$BTC carries two "supply in profit" readings about 15 points apart, and $2B of leverage left the market. One says most active coins are underwater, the other that the market is only cooling. Both can be right.
Short answer: a denominator problem, not a data error. One series drops coins unmoved for a decade, the other counts every coin. The first is harsher, and it tracks the people who trade.
Three numbers:
- Analyst Darkfost put less than 45% of BTC supply in profit on Nov 14, excluding coins unmoved for over 10 years, and flagged readings under 40% as the zone that has often coincided with correction lows (TokenPost).
- Glassnode's Nov 9 pulse had percent supply in profit at 60.6%, from 62.9% a week earlier, still above its low band and read as cooling rather than capitulation.
- CoinGlass via BlockBeats, Nov 15: $2.058B liquidated in 24 hours, $1.922B of it longs, about 93%, across 329,339 accounts. Largest order: $16.17M ETH on Binance.
Why the gap is the point:
- Dormant coins cannot be sold, so removing them leaves holders who transact: a better read on mood, a worse one for dates.
- Almost all liquidation was one-sided. Forced selling of that shape means leverage left; not that a two-sided argument got settled.
Three checks for next sessions:
- Whether the adjusted reading prints below 40%, Darkfost's marker, or stalls above it while price steadies.
- Whether CoinGlass 24-hour totals drop under $500M, which would say leverage is gone rather than paused.
- BTC against its $62,006 low from the Binance spot snapshot at 08:32 Kyiv, and whether a lower low brings a smaller liquidation total.
The rule I keep coming back to: when two versions of the same metric disagree, the disagreement is the story, not the headline.
#BitcoinActiveSupplyInProfitDropsBelow45% #Write2Earn
If you track these metrics, do you use the adjusted series or the raw one, and why?
Short answer: a denominator problem, not a data error. One series drops coins unmoved for a decade, the other counts every coin. The first is harsher, and it tracks the people who trade.
Three numbers:
- Analyst Darkfost put less than 45% of BTC supply in profit on Nov 14, excluding coins unmoved for over 10 years, and flagged readings under 40% as the zone that has often coincided with correction lows (TokenPost).
- Glassnode's Nov 9 pulse had percent supply in profit at 60.6%, from 62.9% a week earlier, still above its low band and read as cooling rather than capitulation.
- CoinGlass via BlockBeats, Nov 15: $2.058B liquidated in 24 hours, $1.922B of it longs, about 93%, across 329,339 accounts. Largest order: $16.17M ETH on Binance.
Why the gap is the point:
- Dormant coins cannot be sold, so removing them leaves holders who transact: a better read on mood, a worse one for dates.
- Almost all liquidation was one-sided. Forced selling of that shape means leverage left; not that a two-sided argument got settled.
Three checks for next sessions:
- Whether the adjusted reading prints below 40%, Darkfost's marker, or stalls above it while price steadies.
- Whether CoinGlass 24-hour totals drop under $500M, which would say leverage is gone rather than paused.
- BTC against its $62,006 low from the Binance spot snapshot at 08:32 Kyiv, and whether a lower low brings a smaller liquidation total.
The rule I keep coming back to: when two versions of the same metric disagree, the disagreement is the story, not the headline.
#BitcoinActiveSupplyInProfitDropsBelow45% #Write2Earn
If you track these metrics, do you use the adjusted series or the raw one, and why?