Recently, I saw someone again treating a few "coincidental transfers" as metaphysics. In fact, most can be broken down into paths: the same batch of funds looping through different pools, eventually converging to a place that's easier to exit or better for storage. To put it simply, don’t focus on individual transactions; first identify the entry address, the first-hop contract, and the commonly used routers, then trace how it swaps tokens, splits, and merges; many "coincidences" are just scripts running according to templates.

After a cross-chain bridge is hacked, there will suddenly be a bunch of seemingly chaotic jumps on-chain. I usually filter out interactions related to the bridge contract separately, otherwise the noise is too great. Also, regarding that abnormal quote from the oracle, everyone was shouting "wait for confirmation." I agree: better to eat a little less than to rush into dirty data. Wait for one or two blocks to run the path before drawing conclusions; it’s more reassuring.