A Global View on Crypto Market Dynamics

insights.glassnodePublicado em 2025-10-16Última atualização em 2025-10-17

Glassnode metrics have mainly been explored on a per-asset basis, providing useful insight into capturing the unique market cycles, liquidity patterns, and on-chain activity of individual assets. While this approach has proven extremely useful, it remains limited when trying to understand the market as a whole.

As liquidity and attention continue to spread beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum, market behaviour is increasingly shaped by collective movements across the broader altcoin landscape, a segment that remains underexplored yet crucial for investors and traders to understand.

To address this, we've developed a multi-asset framework that includes the Multi-Asset Explorer – an experimental dashboard that visualizes Glassnode metrics for over 1,000 assets simultaneously. Aggregating and comparing on-chain and market data across assets provides a broader perspective and a more comprehensive understanding of the crypto ecosystem's dynamics. The framework combines Glassnode’s on-chain and market metrics to help users identify liquidity trends, sentiment shifts, and structural changes across the market.

🔗
Explore the dashboard in Glassnode Studio. Available to Professional plan users.

On-Chain and Market Data: A Unified Framework

How to use the dashboard:

At the core of the Explorer is a heatmap interface. Each row represents an asset, each column a day, and each cell shows the value of the selected metric. Above the heatmap sits a context panel displaying Bitcoin’s price (black), the chosen metric for Bitcoin (orange), and the median or other aggregate across the selected assets (blue).

This layout makes it immediately clear whether Bitcoin is behaving in line with the broader market or diverging from it. Users can customize the time window and the summary statistic, switching between median, mean, sum, percentiles, or standard deviation, and choose the number or types of assets to include. Additionally, users can sort the heatmaps using each individual metric. This results in a single interface that connects data streams previously viewed separately.

Sector View: Understanding Inter-Sector Rotations

The Multi-Asset Explorer also introduces a Sector View on our data. This aggregates metrics across groups of related tokens. Users can analyse trends within categories such as Layer-1s, Ethereum ecosystem tokens, DeFi, memes, or stablecoins, and compare their behaviour over time.

This lens makes it easy to see where liquidity and risk are flowing. For instance, funding rates may surge first in meme coins before spreading into DeFi, or realised profits might cluster in Layer-1s while smaller sectors remain under pressure. By collapsing a large number of assets into a handful of market narratives, the Sector View helps to turn scattered activity into clear structural insight, showing when enthusiasm is isolated versus when it becomes systemic.

Tracking Market-Wide Speculation

Figure 1: Funding Rate Heatmap Access Live Chart

The Funding Rate heatmap (Figure 1) shows funding rates for perpetual futures across the top 500 assets by market capitalisation. The top panel shows Bitcoin’s price, its own funding rate, and the market-wide median. The bottom heatmap highlights periods of broad speculative excess (red) and funding compression or capitulation (blue).

Funding rates in perpetual futures are a useful measure of speculative bias. Positive rates signal long-dominant markets, while negative rates point to short pressure and pessimism.

In the Multi-Asset Explorer, we expand upon our existing funding rate metrics (funding rates & funding rate heatmap). This familiar metric becomes even more powerful when viewed across assets and with summary statistics. Figure 1 shows funding rates across the top 500 assets by market capitalization.

In the upper panel, Bitcoin’s price (black), Bitcoin’s funding rate (orange), and the median funding rate across all assets (blue) move in tandem during broad market rallies. Periods where the median surges ahead of Bitcoin often indicate capital rotating into higher-risk coins, a common sign of overheating.

The lower heatmap turns these dynamics into a visual narrative: red bands mark widespread speculative excess, while blue zones show funding compression and capitulation. The dense red clusters of early 2024 preceded multi-month drawdowns as leverage built across the market and later unwound dramatically.

Recently, funding rates have been very muted, signaling limited speculation across the market. During the recent crash, however, we observed an extreme downward spike across nearly all coins, with the median funding rate reaching -60% annualised – one of the largest market-wide negative readings on record.

Mapping Market Cycles

Figure 2: Relative Supply in Profit

The Relative Supply in Profit heatmap (Figure 2) maps across the top 500 assets, showing the share of supply held at a gain. High values (green) mark broad unrealised profits and distribution pressure, while low values (red) indicate capitulation and loss.

This second example, shown in Figure 2, applies the same framework to an on-chain metric: relative supply in profit, which measures the share of each asset’s circulating supply held at a gain. High readings signal broad unrealised profits and potential distribution pressure, while low readings indicate capitulation.

Around March and April 2024, this metric flashed a clear warning. Nearly every asset displayed high relative profits, the heatmap showing uniform green across the entire market. The result was a broad six-month correction across Bitcoin and altcoins as sustained profit taking occurred. The same pattern re-emerged around December 2024 and January 2025, again preceding a market-wide top. A deep altcoin correction followed for several months, with relative profit across the board steadily trending toward the lows. Looking back to 2023, we see similar patterns: periods of broad relative profitability mark market-wide tops.

In contrast, the most recent data show a split picture. A small cluster of large-cap assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and a few others remains strongly green, while most of the market sits deep red. Bitcoin is at all-time highs, yet the wider landscape shows exhaustion rather than euphoria.

This divergence highlights how the Multi-Asset Explorer surfaces asymmetric strength and rotation, where capital concentrates in majors while the rest of the market consolidates.

Figure 3: Relative Supply in Profit by Sector

Figure 3 shows the agggregate relative profitability by sector. Profits are concentrated in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and large caps, while sectors such as DeFi, AI, and gaming remain deep in loss.

By enabling the Sector View, we can immediately identify in which sectors, on aggregate, the relative profits currently lie. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and top market cap coins are showing high relative profits, while categories such as memes, DeFi, AI, and gaming tokens are deeply red, indicating a very low amount of relative supply in profit and a lot of pain for investors. We can also identify periods during which profits rotate from one sector to another.

Identifying Capitulation and Market Bottoms

Figure 4: Realised Loss USD (Whale Wallets)

In our next example, Figure 4 maps out the aggregate realised losses for large holders across major assets. Sharp spikes mark periods of capitulation, particularly among altcoin investors, while Bitcoin holders remained comparatively stable.

To identify when markets form local or global bottoms, we can observe periods in which large volumes of losses are realised, using Glassnode’s Realized Loss metric. In this case, we focus on holders with substantial balances (whales) for each asset. When these large entities are forced to capitulate into down-moves and significant losses are realised, it often creates conditions for new buyers to finally step in and reverse the downtrend.

As shown in Figure 4, the Multi-Asset Framework captures several events during which altcoin investors realise significant losses in aggregate, while Bitcoin holders do not. This highlights the value of viewing market stress through aggregate altcoin metrics rather than analysing Bitcoin in isolation.

Tracking Market Entrants and Exits

Figure 5: Activity Retention (New and Churned)

Here, we map the aggregate on-chain activity of new and departing participants across all altcoins. The top panel shows the inflows of new wallets late in market cycles, while the bottom panel captures their rapid exit during downturns and eventual stabilization near market bottoms. Heatmaps are omitted for simplicity.

Our final example demonstrates how a multi-asset view can reveal the behavioral dynamics of the market through on-chain activity. Figure 5 highlights the most recent 2 altcoin market tops, which were preceded by a significant, market-wide altcoin rally. It shows Activity Retention across altcoins ranked between 5 and 500 by market capitalization.

In the top panel (Activity Retention – New), we track the aggregate number of new wallets interacting with these altcoins. The spikes represent the arrival of new participants across the market. Historically, such surges tend to occur in the later stages of market cycles, as enthusiasm peaks and retail inflows accelerate. These new entrants often arrive near local or global tops, while experienced holders take profits and liquidity rotates out of higher-risk assets.

The bottom panel (Activity Retention – Churned) reflects the opposite dynamic, showing wallets that drop out of activity after entering the market. Sharp increases in churn usually follow the peaks in new participation, illustrating how late entrants are quickly washed out during downtrends.

Notably, periods where the churn curve flattens, when most of the new participants have already exited, often align with market bottoms. At these points, speculative excess has been cleared, leaving a more stable base of long-term holders and setting the stage for renewed growth.

Together, the two panels outline a full participation cycle: the inflow of new demand at the top and the capitulation of that same cohort at the bottom. These patterns become visible only through an aggregated, multi-asset perspective, a view uniquely enabled by the Multi-Asset Explorer.

It is also worth noting that Bitcoin’s participation profile looks markedly different. While the altcoin aggregate shows three distinct waves of new entrants, Bitcoin exhibits only a single large ramp followed by a smaller secondary wave. This contrast illustrates how on-chain behaviour varies across the market and why analysing altcoins separately can uncover dynamics that remain hidden in Bitcoin-focused views.

Sector-level and Market-wide Insight

The Multi-Asset Explorer brings together Glassnode’s full spectrum of data, including on-chain behaviour, derivatives activity, and sector-level structure, into a single analytical system. It complements our single asset charts with a coherent, comparative framework that helps users understand the market as a connected whole. This is a novel analytical approach, and early adopters have an edge in being the first to explore and interpret the data in this way.

We encourage users to explore the tool, experiment with sectors and metrics, and share feedback as we continue to expand its capabilities. New metrics can also be added, provided they are available for a sufficiently large number of assets. The Multi-Asset Explorer is currently limited to daily resolution, but users can make use of Glassnode’s bulk endpoint to conveniently obtain multi-asset data with up to 10 minute resolution. 
Analysts and traders can apply this framework to build market-wide strategies and signals, identifying crowding, dispersion, or cyclical extremes. We also welcome collaboration on which metrics best serve different use cases and invite users to engage with these datasets through the bulk data endpoints, designed specifically for such research.

Disclaimer: This report is for informational and educational purposes only. The analysis represents a limited case study with significant constraints and should not be interpreted as investment advice or definitive trading signals. Past performance patterns do not guarantee future results. Always conduct thorough due diligence and consider multiple factors before making investment decisions.

Leituras Relacionadas

In the Era of Agent Users, Where Does Crypto Value Flow?

Title: Who Makes Money from Agents? The rise of AI Agents as potential blockchain users raises a crucial question: if they become the next billion users, who will capture the value? Traditional crypto value capture theories—like "fat protocols" (where value accrues to the base layer) and "fat applications" (where value accrues to user-facing apps)—assume human users who value UX, brand, and convenience. Agents, however, operate differently: they interact via APIs, have no brand loyalty, and can switch services with near-zero cost. This shift could disrupt existing value flows. Applications might become "headless," offering their routing and infrastructure as APIs to Agents. Alternatively, Agents might bypass intermediaries entirely, allowing protocols to regain value capture ("fat protocols" reborn). A more extreme scenario is that Agents, being purely rational and cost-sensitive, could commoditize the entire stack, compressing margins toward marginal cost and turning crypto into a low-margin utility. However, Agents may not just amplify existing activities; they could enable entirely new ones—like continuous, sub-penny portfolio rebalancing, machine-to-machine commerce, and new market types only viable at automated speeds. This expands the economic pie rather than just redistributing it. Ultimately, the key question for builders is: what will make an Agent return to your service instead of a cheaper alternative? The answer may not be UX but factors like liquidity, latency, settlement guarantees, or a yet-unnamed business model. As humans and Agents will coexist as users, value capture may split: "fat apps" for human-facing services, and a new, evolving model for the Agent-dominated layer.

marsbitHá 23m

In the Era of Agent Users, Where Does Crypto Value Flow?

marsbitHá 23m

Base MCP, The Next Step for x402

Base has officially launched Base MCP, allowing users to connect their Base Account to AI Agents to perform actions like swaps, transfers, portfolio tracking, and transaction history queries through conversational commands. This move aligns with Base's strategic focus on AI, driven by the broader competition in the emerging Agent-to-Agent payment sector. The evolution of Agent payments has accelerated. In late 2024, the primary method involved insecure browser automation. By 2025, solutions like Coinbase's x402 (providing crypto wallets for Agents), Google's AP2, and Visa's token-based system emerged. x402 has since processed 176 million transactions totaling over $70 million, with a median value between $0.01 and $0.10. Stablecoins, particularly USDC, dominate these settlements due to their negligible transaction costs compared to traditional payment fees, which are prohibitive for micro-payments. Coinbase faces competition from Stripe, which has built a comparable infrastructure for Agent payments with its Tempo blockchain, Privy wallets, Bridge routing (acquired for $1.1B), and the recently launched MPP protocol. Both companies are now competing at the application layer. The core reason AI is central to Base's strategy is to expand the scenarios for Agent payments, ensuring more transactions occur on its network. By securing a dominant position and scale advantage in this nascent field, Coinbase aims to capture the future commercial potential of Agent-driven payments. The launch of Base MCP is thus a strategic step in this larger ambition.

marsbitHá 29m

Base MCP, The Next Step for x402

marsbitHá 29m

Reframing Ethereum's Valuation: Why the Fee Model is Wrong, and the 'Treasury Logic' is the Future?

"Rethinking Ethereum's Value: The 'Vault Logic' Framework" Traditional valuation models incorrectly treat Ethereum as a company, valuing ETH based on transaction fees ("revenue"). This is flawed. Fees are network friction; a successful network aims to reduce them to zero. Ethereum's average fee has dropped from over $50 in 2021 to around $0.20 today, while transaction volume has tripled. Instead, view Ethereum as a digital vault securing ~$250 billion in on-chain assets (stablecoins, RWAs, L2 bridged funds, wBTC, etc.). Post-merge, Ethereum's security is directly purchased with its own asset: ETH. To attack the network, an attacker must acquire and control staked ETH. Therefore, the vault's security level is intrinsically tied to ETH's market value. Currently, the value of all staked ETH is only ~$72B, protecting ~$250B in assets—a dangerous imbalance. For robust security, the staked ETH securing the network should be valued significantly *higher* than the total value it protects. Applying a conservative security multiplier suggests ETH's fair value should be closer to ~$6,900 (vs. ~$2,070 currently). As on-chain asset value grows into the trillions, ETH's price must rise proportionally to maintain this security budget. Comparisons to free infrastructure like Linux or low-margin utilities like the DTCC are misguided. Their security is provided externally (community, law, banks). Ethereum's security is internal and must be purchased in the open market using ETH. ETH is not the clearinghouse; it is the collateral backing it. The model is not a short-term price predictor but a structural framework. The economic force for ETH appreciation grows monotonically with the adoption of Ethereum for settling value. The narrative that high fees are good is backwards; low fees enable more activity, which increases the value needing protection, thus demanding a more valuable ETH.

marsbitHá 36m

Reframing Ethereum's Valuation: Why the Fee Model is Wrong, and the 'Treasury Logic' is the Future?

marsbitHá 36m

Justin Sun’s Interview with Hurun Report: A New Order and Certainty for Value Flow in the Era of Transformation

In an interview with *Hurun Report*, Justin Sun, founder of TRON, discussed the evolution of the Web3 industry as it moves from initial exploration to large-scale adoption. He emphasized that the core value of blockchain lies in building an open and inclusive internet of value, enabling anyone globally to transfer and use funds efficiently and at low cost, regardless of location or access to banking. Sun highlighted that projects with lasting impact are those built on genuine demand and real-world usage. He pointed to the stablecoin payment ecosystem as the most mature and scalable application currently, noting that TRON has rapidly become one of the world's largest stablecoin networks. The circulation of USDT on TRON has surpassed $86.3 billion, driven by actual use cases such as cross-border transfers and daily payments, demonstrating strong network effects. Regarding strategy, Sun outlined a methodology combining data-driven iteration, rapid execution, and user-centric focus. He cited the decision to partner with Tether to launch TRC-20 USDT as a key strategic move, based on an assessment of market trends and long-term potential, which has become a significant growth engine for the TRON ecosystem. On globalization, Sun stressed the importance of local compliance and cultural adaptation, noting that success in different markets depends on deep understanding and local partnerships. He also addressed the convergence of AI and blockchain, describing it as a transformative direction where blockchain provides decentralized infrastructure for AI, while AI enhances the intelligence and user experience of blockchain systems. For industry participants and young entrepreneurs, Sun advised continuous learning and adaptability in a fast-changing environment, focusing on building irreplaceable core strengths rather than spreading resources too thinly. Through infrastructure development, global strategy, and technological foresight, TRON aims to advance the practical implementation and evolution of the value internet.

marsbitHá 1h

Justin Sun’s Interview with Hurun Report: A New Order and Certainty for Value Flow in the Era of Transformation

marsbitHá 1h

Samsung Leverages Technology Cycles, SK Hynix Relies on HBM, What Enabled Micron to Win a Trillion-Dollar Market Cap?

Micron Technology, the Idaho-based memory chip maker, recently saw its market cap surpass $1 trillion, securing its position as one of the top three DRAM manufacturers alongside Samsung and SK Hynix. Its survival and growth story is marked by a unique combination of political maneuvering and hard-won manufacturing efficiency, but also strategic missteps that now challenge its future. Founded in 1978 in Boise without significant government or capital backing, Micron repeatedly turned to Washington for survival during critical junctures. In the 1980s, it filed anti-dumping complaints against Japanese firms, leading to the U.S.-Japan Semiconductor Agreement. Ironically, this created an opening for Samsung, which Micron had earlier licensed its 64K DRAM technology to. In 2002, Micron avoided heavy fines in a price-fixing investigation by acting as a whistleblower against its competitors, cementing its reputation as a "political opportunist." A major strategic error occurred in 2013 with its $2.5 billion acquisition of bankrupt Japanese firm Elpida. This deal burdened Micron with integrating incompatible manufacturing processes just as the industry was pivoting toward HBM (High Bandwidth Memory), a critical technology for AI. SK Hynix had launched its first HBM chip that same year. By the time AI demand exploded with ChatGPT in 2022, SK Hynix commanded about 85% of the HBM3 market, while Micron, playing catch-up, held only around 3%. In 2017, Micron employed similar tactics against a new competitor, Chinese startup Fujian Jinhua, by alleging intellectual property theft, which led to U.S. sanctions effectively crippling the firm. However, this strategy backfired in 2023 when China banned Micron's products from its critical infrastructure, causing its revenue share from China to plummet from 14% in FY2023 to just 7.1% by FY2025. Today, Micron faces a triple squeeze: it lags in the high-margin HBM race, faces pricing pressure in low-end DRAM from Chinese manufacturers like CXMT, and has lost crucial access to the booming Chinese AI server market. Despite its political strategies, Micron's core strength is its exceptional manufacturing cost control, achieved through decades of engineering. Its DRAM chips have a smaller cell area than its rivals, yielding more chips per wafer. This efficiency has been vital for weathering industry downturns. However, this advantage cannot compensate for the decade lost in HBM development. Micron is now racing to ramp up production of its HBM3E, certified by NVIDIA, and develop HBM4. Its future hinges on whether it can close this technological "time debt" through relentless R&D and execution, in a marathon where its competitors, having started earlier, are not slowing down.

marsbitHá 1h

Samsung Leverages Technology Cycles, SK Hynix Relies on HBM, What Enabled Micron to Win a Trillion-Dollar Market Cap?

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片