Bubblemaps rejects claims linking Maduro Polymarket bet insider to WLFI cofounder
Bubblemaps dismissed claims tying a Polymarket bet on Maduro’s removal to a WLFI cofounder, calling the on-chain logic misleading.
- Bubblemaps said exchange timing and value matching alone cannot prove wallet ownership or coordination.
- The firm identified multiple alternative wallet matches using the same assumptions.
- No evidence currently links the Polymarket trader to WLFI or its founders.
Speculation around a high-profile Polymarket trade has escalated into claims of political and crypto insider ties, but Bubblemaps says the on-chain logic behind those allegations does not hold up.
In a Jan. 5 post on X, blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps pushed back against viral assertions linking a Polymarket trader involved in the Nicolás Maduro market to a cofounder of World Liberty Financial (WLFI), a Trump-linked crypto project.
Why the insider link gained traction
The controversy stems from a Polymarket prediction asking whether Venezuela’s president would be removed from power by a set deadline. In the hours before reports surfaced of Maduro’s capture, several newly created accounts placed aggressive “Yes” bets, turning roughly $60,000 into more than $630,000.
One wallet drew particular attention after converting about $32,000 into nearly $400,000. On-chain traces showed the account was funded via Coinbase deposits on Solana (SOL) and Ethereum (ETH), triggering speculation that the trader had access to non-public information.
An on-chain analyst later claimed the funding wallet could be linked to WLFI through a roughly 250 SOL Coinbase deposit that appeared similar to another transfer allegedly tied to WLFI-associated wallets and ENS/SNS domains referencing the name “Steven Charles.”
Bubblemaps: the evidence is weak
Bubblemaps rejected that conclusion outright, warning that timing-based wallet matching is being stretched beyond its limits.
According to the firm, a one-day gap between deposits into and out of an exchange is not meaningful, especially when only a single asset is considered. When other assets such as USDC and ETH are included, Bubblemaps said it identified around 20 wallets that fit the same pattern using the same time window and value range.
The firm also noted that exchange deposits can originate from bank transfers, multiple smaller transactions, or older balances consolidated long after initial funding, factors ignored in the viral claims.
“Calling this a 99% match is clickbait,” Bubblemaps said, adding that shared exchange paths and similar naming conventions do not establish wallet ownership or coordination.
While the timing of the Polymarket trades remains unusual, Bubblemaps stressed that poor analytical discipline can lead to almost any conclusion if the framing is aggressive enough.
The firm urged the crypto community to separate credible on-chain evidence from narratives driven by drama, especially when politically sensitive events and prominent projects are involved.
As of now, neither Polymarket nor WLFI has announced any internal findings, and no formal investigation has been disclosed
