February Opens In Crypto With Liquidity Stress And Heavy Selling
In Brief
This week’s sharp Bitcoin drop, driven by thin liquidity, forced liquidations, and waning institutional confidence, turned $80K from a support level into a key risk marker, highlighting how quickly the market can shift in stressed conditions.
Instead of a Santa rally we got a Santa rug, and it’s almost impressive how quickly the market moved from “new ATH above 126k when?” to “okay, how far below 80?” That’s the energy of this week: not a tidy correction, not a healthy reset, but a blunt reminder that when liquidity thins and leverage stacks up, Bitcoin doesn’t drift — it drops.
The chart told the story in big, unfriendly blocks. Ninety thousand failed, then the market lost its grip on the mid-80s, and once $80K stopped behaving like support, price started acting like it had unfinished business lower. What made it feel nastier than a normal pullback was how little negotiation there was on the way down — you didn’t get many “okay, buyers defended it” candles. You got steps, and each step came with that familiar sensation of the bid disappearing for a moment.
That backdrop matters, because the headlines this week weren’t random. They lined up neatly with the same theme: risk appetite was already shaky, and then the news flow kept taking bites out of confidence.
One of the clearest examples was the ETF/flow narrative turning from “institutional adoption story” into “institutional pain story.” Reports that BlackRock iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) investor returns had flipped back into the red landed like a mood shift. Whether you personally trade ETFs or you don’t care about them at all, that headline does something psychologically: it tells the market that the “serious money” isn’t sitting on comfy profits anymore. When that happens, the reflexive dip-buying gets weaker, because the imagined safety net becomes less certain — not gone, just less dependable.
At the same time, the macro layer delivered a clean catalyst for risk-off positioning. The week’s sharp weekend move was tied in coverage to Trump nominating Kevin Warsh to replace Jerome Powell at the Federal Reserve. Again, the important thing isn’t whether you think this “should” move Bitcoin. The important thing is that the market used it as a reason to reprice. In fragile conditions, traders don’t need a perfect macro thesis — they need a headline that justifies de-risking while liquidity is thin, and that one did the job.
Then came the mechanical part: liquidation-driven selling. We had coverage describing multi-billion dollar market-wide liquidations during the drop below the mid-$70Ks, and you could see the same thing in the structure of the candles — fast downside, shallow rebounds, more follow-through than you’d expect if it was purely discretionary selling. This kind of price action is rarely about “investors changing their mind”; it’s about positions being forced out, and once that process starts, price can fall farther than anyone thinks is reasonable.
While Bitcoin was doing that, the broader market narrative was basically screaming “capital is going elsewhere.” You had a steady drumbeat of stories about gold and silver outperforming, and the idea that traditional hedges were stealing the spotlight while crypto was stuck bleeding. It’s not that Bitcoin has stopped being “a hedge” in the long-term ideological sense — it’s that, this week, the market treated it like a risk asset that needed to be cut.
And if you looked past BTC, the ecosystem headlines added more weight. There was the reported exploit involving CrossCurve (about $3M), which is exactly the kind of story that makes people flinch when risk appetite is already low. Then there was the Step Finance treasury wallet breach narrative and the associated token crash, another reminder that even “infrastructure-adjacent” names can turn into a trapdoor event when operational security fails. In a strong market, these are isolated fires. In a weak market, they feel like confirmation that the whole sector is still structurally fragile.
Derivatives positioning also leaned into the gloom. We saw analysis saying options markets were turning more bearish with odds skewing toward a move below $80K, and that matters because $80K isn’t just a chart level — it’s a psychological line for a huge chunk of participants. When the options crowd starts paying up for downside protection or leaning into bearish structures, spot traders feel that pressure too, even if they can’t explain it in one sentence. It becomes “why fight this?” energy.
At the same time, there were a couple of counterpoints that kept this week from being pure doom. One was the contrarian sentiment angle — Santiment leaning into the idea that lingering “extreme fear” can be a bullish sign. That’s not hopium, it’s just a positioning observation: when everyone is publicly miserable, the market sometimes becomes primed for violent reflex rallies because shorts pile in and liquidity gets thin both ways. Another was the “big players still buy” storyline — Strategy and Michael Saylor signaling buying interest around the dip below their cost basis. That doesn’t stop drawdowns, but it does matter for how people frame the next bounce: “there are still entities willing to absorb size down here.”
So where does that leave the week, practically? It leaves it with one ugly but useful takeaway: $80K has stopped being a comfort level and started being a risk marker. The mid-$75Ks is the area the market is currently stress-testing, and any bounce that can’t reclaim and hold $80K is just relief until proven otherwise. Getting back above the old broken support zone in the mid-$80s would be the first sign the market is regaining structure — until then, traders are going to keep asking the same annoying question: “are we done, or is this just a pause before the next leg?”
And that’s why this week felt “special.” Not because it introduced a brand-new narrative, but because it stripped away the old one. The Santa rally never arrived. Instead, the market got a clean reminder that in risk-off conditions, Bitcoin doesn’t care what month it is — it cares who’s overextended, who needs to de-risk, and how much liquidity is actually sitting under the price when everyone runs for the same exit.
Disclaimer
In line with the Trust Project guidelines, please note that the information provided on this page is not intended to be and should not be interpreted as legal, tax, investment, financial, or any other form of advice. It is important to only invest what you can afford to lose and to seek independent financial advice if you have any doubts. For further information, we suggest referring to the terms and conditions as well as the help and support pages provided by the issuer or advertiser. MetaversePost is committed to accurate, unbiased reporting, but market conditions are subject to change without notice.
About The Author
Alisa, a dedicated journalist at the MPost, specializes in cryptocurrency, zero-knowledge proofs, investments, and the expansive realm of Web3. With a keen eye for emerging trends and technologies, she delivers comprehensive coverage to inform and engage readers in the ever-evolving landscape of digital finance.
More articles
Alisa, a dedicated journalist at the MPost, specializes in cryptocurrency, zero-knowledge proofs, investments, and the expansive realm of Web3. With a keen eye for emerging trends and technologies, she delivers comprehensive coverage to inform and engage readers in the ever-evolving landscape of digital finance.
