970,522 SOL reportedly targeted for BTC conversion after Binance incident
The short answer
Lookonchain monitoring cited by PANews says an address linked to the Binance incident is converting a reported 970,522 SOL, valued at about $95.9 million, toward BTC. Odaily carried the development on November 1 at 18:35 SGT. The reports describe conversion in progress; they do not establish that the whole amount has arrived as BTC or been recovered. For an exchange user with a pending SOL transfer, the useful check is the status of that specific transfer, rather than a conclusion drawn from the headline value. PANews reports the SOL conversion.
The new detail in our Binance incident coverage is a reported SOL-to-BTC route through Relay Protocol. It adds a conversion lead to the fund trail. It supplies neither a complete loss statement nor a customer repayment record. Both news reports attribute the conversion observation to Lookonchain, so their agreement should be read as coverage of the same monitoring claim. Odaily's account.
Show less
What the reported quantities actually measure
PANews gives three quantities with different meanings. It describes 970,522 SOL as the amount being converted, 486,970 SOL as moved out during the preceding hour, and about 483,600 SOL as still held at the tracked address according to Arkham data. Those categories need to remain separate when reading the story. A headline about the first quantity does not turn the second quantity into confirmed swap proceeds. PANews' numerical breakdown.
Odaily uses rounded figures: 970,500 SOL for the broader amount and 487,000 SOL for the recent movement. It values those at about $95.9 million and $46.4 million respectively. PANews uses more precise token counts while giving the same dollar estimates for those two categories. The difference in precision is a reason to preserve each outlet's wording when quoting the report. Odaily's rounded quantities.
Article table: scroll horizontally, or focus the table area and use the arrow keys.
| Reported item | Amount | What the report supports |
|---|---|---|
| SOL described as undergoing conversion | 970,522 SOL, about $95.9 million | Reported conversion scope, according to PANews citing Lookonchain |
| SOL moved in the preceding hour | 486,970 SOL, about $46.4 million | A reported movement, not an independently verified BTC receipt |
| SOL reportedly remaining | About 483,600 SOL, about $46.14 million | An Arkham balance observation relayed by PANews |
The table follows PANews' report. We have not independently queried the wallet or reconstructed its transactions. The short article does not provide a transaction-by-transaction reconciliation between these observations. It would therefore be premature to describe the balance as an exact remaining share of a completed conversion programme.
Even the token arithmetic needs care. Subtracting the reported outgoing 486,970 SOL from the broader 970,522 SOL gives 483,552 SOL. PANews' remaining balance is approximate, at about 483,600 SOL. Those values are close, but they are not an audited ledger. The arithmetic is ours, using the quantities in the report; it cannot establish that both measurements used the same instant or counted exactly the same transactions. Source quantities.
Why the dollar figures cannot measure an execution loss
The $95.9 million figure describes a valuation attached to the broader SOL amount. The $46.4 million figure is attached to the recent outgoing SOL, while $46.14 million is attached to the reported remaining balance. The report does not give a single shared valuation timestamp or an actual BTC output amount. Those omissions prevent a reliable calculation of execution loss from the dollar labels alone. PANews' valuation figures.
Adding $46.4 million and $46.14 million produces $92.54 million. Subtracting that from $95.9 million produces $3.36 million. Calling that difference a trading loss would require evidence the report does not supply: matched valuation times, complete inputs, completed outputs and relevant costs. The calculation only exposes why mixing these headline values is unsafe. It is not a finding that $3.36 million disappeared.
The same problem applies to attempts to infer a current SOL price. Dividing a rounded dollar estimate by a token quantity would yield an implied reference value within that report. It would not supply a live quote or the price achieved on each swap. Readers comparing a later update should first compare token units, observation times and the described operation. A changed dollar estimate, by itself, is insufficient evidence of another movement. Reported inputs for comparison.
What naming Relay adds to the trail
Both outlets say the SOL is being exchanged toward BTC through Relay Protocol. Relay's own documentation describes a platform for moving assets between supported chains and exchanging assets on the same chain or across chains. That explains why a report about a SOL-to-BTC route can name Relay. The documentation establishes the service's described function; it does not verify this address's particular transactions. Relay's platform documentation.
To turn the reported route into a completed-conversion finding, a follow-up would need to connect the relevant outgoing transactions with the destination asset and destination account. The reports opened for this article do not publish a completed BTC quantity or an exhaustive list of transaction identifiers. We therefore retain the wording “reportedly converting” and avoid substituting a completed sale for an ongoing activity.
Naming a service in a fund trail also does not establish who operated the receiving address, whether the service has taken any action, or whether authorities can recover the assets. These reports do not contain a Relay enforcement statement. They do not establish that Relay was itself compromised. The useful analytical distinction is between the route attributed by a monitoring service and a finding about responsibility. The route as reported by Odaily.
The source chain has one monitoring origin
Odaily explicitly attributes its account to Lookonchain, and PANews attributes the conversion observation to Lookonchain as well. Two readable publications give readers access to the account, but they do not provide two independently reconstructed transaction trails. PANews separately attributes the remaining-balance observation to Arkham data. That is a balance statement carried by the outlet, rather than an Arkham query we independently reproduced. PANews' attribution.
This matters most for strong claims about the incident. An analyst's attribution of an address does not, on its own, establish the legal identity of its controller. A report describing stolen assets does not provide a new venue-wide loss total. We use the address's reported link to the Binance incident and attribute the conversion claim, while leaving those broader findings to evidence that actually addresses them.
The truncated address label in Odaily begins with AffzFDKZ and ends with GigBEaU. A reader should not use a shortened label as a transaction destination or assume that a similarly displayed address is the same account. In this article it identifies the subject of the report only. Odaily's address reference.
What to check in your Binance SOL withdrawal record
For a pending transfer, start with the record you already hold. Preserve the asset name, selected network, amount and destination shown when the request was created. Record whether the sending platform has supplied a transaction identifier. Keep the request record open while checking the status of that specific transfer.
If a transaction identifier is available, compare the destination and asset with your original request before drawing a conclusion about receipt. If the platform has not supplied one, keep that absence in the support record and ask about the specific withdrawal request. A story about a separate address converting SOL does not establish that your request was broadcast, completed or cancelled.
Check the current deposit or withdrawal status through the exchange application you normally use. Use the status shown for the relevant asset and network in your account. Keep a copy of any status message with its displayed time so that a later answer can be compared with the original record.
A message offering compensation should be assessed separately from the tracing story. Do not send assets, disclose a recovery phrase or approve an unfamiliar wallet request because someone attaches this headline to a message. Open the familiar application directly to check for an account notice. The report establishes no compensation form, claim deadline or new user action that would require a wallet signature.
Which developments would answer the next questions
A completed BTC amount, tied to identified source transactions, would clarify how much of the reported SOL movement reached the described destination asset. A refreshed SOL balance with an observation time would clarify what remained at that particular address. A verified return to a venue or customer account would answer a different question: recovery. These are the next evidence items to look for, rather than outcomes established by the present reports.
For market impact, the missing evidence is different again. The opened reports give quantities and a route; they do not measure an order book, SOL's price response or a BTC purchase impact. We cannot assign a market move to this conversion from those quantities alone. A reader tracking prices should keep the reported movement and any market snapshot as separate observations until a source connects them.
Quick answers
Has all 970,522 SOL already become BTC?
The opened reports describe conversion in progress. They give no completed BTC total. The more precise SOL quantity comes from PANews' account of Lookonchain monitoring. The report.
Is $95.9 million a newly confirmed Binance loss?
It is the value attached to the reported SOL amount. It is not presented here as a newly audited total loss or as an amount still owed to users. Odaily's valuation.
Does the reported route prove recovery?
Neither a reported movement nor Relay's description of cross-chain swaps establishes a return of funds. The reports contain no customer repayment record, and Relay's documentation does not verify this incident's transactions. Relay's description.