$MVLL 24 hours down 24.035%, current price 26.77. Funding rate 0.00118677, positive—longs are still paying shorts. Open interest 148467.70, with no obvious breakdown.
CNBC updated that piece on August 25: Friday’s stock market rose as investors tried to stabilize after a selloff triggered by rising Treasury yields. The Treasury’s daily yield curve and FRED’s 10-year real yield data point to the same thing: the rates side is tightening. StreetStats’ VIX and MOVE charts are also rising in sync.
The core contradiction is here. Rising Treasury yields first smash risk assets, and $MVLL —an equity-style perpetual contract—is hit first, dropping more than 20% in a day. But funding is still positive, which means the longs haven’t left: in the decline, they’re eating losses while paying funding. OI hasn’t shrunk either. This is a structure of a drawdown that doesn’t capitulate—either longs are stubbornly holding or adding.
My view is that this drop isn’t finished yet. The reason isn’t the news itself, but the positioning structure. A 24% price drop paired with positive funding means new longs are still paying to maintain their positions; their average cost is still higher than the current price. If the price keeps grinding lower, the longs paying a positive rate will be the first to break. Who is paying the cost is already very clear—the longs still inside the market.
The strongest counter-evidence is that CNBC post: the stock market was already up on Friday. If the rate shock was fully digested by Friday, then the 24% drop in $MVLL might be emotional overshoot, and it could repair afterward. I agree with that, but stabilization is a one-day event; funding and OI are continuously accumulating costs. One day stabilizing isn’t enough for the longs paying a positive rate to get out of their positions.
Second-order impact: price keeps grinding around 26.77; positive funding will force short-term longs to cut losses every day and pay money. They either close out or get liquidated, and the closing orders that come out will further pressure the price downward. This is a continuation in the decline, not a bottom.
There’s one invalidation condition: funding turns negative, or the 24-hour return turns positive. If either happens, it means longs have completed turnover or shorts start paying—I’d be wrong.
Action now: don’t enter. Wait until funding turns negative before considering buying the rebound, or watch whether OI drops quickly after price breaks below 26.77. A falling OI is the signal that shorts are taking profit or longs are cutting losses.
Trading tag: #TradFi #链上美股 #MVLL
Where do you think this whole thesis is most likely to be wrong?
CNBC updated that piece on August 25: Friday’s stock market rose as investors tried to stabilize after a selloff triggered by rising Treasury yields. The Treasury’s daily yield curve and FRED’s 10-year real yield data point to the same thing: the rates side is tightening. StreetStats’ VIX and MOVE charts are also rising in sync.
The core contradiction is here. Rising Treasury yields first smash risk assets, and $MVLL —an equity-style perpetual contract—is hit first, dropping more than 20% in a day. But funding is still positive, which means the longs haven’t left: in the decline, they’re eating losses while paying funding. OI hasn’t shrunk either. This is a structure of a drawdown that doesn’t capitulate—either longs are stubbornly holding or adding.
My view is that this drop isn’t finished yet. The reason isn’t the news itself, but the positioning structure. A 24% price drop paired with positive funding means new longs are still paying to maintain their positions; their average cost is still higher than the current price. If the price keeps grinding lower, the longs paying a positive rate will be the first to break. Who is paying the cost is already very clear—the longs still inside the market.
The strongest counter-evidence is that CNBC post: the stock market was already up on Friday. If the rate shock was fully digested by Friday, then the 24% drop in $MVLL might be emotional overshoot, and it could repair afterward. I agree with that, but stabilization is a one-day event; funding and OI are continuously accumulating costs. One day stabilizing isn’t enough for the longs paying a positive rate to get out of their positions.
Second-order impact: price keeps grinding around 26.77; positive funding will force short-term longs to cut losses every day and pay money. They either close out or get liquidated, and the closing orders that come out will further pressure the price downward. This is a continuation in the decline, not a bottom.
There’s one invalidation condition: funding turns negative, or the 24-hour return turns positive. If either happens, it means longs have completed turnover or shorts start paying—I’d be wrong.
Action now: don’t enter. Wait until funding turns negative before considering buying the rebound, or watch whether OI drops quickly after price breaks below 26.77. A falling OI is the signal that shorts are taking profit or longs are cutting losses.
Trading tag: #TradFi #链上美股 #MVLL
Where do you think this whole thesis is most likely to be wrong?