Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Why Heavy Crypto Selling Often Signals Institutional Accumulation, Not Weakness

Published

on

21Shares Introduces JitoSOL ETP to Offer Staking Rewards via Solana

TLDR:

  • Institutional buyers require substantial sellers to build large positions without excessive slippage.
  • Historical market bottoms form during heavy selling as ownership transfers to strong hands. 
  • Low-volume rallies without seller absorption often prove fragile and fail quickly under pressure. 
  • What traders interpret as resistance zones frequently represents patient institutional accumulation.

 

Large sellers appearing in cryptocurrency markets often trigger concern among traders who view heavy supply as resistance.

However, market structure suggests a different reality. Technical analyst Aksel Kibar argues that significant selling pressure enables institutional accumulation rather than preventing price appreciation.

This counterintuitive framework challenges conventional wisdom about market dynamics. Understanding how major buyers require substantial sellers to build positions reveals why apparent resistance zones can precede strong rallies.

Institutional Accumulation Requires a Substantial Supply

Markets function as auctions where every transaction needs both willing buyers and sellers. Many traders expect prices to rise simply because demand exists.

Advertisement

Yet without an available supply, meaningful position building becomes impossible. Pension funds seeking portfolio allocations and hedge funds scaling convictions cannot execute strategies in thin markets.

Price gaps upward when liquidity disappears, but this creates poor entry conditions rather than sustainable trends. Slippage increases dramatically as large orders chase a limited supply.

The result leaves institutions with smaller positions at worse average prices. This friction prevents rather than facilitates strategic deployment.

When institutional sellers provide liquidity, conditions change entirely. Buyers gain time and stability to accumulate quietly. Volume increases as ownership transfers from short-term holders to long-term participants.

Advertisement

Technical analyst Aksel Kibar explains this dynamic: markets cannot move higher sustainably unless strong hands enter, and strong hands require someone willing to sell size.

The process traders interpret as price suppression often represents patient accumulation. What appears as capping actually allows sophisticated positioning.

Retail participants see resistance, while institutions see opportunity. This disconnect between perception and reality shapes market outcomes.

Historical Patterns Show Strength Building Under Pressure

Major market bottoms frequently form while large sellers remain active. Weak holders panic, and forced liquidations create supply.

Advertisement

Institutions step in to absorb available positions during these periods. Volume rises not from weakness but from ownership changing hands.

This absorption phase makes the price appear stuck under heavy supply. However, structural strength builds beneath visible action.

Markets consolidate as distribution meets accumulation. The visible seller provides necessary liquidity for invisible buyers.

Rallies beginning without this process often prove fragile. Low-volume moves lack genuine ownership transfer. These liquidity-driven advances look strong initially but fail quickly. Sustainable bull trends require high volume, willing sellers, and patient buyers working together.

Advertisement

Strong hands differ from traders by prioritizing size, stability, and time over quick moves. Large sellers provide all three elements simultaneously.

Without them, entry becomes inefficient and volatility increases. Markets that eliminate sellers before major rallies never allow proper institutional positioning. The presence of committed supply paradoxically enables rather than prevents subsequent appreciation.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Polymarket Revenue Jumps as New Fees Take Effect

Published

on

Polymarket Revenue Jumps as New Fees Take Effect

Prediction market Polymarket’s recent fee expansion has started to affect its numbers, with daily fees and revenue climbing sharply in the days following a March 30 price overhaul. 

According to DefiLlama data, daily fees rose from about $363,000 on Monday to over $1 million on both Wednesday and Thursday, while revenue (the portion retained after incentives) reached as high as $995,000 on Wednesday before easing to about $899,000 on Thursday. 

Polymarket fees and revenue data since March. Source: DefiLlama

The jump follows the rollout of a broader fee model on Monday, when the platform expanded taker fees beyond crypto and sports to categories including finance, politics, economics, culture, weather and tech, while keeping geopolitical and world events fee-free. 

The spike shows how aggressively Polymarket is monetizing trading activity to maintain continued investor interest amid regulatory scrutiny in the US, Europe and other countries worldwide. Last week, Intercontinental Exchange, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, invested $600 million in Polymarket.

Prediction markets face growing regulatory scrutiny

The fee and revenue spike comes as prediction markets, including Polymarket, face growing regulatory scrutiny across multiple jurisdictions.

Advertisement

In Europe, Polymarket has faced mounting restrictions, with Hungary and Portugal moving to block or limit access in January over concerns that the platform operates as unlicensed gambling. Regulators in both countries cited licensing issues and, in Portugal’s case, concerns around political betting.

Related: Peter Brandt, Polymarket traders don’t see new Bitcoin highs this year

On March 17, a court in Argentina ordered a nationwide ban on Polymarket, arguing that the platform allowed users to place bets without sufficient identity and age verification. The court said this meant that even children and adolescents could access the platform and place bets without any control. 

According to Polymarket’s website, the platform is currently blocked in 33 countries. Kalshi, on the other hand, reports that it’s banned in 52 jurisdictions. 

Advertisement
List of jurisdictions where Kalshi is restricted. Source: Kalshi

In the United States, at least 11 states have taken legal action against prediction markets such as Polymarket and Kalshi, with several issuing cease-and-desist orders or considering new legislation.

Despite regulatory crackdowns, Polymarket and Kalshi are looking to expand, with both reportedly exploring new funding rounds that could value each platform at around $20 billion.

On March 24, Polymarket and Kalshi introduced new trading restrictions to curb insider trading following criticism over well-timed bets and growing concerns around market integrity.

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?

Advertisement