On January 23, 2026, Bitcoin's price on multiple trading platforms such as HTX and OKX broke through the $90,000 mark, setting a new phase high on the charts. However, in stark contrast to the price performance, the 24-hour increase was only about 0.06%-1.12%, and trading volume and participation were not particularly heated. This article will explore the contrast between "price hitting new highs vs. low participation," combining insights from glassnode weekly reports, on-chain large fund behaviors, and derivatives cases, to outline that this round of upward movement resembles a "continuous contraction of sellers" rather than a "frenzied buying spree."

Multi-Platform Breakthrough and Mild Increase

● Price Performance: According to data from a single source, on January 23, in the East 8 time zone, Bitcoin's price on the HTX platform rose to about $90,012, while on the OKX platform, it reached about $90,003, both surpassing the $90,000 mark. This price level was confirmed across multiple mainstream platforms, reinforcing the event's attribute as a "dual technical and psychological barrier" rather than an isolated anomaly on a single platform.

● Increase Intensity: Despite the price crossing the threshold, the same source reported that Bitcoin's 24-hour increase was only about 0.06%-1.12%, which is a very mild upward range. This characteristic of "standing at an integer level with slight increases" sharply contrasts with the single-day percentage points or even double-digit large bullish candles commonly seen in traditional bull market phases, resembling a slow push-up in a context of relatively weak liquidity and limited selling pressure, rather than a main offensive of funds rushing in.

● Price Difference Interpretation: The slight price difference of a few dollars between HTX and OKX, under the premise that the depth of spot and contracts, market-making strategies, and matching mechanisms are not entirely consistent, likely reflects the normal differences in liquidity and pricing mechanisms. Since the brief explicitly states that arbitrage space-related information is missing, it is currently impossible to infer whether there are systematic cross-platform arbitrage opportunities; any refined arbitrage conclusions would be an overextension and should be approached with caution to avoid speculation.

Price Hits New Highs and Participation Cools Down

● Upward Driven by Selling Pressure: According to glassnode weekly reports, the current upward movement in Bitcoin's price is largely due to insufficient selling pressure, rather than a significant increase in trading activity. In other words, potential sellers are choosing to step back and slow down their selling pace, allowing prices to rise even in the absence of significant incremental buying. This judgment emphasizes "supply-side contraction," which fundamentally differs from the traditional logic of volume-driven increases propelled by a large influx of new funds.

● Cold Sentiment Contrast: The contradiction of "price hitting new highs vs. declining participation" in this round is markedly different from the high trading volume, social media buzz, and influx of new funds commonly seen near past Bitcoin historical highs. The current market resembles a test of existing funds at high levels, with trading and on-chain activity not showing a simultaneous explosion, making the $90,000 figure shine on the charts but failing to ignite a widespread consensus of "bull market frenzy" on the emotional level.

● Information Dissemination Blocked: Crypto researcher Nic Carter pointed out that the X platform's algorithm has weakened creators' ability to reach existing audiences. If this viewpoint extends to the current market situation, it may imply that the efficiency of mainstream crypto information and sentiment dissemination has been weakened. The slowdown in the information dissemination chain means that even when prices hit new highs, retail investors' perceptions and emotional feedback are "stifled in the system," further reinforcing the phenomenon of price and visible participation not being synchronized (this is a viewpoint citation, not a quantitative conclusion).

Whale Games and Selling Pressure Contraction Narrative

● OG Whale Floating Loss Sample: According to a single source, an address regarded by the market as a BTC OG insider whale experienced a floating loss of about $44 million during this round of market activity. This case is more illustrative and does not represent all whale behaviors, but it indicates that even early large holders face significant paper drawdowns during price fluctuations, and their adjustment pace is not "mindless long-term holding," providing a concrete reference for understanding the behavior patterns of large positions at high levels.

● Counterparty Liquidation Behavior: In contrast, the so-called "Strategy Counterparty" chose to liquidate about $210 million in BTC long positions near the highs, reflecting another type of large fund's operational logic: when prices approach or refresh historical highs, many institutions or professional accounts opt to take profits or stop losses. The intertwining of floating loss whales and liquidation counterparties creates an on-chain picture of the redistribution of high-level positions among different accounts.

● Impact on Supply Structure: The operations of these large on-chain addresses and institutional-level funds directly affect the market's supply side—weakening the continuous selling side marginally reinforces the structural characteristic of "selling pressure contraction"; while those choosing to liquidate often create a one-time concentrated supply in specific areas. Overall, when long-term holders tend to continue locking in their positions and institutional selling does not form a continuous waterfall, the narrative of "lack of selling pressure driving prices slowly upward" is naturally amplified.

Leverage Speculation and Spot-Dominated Structure

● High-Leverage Floating Loss Case: According to data from a single source, the address 0x61cee once used about 20x leverage to short approximately 226,100 xyz:SILVER, currently resulting in about $2.026 million in floating losses. Although the asset in question is a meme coin, its risk exposure structure is quite typical: during the price upcycle of mainstream assets, contrarian high-leverage shorts often face intense floating loss pressure, and once the market continues to develop favorably for bulls, related positions may be passively reduced or trigger liquidation at any time.

● Reflection of Meme Sample's Significance: Although xyz:SILVER is not a mainstream asset, this case provides a slice for observing the current market's leverage speculation preferences. It reflects that some funds attempt to gamble on corrections near high valuations and key levels but quickly find themselves in unfavorable situations as trends continue. This risk exposure may also exist in BTC and other leading assets, but it has not yet been amplified to the public discourse level with similarly extreme individual cases.

● Derivatives Sentiment and Spot Role: In this context, it can be reasonably inferred that the overall sentiment in the current derivatives market is relatively cautious, adopting more neutral or moderate hedging rather than fully aggressive betting directions. Thus, this round of BTC upward movement resembles a spot-dominated structure: the price increase relies on existing holders' passive behavior of "not willing to sell, not in a hurry to sell," rather than a collective acceleration of leverage in the futures and contracts market, further confirming the market characteristics of "selling pressure contraction" rather than "leverage acceleration."

Historical Comparison and On-Chain Structure

● January High Point Review: The brief mentions that Bitcoin once approached about $98,000 on January 19 (this data is pending verification), but did not provide a more granular intraday price path. Even near this higher historical range, the market briefly exhibited more intense volatility and emotional amplification, but detailed trading and on-chain behavior data still need further confirmation, and this is retained only as a historical reference point.

● Trading and Sentiment Differences: Compared to the time when it approached $98,000, the current upward movement near $90,000 clearly lacks the characteristic of "volume breakthrough," and social media discourse and external fund attention have not significantly amplified in sync. In other words, the current price behavior presents a smooth volume, restrained sentiment gradual rise, sharply contrasting with the FOMO sentiment, rapid retail entry, and continuous trending topics often seen near previous phase tops.

● On-Chain Participation Structure: Combining observations from glassnode and others, it can be seen that the combination structure of limited selling pressure from long-term holders and insufficient short-term trading interest—old positions are still firmly locked on-chain, while new positions and short-cycle trading have not seen significant expansion. This structure shapes the "slow push-up" price trajectory on both the supply and demand sides: on one hand, there is a lack of continuous large sell orders, and on the other hand, there is no new explosive capital driving the market, leading to prices being gradually pushed higher in a limited liquidity environment.

High-Level Slow Grind or Pre-Peak Night

● The Essence of This Breakthrough: Considering price performance, trading characteristics, and on-chain data, this round of Bitcoin breaking through the $90,000 mark resembles a price increase driven by continuous contraction of sellers, rather than a typical bull market volume-driven surge. The process of "grinding higher" above key integer levels relies more on long-term holders' unwillingness to significantly cut losses or take profits in the current range, rather than a large influx of new funds frantically buying high, thus forming a structural characteristic of "slow grind" at high levels.

● Three Key Signals: Looking ahead, whether this will evolve into a new round of main upward phase depends on tracking three types of signals: first, the intensity of new funds entering, including the rhythm of off-exchange incremental capital entering through compliant channels or spot ETFs; second, the recovery of on-chain activity, such as whether the number of addresses, transfer frequency, and new participant indicators are synchronously amplified; third, the direction of large addresses' positions, observing whether long-term holders and institutional-level funds begin to systematically reduce or reverse their holdings.

● Balance of Price and Sentiment: In the absence of explosive incremental funds, prices are more likely to oscillate and digest in the high range, using time to exchange for space while waiting for the choice of a new trend direction. Neutrally speaking, it is currently difficult to assert that we have entered a traditional main upward phase, nor can it be simply viewed as a precursor to a top reversal; what truly determines the next large-level wave will still be the combination of sentiment repair and liquidity changes, rather than the price level itself.

Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。