Word on the street is: this price graph is fucked up. What happened?

A thread about the calm, the storm, and how to tell the difference.
There have been a few prevailing narratives lately:
- China FUD driving prices down, U.S. maybe to follow?
- Bitcoin is bad for the environment, or at least Elon thinks so
- Maybe with this dip, some of the institutions who bought are under water and need to sell? (Saylor, etc.)
None of that is concrete, though, and people vacillate between over-stating the pieces of news they want to hear and under-stating the ones they don't. So let's break it down a little, and look at some stuff which *is* concrete.
I'll start by saying something that sounds dumb (and is :P), but hear me out. The price graph I posted is from a two week-long period, but can actually be divided into four distinct sections, as follows:
Stuff like this is why I make the big bucks.

No, obviously I'm being a little tongue-in-cheek, but this *is* worth highlighting -- BTC's price has been very momentum-driven on a days-long timescale. Why?
I think different kinds of news were dominating price action for each period.
June 9 - 11: El Salvador / reversion from Elon dump
June 11 -13: China/U.S. FUD / reversion
June 13 - 15: Saylor or something / reversion
June 15 - 23: China FUD / "Is Saylor fucked?" / reversion
Each of these, I think, constituted an over-reaction -- that's why I included "reversion" as an effect for all of them, because I think probably none of them *really* mattered in the first place for BTC's "value," or where people should be pricing it medium-term.
- Can you tell me where El Salvador is on a map?
- The China FUD is new-ish, but China has always had FUD and we knew China would do *something*.
- Warren is FAR from regulating crypto away.
- We *know* instos are *in*, this TWAP doesn't move that needle.
- Saylor isn't fucked.
That shit KEEPS happening -- remember all the times Elon would tweet, BTC would rally 10%, and then BTC would fall 9% over a few hours? I think the days of ping-ponging are just a drawn out version of that (see: right before the other graph when Elon caused a reverted dump).
Furthermore, check this graph out -- it shows the net BTC buying and selling liquidations across platforms per day. The days with inflows had $100s of millions in net buying liquidations, and vice-versa -- which creates momentum (one piece of news -> days of price movement) ...
... and, because so much of the new buying from good news and selling from bad news was from liquidations (and therefore not organic), that means there was even MORE propensity for reversion -- no one (or, not everyone who did :P) wanted to buy $41k on June 15, so people sold.
So really what's going on: people are over-reacting to news, liquidations are exacerbating that over-reaction, and then people are trading the other way when they realize that (and when another piece of news tells them to).

Tale as old as time!

The week-long crash we've just witnessed (culminating in the dip below $30k earlier today) is worth highlighting specifically, because it saw some weird behavior.

Specifically, let's look at some BTC perps -- here's Binance's average funding.
Binance's BTC perps often matter a ton, and as we can see, for a ton of this period funding was paying *longs* which we don't typically see -- and this was a period when OI was *shrinking*, and not *all* from liquidations.
This suggests that longs were closing one way or another -- some liquidations, yes, but also some people just ... choosing to close (also the effect is smaller than it looks cuz BTC went down, but it's still real).
FTX was similar -- more funding -> longs as OI net went way down. Bybit, OKEx, etc., all the important perps had similar patterns, and those patterns suggested the same thing -- people were closing for whatever reason, and aggressively selling to do so.
After a few days of this, it sort of just becomes predictable that it'll keep happening (until it doesn't!), and that's the kind of thing which can help us predict patterns like the skillfully drawn lines I made above.
Also, yesterday/today had the most net liquidations of any days recently -- and a spike in liquidations has tended to help fuel reversion, as we discussed, because no one WANTED to sell down to $30k, really. Buying there is a predictably great trade, just like it always is.
In fact, trading at the END of any of these periods is a predictably awesome trade -- the goal is finding it.

It seems like MAYBE today marks yet another paradigm switch? We'll have to wait and see -- Alameda's new long positions are sure hoping so.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Sam Trabucco

Sam Trabucco Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlamedaTrabucco

16 Jun
The macro market DOES drive crypto, but only when it has to. In March 2020, crypto had no choice but to go down with (e.g.) SPY — the whole world was watching, and when the whole world watches people will buy BTC when it lags below SPY, and vice-versa.
Honestly? Crypto traders don’t give a shit about what happens when the traditional markets aren’t going crazy. I literally couldn’t tell you which direction SPY moved .3% in (or whatever) yesterday.
But when SPY crashes 20%? Yeah, we’ve gotta follow it. And because we’re following it, our trades will follow it — not all the time, but enough for a correlation to exist.
Read 8 tweets
10 Jun
Let's look at two investors, Adam and Beth. Both are 25 years old, both make $200k/year (lump sum) and expect to keep doing so for their careers (not realistic, but let's just use that for now). Adam invests it all in a 5%/year fund, Beth's fund is 50/50 to make +30% and -10%.
By age 60, Adam will always have around $20m put away (ignoring taxes and expenses or whatever, but this is just a comparative exercise so it's OK to ignore thise) -- there's no uncertainty here.
What about Beth? Her EV on earnings each year is higher than Adam's, of course, but let's dig deeper. Let's look at her distribution of outcomes by age 60.

One natural question: what are the chances she has more money than Adam does?
Read 10 tweets
7 Jun
I'll be honest -- I was dreading this conference. I'm not great at meeting strangers, I dislike much of networking, I was vaguely concerned that crypto culture might be toxic in person, and I'm not wild about public speaking. Also, Miami is so hot.
How wrong I was! I enjoyed basically the entire trip -- it managed to be productive, invigorating, sentimental, and super fun all at once.
I was pretty sure the perfect timing + chance to speak meant this was the only conference I'd ever attend, but now I doubt it.

A thread about being wrong and not really making money but "generating personal value" or something.
Read 25 tweets
4 Jun
Let’s just say @SBF_Alameda was lied to about what “Tradjng Day” was gonna be Image
“We host the world’s best athletes and the world’s best entertainers, and we’re thrilled to welcome FTX” Image
“I may be the shortest one here” Image
Read 7 tweets
3 Jun
On a plane to Miami, thinking about the topic of the panel i’m on: Is it possible to time the market? It’s a great question, and one my priors were REALLY wrong about.

A thread about being wrong and making money.
My initial training in quant trading came at SIG, trading more traditional assets than crypto (let’s hear it for fixed income ETFs). These are markets that have existed forever, and many large, skilled firms have traded them forever.
In these markets, it’s really hard for there to be large, fairly obvious, predictable moves — if those existed, these big quant firms would have figured them out too and arbed them out (or similar).
Read 14 tweets
23 May
BTW not to be a downer but the stablecoin supply being up is less obviously +++ than a lot of people have claimed.

There are plenty of reasons why it could be good -- more USD flowing into the ecosystem could of course be used for buying crypto ...

... but, it could also be used to be parked in a yield farm, or as collateral for someone trying to get super short, or whatever.

Also, consider a common trade -- USDT gets really rich, MMs (such as Alameda) create USDT to sell it >1. This increases stablecoin supply!
Why does USDT (or any stablecoin) get rich? Various reasons -- maybe people really need something USD-like and so bid it up (because they're not creating for whatever reason). But maybe the BTC/USDT market has significant activity.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!