Depth Analysis: Is Bitcoin's突破9.3萬鎂 a reversal starting point, or a second distribution of the跌逃命波?

The crypto market has rebounded significantly in the past two days, and the community bull-bear debate has further intensified, which view do you agree with? This article is from an article by Kevin, the Researcher at Movemaker, curated, compiled and contributed by Foresight News. (Synopsis: Multiple technical indicators rarely resonate, BTC is starting a new round of breakthroughs? (Background supplement: U.S. technology stock earnings observation: the weather vane of the crypto market) With the rise in the volume of bitcoin open interest and the continuous increase in key price points in the clearing map, the divergence in the market has begun to intensify, is the current rally turning into a reversal, or is it the second distribution of the downward relay? This is what the author observes from the market, the two mainstream views on the future trend, both views are supported by many analysts, the two views from completely different data and perspectives, but a closer look at the core of their thinking can see that the two have the same path. Therefore, today's sharing context is to start from supply and demand, analyze how to look at the reversal and see how the secondary distribution views from the same root, that is, both start from the analysis of supply and demand, but come to completely different conclusions. At the beginning of the K line is the trend of the price, it is the most superficial visual graph of the relationship between supply and demand, the trade-off of the buying and selling intensity constitutes the price fluctuations, the formation of each K line, is the result of the power exchange between buyers and sellers, is a compressed image of changes in the structure of supply and demand. Further, buying and selling are intensive, which can be intuitively observed from the trading volume. If you think further, why does the price move? Why a drawdown somewhere? Why do breakthroughs sometimes fail? Here the author shares a marbleball theory, in order to facilitate the explanation of the influence of tariff policy changes and the level of momentum formed when supply and demand change. Pinball theory is an idea that changes the relationship between supply and demand from abstraction to concreteness. The narrow supply and demand relationship can be easily seen in the order book, different pending orders form glass of different thicknesses, and each actively traded transaction order is a marble with kinetic energy. The process of price change is essentially the process of these marbles constantly hitting the order book, breaking through the glass, and pushing the price forward. The thickness of the glass represents the liquidity depth and pending order density at a certain price; The kinetic energy of marbles comes from the volume and speed of active buying or selling orders. Every push in the market price is the result of the price jumping to the next layer after the marbles break through a certain layer of glass. If the kinetic energy is strong, it may continuously break through multiple layers of glass; If the kinetic energy is insufficient, it may get stuck in a certain layer or even be rebounded. When the market is volatile, switch to the 1-minute level and you can find such a breakdown marble. This can explain the unpredictability of prices on short time frames, as it can be seen as a disordered movement between two thick layers of glass. Compared with "price movements", marbles theory emphasizes "motive structure"; Rather than predicting candlesticks, marbles theory attempts to reconstruct the physical process by which prices are pushed. This is a way of analyzing that is closer to the essence of the market. From the emergence of the candlestick, the combination of time and volume can diverge countless trading indicators, most of which are not in today's discussion, but they involve supply and demand, which I will mention in the next content. Based on the marbles theory, the following abstractions can be obtained: Pending order thickness = depth of a price layer Active Trading = Marbles Volume = kinetic energy of the marbles Impact cost = energy loss of the marbles penetrating the glass Based on this idea, the following assumptions can be further derived: The market price does not slide continuously, but jumps to "breakdown" one price range after another; The density of pending orders at different prices is different, and the difference in thickness creates support and pressure; The larger the active transaction, the stronger its momentum and can push the price through more "glass layers"; Some pending orders in the market are "false liquidity", which does not represent true willingness, and marbles hitting such glass will cause false breakouts; Price action has inertia, and when the momentum is too large, it may cause the price to "hit the head", forming an overheated or overcooled phenomenon, that is, overbought or oversold. This is the author's theory from both points of view and from his own trading. To make a transaction, you can only look at the K line, because all the supply and demand relationship is hidden in the K line, if the trading level is high enough, you can only look at the K line to judge the direction of the supply and demand relationship, and the control of the arrival of the critical point, the master simplifies the complex, the K line is enough. To give two simple examples: a long white candlestick usually means that buyer power dominates during the cycle, demand continues to rise and eats away pending orders, and momentum strongly breaks through multiple layers of "glass"; A long black candlestick reflects the oppressive dominance of supply, the buyer's support is weak, the price quickly breaks down multiple support levels, and the kinetic energy of the marbles is strong from the seller's will. If you can't see the relationship between supply and demand by observing the K line, you need the assistance of more indicators, such as open interest volume, spot premium, clearing map, and find data support to support your own transactions from more angles. The strengthening of the rebound into a reversal, or the relay of the second distribution, are based on their own perspectives, the former believes that demand is greater than supply, the latter believes that supply is greater than demand, more directly the former believes that the bull market is still there, and the latter believes that the bear market has become and will continue to deepen. In terms of physical perception, there are more people who are optimistic about the rebound turning into a reversal, that is, there are more people who have not left, so I will first introduce the theoretical basis of the first view. The first view: the rebound is likely to turn into a reversal The first view is roughly divided into 3 different types of demand is greater than supply, from long-term and short-term holders to the discussion of the supply relationship in the dense chip area from @Murphychen888, and Murphy's ideas will also be used a lot below. The first is the relationship between long-term holders (LTH) and short-term holders (STH), and LTH-to-STH state transitions often signal important market turning points. The first small argument is to observe changes in the long-term holder profit and loss ratio (LTH-RPC) to capture the market bottom signal. When the indicator shows that long-term holders are starting to show widespread losses, it often means that the market is approaching a stage low. The principle of the indicator is: When the profit ratio of long-term holders drops significantly and there is a loss, it means that the profit margin that can be realized is greatly compressed The continuation of the loss state will inhibit the willingness to sell, and the market selling pressure will gradually weaken as the sellable chips decrease When the selling momentum is exhausted to a certain extent, the market naturally forms a price bottom Historical data support: At the bottom of the bear market in 2018 and 2022, the proportion of loss-making chips of long-term holders reached 28%-30% range In the extreme market in March 2020, The indicator also climbs to around 29% During a bull cycle, when this percentage reaches 4%-7%, it usually corresponds to the low area of the correction market Current market characteristics show that: The share of losses by long-term holders has risen from near zero to 1.9%, close to July 2024 levels Considering that Bitcoin purchased at a cost of $90,000-$100,000 at the end of 2024 and early 2025 is about to turn into a long-term position (currently in a floating loss state), the proportion is expected to continue to rise When the proportion of losses enters 4%-7% , there will be more definite layout opportunities When the vast majority of long-term holders are profitable, each price rally triggers profit-taking, creating sustained downward pressure. And historical experience shows that whether it's the bottom of a bear market or ...