Curriculum·G106 The Research Report·about 31 min
Writing the report
By the end of this lesson you can
- →Structure an on-chain report so a reader can reproduce every claim from the public evidence
- →Explain why on-chain investigative reports that cite transactions have led to real recoveries and arrests
- →Compute what makes a report reproducible: named addresses, cited transactions, and stated confidence
- →Write a claim, its evidence, and its confidence so a skeptic can check it independently
Graduate · enrolled learners
This lesson opens with On-chain investigative reporting and public recoveries, 2021 onward.
- What happened
- The independent investigator known as ZachXBT became one of the most cited on-chain researchers by publishing investigations that trace stolen funds and expose scams, and a defining feature of that work is reproducibility: the reports name the addresses, cite the specific transactions, and lay out the trail so any reader can open a block explorer and verify the evidence for themselves. Because the underlying data is public and the reports point straight at it, these investigations have repeatedly moved from a written thread to real consequences, funds frozen at exchanges, victims made whole, and leads handed to law enforcement. The power is not the author's authority; it is that the evidence is checkable and the report shows exactly where to check. A claim that says trust me is weak; a claim that says here are the transactions, verify them yourself is strong, because it invites the reader to confirm rather than to believe.
- The decision point
- An on-chain report has an advantage no ordinary investigative report has: its evidence is public, so it can be written to be reproduced rather than believed. That is the standard to write to. A report that names the addresses, cites the transactions, and lays the trail out step by step lets a skeptical reader, an exchange compliance team, or a law-enforcement analyst follow the same path and reach the same conclusion, and a report that asserts a conclusion without the transactions asks to be trusted and earns less. Combined with the confidence discipline of this course, the form is clear: state each claim, show the on-chain evidence for it, and mark the confidence, so the reader sees not only what you concluded but exactly how, and can check it. The measure of a good on-chain report is whether a stranger who distrusts you can reproduce it, and the ones that met that bar are the ones that turned into recoveries.
What you will be able to answer
- →What makes an on-chain report reproducible?
- →Why have reproducible on-chain reports led to real recoveries?
- →Why is 'verify it yourself' stronger than 'trust me'?
- →What three things does a report claim include?
Orientation and Year One are open: anyone can read them without an account. From Year Two onward the lessons are for enrolled learners, because progress through the later years only means anything if it is tracked against a record.
It is free. We do not sell the list and there is nothing to buy at the end of it.
Sources and review
- https://www.wired.com/story/zachxbt-crypto-tracing-detective/
- https://www.chainalysis.com/blog/how-crypto-tracing-works/
- https://rekt.news/
Confidence medium·Volatility medium·Reviewed 2026-09-15·Owner unassigned
Contested
On-chain investigative reports have contributed to recoveries, exchange freezes, and law-enforcement leads across many cases; specific outcomes and figures vary and are attributable to combined efforts, not a single author. The lesson's point is the reproducibility standard, which holds regardless of any one case's details.
Reproducibility does not guarantee correctness: a report can cite real transactions and still draw a wrong inference or attribution, which the confidence discipline and the next lesson address.
