On February 13, 2026, rumors of a liquidation of roughly $260 million spread throughout Ethereum trading circles after users on r/ethtrader's Daily General Discussion thread identified a big wipeout and shared an on-chain style link for others to view.
The claim gained additional attention because a separate r/ethtrader post specifically framed the event as “Garett Jin was just liquidated for 260 million” and directed readers to a wallet dashboard for the address related to the move. In other words, this will not be a platform statement. It is a community narrative based on a publicly visible address and dashboard snapshot.
What the Linked Wallet Dashboard actually shows
The most typical link results in a hyperliquid-focused wallet page on Wangr, where the address is labeled “Shifu Garrett Jin” and doesn’t appear to have any open positions on the time of viewing. This label alone will not be proof of identity. It is a tag inside a third-party dashboard.
To confirm that a liquidation event has actually occurred, traders generally search for three things:
First, liquidation markers and timestamps in a location-specific explorer, then an appropriate position within the wallet's trading history, and at last a plausible path for where collateral or proceeds move next. A Hyperliquid Explorer-style view for a similar address is accessible via HypurrScan. This is the kind of page investigators use to verify whether “liquidated” is an actual event on the venue or a misread dashboard status.
Why the “$260 million” number is difficult to find out
Even if the address is correct, “$260 million” can seek advice from several different numbers.
Some contributions describe the fictional overall position. Others describe realized losses, equity destroyed, or the difference between unrealized peak profit and final equity. The r/ethtrader post itself points out this ambiguity by talking about “260 million gone” and in addition mentions higher numbers when previous positive P&Ls are taken into consideration.
This is why independent trackers are necessary. A tracker page for a similar address within the Hyperliquid Whale section of CoinGlass will help confirm whether the account is currently showing open positions or recorded performance, even though it doesn't at all times show a clean, single “loss number” summary.
What is understood about wallet attribution?
The name related to the address also adds to the uncertainty of the story.
Previous reports have linked a wallet linked to large hyperliquid positions in reporting to former BitForex CEO Garrett Jin, including a Decrypt post portraying a “Garrett Jin” wallet as a notable on-chain player. This context explains why a dealer nickname can spread quickly, however it doesn’t replace official confirmation of the person, venue, or signed proof.
Why this matters, even when it’s “only a rumor.”
Large liquidations are necessary because they modify intraday liquidity, not since the Internet is fascinated by large numbers.
When a concentrated leveraged position is displaced, the liquidation can result in thin order books, triggering cascading liquidations and broadening the bottom between trading venues. If the event is tied to a venue, rapid movements may distort market and index dynamics, especially when market makers pull quotes and funding turns over quickly.
This is why such a rumor can turn into a story before it’s fully proven. Traders are reacting to the potential of forced flows. This response itself can increase volatility, even when subsequent evaluation shows that the number was overstated.
How to verify the claim without guesswork
The cleanest confirmation path is mechanical.
A verified liquidation event should appear in an explorer log for the venue related to the address, with a time window corresponding to the market movement observed by traders. The same window should show clear position changes after which an obvious end state, e.g. B. no open positions. If the rumor names a person, credible confirmation typically requires either a platform statement, a direct admission, or a powerful chain of attribution from multiple independent analysts.
Until these pieces fall into place, the safest assumption is that an ETH trading community circulated a particular address and dashboard link and claimed a nine-digit liquidation, while the precise loss figure and identity attribution remain unverified.
The post ETH Community Circulates On-Chain Link Calls for $260 Million Liquidation appeared first on Crypto Adventure.
