It’s up 9.74% in the past 24 hours. The current price of $NET is 313.77—and this isn’t finished yet. The key data is here: funding rate -0.00054360.
The shorts are paying while the price keeps rising. This is the most classic short-squeeze structure: long positions “free-ride” on the interest the shorts are paying, pushing the price higher. The shorts are bleeding twice—losing on price and losing on funding rate.
The open interest is 1360.44. It can’t be directly converted into how much USD that represents, but considering the $2.32 million trading volume, liquidity doesn’t look thin. This squeeze may still have room to run.
The market generally thinks the tech stock rebound has already peaked, but I don’t believe it. Shorts are currently the ones getting roasted. If the price moves up even another 5 points, that batch of shorts carrying negative funding rates will have liquidation orders triggered in sequence—turning into fresh fuel. This isn’t a fundamental story; it’s purely a funding/positioning battle.
My order is already placed. Going long $NET /USDT with 5x leverage, stop loss at 312, take profit at 325, position size 10%. If the price drops below 313.77—this current level—I’ll admit I’m wrong. That means the squeeze failed and the longs are lacking strength. If it pushes up toward 325, I’ll consider cutting the position in half, keeping the other half to play a more extreme short-squeeze scenario.
What’s the strongest counter-evidence? It’s that the broader tech sector is weak overall, and $NET can’t stand on its own. If the U.S. stock market turns down, all these high-beta names will get dragged lower too. The protection “shell” of negative funding won’t hold—once it’s punctured, it breaks.
The invalidation conditions are clear: if two consecutive 4-hour candles close below 313.77, my logic fails. I’ll close the position immediately without hesitation.
Second-order impact: the shorts are currently paying their costs. If price holds up, over the next few days you’ll likely see shorts being forced to close, and buying pressure will get even stronger. But the other way around: if price gets pushed back down here, longs will quickly take profits, and the price could fall faster than it rose. This isn’t a mild consolidation pattern—it’s the prelude to a stampede.
Aggressive approach: open long at the current price, don’t set a stop loss, and bet on a chain reaction liquidation cascade.
Defensive approach: wait for a pullback near 313.77 to enter, with a tighter stop loss.
Avoidance approach: don’t touch it—wait until the funding rate turns positive. Entering now is catching a flying knife in midair.
When shorts are squeezed into negative funding but the price is still rising, that usually isn’t the top—it’s the middle stage of the move. Everyone is waiting for a pullback, but I’m betting it won’t come.
Trading tag: #TradFi #链上美股 #NET
Where do you think this set of judgment calls is most likely to be wrong?
The shorts are paying while the price keeps rising. This is the most classic short-squeeze structure: long positions “free-ride” on the interest the shorts are paying, pushing the price higher. The shorts are bleeding twice—losing on price and losing on funding rate.
The open interest is 1360.44. It can’t be directly converted into how much USD that represents, but considering the $2.32 million trading volume, liquidity doesn’t look thin. This squeeze may still have room to run.
The market generally thinks the tech stock rebound has already peaked, but I don’t believe it. Shorts are currently the ones getting roasted. If the price moves up even another 5 points, that batch of shorts carrying negative funding rates will have liquidation orders triggered in sequence—turning into fresh fuel. This isn’t a fundamental story; it’s purely a funding/positioning battle.
My order is already placed. Going long $NET /USDT with 5x leverage, stop loss at 312, take profit at 325, position size 10%. If the price drops below 313.77—this current level—I’ll admit I’m wrong. That means the squeeze failed and the longs are lacking strength. If it pushes up toward 325, I’ll consider cutting the position in half, keeping the other half to play a more extreme short-squeeze scenario.
What’s the strongest counter-evidence? It’s that the broader tech sector is weak overall, and $NET can’t stand on its own. If the U.S. stock market turns down, all these high-beta names will get dragged lower too. The protection “shell” of negative funding won’t hold—once it’s punctured, it breaks.
The invalidation conditions are clear: if two consecutive 4-hour candles close below 313.77, my logic fails. I’ll close the position immediately without hesitation.
Second-order impact: the shorts are currently paying their costs. If price holds up, over the next few days you’ll likely see shorts being forced to close, and buying pressure will get even stronger. But the other way around: if price gets pushed back down here, longs will quickly take profits, and the price could fall faster than it rose. This isn’t a mild consolidation pattern—it’s the prelude to a stampede.
Aggressive approach: open long at the current price, don’t set a stop loss, and bet on a chain reaction liquidation cascade.
Defensive approach: wait for a pullback near 313.77 to enter, with a tighter stop loss.
Avoidance approach: don’t touch it—wait until the funding rate turns positive. Entering now is catching a flying knife in midair.
When shorts are squeezed into negative funding but the price is still rising, that usually isn’t the top—it’s the middle stage of the move. Everyone is waiting for a pullback, but I’m betting it won’t come.
Trading tag: #TradFi #链上美股 #NET
Where do you think this set of judgment calls is most likely to be wrong?