Average Crypto Trader Losses Reached $500 Million Per Day in 2025

RBK-cryptoPublicado a 2025-12-25Actualizado a 2025-12-25

Resumen

According to a Coinglass report, the total volume of forced liquidations of margin-based trading positions on crypto exchanges neared $150 billion in 2025. The estimated average daily liquidation volume throughout the year ranged from $400 million to $500 million. A record-breaking single-day liquidation event occurred on October 11, accounting for nearly 15% of the annual total with nearly $20 billion in futures positions liquidated. This was triggered by US President Donald Trump's announcement of new 100% tariffs on Chinese imports and export controls on critical software, which sparked fears of a new trade war and caused a sharp shift towards risk-off sentiment. Bitcoin and Ethereum fell by 10-15% at their peak, while many altcoins crashed by 80% or more. The crash exposed key market vulnerabilities, including reliance on opaque liquidation mechanisms, fragile infrastructure under peak load, and a lack of effective circuit breakers common on traditional exchanges. Unlike the Terra (LUNA) collapse in 2022, this event did not lead to a cascade of institutional investor defaults, as the risks were concentrated in specific strategies and assets rather than being systemic.

In 2025, the total volume of forced liquidations of margin-based trading positions on cryptocurrency exchanges approached $150 billion, according to a Coinglass report. The estimated average daily liquidation rate throughout the year ranged from $400 million to $500 million.

This refers to the nominal value of positions including leverage (a $100 position with 10x leverage counts as $1000 in the total loss amount), but even with this adjustment, the scale of the losses remains impressive.

Nearly 15% of the annual liquidation volume occurred in a single day—on the night of October 11th, when the crypto market experienced the largest cascade of futures position liquidations in history, with a total volume of nearly $20 billion. This set an absolute record for the volume of forcibly closed trading positions on cryptocurrency exchanges.

The event occurred against the backdrop of U.S. President Donald Trump announcing new 100% tariffs on imports from China, as well as export controls on critical software. This sharply increased expectations of a new trade war, as Coinglass writes, which forced markets into a "risk-off" mode, meaning a retreat from high-risk assets, including Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

Experts note that the scale of the consequences was determined not only by external factors but also by the structure of the leverage used and the functioning of liquidation mechanisms. During exchange overload, Auto-Deleveraging (ADL) mechanisms were triggered, and trades were executed at unfavorable prices, causing losses even for profitable traders.

Bitcoin and Ethereum lost 10–15% at their peak, while many altcoins collapsed by 80% or more.

The Coinglass report stated that the crash of that day revealed key market vulnerabilities: reliance on opaque liquidation mechanisms, the fragility of infrastructure under peak loads, and the lack of effective circuit breakers that exist on traditional exchanges.

Unlike the crash of the Terra (LUNA) project in 2022, this collapse did not lead to a series of defaults by institutional investors. The risks were not systemic and were concentrated in specific strategies and assets, noted Coinglass.

How the Base Blockchain Ecosystem is Structured. Top 5 Applications

AI Outperformed Humans in a Crypto Trading Tournament. What Were the Results

Miner "Capitulation" Called a Bullish Factor for Bitcoin. Why

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the average daily liquidation amount for crypto traders in 2025 according to the Coinglass report?

AThe average daily liquidation amount ranged from $400 million to $500 million in 2025.

QWhat event on October 11 triggered the largest cascade of futures liquidations in crypto market history?

AUS President Donald Trump announced new 100% tariffs on imports from China and export controls on critical software, which sharply increased expectations of a new trade war.

QWhat were the maximum losses for Bitcoin and Ethereum during the market crash described in the article?

ABitcoin and Ethereum lost 10-15% at their maximum, while many altcoins collapsed by 80% or more.

QWhat key market vulnerabilities were exposed by the crash according to the Coinglass report?

AThe key vulnerabilities were dependence on opaque liquidation mechanisms, infrastructure fragility during peak loads, and the lack of effective circuit breakers that exist on traditional exchanges.

QHow did this market crash differ from the Terra (LUNA) collapse in 2022 in terms of institutional impact?

AUnlike the Terra collapse, this crash did not lead to a series of defaults by institutional investors. The risks were not systemic and were concentrated in specific strategies and assets.

Lecturas Relacionadas

North Korean Hackers Loot $500 Million in a Single Month, Becoming the Top Threat to Crypto Security

North Korean hackers, particularly the notorious Lazarus Group and its subgroup TraderTraitor, have stolen over $500 million from cryptocurrency DeFi platforms in less than three weeks, bringing their total theft for the year to over $700 million. Recent major attacks on Drift Protocol and KelpDAO, resulting in losses of approximately $286 million and $290 million respectively, highlight a strategic shift: instead of targeting core smart contracts, attackers are now exploiting vulnerabilities in peripheral infrastructure. For instance, the KelpDAO attack involved compromising downstream RPC infrastructure used by LayerZero's decentralized validation network (DVN), allowing manipulation without breaching core cryptography. This sophisticated approach mirrors advanced corporate cyber-espionage. Additionally, North Korea has systematically infiltrated the global crypto workforce, with an estimated 100 operatives using fake identities to gain employment at blockchain companies, enabling long-term access to sensitive systems and facilitating large-scale thefts. According to Chainalysis, North Korean-linked hackers stole a record $2 billion in 2025, accounting for 60% of all global crypto theft that year. Their total historical crypto theft has reached $6.75 billion. Post-theft, they employ specialized money laundering methods, heavily relying on Chinese OTC brokers and cross-chain mixing services rather than standard decentralized exchanges. Security experts, while acknowledging the increased sophistication, emphasize that many attacks still exploit fundamental weaknesses like poor access controls and centralized operational risks. Strengthening private key management, limiting privileged access, and enhancing coordination among exchanges, analysts, and law enforcement immediately after an attack are critical to improving defense and fund recovery chances. The industry's challenge now extends beyond secure smart contracts to safeguarding operational security at the infrastructure level.

marsbitHace 55 min(s)

North Korean Hackers Loot $500 Million in a Single Month, Becoming the Top Threat to Crypto Security

marsbitHace 55 min(s)

Circle CEO's Seoul Visit: No Korean Won Stablecoin Issuance, But Met All Major Korean Banks

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire's recent activities in Seoul indicate a strategic shift for the company, moving away from issuing a Korean won-backed stablecoin and instead focusing on embedding itself as a key infrastructure provider within Korea’s financial and crypto ecosystem. Despite Korea accounting for nearly 30% of global crypto trading volume—with a market characterized by high retail participation and altcoin dominance—Circle has chosen not to compete for the role of stablecoin issuer. Instead, Allaire met with major Korean banks (including Shinhan, KB, and Woori), financial groups, leading exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone), and tech firms like Kakao. This approach reflects a broader industry transition: the core of stablecoin competition is shifting from issuance rights to systemic positioning. With Korean regulators still debating whether banks or tech companies should issue stablecoins, Circle is avoiding regulatory uncertainty by strengthening its role as a service and technology partner. The company is deepening integration with trading platforms, building connections, and promoting stablecoin infrastructure. This positions Circle to benefit regardless of which entity eventually issues a won stablecoin. Allaire also noted the potential for a Chinese yuan stablecoin in the next 3–5 years, underscoring a regional trend of stablecoins becoming more regulated and integrated with traditional finance. Ultimately, Circle’s strategy highlights that future influence in the stablecoin market will belong not necessarily to the issuers, but to the foundational infrastructure layers that enable cross-system transactions.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Circle CEO's Seoul Visit: No Korean Won Stablecoin Issuance, But Met All Major Korean Banks

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

SpaceX Ties Up with Cursor: A High-Stakes AI Gambit of 'Lock First, Acquire Later'

SpaceX has secured an option to acquire AI programming company Cursor for $60 billion, with an alternative clause requiring a $10 billion collaboration fee if the acquisition does not proceed. This structure is not merely a potential acquisition but a strategic move to control core access points in the AI era. The deal is designed as a flexible, dual-path arrangement, allowing SpaceX to either fully acquire Cursor or maintain a binding partnership through high-cost collaboration. This "option-style" approach minimizes immediate regulatory and integration risks while ensuring long-term alignment between the two companies. At its core, the transaction exchanges critical AI-era resources: SpaceX provides its Colossus supercomputing cluster—one of the world’s most powerful AI training infrastructures—while Cursor contributes its AI-native developer environment and strong product adoption. This synergy connects compute power, models, and application layers, forming a closed-loop AI capability stack. Cursor, founded in 2022, has achieved rapid growth with over $1 billion in annual revenue and widespread enterprise adoption. Its value lies in transforming software development through AI agents capable of coding, debugging, and system design—positioning it as a gateway to future software production. For SpaceX, this move is part of a broader strategy to evolve from a aerospace company into an AI infrastructure empire, integrating xAI, supercomputing, and chip manufacturing. Controlling Cursor fills a gap in its developer tooling layer, strengthening its AI narrative ahead of a potential IPO. The deal reflects a shift in AI competition from model superiority to ecosystem and entry-point control. With programming tools as a key battleground, securing developer loyalty becomes crucial for dominating the software production landscape. Risks include questions around Cursor’s valuation, technical integration challenges, and potential regulatory scrutiny. Nevertheless, the deal underscores a strategic bet: controlling both compute and software development access may redefine power dynamics in the AI-driven future.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

SpaceX Ties Up with Cursor: A High-Stakes AI Gambit of 'Lock First, Acquire Later'

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片