A Turning Point Approaches: The "Net Long vs. Net Short" Structure Presents a Historically Rare State

marsbitPublié le 2026-03-09Dernière mise à jour le 2026-03-09

Résumé

The cryptocurrency market is exhibiting a historically rare structure in perpetual futures, with directional long positions nearly equal to directional short positions, signaling a potential major shift (变盘). Analysis using Ethena's transparency dashboard reveals that Ethena's deployed capital, which acts as a proxy for excess long demand in the market, has plummeted to $790 million—just 71% of its 2025 low and 12.9% of its October 2025 peak. This sharp decline, occurring amid relatively stable prices since Bitcoin's crash to $60,000, suggests a significant reduction in speculative long leverage and a rise in directional shorting or hedging demand, particularly from VCs and projects hedging illiquid assets. While this balanced state could theoretically persist, it is extremely uncommon in other asset markets, indicating that a volatility surge and market turn may be imminent.

This article is from: Kyle Soska

Compiled by | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina); Translator | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

Editor's Note: The market has been oscillating at low levels. Will the future direction be up or down? Ramiel Capital Chief Investment Officer Kyle Soska analyzes the long-short structure of the perpetual futures market in his latest article and attempts to provide an answer by examining changes in market risk appetite.

The highlight of Kyle's analysis method is that by incorporating data disclosures from Ethena, he excludes basis positions and hedging positions, which have some noise impact on the price direction, and focuses only on net long and net short positions, which more directly determine the market's direction. His final conclusion is that the current market's net long vs. net short structure is in a historically rare state. While it's possible this could become the new normal, observing other asset markets reveals that such a trend is generally extremely difficult to sustain long-term. In other words, a turning point may be imminent.

Below is the original content by Kyle Soska, compiled by Odaily Planet Daily.

The cryptocurrency market has been in a risk-off state for several consecutive months. I have been sifting through various forms of market data, hoping to find signs of a potential market turnaround. This article will delve into the market structure of perpetual futures and, combined with data from the Ethena transparency dashboard, explore changes in market risk appetite.

Ethena's currently deployed capital has fallen to its lowest level in years, only 71% of the low point in 2025. This is not a criticism of Ethena, but rather a reflection of the current market state. Directional shorts have nearly equaled directional longs — an extremely rare structure in the crypto market that has historically been difficult to sustain long-term.

The cryptocurrency market has long been characterized by extremely high asset volatility and the widespread use of high leverage by traders. Since the BitMEX era, perpetual futures have become the highest volume product, with trading volumes typically 5 to 20 times that of the spot market. As the core hub providing leverage to retail investors in the market, observing the perpetual futures market can provide a good reflection of the overall risk appetite of the crypto market.

Ethena provides us with a unique window into the crypto derivatives market. As shown in the figure below, Ethena's strategy essentially executes a carry trade in cryptocurrency, and its logic is very simple — when a trader goes long on a crypto asset, Ethena acts as the counterparty and goes short. Simultaneously, Ethena buys an equivalent amount of the asset in the spot market to hedge its short position.

In a sense, Ethena provides "Leverage-as-a-Service":

  • Traders want exposure to rising crypto assets but lack sufficient capital;
  • Ethena has capital but has a lower risk appetite;
  • Therefore, traders borrow capital from Ethena through perpetual futures, and their cost is the "basis" + "perpetual funding rate".

According to the structure of perpetual futures, every long position is matched by a short position; they are always 1:1. Each open interest represents a cash flow agreement between two parties. The exchange's role is to match these contracts, ensuring that every contract always has a sufficiently funded long and short holder. The matrix below shows the four possible outcomes when an exchange matches contracts.

Every trade has a buyer and a seller. When the buyer and seller of a contract are both long or both short, the exchange only needs to transfer the contract ownership between the two parties. This transfer does not create or destroy any contracts. When the buyer is long and the seller is short, a new contract must be created: the buyer gets a long position, the seller gets a short position, thereby increasing the open interest by 1. Conversely, if the seller is long and the buyer is short, the exchange can unbind both parties from a specific contract and delete that contract, thereby reducing the open interest by 1.

So who holds these contracts in a typical market? Essentially, there are four types of contract holders:

  • Directional longs want exposure to price increases. They are risk-seeking participants, and their risk demand depends on the strength of market risk appetite.
  • Directional shorts comprise two types of participants: those who want exposure to asset price declines, and those who want to hedge their holdings in a more tax-efficient manner. For example, VCs and company employees who receive compensation in tokens often want to hedge future unlockable tokens to lock in the current price. For many altcoins, market liquidity is often too thin to support effective direct hedging, or the relevant market may not even exist. In such cases, companies like Cumberland, Wintermute, FalconX, Flowdesk, Amber, etc., can construct a dynamically managed synthetic position: by shorting a number of highly liquid and correlated assets (like Bitcoin and Ethereum) to hedge an exposure to a less liquid asset (e.g., Monad). This category also includes projects like Neutrl, which use this hedging structure as a yield strategy.
  • Basis traders are opportunistic shorts. They are not concerned with price direction but voluntarily match the excess demand from directional longs when market imbalances occur. In most market environments, long demand tends to exceed short demand, and their role is to fill this gap. Their scale is typically highly elastic and can expand or shrink rapidly.
  • Perp-Perp arbitrageurs hold both long and short positions in perpetual futures simultaneously. Their role is to connect prices between different perpetual futures markets and eliminate any slight price differences after deducting transaction fees. Their long and short positions are perfectly matched at any given moment.

According to the structure of perpetual futures, every contract must be 1:1 long-short matched, so we know that "Directional longs + Arbitrage longs = Directional shorts + Basis shorts + Arbitrage shorts"; furthermore, due to the arbitrage structure, we also know that "Arbitrage longs = Arbitrage shorts"; canceling this relationship out from the first equation gives us "Directional longs = Directional shorts + Basis shorts".

Ethena provides us with a proxy metric for all basis shorts, thereby helping us observe the structural comparison between directional longs and directional shorts.

The chart below shows the balance sheet disclosed by Ethena, which divides assets into cash and deployed capital, for the time range from December 27, 2024, to March 7, 2026.

In 2025, following the launch of the TRUMP token in January, the market quickly entered a risk-off state, continuing to decline during the initial tariff discussions and the "Liberation Day" event in April. During this period, Ethena's deployed capital plummeted from over $5 billion to about $1.1 billion, a drop of more than 75%.

Remember, Ethena's deployed capital can be seen as a proxy for excess long demand in the market. Although Ethena is not the only institution executing this trade, its scale is very large (at times accounting for about 25% of the total size on Binance and Bybit). As long as Ethena has excess cash, it would theoretically expand its positions to fill the unmet long demand in the market. This means that while overall long demand may not have fallen by 75%, the excess long demand not absorbed by directional shorts did indeed decrease by that much.

The chart below shows the change in deployed capital in Ethena's balance sheet relative to its total size, the 2025 low, and the 2025 high.

Looking at the current market, Ethena's deployed capital across all markets (BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, HYPE) is $790 million. This figure is only 71% of the 2025 low and 12.9% of the pre-October 10th high. This number is not a criticism of Ethena but a reflection of the overall market state — net long demand in the current market is at a historically low level.

It is worth noting that during the market crash when Bitcoin fell to $60,000, Ethena still deployed over $2 billion in capital. Yet, just one month later, after February 8, 2026, deployed capital plummeted by 60%.

The chart below zooms in on Ethena's deployed capital and Bitcoin's price movement since January of this year.

Since BTC fell to $60,000, Ethena's basis positions have shrunk from over $2 billion to less than $800 million. This change is quite intriguing because the overall market price has been relatively stable during this period. There are three possible explanations for this situation:

  • Basis trades from the February crash are gradually being closed. These trades were profitable but unsustainable (the basis became more negative, but the funding rate was also negative);
  • Directional short and hedging demand has increased, squeezing out opportunistic basis traders;
  • Insufficient demand for leveraged long exposure.

In my opinion, the reality is mainly a combination of the first two possibilities, with the third having a smaller impact. As shown in the figure above, during the period when Ethena was gradually closing positions, the open interest for Bitcoin and other major assets remained generally stable. At the same time, funding rates were negative for a considerable period, and coins like SOL had cumulative negative funding rates on multiple exchanges. This indicates that market demand for directional shorting or hedging exposure is rising.

If I had to guess, I think many small and medium-sized crypto companies and VCs are going through a crisis. Think of those small-cap projects (like Eigen, Grass, Monad, etc.). There could be hundreds of such tokens, and each project corresponds to multiple VCs, a project team, a company treasury, and a large number of employees. VCs need to limit losses and lock in profits to meet fund investment requirements, and project companies need to protect their operational capital reserves and employee size. This creates a situation where all participants must squeeze as much yield as possible from limited resources, and the solution is often a "crowded trade," namely actively managed structured products that short a basket of correlated assets.

We can see some signs of these structured products in some of ETH's short-term spikes, as these rallies often trigger short covering and drive synchronous increases in many small and mid-cap crypto assets. Another piece of evidence is the noticeable crowding out of opportunistic basis trading (e.g., Ethena) from the market.

Whatever the reason, we can be sure that for almost the first time in crypto market history, directional longs and directional shorts have nearly reached complete parity.

Theoretically, there is no reason why this state cannot become the new normal, or that this structure must change. But if we look at markets in other asset classes, we find that such a trend is very rare to sustain long-term.

Questions liées

QWhat is the current state of the net long vs. net short structure in the perpetual futures market according to the article?

AThe net long vs. net short structure is in a historically rare state where directional shorts have almost reached parity with directional longs, a situation that is extremely rare and difficult to sustain long-term in the crypto market.

QHow does Ethena's deployed capital serve as an indicator for the market's risk appetite?

AEthena's deployed capital acts as a proxy for the market's excess long demand that is not absorbed by directional shorts. Its current sharp decline to multi-year lows reflects a significant drop in the market's overall risk-on appetite and net long demand.

QWhat are the four types of contract holders in the perpetual futures market as described in the article?

AThe four types are: 1. Directional longs (speculating on price increases), 2. Directional shorts (speculating on price decreases or hedging existing holdings), 3. Basis traders (opportunistic shorts filling excess long demand), and 4. Perp-Perp arbitrageurs (holding matched long and short positions to profit from price differences between markets).

QWhat major event does the article suggest might be causing an increase in directional short or hedging demand?

AThe article suggests that many small and mid-sized crypto companies and VCs might be facing a crisis, leading them to engage in a 'crowded trade' of actively managing structured products to short a basket of correlated assets to limit losses, lock in profits, and protect treasury and payroll funds.

QWhat does the article conclude about the likelihood of the current market structure persisting?

AThe article concludes that while theoretically this balanced structure could become a new normal, observing other asset classes shows that such a trend is extremely rare to maintain for a long time, implying that a significant market move (a turning point) is likely coming soon.

Lectures associées

À mesure que le consensus s'accélère, sur quoi parient les jeunes investisseurs ?

Dans le paysage actuel des investissements technologiques, la rapidité d’évolution des consensus oblige les jeunes investisseurs à s’adapter. L’IA quitte désormais l’écran pour s’intégrer au monde physique, avec un accent croissant sur l’intelligence embarquée, les robots et les systèmes industriels. Le défi n’est plus seulement de démontrer des capacités techniques, mais d’assurer une livraison fiable et scalable dans des environnements réels. Parallèlement, la valeur des grands modèles linguistiques ne se limite pas à leur performance initiale ; elle réside dans leur capacité à s’insérer durablement dans les flux de travail, créant ainsi une « roue de l’intelligence » auto-renforçante grâce aux données et retours utilisateurs. Face aux limites des données humaines, des approches comme l’apprentissage par renforcement et les modèles scientifiques fondamentaux émergent comme des pistes pour dépasser ces contraintes. Enfin, dans les domaines de pointe comme l’aérospatiale commerciale, l’informatique quantique ou l’énergie avancée, le capital doit faire preuve de patience. Ces secteurs requièrent des cycles de validation longs, une maîtrise des chaînes d’approvisionnement et une résilience face à l’incertitude. Les investisseurs doivent donc anticiper les besoins futurs et soutenir des équipes capables de naviguer dans ces écosystèmes complexes, en misant sur le long terme plutôt que sur des rendements immédiats.

marsbitIl y a 7 mins

À mesure que le consensus s'accélère, sur quoi parient les jeunes investisseurs ?

marsbitIl y a 7 mins

Libération de 100 millions de dollars de liquidités ? La nouvelle politique de Pump.fun teste la technique du pump de 5 minutes

Pump.fun, une plateforme d'émission de memecoins, a lancé le mode BOOST le 21 juillet. Ce nouveau mécanisme par défaut vise à résoudre le problème de liquidités "mortes" estimé à plus de 100 millions de dollars par an. Habituellement, lorsqu'un jeton migre de sa courbe de liaison (bonding curve) vers un pool de liquidités, environ 20% des fonds restent bloqués de façon permanente, même si le jeton tombe à zéro. Le mode BOOST redirige ces 20% (environ 17.6 SOL ou 2516 USDC) pour acheter le jeton lui-même via un système TWAP (prix moyen pondéré dans le temps) pendant les 5 minutes suivant sa migration, puis détruit immédiatement les jetons achetés. L'objectif est de créer un pic d'achat initial ("un feu d'artifice") pour stimuler l'activité trading et améliorer l'expérience des traders, qui recherchent souvent un "pump" au moment du lancement. Pump.fun espère ainsi augmenter la rétention des utilisateurs et les volumes d'échange durables, renforçant à terme ses revenus et la valeur de son jeton natif PUMP. Cependant, des craintes existent. Certains estiment que cela pourrait faciliter artificiellement le succès de jetons de mauvaise qualité et qu'un crash brutal pourrait survenir dès que l'achat programmé s'arrête après 5 minutes, exposant les traders à un risque élevé.

Foresight NewsIl y a 20 mins

Libération de 100 millions de dollars de liquidités ? La nouvelle politique de Pump.fun teste la technique du pump de 5 minutes

Foresight NewsIl y a 20 mins

Le plus grand gestionnaire d'actifs indien, SBI, fait son entrée en Bourse. Que révèlent les données de trading ?

SBI Funds Management, le plus grand gestionnaire d'actifs indien, a réalisé son introduction en bourse le 21 juillet, levant environ 1 milliard de dollars. L'opération a été souscrite environ 42 fois, mais le cours n'a augmenté que d'environ 6,3 % le premier jour. Ces chiffres signalent que le marché indien dispose de liquidités pour absorber des actifs de qualité, mais que les investisseurs refusent de surenchérir sans condition. Le succès modéré de SBI ouvre une fenêtre pour les introductions en bourse, mais elle sera probablement réservée aux entreprises fortes, avec une marque solide, des flux de trésorerie stables et une croissance à long terme claire. Un autre point notable est le faible niveau des frais de garantie (environ 0,01%), qui a conduit certaines banques internationales à se retirer. Cela reflète le pouvoir de négociation des émetteurs forts comme SBI, qui s'appuient sur leurs réseaux locaux, plutôt qu'un désintérêt pour l'Inde. La croissance du secteur de la gestion d'actifs en Inde, portée par la pénétration des fonds communs de placement, soutient la valorisation de SBI. Cependant, les investisseurs intègrent déjà cette croissance et ne paient pas de prime excessive. Le véritable test pour le marché des IPO indien viendra des prochains grands projets, comme Reliance Jio et la NSE (Bourse nationale). Leur succès à une valorisation raisonnable confirmera la réouverture de la fenêtre. Sinon, le cas SBI restera un succès isolé d'un émetteur privilégié.

marsbitIl y a 37 mins

Le plus grand gestionnaire d'actifs indien, SBI, fait son entrée en Bourse. Que révèlent les données de trading ?

marsbitIl y a 37 mins

Le marché actions A sacrifié : résilience, anticipations et fondamentaux

**Résumé :** En juillet, le secteur technologique des actions A a été affecté par la contagion du risque lié aux ventes forcées sur les marchés coréen et mondiaux. Cependant, cette correction est principalement due à des facteurs externes plutôt qu'à un renversement de la dynamique fondamentale du secteur technologique chinois. Contrairement au marché coréen, très concentré sur les puces mémoire, le secteur technologique A est diversifié, avec des récits d'investissement tant sur les chaînes d'approvisionnement mondiales de l'IA que sur la substitution aux importations. Les autorités ("l'équipe nationale") sont intervenues massivement pour soutenir le marché, avec des engagements d'achats substantiels d'actions et d'ETF, signalant un soutien politique fort et un plancher potentiel du marché. Parallèlement, le marché dans son ensemble bénéficie d'une dynamique de récupération endogène dans trois domaines clés : la consommation (amélioration des prix à la consommation, reprise potentielle des spiritueux), les matières premières cycliques comme l'aluminium (profits élevés, perspectives de hausse des prix, faibles valorisations) et la finance (actifs à dividendes stables, valorisations basses). Ces trois piliers, combinés à la solidité sous-jacente de la technologie, confèrent au marché A une résilience importante, suggérant que le retour à la stabilité n'est peut-être pas loin.

marsbitIl y a 1 h

Le marché actions A sacrifié : résilience, anticipations et fondamentaux

marsbitIl y a 1 h

Trading

Spot
活动图片