Recently, there have been screenshots circulating on the chain claiming "coincidence transfers," with the same addresses moving back and forth, looking like metaphysics. To be honest, many of these are not coincidences; it's just that the path hasn't been broken down: first, the exchange/ custodian's hot wallet aggregates, then the routing contract distributes, and finally, it's either snatched by MEV or transferred again through a rebate system. If you only look at the start and end points, you'll mistake it for "someone drawing a diagram."

The same goes for staking and shared security; the compounded returns are often criticized as "matryoshka dolls," which I understand because the path becomes longer, responsibility boundaries are broken into smaller pieces, but the risks don't automatically disappear. In the future, when I see these kinds of diagrams, I’ll first mark out the "intermediary roles": who is doing aggregation, who is distributing, who is hedging/liquidating. Next time, I plan to make a small table to categorize the behavior patterns of common intermediary contracts... What's the part you most often miss when you see "coincidence"?