Recently, on-chain "coincidence transfers" have been observed, but honestly, many are not coincidences; the paths just haven't been unraveled.

For example, A transfers to B, which looks like a personal payment, but the previous hop is a hot wallet of an exchange, and the next hop goes into a commonly used interaction contract, with a new address in between as a buffer, the purpose is clear: to change positions, diversify, or evade tracking.
Another type is the same batch of funds circulating between different addresses to "wake up" occasionally; as long as the time intervals, gas usage, and frequently accessed contracts are combined, the behavior can basically be reconstructed.

These days, fee rates are extreme, and the group is arguing whether to reverse or continue squeezing the bubble.
I think there's no need to rush to pick a side.
No matter how high the fee spikes, if on-chain only addresses are performing, and there's no sign of retention and interaction frequency increasing, it looks more like squeezing toothpaste.
Anyway, when I see "coincidence" now, my first reaction is to clarify the path first, then discuss emotions.