Get started

Liquidity

is BTC on track ?you might wonder , now that we had some good bullish days , will it keep going ? well in long-term yes , i officially claim that bull market is over , BUT ; in Short-term , i still believe after such high volatile bearish market that almost took one year and half to finally finish , now bitcoin needs a lot of LIQUIDITY for the bull run we all expect . but how will it accumulate liquidity and where will it form ? Good question !! finally . let me explain . BUY side liquidities are price ranges (zones) that investors find price rather UNDERVALUED . so what they do in contrast is that they buy to keep for long-term . AND BELIEVE ME WHEN I SAY THIS :''BTC CAN ONLY GO HIGHER IF LONG-TERM INVESTORS START INVESTING IN IT " well also if miners would finally kindly stop selling their BTC . 😊😊 PLEASE ! so what happens is that market starts going lower and lower to give these investors the opportunity to participate . to rap it all up , in short-term i guess market will see prices bellow 25K . its a huge thing to say and there it is i said it . but this year we will go near or even above ATH of 69K .
CRYPTO:BTCUSDShort
by hamidking82
NQ 4/30/2023 AnalysisLast week NQ finally broke out of its accumulation range by a manipulation bearish to target the sell stops below the accumulation range then an energetic reversal bullish heading towards daily external swing high at 13348. On Friday 4/28 at 4pm New york session close we took out Thursday's High (Buyside Liquidity) at 13333. Friday's bullish run created a big Fair Value Gap imbalance on the daily chart which I'm anticipating price to retrace down into fill in the imbalance during London and New York session. Currently on Sunday open we gaped down creating a NWOG New week opening gap and is currently consolidating showing a bearish market structure on small time frame 1min - 5min. There's equal lows (sellside liquidity) sitting around 13169 right before the Daily FVG created on Friday which is an added confluence that price is likely to draw lower into the FVG. If we have a bearish Market Structure Shift I believe we can retrace back into the range to 13006 - 12957 before going bullish again to take out 13348
CME_MINI:NQ1!Short
by Ictcurry
M2 Money Supply versus Global Net LiquidityM2 is getting a lot of attention, but is it really driving markets? M2 is the Federal Reserve's estimate of the total money supply including all cash hand, money deposited in checking accounts, savings accounts, and other short term savings. The rate of change for M2 over the past 3 years has been the steepest incline and decline in the M2 rate of change in history. However, global net liquidity, which is driven by fractional reserve banking and credit expansion from cycling credit between central banks and the private sector, as far greater impact on markets and is more strongly correlated than M2. In the fall of 2021 the Federal Reserve announced the end of quantitative and monetary easing, marking the top of the market for risk assets. Other central banks followed suit and interest rates increases and liquidity tightening started in the beginning of 2022. This contraction is highlighted in the red box in the center of the chart. The white line in the center marks the liquidity bottom that we observed in the fall of 2022 which also marks the bottom for risk assets. The green box highlights the expansion in liquidity that begins immediately after with a correlated and coincident rise in risk assets. Note that M2 has continued to contract and interest rates hikes have continued during this time. Michael Howell regularly tweets timely and insightful updates on global liquidity. I highly recommend following him @crossbordercap twitter.com Thank you to Codi0 and to dharmatech for their work on the liquidity indicators. These are fantastic editions to macroeconomic and monetary analysis.
SP:SPX
by Ben_1148x2
Algorithm vs Liquidity In Determining PriceBased on my research into IPDA and algorithms, central banks, trading firms/hedge funds, and smaller banks use execution algos (EAs) for trading with different objectives. Small banks use EAs to split large parent orders into smaller child orders generally in one direction, buy or sell. These orders are executed separately over a period of time to either open or close positions. Trading firms and hedge funds use opportunistic EAs to buy and sell to turn a profit. Central banks use market making EAs to buy and sell in order to bring liquidity providers net positions back to or close as possible to neutral. (This sounds like equilibrium). Central banks use EAs cautiously and only during their main trading hours and always under the supervision of people. A key reason for using EAs is to access multiple liquidity pools in order to reduce market impact or footprint. This is similar to a parent child relationship between Central Bank algos and other smart money players, where smart money (including central banks) accumulate orders in consolidation before expanding price, then the central bank algo pulls them back to equilibrium like a parent calling their child that has strayed too far away. Then they rinse and repeat. I am of the opinion that with the function of central bank algos to facilitate the provision of liquidity with minimal market impact, that liquidity itself is the determining factor in price delivery. Algos used by smart money break up large orders in to smaller chunks and funnel them to multiple liquidity providers (market makers) for fulfillment since forex is decentralized. If there is enough liquidity (buyers and sellers) to open/close positions at a certain price then it is done at that price. When liquidity is low or there aren't enough buyers and sellers at the current price, the market maker's algo has to fill these received orders where there is enough liquidity based on available buyers and sellers. The algos move very quickly which can deplete available buy or sell orders rapidly leaving unfilled counter party orders in its wake which defines liquidity voids (imbalance). Algo adjustments to meet buyers and sellers at their price is perceived as a stop hunt but it's just economics. Example: If I must sell something and I want to sell it for $100 but no one is willing to pay $100, I would have to look for buyers willing to pay $95. If I must buy something and I only want to pay $100 but the seller is charging HKEX:105 , then I have to pay $105. Either the buyer crosses the spread to meet the seller or the seller crosses the spread to meet the buyer. When there are limit and stop orders the buyer or seller isn't moving so the liquidity provider has to move to meet these buyers/sellers at their limit or stop order prices (including orders left behind in liquidity voids). When the orders trigger and price reverses it takes out both buyers and sellers so people call it a hunt, but I'm sure it is intended for actual institutional trading entities because retail traders such as ourselves can not provide the liquidity to be on the other side of every order placed by institutions. We are simply collateral damage in the battle between financial titans seeking to provide and tap into liquidity.
Education
by MartialChartsFX