Get live statistics and analysis of Cred's profile on X / Twitter

Genesis Timeline November 8: "No material net credit exposure" November 9: We lost $7M November 10: Okay, we have $175M locked in FTX November 16: Sorry, no withdrawals or new loans November 17: Okay, we need $1BN November 21: We'll go bankrupt without the money 👍

Bought $ETH at $4139 and sold it at $4140. Don’t know how you do that 9-5 shit 💅

$SHIB will continue to go up, until you buy it.

"AI agents will replace manual trading." Yeah right I'd love to see an AI agent sell the bottom, lever into a revenge trade, get liquidated, and then reenter the trade with double the size before closing for a catastrophic loss

When I read that $ETH is going to be deflationary, I didn’t know it was referring to my net worth.

Saylor should fight Elon in Dubai.

Using $BTC to buy a Tesla in 2021 is like using it to buy pizza in 2010.

$BTC

“Institutions are here. The market has really matured.” Best performers: Doge, Safemoon, and CumRocket

“The market will regulate itself.” The market:

Is today one of the worst days in crypto history? Yes. Do we have a difficult period ahead of us? Yes. Am I confident that we’ll learn from this, curtail our greed, demand better transparency, and build a better system? No.

I spent almost all of my 20s trading crypto. Over 8 years. Did I sacrifice my health? Yes. Did I sacrifice relationships? Yes. But was it all worth it in the end as I was able to be early and use my multi-cycle experience to be financially free for life? No, I sold the bottom.

"Babe, come to bed." "I can't; the billionaire is tweeting memes about my internet coins again and all the buy support is drunk in Miami."

$DOGE will continue to go up, until you buy it.

"How did you get rich?" "Vitalik and Elon." "How did you lose it all?" "Vitalik and Elon."

$BTC Vicious swing failure at the highs. Buyers were absorbed and trapped. Logically, being completely reasonable, the first level of support is the middle of the range at $69,000. But typically failure on one side signals a move to the opposite extremity. That would be a sweep of the resting liquidity at $15,000. Lots of unfilled orders there. A sweep and close above $15,000 would be an extremely bullish signal. Waiting for the yearly close for confirmation.

A fat trader is a bad trader. 2019 to 2024.

Lads it feels like the current U.S. administration is using crypto for its shady self-enrichment and if democrats win next time they’re gonna smash our industry to pieces as revenge Please tell me I’m dumb and wrong about this Cheers

Funding Rates The funding rate is the cost of holding an open position in a perpetual swap contract (perp). It is usually calculated by the difference between the [price of the perpetual swap contract] and [price of a spot-based index]. If funding is positive, the perp price is trading at a premium (above) the index price. Open long positions pay funding, open short positions receive funding. If funding is negative, the perp price is trading at a discount (below) the index price. Open short positions pay funding, open long positions receive funding. Perps are different to standard futures contracts because there is no expiry or rollover mechanism. This begs the question: how and why do perps generally trade in line with spot markets? Answer: Funding. This is a built-in arbitrage mechanism designed to incentivise traders to keep these instruments (specifically their prices) in line with one another. For example: Perp trading meaningfully above the spot index price --> funding rate goes up. Two things happen: 1. It becomes more expensive for long holders to keep their positions open (negative incentive). 2. Traders can buy spot, sell the perp, and collect the funding rate with minimal directional exposure (positive incentive). The bigger the difference between the perp price and the spot price, the higher the funding rate. Think of this as providing greater incentives to arb the difference the more out of line these instruments get from each other. To be crystal clear, funding is primarily a product of the difference between [perp price] and [spot-based index price]. I'll also reiterate an important point from an earlier tweet: if funding is at baseline and/or there is no interesting divergence forming between price, funding, and time - you are unlikely to find an attractive setup. All of these tools become complementary and contextually interesting when "something doesn't add up" or if they're at/near a relative extreme. From a trading perspective, identifying divergences between funding and price can lead you closer to productive trade ideas: 1. Example: High positive funding but price is moving lower or stalling/not moving higher. 1.1. Reasonable inference: Perp longs are aggressive but are not being rewarded for it. This is potentially bearish (especially if other contextual clues present e.g. price into key resistance). 2. Example: High negative funding but price is moving higher or stalling/not moving lower. 2.1. Reasonable inference: Perp shorts are aggressive but are not being rewarded for it. This is potentially bullish (especially if other contextual clues present e.g. price into key support). 3. Example: Funding becoming more positive as price is moving lower. 3.1. Reasonable inference: Perp dip buyers are in 'disbelief' fading the move AND/OR spot traders are the aggressive sellers. This is potentially bearish (especially if other contextual clues present e.g. perp OI increasing, spot volumes and CVD leading, et cetera). 4. Example: Funding becoming more negative as price is moving higher. 4.1. Reasonable inference: Perp sellers are in 'disbelief' fading the move AND/OR spot traders are the aggressive buyers (especially if other contextual clues present e.g. perp OI increasing, spot volumes and CVD leading, et cetera). These are just a few basic ones and you can build more setups especially if you incorporate OI + CVD where appropriate. In essence, we're circling back to very important first principles here: 1. Who (if anyone) is being aggressive? 2. Is their aggression being rewarded? As a final note, it's also important to understand not only what the funding rates are and their implications, but also how they came to be. I can think of three particular examples where funding rates are misinterpreted most frequently. 1. Negative funding after an outsized move with liquidations. As discussed, funding reflects the difference between the perp price and the index price. Perps have higher leverage than the spot-based assets that typically make up the index. As a result, when there's a large amount of liquidations in the perp, those liquidations and messy unwinds exacerbate the size of the move. Perps typically become more dislocated than spot at extremes, so naturally they end up trading at a discount to the index. Accordingly, the negative funding after a wipeout does not necessarily mean that the market is short from the bottom now. It's just a reflection of perps getting hammered harder than spot because of the leverage that they offer. 2. "Spot premium". Spot premium - where spot price of an asset is trading consistently higher than the perp or future price of an asset - can provide useful signals. For example, during the 2021 bull run it was common to see spot exchanges like Coinbase consistently trading at a premium to perps and futures during the U.S. session. One could reasonably see this as a reflection of risk appetite and more aggressive buyers in the spot market, which is generally a good sign. However, this same argument was made many times on the way down from circa ~50k BTC - and it didn't quite work out. Mechanistically, spot was leading the selling --> perps would follow --> perps get liquidated and move more aggressively than spot --> perps end up below spot --> "spot premium". It's the same spot premium in form but completely different in substance and context. If you will be relying on spot premium as an argument for spot demand, make sure that you have other arguments for there being demand in the market (not just the funding rate or basis). 3. Dodgy outlier altcoin (max) funding = squeeze imminent. Particularly pertinent pattern in the second half of 2023. It goes something like: huge price increase --> hugely negative funding --> speculators pile in the long side for continuation/short squeeze on account of the negative funding rate --> spot gets mega dumped instead and funding normalises. For the outlier lower caps specifically, I'd be sceptical about looking into funding-oriented stuff too closely as it tends to be 'gamed' more often than not. The signals tend to be clearer on more liquid, higher cap assets. More broadly, funding alone does not always make for a compelling argument for a squeeze. You need to first build a prima facie credible case that the aggressors are the ones offside, ideally with some confluence via OI. Even then, positive funding can normalise by perps closing/spot buying and negative funding can normalise by perps buying/spot selling - without any dramatic squeeze. There are a lot of other interesting things about funding rates, but this is already quite long for an 'introductory' post. Hope you enjoyed this one. Thanks for reading and let me know if you want more.

“What do you do?” “I’m a professional cryptocurrency trader.” “What do you think of the market?” “A cartoon duck is bearish memes and flipped his profile pic upside down, which he famously did in 2018 when he crushed the bear market. But Ansem, future Mayor of New York City,

The market is dipping. You bullposted at the high. You're worried your followers are about to clown you, and your sweetheart KOL seed deals will dry up as a result. Here are your options: 1. Double down. Talk about how this is a weekly open scam that'll revert ASAP, and how it's a generational opportunity to get even more long. Also raise your targets in the process. 2. Obscure via TA. You must distract your followers. Get in the weeds with the TA. Use the 5M-1H time frames and just start making shit up. CME gap liquidity purge reverse sudoku orderblock retest. Lots of levels, lines, and annotations. 3. Obscure via order flow. Pay for TRDR, TradingLite, Exocharts, Okotoki, Hyblock, and whatever else you can get your hands on. You must focus on the micro and sow confusion. Post a liquidation heatmap with an emoji. Post a footprint chart with the worst settings imaginable and talk about delta clusters. Post a Velo chart with every indicator you can find and make stuff up about spot book depth, limit taking on perps, Hyperliquid whale, and spot vs perp CVD - ideally all at the same time for maximum obfuscation. 4. Change time frames. Post a monthly time frame and tell people to chill out, even if your last post was about the H1 breakout. Go further: zoom out to the yearly time frame and talk about $BTC price performance after the halving. 5. Risk management LARP. Talk about the large number of liquidations and how important it is to always use a stop loss and have an invalidation. Pivot your embarrassment into an opportunity to teach something that you don't practice. Bonus points if you make stuff up about exiting at break even or for a small loss - it makes you see humble and relatable, even if you just wiped out your entire account. 6. Fake illness. Say you're feeling unwell and won't be around to check the charts. Or that you're taking your pet to the veterinarian. Extra points if you have a cute picture of your pet. Ask for thoughts and prayers. You need to be sympathymaxxxing. Your opps will be more reluctant to clown you if you have a built-in guilt trip defence. Good luck.

Genesis Timeline November 8: "No material net credit exposure" November 9: We lost $7M November 10: Okay, we have $175M locked in FTX November 16: Sorry, no withdrawals or new loans November 17: Okay, we need $1BN November 21: We'll go bankrupt without the money 👍

I spent almost all of my 20s trading crypto. Over 8 years. Did I sacrifice my health? Yes. Did I sacrifice relationships? Yes. But was it all worth it in the end as I was able to be early and use my multi-cycle experience to be financially free for life? No, I sold the bottom.

Did I make money on $SOL? No. Did I make money on memecoins? No. But did I stick to my system, avoid FOMO, and make money trading $BTC and $ETH? Also no.

There are lots of people who have been in crypto since my time (early 2017) that basically haven’t made any money You just don’t hear about them because dead bodies don’t talk You need to assume that you’re an impulsive idiot who will round trip most of your money So hedge against yourself Get a job (in crypto or otherwise) and shove it into the S&P 500 as a cushion It’s not sexy and your ego will take a hit, but it simply works ‘Worst’ case your crypto trading will be lower stress, you’ll make better decisions, and you’ll have more dry powder to execute on a few big trades per quarter or even per year What you see on your feed isn’t real: it’s massive survivorship bias with varying amounts of LARPing Zoomer trenches have microwaved normal people into thinking they need to be rotating 10x/day while ‘trading’ 16 hours/day while copy traders farm them, all while underperforming BTC Most people lose most of their money Survival is an actual edge in crypto, but you need to stick around long enough to make the most of it - and that means doing ‘boring’ stuff that works GM

TechnicalRoundup was sponsored by Blockfolio/FTX in the last year or so. I didn’t expect it to blow up. I feel awful to have lent it credibility via association — I am sorry. I’ve been making crypto content since 2017 and will continue doing so, sponsored or not. Cheers.