What Does Ethena's Trend Reveal About the Cryptocurrency Market?

marsbit2026-03-09 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-03-09 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

The article analyzes the perpetual futures market structure and risk sentiment in the cryptocurrency market using Ethena's transparency dashboard as a key indicator. It reveals that Ethena's deployed capital has dropped to $791 million, only 71% of its 2025 low and 12.9% of its peak, reflecting extremely low net long demand in the market. A key insight is that directional long positions are nearly equal to directional short positions—a rare and historically unsustainable balance in crypto. The analysis breaks down perpetual contract holders into four categories: directional longs, directional shorts (including hedgers), basis traders (like Ethena), and arbitrageurs. Ethena’s role as a basis trader provides a proxy for excess long demand. The sharp decline in its deployed capital—over 60% since February 2026—suggests either the unwinding of unprofitable basis trades, increased hedging activity from directional shorts, or weak leveraged long demand. Current negative funding rates and stable open interest indicate growing short or hedge demand, possibly from VC firms and crypto companies managing risk in a bearish market. This equilibrium between longs and shorts is unusual and may signal a market regime change, though it remains uncertain whether this balance can persist.

Article Author: Kyle Soska

Article Translation: Block unicorn

The cryptocurrency market has been in a risk-off state for several consecutive months, and I have been carefully studying various market data, looking for signs of a potential market turnaround. In this article, I will delve into the market structure of perpetual futures and, combined with data from the Ethena transparency dashboard, analyze market risk appetite.

In short: Ethena's deployed capital is at a multi-year low, only 71% of the 2025 low. This is not a criticism of Ethena, but rather a reflection of the current market conditions. Directional short positions are almost on par with directional long positions, an extremely rare and historically unsustainable balance in the cryptocurrency space.

The cryptocurrency market has long been characterized by the extreme volatility of its assets and the heavy use of leverage by traders. My previous research, "Understanding Cryptocurrency Derivatives: The BitMEX Case Study," explored the novel 100x perpetual contracts offered on BitMEX.

Since the BitMEX era, cryptocurrency futures have become the highest-volume product in the cryptocurrency market, with trading volumes 5 to 20 times that of the spot market. As a center for leveraged trading for retail investors, perpetual contracts can reflect the risk appetite of the cryptocurrency market and are therefore worthy of our attention.

Ethena provides us with an extremely unique perspective, allowing us to gain deep insights into the cryptocurrency derivatives market. As shown in the figure below, Ethena implements a cryptocurrency arbitrage trade. The strategy is simple: when cryptocurrency traders go long, Ethena acts as their counterparty and goes short. Ethena ensures it buys exactly the same amount of assets as the traders are shorting. In a sense, Ethena provides a leverage service. Traders want to profit from rising cryptocurrency prices but lack capital; while Ethena has capital but limited risk tolerance. Therefore, traders use perpetual contracts to borrow funds from Ethena at the basis plus the funding cost of the perpetual contract.

(Chart: Ethena Mechanism Illustration)

By construction, each long contract corresponds to a short contract in a 1:1 ratio. Each open interest in perpetual contracts represents a cash flow agreement between two parties. The exchange's role is to facilitate the matching of these contracts, ensuring that each contract always has a sufficiently funded long and short holder. The table below shows the four possible outcomes facilitated by the exchange.

Perpetual Contract Matching Matrix

Every trade has a buyer and a seller. When both the buyer and seller of a contract are long or both are short, the exchange merely transfers ownership of the contract from one party to the other. 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, with the buyer taking the long position and the seller taking the short position, increasing the open interest by 1 contract. On the other hand, if the seller is long and the buyer is short, the exchange can directly unwind the contracts of the buyer and seller and delete the newly released contract, decreasing the open interest by 1 contract.

So, who are the actual holders of these contracts in a typical market? I believe contract holders can be broadly categorized into four types:

  • [Long] Directional Longs

  • [Short] Directional Shorts / Hedgers

    • a. Direct Asset Shorts / Hedges

    • b. Structured Product Hedges

  • [Short] Basis Traders (e.g., Ethena, etc.)

  • [Hybrid] Perpetual Arbitrageurs

Directional Longs seek exposure. They are risk-takers, and their demand for risk depends on their level of risk appetite.

Directional Shorts include both investors who wish to take on the downside risk of an asset and investors who wish to hedge their assets in a tax-efficient manner. Venture capital firms and company employees compensated with tokens often wish to hedge tokens that vest at current prices. For altcoins, many markets are too small for effective direct hedging, or may not even exist. In such cases, companies like Cumberland, Wintermute, FalconX, Flowdesk, and Amber can construct dynamically managed synthetic positions, using short sales of Bitcoin and Ethereum and other highly correlated assets to hedge exposure to less liquid markets (e.g., Monad). Projects like Neutrl also employ this strategy, offering such hedging as a yield strategy.

Basis Traders are opportunistic shorts. They are not interested in directional risk but actively fill the excess demand from directional longs when market supply and demand are imbalanced. Under most market mechanisms, long demand exceeds short demand, and the basis traders' role is to bridge the gap. Their position sizes are usually highly elastic.

Perpetual Arbitrageurs hold both long and short positions in perpetual contracts simultaneously. Their role is to connect different perpetual contracts and correct any minor price discrepancies, at a cost not exceeding transaction fees. Their long positions perfectly match their short positions at any given moment.

By construction, all perpetual contracts are in a 1:1 ratio, with long positions perfectly matched by short positions, so we know:

Directional Longs + Arbitrage Longs = Directional Shorts + Basis Shorts + Arbitrage Shorts

Furthermore, the structure of perpetual arbitrage tells us:

Arbitrage Longs = Arbitrage Shorts

Canceling this term from the first equation yields:

Directional Longs = Directional Shorts + Basis Shorts

Ethena provides us with a proxy for all basis shorts, which helps us gain insight into the difference between directional longs and shorts.

The chart below is Ethena's self-reported balance sheet, divided into cash and deployed capital, for the period from December 27, 2024, to March 7, 2026:

(Chart: Ethena Balance Sheet 2024-2026)

The market turned sharply risk-off in January 2025 after the launch of the $TRUMP token, followed by a continued decline during the initial tariff discussions and the "Liberation Day" in April. During this period, Ethena's deployed capital plummeted from over $5 billion to around $1.108 billion, a drop of more than 75%.

It is important to note that Ethena's deployed capital can serve as a reference for the degree of excess long demand in the market. Although Ethena is not the only institution conducting such trades, its size is substantial (sometimes around 25% of Binance and Bybit), and as long as it has ample cash, it will expand its positions to meet any unmet long demand. This suggests that while total long demand may not have fallen by 75% by April 2025, the excess demand not met by directional short covering did indeed fall by 75%.

The chart below shows the deployment of Ethena's balance sheet relative to its total size, the 2025 minimum, and maximum values.

(Chart: Ethena Deployment Comparison)

Observing the current market, the total capital deployed by Ethena across all markets (BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP, HYPE) is only about $791 million. This is only 71% of the 2025 minimum and a mere 12.9% of the peak value before October 10th. This figure is not a criticism of Ethena but reflects the current market conditions: net long demand is at a historically low level.

It is particularly noteworthy that during the market crash where Bitcoin price plummeted to $60,000, Ethena deployed over $2 billion in capital. Since just a month ago, on February 8, 2026, Ethena's deployed capital has astonishingly decreased by 60%!

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

(Chart: Ethena Deployed Capital vs. Bitcoin Price Trend 2026)

Since the Bitcoin price fell to $60,000, Ethena's basis positions have shrunk by over 60%, from over $2 billion to less than $800 million. This change is puzzling because the market has been relatively stable during this period. The reasons for this are as follows:

  1. Profitable but unsustainable basis trades established after the February crash (the basis turned negative, but funding rates were also negative) are being gradually unwound.

  2. Increased hedging activity from directional shorts and price-insensitive participants is squeezing out opportunistic basis traders.

  3. Insufficient demand for leveraged exposure from longs.

(Chart: Open Interest vs. Funding Rate Trend)

In my opinion, the truth is primarily determined by a combination of factors 1 and 2, with factor 3 playing a minimal role. As shown in the chart above, during this period of gradual Ethereum project unwinding, the overall open interest for Bitcoin (and other major cryptocurrencies) has remained relatively stable. Meanwhile, funding rates have been negative for an extended period, with many cryptocurrencies (e.g., SOL) having cumulative negative funding rates across multiple exchanges. This indicates an increasing demand for shorting or hedging some form of risk exposure.

If I had to guess, I would say that small and medium-sized cryptocurrency companies and venture capital firms are both facing a crisis. Think of small-cap projects like Eigen, Grass, Monad, etc. There are hundreds of such cryptocurrencies, each representing dozens of venture capital firms and a company with capital and employees. Venture capital firms need to control losses and lock in profits to meet fund investment targets, and these companies need to ensure cash flow and headcount. This creates a situation where all participants want to squeeze the maximum benefit from the "stone," and the answer lies in relatively crowded trades through actively managed structured products that short a basket of correlated assets.

We saw the presence of these structured products during Ethereum's (ETH) explosive rally days, which also triggered short-covering rallies in numerous small and medium-sized cryptocurrencies. Another piece of evidence is the significant crowding out of opportunistic basis traders like Ethena.

Regardless of the specific reason, we can be sure that this is the first time in the history of the crypto market that directional longs and directional shorts have almost reached equilibrium. There is no充分 reason why this state cannot become the new normal, nor can it be proven that this market regime must change, but looking at other asset classes and markets, it is very unusual for such a trend to persist.

İlgili Sorular

QWhat does the significant decrease in Ethena's deployed capital indicate about the current cryptocurrency market?

AThe significant decrease in Ethena's deployed capital, which is at 71% of its 2025 low and only 12.9% of its peak, indicates that net long demand is at a historically low level. This reflects a prolonged risk-off sentiment in the market, where there is a lack of excess demand for leveraged long positions that is not being met by directional shorts.

QAccording to the article, what are the four main categories of perpetual contract holders in the crypto market?

AThe four main categories are: 1. Directional Longs (speculators seeking upside exposure), 2. Directional Shorts / Hedgers (those betting on downside or hedging existing assets), 3. Basis Traders (opportunistic shorts like Ethena that fill excess long demand), and 4. Perpetual Arbitrageurs (traders who hold both long and short positions to exploit price differences between contracts).

QHow does the article use the equation 'Directional Longs = Directional Shorts + Basis Shorts' to interpret market structure?

AThis equation, derived from the fact that all perpetual contracts are matched 1:1, shows that the amount of speculative long demand must be balanced by a combination of speculative short selling and the capital provided by basis traders. Ethena's deployed capital serves as a proxy for 'Basis Shorts,' allowing analysts to infer the relationship and imbalance between directional long and short interest.

QWhat are the proposed reasons for the 60% contraction in Ethena's positions since the February market crash, despite relatively stable prices?

AThe proposed reasons are: 1. The unwinding of profitable but unsustainable basis trades established after the February crash (where basis turned negative along with funding rates). 2. Increased hedging activity from directional shorts and price-insensitive participants, crowding out opportunistic basis traders. The article suggests reason 3 (insufficient leveraged long demand) plays a minimal role compared to the first two.

QWhat unique market condition does the current low level of Ethena's deployment reveal, and why is it considered unusual?

AIt reveals a market condition where directional long positions are nearly equal to directional short positions, achieving an extremely rare and historically unsustainable equilibrium. This is unusual because, in most asset classes and market regimes, there is typically a natural imbalance with a greater propensity for long speculation, making such a balance between bullish and bearish directional bets highly atypical.

İlgili Okumalar

Wall Street's Most Famous 'Cassandra' Now Has His Sights Set on Nvidia

Michael Burry, the famed "Big Short" investor, has once again captured Wall Street's attention with a series of short positions against major tech and semiconductor stocks, most notably Nvidia. In late June and July, through his "Cassandra Unchained" newsletter, Burry disclosed short bets against Nvidia, Tesla, Applied Materials, Caterpillar, the SOXX semiconductor ETF, and later, Micron Technology. His core thesis revolves around potential distortions in the AI infrastructure boom, specifically questioning whether extended depreciation schedules (e.g., 6 years vs. a realistic 2-3 years for AI chips) by cloud giants like Microsoft and Google artificially inflate profits. He also raises concerns about possible "off-balance-sheet circular financing," where chip demand might be propped up by vendor-backed funding to clients. Nvidia's stock experienced volatility following these disclosures, briefly dipping but largely holding near Burry's reported entry points, leaving his positions roughly flat or slightly underwater as of late July. This move is part of a pattern for Burry, whose track record since his legendary 2008 bet is mixed. He has faced notable losses, such as on Tesla in 2021, while scoring on broader market turns like the 2020 pandemic crash. His methodology focuses intensely on free cash flow and scrutinizing original financial documents to spot overvaluation and structural risks, but it often struggles with timing the market. The article contrasts Burry's stance with other prominent investors. Steve Eisman, another "Big Short" figure, is not shorting Nvidia, citing strong fundamentals but expressing nervousness about sustainability. Jim Chanos agrees with the broad "accounting mismatch" concern—comparing it to the dot-com bubble—but targets financial leverage in private equity firms rather than the chip stocks themselves. While Nvidia's short interest remains relatively low at 1.3-1.4% of float, the massive stock size means absolute short losses have been significant, exceeding $5 billion earlier this year. The piece concludes that for ordinary investors, the key takeaway is not replicating specific short bets but learning from the critical frameworks these investors use: questioning rosy accounting, identifying structural vulnerabilities, and maintaining skepticism during market euphoria, even if pinpointing the exact catalyst for a downturn remains elusive.

marsbit26 dk önce

Wall Street's Most Famous 'Cassandra' Now Has His Sights Set on Nvidia

marsbit26 dk önce

Weekly Selection丨Epic Stock Market Volatility, Changxin Tech's IPO Reshapes Storage Landscape, Saylor Aims to Re-Anchor STRC Around September 8th

PANews Weekly Digest: Market Turmoil, Tech Breakthroughs, and Crypto Developments. The week saw significant volatility across global markets. South Korea's KOSPI index experienced extreme turbulence, including multiple trading halts, largely driven by sharp declines in AI hardware stocks like SK Hynix. In contrast, China's Changxin Xinqiao (CXC) achieved a landmark IPO with a market cap surpassing 4 trillion yuan, marking a major success for the domestic DRAM industry after a decade of losses. In the crypto and Web3 space, several key narratives emerged. AI is driving demand for new infrastructure, with projects like AI agent wallets and programmable payments gaining traction, attracting interest from firms like Coinbase. The Bitcoin mining sector is pivoting, with companies like MARA focusing on energy management as electricity becomes a core AI-era asset. Meanwhile, the RWA (Real World Assets) sector faces a "utilization puzzle," with hundreds of billions in on-chain assets remaining dormant. Notable market movements included a historic single-day surge of over 17% for the KOSPI index and a significant migration of $16.5 billion in staked ETH within the Lido ecosystem. Michael Saylor announced a target to re-peg the STRC stablecoin around September 8th. Other highlights include discussions on Ethereum's ambitious 2030 roadmap for scaling and privacy, analysis showing high protocol revenues not always translating to token price gains, and warnings from Citi about potential extreme commodity price shocks by late 2026.

marsbit31 dk önce

Weekly Selection丨Epic Stock Market Volatility, Changxin Tech's IPO Reshapes Storage Landscape, Saylor Aims to Re-Anchor STRC Around September 8th

marsbit31 dk önce

When the Market Begins to Question AI Capex: A Full Analysis of Q2 Earnings Reports from Five Tech Giants

In late July 2026, five major US tech giants—Alphabet, Intel, Microsoft, Meta, and Apple—released their Q2 earnings reports. While all companies exceeded revenue and profit expectations, driven by strong AI-related business growth, investor reactions diverged sharply due to concerns over escalating AI capital expenditures (capex) and their impact on free cash flow. Alphabet reported strong revenue growth and a surging cloud business, but its stock fell after announcing a doubled year-on-year capex and negative quarterly free cash flow for the first time. Intel posted its strongest revenue growth in over 15 years, but its stock experienced volatile trading after significantly raising its full-year capex guidance. Microsoft saw its stock surge after beating estimates and, crucially, lowering its capex forecast while projecting positive free cash flow. Meta faced the most severe sell-off as its profits declined despite revenue beats, with free cash flow plunging over 90% and its capex guidance raised. Apple reported record June-quarter results, but its stock plummeted after providing Q4 revenue guidance that fell short of expectations, citing supply chain constraints and forex headwinds. The overall takeaway is that the market's focus has shifted from validating AI demand to scrutinizing the timeline for returns on massive AI investments. Companies demonstrating a clearer path to managing capex and preserving free cash flow, like Microsoft, were rewarded, while those signaling continued aggressive spending faced investor skepticism.

Odaily星球日报40 dk önce

When the Market Begins to Question AI Capex: A Full Analysis of Q2 Earnings Reports from Five Tech Giants

Odaily星球日报40 dk önce

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

This article, "From Companies to DAOs: How DUNA Could Become the Next Organizational Form," traces the 500-year evolution of business collaboration. It begins with medieval structures like the *commenda* and Florentine *compagnia*, which exposed partners to personal risk. The modern corporation, exemplified by the Dutch East India Company (VOC), was a revolutionary leap, enabling large-scale, capital-intensive ventures by offering limited liability and reducing coordination costs. However, corporations introduced new challenges like principal-agent problems and bureaucratic overhead. The piece argues that software and internet-native protocols are now reducing these traditional overheads. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) emerged as a new model for coordination without centralized management. Yet, DAOs face a significant legal vacuum: they lack legal recognition, leaving members exposed to unlimited personal liability, and their tokens are vulnerable to being classified as securities under unclear regulations (e.g., the Howey Test). This has forced projects into suboptimal workarounds like offshore foundations. The article identifies the Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) as a potential solution. Recently legalized in states like Wyoming, the DUNA provides a legal wrapper for decentralized networks. It grants key protections—legal personality, limited liability, and perpetual existence—to a group without imposing a traditional hierarchical management structure. This allows token-holder communities to govern, hold assets, and contract as a single legal entity, aligning with their decentralized nature. While DUNA doesn't solve all governance challenges or magically resolve securities law questions, it represents a crucial step. It fills the legal recognition gap, offering a native legal form for internet-scale, decentralized collaboration and extending the separation of personal risk from organizational venture into a new domain.

marsbit1 saat önce

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

marsbit1 saat önce

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

The 2026 Mid-Year Report on On-Chain RWA highlights a significant growth in tokenized stock market capitalization, which nearly doubled from $951 million in March to $1.89 billion by July. However, the report reveals a fundamental contradiction in this "layer 2.5" ecosystem: products with the strongest legal foundation (like regulated U.S. infrastructure) lack liquidity and distribution, while freely tradable offshored wrapper products often lack substantive ownership rights. The increase is driven largely by a few products (SECZ, FGRS, STRCx) and platforms (Ondo, xStocks, Securitize collectively hold over 85% share). While distributed value across networks like Ethereum, Solana, and BNB Chain has grown, the market remains fragmented. Products referencing the same underlying asset (e.g., Apple stock) are distinct legal liabilities with different intermediaries and jurisdictional rules, offering varying degrees of legal claim. The report cautions that headline numbers are misleading, as they reflect changes in distributed token value—driven by issuance, conversions, and price movements—not pure investor inflows. True "canonical shares" with legal ownership, wide wallet distribution, institutional liquidity, and independent on-chain price discovery do not yet exist at scale. Tokenized treasuries show stronger product-market fit, and ETFs may be easier to scale than single stocks. The core takeaway is a trade-off: legal certainty versus liquidity and composability.

marsbit2 saat önce

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

marsbit2 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
活动图片