Paul

[Fefe Demeny @FefeDemeny]

Today is the beginning of a new era for me and the 100XClub

This has been long due, appreciate all the support and messages the past months

Here is what I can share:

Following lengthy negotiations, Fefe Demeny has bought out Crypto Banter's minority stake in 100XClub.

The two sides held different views on the company's future and concluded they could not continue building together.

100XClub is now fully owned by Fefe Demeny and independent from Crypto Banter.

The terms are confidential and neither side will comment further.

It’s time to build

Much love

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@FefeDemeny You've really fallen off the wagon this year... Non stop poorly researched information. The red numbers are interest rates in US, only the first hike nuked us presumably because it wasn't expected and thus not priced in coming as a surprise, unlike now.

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@astronomer_zero @mcclain_darren Pretty sure that's ChatGPT, I wouldn't remotely trust that even with a well engineered prompt. Very high likelihood that was fabricated and it only looked at 5%~ of the claimed posts... especially on free tier. Can you share your prompt?

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@chart_junkies It's going to be a rotten bull like 2018-2019, foundation wasn't built right and all futures driven. Still might be another year before it all crashes to the lows though, can run a lot until then.

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@KillaXBT While I 100% agree with the message, that chart seems off and missing a bunch. Yen carry trade Aug '24 dump into the news - mega dump after, mega nuked on the tariff news feb '25 once trump announced it, jan '25 was speculation and not many believed he would actually do it.

[Killa @KillaXBT]

“The Clarity Act won’t pass, so $BTC is going to dump further.”

“A rate hike is expected tomorrow with FOMC, so BTC is going to dump even more.”

Little do they know, the market has already priced in those expectations. That’s why it’s dumping BEFORE the news is released.

By the time the news gives the crowd a reason to sell, they are already selling into the very bids that mark the bottom.

[Astronomer @astronomer_zero]

$btc - the macro playbook

And why macro trades should ideally be spot/why leverage on the long side doesn't make sense on high timeframes.

As a response to the poll below since many mixed opinions were present.

That means a debate and so I'm happy to share my opinion.

As you know, on macro timeframes (weekly/monthly), I am bullish, and I have a clearly defined spot plan with buying 3 buys. 2 already in in the 60-70k region, looking to place the last one soon.

"Why do you not add leverage on top, if you're so confident on the bottom, Astro?" Is the question at hand.

I enjoy talking about this because what lacks on this platform is execution oriented trading plans and execution itself. And naturally, some of the "execution" seeing suggested on this platform is way off at times in my most humble opinion.

Probably why this poll carries mixed opinions and I blame no one.

Let's say I already bought spot and I would add leverage (2x) $btc long at 60k, to TP it at say 120k 2 years later. Stop at 40k, that's a potential gain of "3 RR".

I say "3RR" because it's in reality not a real 3 RR. All power to them but influencers who don't take the trades they post may forget. But let me explain (warning: trading math incoming)

The issue is funding rates and more than often perceived.

$btc's average funding rate is 0.01% every 8 hours.

Let's say I would hold this position for 2 years.

At 60k, with 2x account leverage, every funding payment costs roughly 0.0003R.

How do we get there?

If my stop is at 40k, meaning $btc has to move 33.3% against me to hit invalidation.

At 2x account leverage, that 33.3% move equals a 66.7% account loss (also flawed by the way)

That's my 1R.

Meanwhile, 2x leverage means my position notional is 200% of my account.

A 0.01% funding payment on 200% account exposure therefore costs 0.02% of my account every 8 hours.

And because 1R = 66.7% of my account:

0.02% / 66.7% = ~0.0003R per funding payment.

Tiny.

Until you remember it gets charged every 8 hours, for potentially years.

As price moves higher, however, so does the notional value of the position you're paying funding over.

By the time $btc reaches 120k, that same position costs roughly 0.0006R every 8 hours in funding.

Assuming a roughly linear appreciation from 60k to 120k, you're looking at an average funding drag of around 0.00045R every 8 hours.

Doesn't sound like much, right?

There are 3 funding payments a day.

730 (2 yrs) days later:

0.00045R × 3 × 730 = ~0.99R.

Your beautiful "3R" macro trade just became roughly a 2R trade.

You've given away almost one full R simply for the privilege of holding leverage while your macro thesis plays out.

"Longing" $btc to TP years later is a myth frankly.

No one in their right mind tries to go for 3 RR to only get 2 RR as math proves.

I mean your edge would erode from 25% winrate to break even all the way to 33% just to break even, a large jump just because you clicked long instead of spot.

Using leverage on the long side on weekly timeframes is bad practice mathematically.

Like playing poker with a dealer who never gives you aces.

Just my opinion, but spot exists for a reason. Let's make use of it in our framework, for macro trades.

But also for high back-and-forth volatility/slow periods, where funding also likely takes it's toll.

What about macro shorts? They are fine since you usually would gain from funding the other way.

So then the overall macro framework is quite simple:

1️⃣Macro top approaching: still spot bought, but early shorts to farm funding.

2️⃣Macro top clear: now start selling spot (no rush hence luxury to sell late)

3️⃣market starts dropping a lot: TP macro shorts into the drawn out macro negative funding periods

4️⃣buy spot again early as bottom approached for next bull run (e.g. our 70k buy in Feb was early)

5️⃣If trend breaks out, positional longs make sense, for 1 week - 1 month holding period to ride the trend

In this framework, there's no room for macro longs.

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@FefeDemeny Actually it hasn't, half the time the dump started a week before. The key is pinpointing the local top leading up to FOMC to enter a short. It was very unlikely we were going to sweep the highs first, so the entry became more obvious.

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@astronomer_zero FOMC reversal incoming soon?

[Killa @KillaXBT]

You do not liquidate $4,000,000,000 in $BTC shorts during a simple bear market rally.

Study.

MMs build short delta to eventually take it once the bear market is over. We just printed a 25% weekly candle and broke above essentially every significant level that mattered.

If we were truly still in a bear market, we shouldn't have had this move. Bear market retests are typically shallow, controlled, and designed to protect short exposure. Instead, we completely obliterated shorts.

That is exactly why the probability of trending back down to a new low in Q4 looks extremely unlikely, incentive-wise, structurally, and fundamentally.

A lot of people will probably revenge short after getting blown out. It happens every cycle. They’ll convince themselves the move is "just another bear market rally" because accepting the structural shift is harder than fighting it.

Ignore anyone telling you that you shouldn’t be bullish.

Structure has already confirmed the shift. The positioning has been reset. Shorts have been blasted out of the market.

You don’t do that in a sustained bear market.

In a real bear market, you protect the shorts, encourage increasingly aggressive short positioning, and let the market grind lower.

Instead, we just saw the opposite.

Shorts were encouraged.
Short delta became enormous.
The market broke higher.

And then the entire positioning structure was squeezed into oblivion. That is not how a bear market behaves. That is how a trend transition begins.

[Paul @Paul94zzz]

@KillaXBT Your isolated margin could be down to 8 or 9k before BTC gets out of a sideways htf range from funding rate fees, which also raises your liq price quite a bit. Are you going to be adding extra margin later to compensate? This feels like Denny's napkin ideas with many oversights.