Pages:
Author

Topic: This Bitfinex Credit Bubble cannot end well - page 4. (Read 62097 times)

legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009
Looks like we're seeing some short covering while the price is bottoming.
And now the shorts are at over 25k BTC again.
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Looks like we're seeing some short covering while the price is bottoming.
It looks like you are right, at least about the first part of your statement.

The price on bitfinex is ~$10 higher then bitstamp and btc-e while having ~4x as much trading volume. I am not sure if the price really has bottomed yet or not, I guess we will probably see in the next day or so
donator
Activity: 4760
Merit: 4323
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Looks like we're seeing some short covering while the price is bottoming.
sr. member
Activity: 479
Merit: 500
This data is very misleading. The increasing (ATH) number of shorts doesn't exist in a vacuum. We don't know how much of these swaps are a) new traders/increased liquidity vs. old liquidity and b) how many swaps are actively being used to take short positions.

Follow this data at your peril.
About b. Is there any point in borrowing without opening a position? You still have to pay interest, what's the point?

for one thing, many people watch bfx data and try to extrapolate. if someone perceives that others will think "SHORT SQUEEZE!!!" when they see another 10k swaps taken out, maybe there is some incentive to borrow them.
legendary
Activity: 1281
Merit: 1000
☑ ♟ ☐ ♚
https://i.imgur.com/2tIPKUq.png

via /r/bitcoinmarkets

Quite interesting! Thanks for posting!
legendary
Activity: 938
Merit: 1000
chaos is fun...…damental :)
https://i.imgur.com/2tIPKUq.png

via /r/bitcoinmarkets
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009
This data is very misleading. The increasing (ATH) number of shorts doesn't exist in a vacuum. We don't know how much of these swaps are a) new traders/increased liquidity vs. old liquidity and b) how many swaps are actively being used to take short positions.

Follow this data at your peril.
About b. Is there any point in borrowing without opening a position? You still have to pay interest, what's the point?
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
This data is very misleading. The increasing (ATH) number of shorts doesn't exist in a vacuum. We don't know how much of these swaps are a) new traders/increased liquidity vs. old liquidity and b) how many swaps are actively being used to take short positions.

Follow this data at your peril.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009
Anyone consider the possibility that some nervous/smart (time will be the arbiter) miners may be using shorts on BFX to hedge some of their future production in uncertain times. This would make that portion pretty much un-sqeezable as they are not really naked short.

You cannot be naked short on bitfinex (unless you're the operator). Only leveraged (1:2? 1:3? I don't even know).

If miners are hedging with borrowed coins then yes: they are squeezable. Unless they have the coins in the first place in which case they could've just sold their own coins instead.

If it was possible to be 'naked short', then those naked shorts would be unsqueezable because: no collateral, no margin call.

Or am I misunderstanding something? What exactly do you mean by 'not really naked short'.
Yep, I think being simply short or hedged is essentially the same thing. Either way you must have collateral to borrow against. While naked shorting by definition implies selling what you doesn't have. It can only happen in systems where settlement is postponed, which is not the case with Bitcoin markets.

The only difference between simply shorting and hedging is that hedged miners have the required 'coinflow' to back their position. Price movements with proper hedging are neutral to their position, so they can get margin called only if the squeeze happens fast and their position is too large when compared to their coinflow. Moreover, normally the position must be rolled over as coins are mined.

Anyways I don't think that hedging this way is a good practice. Using futures and options is more logical in my opinion.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1000
It isn't a bubble until it grows 4-5%/day.

25,641.

 Grin

So, I must be missing something that maybe you guys can explain. How do you expect this rising short position to explode upward (in the near term) when there is the equivalent of 65,200 coins in long positions waiting to cover? Isn't the best case scenario a small jump in price that immediately gets dumped on?

If you look at the long USD swaps they are down roughly 12 million dollars from a few months ago.

Looking at the short swaps, if they have been sold into the market then a short squeeze is very likely. This can cascade like previous price collapses, but upwards.

If the extra few thousand coins are being hoovered up and held on margin to be sold into the market then a large sell could also happen.

Historically, such a high ratio of shorts heralds a rise in the price. But who knows..
legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1001
It isn't a bubble until it grows 4-5%/day.

25,641.

 Grin

So, I must be missing something that maybe you guys can explain. How do you expect this rising short position to explode upward (in the near term) when there is the equivalent of 65,200 coins in long positions waiting to cover? Isn't the best case scenario a small jump in price that immediately gets dumped on?
legendary
Activity: 1868
Merit: 1023
It isn't a bubble until it grows 4-5%/day.

25,641.

 Grin
donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
Anyone consider the possibility that some nervous/smart (time will be the arbiter) miners may be using shorts on BFX to hedge some of their future production in uncertain times. This would make that portion pretty much un-sqeezable as they are not really naked short.

You cannot be naked short on bitfinex (unless you're the operator). Only leveraged (1:2? 1:3? I don't even know).

If miners are hedging with borrowed coins then yes: they are squeezable. Unless they have the coins in the first place in which case they could've just sold their own coins instead.

If it was possible to be 'naked short', then those naked shorts would be unsqueezable because: no collateral, no margin call.

Or am I misunderstanding something? What exactly do you mean by 'not really naked short'.
sr. member
Activity: 442
Merit: 250
I'm really interested how Bitfinex trading engine will manage next short squeeze...
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1009
Anyone consider the possibility that some nervous/smart (time will be the arbiter) miners may be using shorts on BFX to hedge some of their future production in uncertain times. This would make that portion pretty much un-sqeezable as they are not really naked short.

I have no idea if this is practice is currently going on, but as the market matures I would imagine it will almost certainly appear in the same way it exists in other commodity markets.
That's actually a good point, though I think using futures or options is more appropriate for hedging.
Hedging is very popular among commodity producers, like oil producers. Bitcoin miners can also be treated as commodity producers Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Still no proper squeeze  Huh

I wouldn't expect it at these prices. At 400, 500 it might get interesting.


You can drag it out indefinitely as long as you have btc to add to your trading account. This increases your collateral and you won't get margin called. It depends when they decide enough is enough and accept losses, that's when you'll see the squeeze of longer-term shorts.
sr. member
Activity: 293
Merit: 250
Huge short squeeze to happen in the coming weeks. The market is reacting very bullishly to crappy news about bitstamp, and sellers are exhausted for now. I think testing $340 is a given on bitfinex, but shorts aren't even closing as we start this correction... so a massive short squeeze could get us much higher.
Pages:
Jump to: