$INTW 24 hours it surged 7.5%, the price is 35.23, but the funding rate is -0.0011, which is negative. This combination looks very conspicuous: as the price pushes up, shorts are actually paying longs.
A rising position with a negative funding rate is a typical short squeeze structure. Shorts are piling up positions; once the price rises, they either have to close or endure a high funding cost. Forced liquidations then push the price even higher, creating a cascade. From a political-events perspective, if there is recent policy uncertainty, funds may temporarily flow into these on-chain U.S. stock contracts as a hedge, further amplifying longs’ advantage. One signal alone isn’t enough, but in this case the market looks like shorts are being squeezed—while longs effectively collect rent for free with their positions.
The strongest counterargument is: if political risk fades quickly, funds may flow out and the price could drop rapidly. A second-order effect is that a negative funding rate means shorts are bleeding every day. They either admit defeat and exit, or they stubbornly hold on waiting for a pullback—either way, it keeps providing upside momentum.
My view is that there is still short-term momentum, but you should watch key levels closely. Direction: go long, 10x leverage, stop loss at 34.00, take profit at 38.00, position size 20%. If the price breaks below 34.00, it means the shorts have resisted the squeeze and my logic fails—then immediately撤.
Trading tag: #TradFi #链上美股 #INTW
Where do you think this set of assumptions is most likely to be wrong?
A rising position with a negative funding rate is a typical short squeeze structure. Shorts are piling up positions; once the price rises, they either have to close or endure a high funding cost. Forced liquidations then push the price even higher, creating a cascade. From a political-events perspective, if there is recent policy uncertainty, funds may temporarily flow into these on-chain U.S. stock contracts as a hedge, further amplifying longs’ advantage. One signal alone isn’t enough, but in this case the market looks like shorts are being squeezed—while longs effectively collect rent for free with their positions.
The strongest counterargument is: if political risk fades quickly, funds may flow out and the price could drop rapidly. A second-order effect is that a negative funding rate means shorts are bleeding every day. They either admit defeat and exit, or they stubbornly hold on waiting for a pullback—either way, it keeps providing upside momentum.
My view is that there is still short-term momentum, but you should watch key levels closely. Direction: go long, 10x leverage, stop loss at 34.00, take profit at 38.00, position size 20%. If the price breaks below 34.00, it means the shorts have resisted the squeeze and my logic fails—then immediately撤.
Trading tag: #TradFi #链上美股 #INTW
Where do you think this set of assumptions is most likely to be wrong?