A recent incident involving the low-liquidity meme coin BROCCOLI(714) on Binance has raised eyebrows as unusual trading activity triggered significant price fluctuations. On January 1, the asset experienced a dramatic surge followed by an equally sharp decline, creating a volatile environment that savvy traders could exploit.
A pseudonymous trader known as “Vida” took advantage of these market dynamics, reportedly generating around $1 million in profits. Vida, who already held both spot and derivatives positions in BROCCOLI(714), had set up automated alerts to identify quick price increases and significant divergences between spot and perpetual futures prices. When these alerts were activated, they pointed to extreme imbalances in Binance”s order book.
Vida noticed unusually large buy orders in the spot market that lacked corresponding depth in the futures market. Recognizing this behavior as abnormal, they first closed an existing funding-rate arbitrage position to secure profits. Following this, they increased their long exposure as spot prices continued to rise. Vigilantly monitoring the order book for indications that the large bids might be withdrawn, Vida anticipated a potential market reversal. When those bids vanished, they swiftly exited their long positions and transitioned to shorting the asset, subsequently closing those trades after prices fell sharply.
According to blockchain analytics firm Lookonchain, the trading activity appeared to align with a scenario where a hacker had gained control of a market maker”s accounts on Binance. The suspected attacker allegedly attempted to manipulate the market by aggressively purchasing spot assets, opening long perpetual positions through other accounts, and engaging in coordinated self-trading. The choice of BROCCOLI(714) for such maneuvers likely stemmed from its limited liquidity, making it more susceptible to price manipulation.
However, in a follow-up statement, Vida noted that Binance”s internal investigation did not uncover clear evidence of hacking. The exchange asserted that it found no definitive signs of account compromise based on its internal data, leaving the nature of the trading anomalies somewhat ambiguous.
Community reactions to this incident have been mixed. Many traders labeled the price action as contrived and engineered, pointing out that the token had remained stable for most of the day before suddenly spiking and crashing without substantial spot demand or on-chain activity to justify the movement. Others suggested that the rally was primarily fueled by futures trading, indicating a forced squeeze rather than genuine buying interest. This event has also highlighted concerns regarding supply concentration, given that Binance-controlled wallets hold a significant portion of the tokens, resulting in highly centralized price discovery.
