是，就是这个原因。以下是技术团队核查后的回复： Our data science team completed the investigation. Here's what happened on July 7: The Tether Multisig contract on ETH (0xc6cde7c39eb2f0f0095f41570af89efc2c1ea828) is currently labeled as a Bitfinex-controlled address in our system. Two $2.5B transfers from Tether Treasury to that address were therefore captured in our exchange transfer metrics, hence the ~$5B net inflow spike you saw. However, $5B was subsequently burned via Tether's on-chain Redeem function. Burn events are non-transfer events, so they affect entity balances but don't appear in exchange transfer metrics. The net result: +$5B in transfers, -$5B in burns, leaving exchange balances unchanged. Both metrics were behaving correctly per their respective methodologies, they were capturing different parts of the same event. The July 7 spike should not be interpreted as real exchange-side USDT inflow. We've concluded that the Tether Multisig is more accurately classified as a Tether operational contract than a Bitfinex exchange wallet. We'll be updating our labels accordingly in the coming days, after which the transfer event will no longer appear in exchange net flow metrics. 简单说，就是7月7日的USDT交易所净流入 spike，是Tether Treasury向一个被误标为 Bitfinex交易所钱包的 Tether 多签合约转账，并随后赎回销毁导致的统计异常，不代表真实交易所稳定币流入。 而Balance on Exchanges是看地址或实体最终还持有多少USDT。USDT被销毁后，这个地址的余额自然就减少了。