BTCUSDMOVED20200927
Bitcoin September 27 2020 Daily MOVE Contracts
crypto

Owning 0.03 BTC actually puts you in the top 10% of wealthiest Bitcoiners in the world. There will only ever be 21million.
I think people often forget how important scarcity is. And I’m sure many people who claim they own full coins+ are lying to you. The number can’t be more than 21million people, remember that.

There was. you missed it. It happened prior to the final leg of the BTC bull run.

Best way to do this in a decentralized fashion would be to swap the USDT for UBTC on Hyperliquid. You can then withdraw the UBTC as native Bitcoin to your wallet without issue, or hold it Spot on Hyperliquid, though this becomes subject to protocol risk.
Either bridge your USDT to Arbitrum as USDC then deposit, or Swap directly in an aggregator from USDT to UBTC with a slight fee.
UBTC is Unit's Spot BTC offering on Hyperliquid that's driven >$64B in cumulative spot volume since launching in February 2025. Not shilling, but sharing a newer protocol that I've found no issue with since launch.

TL;DR — Stablecoin dominance is a ratio. It rises either because fresh money is coming in (dry powder), or simply because the rest of the market is collapsing. The chart looks identical in both cases. Right now USDT.D sits at 8.5% while supply has been flat for months — that's the second case. And we've seen this signature before.
Disclosure: None of this is financial advice.
The problem with USDT.D
You see it constantly: "USDT.D bouncing off support → alt season incoming." The implicit reasoning is that rising dominance = capital waiting on the sidelines = fuel for the next leg up.
That can be true. It can also be completely wrong. The dominance chart alone can't tell you which.
The mechanics
: USDT.D = USDT market cap / total crypto market cap
It's a fraction. It rises in two opposite situations:
Case 1 — the numerator rises. New USDT gets minted. Fresh money enters and parks in stables. Real dry powder. Constructive.
Case 2 — the denominator falls. Supply doesn't move an inch, but BTC/ETH/alts get destroyed. Dominance rises mechanically, without a single new dollar arriving.
The chart goes up the same way in both cases. That's the whole problem.
How to tell them apart: absolute supply
Look at market cap in dollars, not percentage. On TradingView: CRYPTOCAP:USDT below USDT.D.
|Dominance|Absolute supply|Reading|
|:-|:-|:-|
|↑|↑|Genuine inflows. Capital waiting. Constructive|
|↑|flat or ↓|No new money. The market is just bleeding.|
|↓|stable or ↑|Capital deploying into risk. Risk-on signal.|
Only the first has predictive value. And it's visible only on the supply panel.
https://preview.redd.it/zu58susnq7fh1.jpg?width=2302&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c0da31b6b7379419703e986364b0f632ce2aeff9
Top: USDT.D weekly. Bottom: USDT market cap (CRYPTOCAP:USDT). Boxes aligned on the same time windows.
What the chart shows
Today: USDT.D at 8.50% (+1.45% on the week). USDT supply at 183.99B, down roughly 30M week over week. Dominance is climbing while supply has been flat since early 2026, with slightly negative weeks.
Do the implicit math. If dominance rises sharply while the numerator stays fixed, the denominator — total crypto market cap — must be contracting. That's what this chart is saying, and it's invisible if you only look at the top panel.
2022-2023: same signature. Dominance peaks around 9.1%, and on the bottom panel you can see USDT supply contracting meaningfully over the same window (from \~83B down toward \~65-70B). That wasn't dry powder accumulating. That was the bear market: the market collapsing while money genuinely exited the ecosystem.
Today dominance sits at 8.5%, just below that peak, with the same absence of net inflows.
Limitations of this comparison (important)
I'd rather raise these myself than leave them for the comments:
1. The magnitudes aren't comparable. In 2022-2023 supply actually contracted, on the order of −20%. In 2026 it's a plateau with marginal weekly moves (−0.02%). What they share is the absence of net inflows, not the intensity. This is a growth stall, not a collapse.
2. Two occurrences aren't a statistic. I'm showing what this configuration looked like last time. I'm not claiming the outcome repeats.
3. The context changed. Spot ETFs didn't exist in 2022. Part of institutional capital no longer needs to route through stablecoins to get exposure — so this indicator captures TradFi flow less well than it used to. It mostly tells you what's happening inside crypto-native markets.
4. The levels aren't identical. \~9.1% in 2022 versus 8.5% today.
USDT ≠ USDC: the layer above
Aggregating all stablecoins throws away the most interesting information.
USDT — offshore-dominant, Asia, retail, non-US exchanges, perp markets. It's leverage collateral. Its supply reflects global speculative appetite.
USDC — regulated, US rails, DeFi, corporate treasuries, banking on/off-ramp. Its supply reflects institutional capital.
The divergences are the real signal:
USDC ↑, USDT flat → institutional money via US rails. Slower, generally more durable.
USDT ↑, USDC flat → offshore leverage and speculation. Faster, more fragile.
Both contracting → global deleveraging. Money leaving crypto.
One level deeper: supply by chain. Stables flowing onto one chain while global supply stagnates isn't new money — it's capital rotation. Invisible on an aggregate dominance chart. (Not available on TradingView; use DefiLlama.)
Other caveats worth knowing
Not every mint is new money. There's cross-chain rebalancing and treasury pre-positioning. Look at smoothed net mints, never the isolated event.
This is a slow indicator. Regime context, not entry timing. Don't build an intraday trade on it.
Correlation ≠ causation. Rising supply doesn't force anyone to buy. It indicates capacity, not intent.
What this actually changes
None of this gives you an entry. What it gives you is a regime filter: knowing whether you're trading in an environment where capital is genuinely available, or one where dominance is rising simply because everything around it is burning.
The two look alike on a chart. They don't have the same follow-through.
What I'm watching for a regime change: supply resuming its uptrend, not dominance falling. If USDT.D drops while supply keeps contracting, that's a false signal of exactly the kind described above.
Data: TradingView (USDT.D, CRYPTOCAP:USDT, CRYPTOCAP:TOTAL), DefiLlama for per-chain breakdown.
Do you track stablecoin supply in your process? Curious whether anyone here watches the per-chain split, and on what horizon you find it actionable.

Investing in any crypto besides BTC is gambling

BTC 1 SNDK $1450/1400p @ $1.75 +$4.00

You are abso-frickin'-lutely 100% CORRECT. One doesn't have to be a BCH 'fan' to see how spurious, illogical and INCONSISTENT the narratives and rationales behind BTC are.

During the Bitcoin Civil War of 2015, paid trolls, get-rich-quick ppl more interested in number-go-up over utility and a 3rd generation of BTC core devs whose interests were more aligned with Blockstream, the company they founded, rather than the crypto community at large, were all very motivated to destroy BTC's suitability for p2p cash and they managed to drown out the sensible arguments for a straightforward blocksize increase.
Well, BTC got the ticker and the Bitcoin 'brand name' even as it mangled the Bitcoin architecture with endless misfeatures (such as RBF which makes double-spends a lot easier, killing its applicability for PoS) to the point that IT and not BCH should be considered the altcoin.

Then there is Bitcoin SV ('Satoshi Vision') with its very charismatic but ultimately fraudulent figurehead Craig Wright. BSV positions itself as the OG Bitcoin to the point of removing even stuff like P2SH. Its INANE roadmap decisions such as ultra big blocks (offering its blockchain to be used as incredibly inefficient decentralized storage) leads me to suspect that BSV could be the other end of a two-pronged attack vs Bitcoin \[as working p2p\] Cash.

Between BTC, BCH and BSV, it is Bitcoin Cash which reflects the original ethos of the Bitcoin community and its intentions of being p2p cash while also having a sane roadmap.

BTC 3 SOXL 8/14 225 C for $5.25. Sold them Monday for $9.27. Think I could have waited and bought back lower but decided I didn’t want SOXL risk over the weekend

If you believe BTC will reach or surpass ATH, then it's not the worst investment you can make. Understand it follows BTCI at 1.5 leverage - so more upside/downside swing. I personally have invested in XBCI/BTCI - I also have been in the BTC space since 2017. I don't put all my marbles in one basket - I have a good growth account for retirement that I max out each year. Don't make this your core investment, but if you want btc exposure - given BTC is about 50% down, it might be a good time to enter. Not financial advice obviously.

Sheesh AAPL! BTC my 7/31 $360c the other day and just re-sold it today!

Get a Roth IRA going, and put money into a mix of stocks and BTC. Given you’re investing, a BTC ETF is best. Maybe IBIT, QQQM, and VOO for example. That way you’re diversified and can still cash in that BTC growth along with everything else at retirement.

Yeah, that's why I moved over to Strive SATA - a very similar digital credit Treasury model to Strategy - except the CEO isn't a personality, and has "second to market" advantages similar to BlackBerry having the idea for a smart phone and being first to market destroyed by Apple. Strive is debt free and isn't making and breaking large promises ( we'll never sell BTC, actually we will)

BTC 10 SPY $740/739p @ 0.07 +50%
I had originally opened 20 of these the other day, but I wouldn't open these at the current price so I'm cutting half to reduce the risk. I'll leave the other 10 and try to close at 0.01

Grandkids laying in bed: “Grandpa, tell us the story again about FIAT as a tool for slavery and how BTC rose in on an orange horse and saved everyone.”

I started buying £100 of BTC every week 3 months ago. I’m 53 so will work till I retire on my 68th birthday. What do you recon it will be worth.

Far more BTC has been lost in self custody than on exchange over the years. Keep that in mind, you have to be confident in your ability to be your own bank, it's not something you just wing because some random u/ told you to.

Just a theory, sell at high, buy at low.
I know, crazy concept, goes against what BTC is supposed to be used for. For shame. I'm a horrible human.

> Its way too slow
You tried to play the wise one, you ended up showing your foolishness.
It's actually near-instant, faster than normal VISA. Ultimate settlement is also faster than VISA - takes hours instead of months.
Of course only BCH has this property, because it supports ZeroConf. Unlike many other coins, like BTC.

From the Coinbase one weekly report
Coinbase released a new research report called “Fresh Bid, Expensive Money,” and the Bitcoin section had a few important takeaways.
Bitcoin has rallied more than 10% even though the macro environment is still difficult. The 10-year Treasury yield is near 4.65%, the 30-year is above 5%, oil remains elevated, and the Fed could still take a hawkish position at its next meeting.
Normally, that combination would put pressure on Bitcoin. A long-term government bond yielding more than 5% competes directly for capital, especially because Bitcoin does not generate income or interest. Despite that, BTC has continued climbing toward the mid-$60,000 range.
Coinbase believes the main reason is the return of spot ETF demand. Bitcoin ETFs recorded five consecutive inflow sessions for the first time since April, and those funds have recently been absorbing more Bitcoin than miners are issuing.
That is a positive development, but Coinbase does not consider it a confirmed reversal yet. ETF flows remain negative for the year, and some of the recent inflows may be connected to market-neutral basis trades rather than long-term bullish positioning.
Another important point was the relationship between Bitcoin and the AI and semiconductor trade.
Earlier in 2026, semiconductor stocks attracted a large share of available risk capital while Bitcoin lagged. More recently, Bitcoin and AI-related stocks have risen during some of the same sessions, while the performance gap between them has narrowed.
Coinbase interprets this as evidence that the AI trade may no longer be diverting capital away from Bitcoin. However, the current data does not yet show a broad liquidity expansion lifting every risk asset. The Bitcoin rally still appears to be driven mostly by crypto-specific ETF demand.
The options market may also limit short-term upside.
Traders have been selling a large amount of July 31 Bitcoin calls around the $72,000 strike. This can create a mechanical ceiling because dealer hedging may produce additional selling as Bitcoin approaches those levels.
Coinbase identified the following BTC levels:
Support at $63,000, followed by $58,000 to $60,000.
Resistance at $68,000, followed by approximately $73,000.
The scenarios are straightforward:
Holding above $68,000 would favor a move toward $73,000.
Losing $63,000 would favor a move back toward $60,000.
Losing the $58,000 to $60,000 range could open significantly more downside.
The main conclusion from the report is that Bitcoin is no longer rising only because sellers are becoming exhausted. There is now evidence of an actual institutional buyer returning through the spot ETFs.
At the same time, the rally remains dependent on that ETF demand. Long-term yields are still high, the Fed remains a risk, and options positioning could keep Bitcoin range-bound through the end of the month.
The report is cautiously constructive, but it does not treat the current move as a confirmed breakout. The stronger confirmation would be Bitcoin holding above $68,000 while ETF inflows continue and long-term Treasury yields stabilize.

Good luck, but stop taking my BTC.