On this page
Start with a specific candidate
A candidate can come from a token's early buyers, its large holders or an observed trader ranking. Save the public address and the reason it attracted your attention. Avoid attaching a person's identity to the address unless you have evidence separate from a display name or a copied profile picture.
BLIX's wallet research uses observed appearances across multiple coins, including early buyers and holders of tokens that subsequently moved. That helps surface addresses to examine. It is not an independent certification of skill, and it does not establish the wallet's complete return across every asset it has touched.
Establish the history you actually have
Write down the earliest and latest transactions in the record and any tracking gaps. Solana's transaction-signature endpoint returns a newest-first list with pagination controls and fields such as transaction error and confirmation status. A first page is therefore not automatically a complete wallet history. Solana: transaction history requests.
In BLIX, new-wallet backfills and ongoing tracking depend on the running service and RPC access. A sale may be observed even when the earlier purchase was not. The wallet accounting can leave the realized result unknown when its entry cost is missing. Treat that as missing evidence rather than a free acquisition.
Separate closed results from open marks
Review the trades behind a return figure. Did the wallet sell, partly sell or continue holding? Was the apparent gain mainly an open position whose quote later disappeared? Use the PnL definitions to keep realized outcomes, open value and sellable estimates separate.
Consider an illustrative comparison: wallet A has one spectacular open position and little earlier history; wallet B has many observed closed trades with both gains and losses. These records support different questions. The headline number alone does not justify ranking A above B, because the outcome and coverage are different.
Check whether addresses represent separate evidence
Repeated synchronized purchases, transfers or a shared fee payer can indicate a relationship worth examining. BLIX groups some correlated wallet activity so several related addresses are not automatically counted as separate opinions. Its grouping logic also accounts for a known shared Fomo fee payer rather than treating all users of that service as one trader.
A relationship heuristic does not prove common ownership. The useful research question is narrower: would counting these addresses independently exaggerate the evidence behind a token? Read the reason for a link and examine the underlying transactions before drawing a stronger conclusion.
Create a watchlist with a review rule
- Save the candidate address and the observation that earned it a place.
- Record history coverage and any unknown entry costs.
- Review multiple closed positions, including the largest observed loss.
- Inspect related-address evidence and recurring tokens.
- Follow future activity as a research input, then reassess after a defined observation period.
This is an observation procedure, not an automatic-copy instruction. A notification can arrive after the original trader's fill, and your available route or price may differ. The transaction that made the wallet interesting does not establish what its next transaction will do.
Keep reasons for removing a wallet
When an address no longer fits the research criteria, preserve the reason: insufficient coverage, repeated unavailable exits, dependence on one unusual event or misleading attribution. Otherwise the remaining watchlist can look stronger simply because weak candidates disappeared from the record. Ask the same questions of new and established candidates.
Frequently asked questions
Does 'smart money' mean the wallet has insider information?
No. Here it describes a research candidate identified from observed trading. It is not a claim about private knowledge or verified identity.
Should a large wallet always outrank a small one?
Size and research quality answer different questions. Compare coverage, repeated behavior, closed outcomes and the liquidity context.