Recently, I've been looking at a bunch of address profiles and label clustering, and the more I look, the more it feels like sticking sticky notes on strangers: useful, but don’t treat them as IDs. On-chain, you can indeed see “habitual actions” of fund flows, like splitting at fixed times, which bridges they prefer, frequency of entry and exit, and so on, but honestly, people change aliases, teams split wallets, and even a “whale” might just be a multi-signature shared by a few people.

Layer 2 is also starting to compare TPS, fees, and subsidies, causing a lot of noise; I’d rather focus on who moves money from where at what node, and whether the whole thing collapses once subsidies stop. Labels can serve as clues, but not conclusions. I usually use them to narrow down the scope, then go back to the simplest method: look at the flow paths and whether the counterparties are consistent.

What I regret isn’t the outcome, but trusting a certain “smart money label” too much at the time, and forgetting my own stop-loss line… Let’s leave it at that for now; being cautious is never wrong.