Viewing On-Exchange Buyer Momentum Intensity from SVD Data The chart below shows the 24-hour average SVD (Spot Volume Delta) data for Binance and Coinbase; that is, the taker's transaction difference, where positive indicates buyer dominance and negative indicates seller dominance. From the data, since the market started on August 19, Coinbase's SVD has remained positive, but the three peaks I circled are consecutively decreasing. This reflects a stepwise weakening of active buying strength, a typical volume-price divergence. Binance also shows decreasing peaks, and after August 26, it overall turned negative, marking the deepest seller dominance of the entire month. This can be interpreted on two levels: 🚩 Seller dominance without price decline may rely on passive limit orders or ETF primary market absorption that is not reflected in taker data. If subsequent selling pressure gradually exhausts, essentially the chips are transferring from short-term profit-taking to demand-side holders, which is a digestion process. 🚩 It can be seen that market sentiment has shifted from broad chasing before and around August 20 to a high-level divergence phase, with upward momentum entering a decay period. Looking only at active buying, given the current situation, continuing a large-scale rally would be quite difficult. For a secondary upward attack to occur, selling pressure must be fully digested, or external forces must again catalyze market sentiment.

Any BTC bought in 2025 would be at a loss if held until now. Therefore, as long as the 2025 chips decrease, except for wallet transfers, the rest are sell-offs at a loss. As of today, there are still 4.77 million BTC from 2025, down 41.5% from the peak in December last year. The slope of the downward trend clearly has two segments: a rapid decline before February, and a slowdown after February, but still maintaining a certain slope. This group is probably the largest supply side in the current market. Comparing data from 2024, 2023, and 2022, it’s not hard to see that these chips with unrealized gains have basically passed the steep phase of the decline slope. Moreover, the longer the time, the smaller the slope. From the chart, the slope of the curve after February almost became a straight line. Even if the price falls further, the change in the number of these chips is not obvious. In other words, those who needed to turnover have done so, and the rest remain inactive. From the past two bear markets, at the 2022 bear bottom, the high-position chips from 2021 dropped by 51%; at the 2018 bear bottom, the high-position chips from 2017 dropped by 62%; If we simply extrapolate, I personally think the bottom of this bear market will be at most 50-60% (currently 41%), not yet considering BTC bought by 2025 ETFs and MicroStrategy, most of which are locked and inactive.

Another new indicator — BTC Seller Exhaustion Index! It measures both low volatility and high loss; When both conditions are met, the indicator triggers a signal. First, let's talk about the present: sellers have entered the "extreme exhaustion zone" (red zone), which is the first time in this bear market that they have entered this zone. Comparing historical data, similar situations have occurred in every past bear market; sometimes more than once (marked 1/2 in the chart). When current 1 appears, it may not be the lowest point of the bear market, but it is definitely in the bottom range. Later, if the price fluctuates or remains lower but the index does not fall lower, I mark it as 2; Historically, 2 has always been more certain than 1. But the risk is that the price of 2 may also be higher than 1. Based on the above observations, we can conclude: It's not wrong to have already established positions now; It's also okay to wait for 2 to appear; But if 2 appears and you still don't dare to buy, then you're about to miss out on the entire bull market. (ps: Don't say I'm always coming up with new metrics—it's the Glassnode team that updates them often. I saw them and found them useful, so I'm sharing them with everyone.)

Chip concentration has risen to 14.8%! Half a foot is stepping into the "high-risk zone." Note! Here, risk does not refer to rise or fall, but to volatility. Chip concentration can't predict direction, but based on historical data, my friends and I have noticed a pattern: When the curve starts to turn, as BTC had previously risen, the probability of continued upward movement is higher; Conversely, the probability of continuing downward fluctuation is higher (as shown in the figure); However, at this moment, the curve is still continuously rising. Therefore, we cannot yet predict which direction will lead with greater probability. But what is certain is that risks are accumulating and volatility is brewing......

The current market debate over BTC's bottom is all reflected in this chart. I think it's very representative and needs further explanation: This chart places every day since 2015 into a two-dimensional coordinate system. The horizontal axis is the Profit Percentage (PSIP), which measures whether the market is cheap or expensive; The vertical axis is the 1-month realized volatility, which measures whether the market is intense or calm. The dashed line divides the plane into four quadrants: Cheap and Intense (top left), Cheap and Quiet (bottom left), Expensive and Intense (top right), Expensive and Quiet (bottom right). The red diamond marks the bottom of the last 3 cycles. They all fall in the upper left corner, meaning cheap and incentive. This is easy to understand: historically, bottoms have always forced "surrender" out, causing prices to instantly break through a large number of holders' costs, and panic selling to amplify volatility. The orange dot is the present, falling in the lower left half. This indicates that there was no concentrated capitulation in this cycle; chips were changing hands in a low-volatility environment. Relying on time and coolness to digest selling pressure, without violent breakdown. My personal understanding of this is: Shrinking volatility usually means sellers have exhausted their strength, with those who want to cut and those who remain unmoved; A PSIP of 55% means the price is close to the cost of nearly half of the chips. Low volatility + cost intensity, typical redistribution and bottoming structure. This is the "boring bottom" model, not the "pain-based" script. However, it must be said that volatility is mean-reverting. Long-term compression is often the prerequisite for volatility explosions, but the direction of the explosion is uncertain. If a downward wave is released later, the orange dot will instantly move upward to the left, becoming the historical "standard bottom." It tells us: the current market structure looks different from all historical bottoms! Either this is the first boring bottom, or the real "surrender" has yet to come. Isn't this exactly where everyone's current disagreement lies? Some believe it's the former, while others are waiting for the latter. Since I'm no longer in the "upper right" or "lower right" position, and I don't want to bet on one side, then splitting the bet is half and half. That should be fine, right 😀?

Awesome! It has really surpassed 1.15 million. Now, the single price of $63,000 has accumulated to 1.15 million BTC, which is an extremely rare phenomenon in history. Although the recent coldcard hardware wallet vulnerability has forced some long-term holders to transfer BTC. But it is definitely not the main reason for the explosive turnover of chips around 63k. Rather, it is the result of BTC price maintaining low volatility over a long period of accumulation. At the same time, the nearby chip concentration has risen to 13.5%. Chips cannot accumulate indefinitely; the long and short game has reached a critical point where there must be a winner. I am increasingly looking forward to what will happen next.....

It really is a bit strange! In the past two days, long-term holders (LTH) have suddenly made large-scale transfers of shares. For two consecutive days, 65,000+ BTC were moved (excluding internal transfers within the same entity), causing a sharp drop in LTH net holdings. As shown in Figure 2, LTH net holdings began to change their previous upward trend from May and remained "stagnant" until July. This is an extremely rare phenomenon in the past year. Nearly 14,000 BTC were transferred to exchanges. For example, Trump's listed company transferred 2,628 BTC to the Crypto .com exchange, which is part of it. As for other net reductions in LTH, where they went and what their purpose was, we do not know. Could it be that they knew something and chose to avoid danger in advance? If we talk about potential macroeconomic risks, especially those affecting BTC, the ones I can think of are as follows: 1⃣ The possibility of a Federal Reserve interest rate hike. This time, it was a 9:3 split vote, the highest number of dissenting votes since September 2016. 2⃣ Middle East conflicts and oil prices are the biggest variables for inflation and are also the upstream link of Article 1. 3⃣ Valuations in the US AI sector are highly concentrated, and capital expenditure increasingly relies on debt and private credit financing. If revenue falls short of expectations and financing costs rise, systemic deleveraging may be triggered. 4⃣ Positions in yen carry trades have once again piled up to one-sided net shorts, crowded and close to historical extremes. Is there anything else? I also welcome friends to help me add more. Finally, the sensitivity of BTC's own token structure can invisibly amplify these potential risk points. -------------------------------- Of course, this does not mean it will definitely happen; it is just our speculation about the sudden abnormal behavior of LTH. When something unusual happens, there's always something fishy; we should closely monitor changes in LTH's behavior in the near future. If large-scale distributions continue, it will inevitably put pressure on the market. If it's just a brief individual act, the impact isn't significant.