA on the open market through market makers.
I have identified two clusters that align with the announced plans in terms of scale and timing. Before diving into these fund flows, it's worth examining the supply dynamics at the venue level:
- ENA balance on Coinbase Prime appeared on July 16 – five days before the PIPE 1 announcement – and moved in large, dispersed increments.
- During November-December, approximately 2% of the total supply was rebalanced between Coinbase and Coinbase Prime.
- Bybit balances expanded aggressively, momentarily surpassing Binance, before collapsing.
PIPE 1 Observed Execution
- Duration: August 20 – September 26
- Total Observed Scale: 370 million ENA / ~$266 million (at withdrawal) (vs. filing net ~$260 million)
- Venues: Coinbase Prime, Binance
Coinbase Prime Component
Consisting of three Coinbase Prime Custody wallets, which withdrew:
- 21.8 million ENA on August 20 (4) – subsequently sent to the PIPE 2 wallet (12), linking the two clusters
- 187.5 million ENA on September 10 (5)
- 26.5 million ENA on September 11 (6)
Total approximately $180 million.
Key Observation: Coinbase Prime had no substantial ENA balance before mid-July.
So, where did this supply come from?
Between July 16 and September 11, wallets strongly associated with Ethena accounted for approximately 89.3% of all external Coinbase Prime inflows, depositing approximately 383.9 million ENA (~$278 million) through a single deposit wallet (7).
The majority of this – approximately 316.7 million ENA – came from a major Ethena treasury wallet (8).
70 million ENA (~$46.4 million) on September 5 – the very day PIPE #2 was announced
246.7 million ENA (~$194.5 million, across 5 transactions) on September 10 – the very day the largest withdrawal occurred
In other words, a significant portion of the ENA subsequently withdrawn from Coinbase Prime appears to have originated from wallets controlled by Ethena.
Binance Component
Consisting of a single wallet (9) that withdrew 133.3 million ENA (~$86 million) from Binance between September 15 and 26, and approximately $500,000 from Coinbase, almost entirely sent to wallets associated with Ethena and the StablecoinX fundraising (10).
The chart below shows a wallet (11) that received approximately 8.4% of the total supply from the main treasury wallet in 2024 – indicating control by the Ethena treasury – and distributed 150 million ENA to Binance and Bybit through nine intermediary wallets between July 21 (the day PIPE 1 was announced) and July 26.
Between July 21-26, a wallet strongly associated with Ethena distributed 150 million ENA to exchanges via nine intermediary wallets. Approximately 1.5 months later, another Ethena-associated cluster withdrew ~134 million ENA from Binance.
PIPE 2 Observed Execution
- Duration: November 7 – February 12
- Total Scale: 1.068 billion ENA / ~$272 million (at withdrawal) (vs. filing net $265 million)
- Venues: Coinbase, Bybit
The execution ultimately converged into a single wallet (12)
Coinbase Component
Consists of a single transaction (13):
302.94 million ENA / $83 million on December 3.
Let's examine the fund flow leading to this transaction:
Sequence of Events:
- October 14: Ethena treasury injects ~363 million ENA into Coinbase Prime (14)
- November 1: 63.6 million ENA returned to the same treasury wallet (15)
- November 14: Coinbase Prime transfers ~281 million ENA to Coinbase (16)
- November 17-20: CB Prime and Coinbase rebalance inventory via intermediary wallets (17)
- December 3: ~227 million ENA transferred from CB Prime to Coinbase (18) – less than a minute before Coinbase sent 303 million ENA to the execution wallet (12)
Summary: The December 3 transfer appears to result from a CB Prime → Coinbase injection, rather than a gradual accumulation of Coinbase's held supply – and that Prime inventory was supplied by the Ethena treasury. After the transaction, Coinbase's balance was roughly back to its starting point (~140 million ENA).
Bybit Component
The same execution wallet shows two distinct accumulation phases:
- November 7 – December 7: 440 million ENA (~$126.8 million), primarily in units of 25 million ENA
- January 7 – February 12: 325 million ENA (~$62.2 million), also in units of 25 million ENA
CEX balances provide additional context.
Bybit's balance grew from ~240 million ENA at the end of April to ~1.05 billion ENA on November 6 – the day before execution began.
While this period overlaps with investor distributions, the relative changes between venues are notable:
- Bybit:Binance supply ratio from ~1:3 at the end of April
- Peaked at ~1.1:1 on November 6
- Then reverted to ~1:3 after the program concluded
Arkham's "Token Balance History" can be used for cross-verification.
What stands out here is the timing: inventory appears to have been concentrated on Bybit *before* execution began, rather than accumulating gradually *during* execution.
What could cause this shift? The data shows cross-venue market maker routing (heavily skewed towards Bybit), concurrent with ongoing investor distributions (primarily to Binance), and some flows from Coinbase Prime.
Several possible explanations exist:
- Execution occurred earlier on another venue (e.g., Binance), with supply subsequently repositioned to Bybit for withdrawal
- Demand for ENA on Bybit happened to surge just before execution, peaking before withdrawals started, and then normalizing
- Execution counterparties routed existing inventory to Bybit before the program began
The question is whether this fits a simple narrative of "accumulation on the open market during the execution period." I welcome alternative interpretations and am happy to share the underlying data.
Final Thoughts
I have reconstructed the on-chain activity within the execution windows. The final chart summarizes the fund flows discussed in the article:
Total Observed Scale: 1.44 billion ENA (~$538 million at withdrawal)
This represents:
- ~9.6% of the total supply
- ~25% of the free float (calculated as total supply minus treasury, StablecoinX, and locked insiders)
Some of the execution wallets shown above are commonly associated with Ethena's buyback activity. More importantly, they are the only substantial, observable clusters I have found that simultaneously match the scale, timing, and footprint described in the filing documents as "on the open market."
This does not mean these transactions did not occur on public venues. Rather, the interpretation of "buyback" depends on whether they represent net market absorption or the withdrawal of supply that had previously been *positioned* at these venues.
This is not a definitive attribution statement. On-chain attribution is inherently probabilistic. If there is additional context or a different interpretation supported by on-chain data, I am happy to incorporate it.
At this scale, execution cannot be invisible.
Notes
(1) StablecoinX Batch #1 Transaction: 0x3339455dd775da5e18778577bdbb9dd20f96858295cb05c9d3ed0f630f6fb868
(2) StablecoinX Batch #2 Transaction ID: 0xb22d5e79122aa6a3c6ed1bb4dbe0057a4802c0dc37eaf6dab38736cddca31b44
(3) StablecoinX Batch #3 Wallet: 0x7462f0D93260909870487f17A27c336349579557
(4) PIPE #1 CB Prime Cluster Wallet #1: 0xd54ce6a55312cbd708166d225bbdba95458177ab
(5) PIPE #1 CB Prime Cluster Wallet #2: 0xa55457e0d0652ba47fe1f97873a62b4f9dcae4d1
(6) PIPE #1 CB Prime Cluster Wallet #3: 0x72b272ccca76e0394352ff7819fb846855a164ad
(7) Ethena's CB Prime Deposit Wallet Address: 0xF2e2f6827AB893d636eb98F3Aac81E850880DA83
(8) Ethena Treasury Wallet: 0xcfc40d4ECa21F60D329F1E6b9B3D6069EaA20BBC
(9) PIPE #1 Binance Execution Wallet: 0x9c7B3C57632aB8BED71a4dDbC950d8C009DFe7aA
(10) Ethena-Controlled Wallet: 0x8e771f7bAb34a3b4491e03F22f005483E5c375f5
(11) Ethena-Controlled Wallet: 0xB2af973905F05BC82bf97486b6aB883598D98298
(12) PIPE #2 Execution Wallet: 0x631ee55b8ecd7afb53ec30211a082691a4cbe3ae
(13) PIPE #2 Coinbase Transaction: 0x0563d67d3133d48ee5198fdd767adbcafa56e7f21e1b97bf8162322f4d75bab1
(14) PIPE #2 Treasury → CB Prime Outflow: 0x5152627b344638435633a019236e89d5aa8b4dfeb2d3888d624c2094339aa520
(15) PIPE #2 CB Prime → Treasury Outflow: 0xd42b531494d2c4
