I just finished a few of the forwarded options notes that got a lot of attention. Most people are focusing on the fact that
$VRT is down 1.5% today and start labeling the market as weak. I think they’re missing the real key issue. The negative funding rate structure is the variable in this chart that should not be ignored.
VRT’s funding rate is at -0.00014412. By itself, the absolute value doesn’t look extreme, but paired with the -1.51% price move, while the open interest is still maintained at 1.7684 million, it’s worth revisiting the entire picture. The price is being pushed down, shorts are getting paid, and yet there’s no obvious unwinding of positions. This doesn’t look like shorts are actively pursuing additional downside; it looks more like longs are trapped and unwilling to cut losses, while the shorts don’t show strong willingness to add—this is mainly structural pressure caused by leveraged capital leaning bearish. I’ve seen setups like this several times. In the end, they usually don’t evolve into a continued drift lower; instead, at some point, selling pressure suddenly disappears, and price snaps back quickly with a very low turnover rate.
On X, the prevailing voices have basically classified
$VRT as a weak coin, and the reasons are simply that the price lacks strength to push higher and the funding rate is biased bearish. The surface logic holds, but it’s missing a variable: if the shorts truly have confidence in a downside move, why aren’t they going all-in? With no major OI breakout in volume, it suggests large capital hasn’t taken decisive conviction to bet on the direction. Both sides are actually waiting for a catalyst—whether it’s spot buying coming in or some piece of news. Until then, they keep grinding against each other. In this current phase, longs are passive but haven’t lost their position, while shorts are active but haven’t added aggressively. That kind of state is exactly what tends to create a trading window for contrarian consensus.
My conclusion goes against the mainstream: I’m bullish on
$VRT . The reason isn’t that the price will surge immediately, but that the current negative funding rate structure naturally gives longs a time advantage. Shorts have to pay longs about 0.0144% in position fees every 8 hours—three times a day. The cost is close to 0.3% per week, and annualized it’s over 1.2%. For leveraged short positions, that’s continuous blood loss. If the price chops sideways around the current level for two weeks, the shorts’ actual profits will be heavily eroded by funding costs. And if the price rebounds upward by 1% to 2%, triggering stop-loss squeezes, then at the moment funding flips from negative to positive, that’s often the point where shorts get hit the hardest.
For trading, here’s a clear plan: if
$VRT does not break down below 305 effectively, I will use 2x leverage to open a long position at the current level.
Trading tag:
#TradFi #链上美股 #VRT
The market says VRT will go up/down—where do you stand?