Recently, while looking at the on-chain data of PIPPIN, I found something quite unusual.
The average long position price on the big holder's side actually slid from 0.83 to 0.81. Logically speaking, if no one is closing their positions and leaving the market, this average cost price should be stable, and it might even rise due to new positions being added. Why has it decreased instead?
I was wondering, could it be that the whales who built positions in the range of 0.18 to 0.196 just couldn't hold on anymore? Did they sell off part of their positions? After all, only by liquidating the low-priced positions can the overall average price be pulled down.
But this logic confuses me - those who entered the market early at a low position originally had a clear cost advantage, so why did they suddenly stop playing? Is it because they are bearish on the market? Or is there a problem with their funding chain?
Is there anyone who understands on-chain data to help me check if my understanding is correct?
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
15 Likes
Reward
15
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
pumpamentalist
· 7h ago
The decline in average price indicates that someone is offloading their bottom positions, but is the low-level whale cutting losses? This logic really seems a bit strained.
It's hard to tell whether the capital chain is having issues or if they are feeling trapped, but this signal is indeed not very good.
View OriginalReply0
TokenomicsShaman
· 7h ago
The average price fell from 0.83 to 0.81, which is indeed strange. But I think your logic is reversed—liquidating low-position chips would actually pump the average price, not lower it. Unless large positions are being built at a new low price?
View OriginalReply0
screenshot_gains
· 7h ago
The decline in the average price is indeed strange, but I think we might consider it from another perspective — those early whales actually didn't cut losses; they were just building a position. Accumulating at low prices and bringing the average price down seems more normal, right?
View OriginalReply0
WealthCoffee
· 7h ago
Early whales cutting loss? That must be so desperate, with such a large cost advantage and still running away, unless they really see something that we can't.
View OriginalReply0
LightningPacketLoss
· 7h ago
Early Whale Cut Loss? This doesn't make sense, how can they bear to move low-level chips?
---
A decrease in average price indicates what? The low-level positions have been cut, but the motivation is the blind spot.
---
Is the capital chain unable to hold? Or is there a pessimistic view on the future? It's terrifying to think deeply.
---
This logic doesn't add up, bro needs to supplement the cycle perspective.
---
The average cost decreasing in reverse is indeed strange, could it be that Large Investors are Whipsawing?
---
Could it be that someone has been liquidated? The leverage trap is quite common.
---
Are low-level Whales actively rug pulling? That would be alarming.
---
The average price turning around too quickly, beware of dumping signals.
---
Bro, this discovery is quite interesting, but it needs to be confirmed with Trading Volume coordination.
Recently, while looking at the on-chain data of PIPPIN, I found something quite unusual.
The average long position price on the big holder's side actually slid from 0.83 to 0.81. Logically speaking, if no one is closing their positions and leaving the market, this average cost price should be stable, and it might even rise due to new positions being added. Why has it decreased instead?
I was wondering, could it be that the whales who built positions in the range of 0.18 to 0.196 just couldn't hold on anymore? Did they sell off part of their positions? After all, only by liquidating the low-priced positions can the overall average price be pulled down.
But this logic confuses me - those who entered the market early at a low position originally had a clear cost advantage, so why did they suddenly stop playing? Is it because they are bearish on the market? Or is there a problem with their funding chain?
Is there anyone who understands on-chain data to help me check if my understanding is correct?