On January 25, 2026, East 8 Time, the internal flow of Bitcoin on major global exchanges dropped to 14,000 BTC, marking a new low since 2022. Among them, Binance's internal flow is only about 2,700 BTC, also at a historical low. This abnormal contraction in operational flow indicates a significant reduction in chips available for matching, hedging, and short-term distribution within the exchange system, directly reflecting a thinning market depth and rising price impact costs. Based on historical experiences, similar "liquidity pauses" often precede significant volatility; this round of flow bottoming does not automatically point to a one-sided trend but clearly releases a signal: before incremental liquidity returns, both price volatility and tail risks are being significantly amplified.

The Implications of 14,000 BTC Flow Bottoming

● Indicator Connotation: The internal BTC flow of exchanges usually refers to the total amount of daily or periodic fund transfers between major platforms and within platform accounts. It reflects the comprehensive activity level of market making, hedging, institutional rebalancing, and short-term distribution preparations. A higher value means chips are frequently circulating between different matching pools and risk accounts, indicating a stronger market's "digestion capacity" for orders; conversely, a lower value indicates a simultaneous cooling of operations and trading activities.

● Data Comparison: According to CryptoOnchain statistics, the current total internal flow of major global exchanges is only about 14,000 BTC, while Binance's internal flow of about 2,700 BTC is at a low range in its observed history. Compared to the higher daily or periodic scales commonly seen in the past, this round of values not only deviates from the center but also shows a continuous downward trend, indicating that both platform self-operation and institutional market making have significantly tightened chip turnover in the BTC dimension.

● Rarity: From the range changes since 2022, this indicator has repeatedly risen during market active periods and gradually returned to normal after panic or event shocks. However, this time it has directly dropped to the lowest level since 2022, representing an extreme value event within the sample period. Considering that there has not yet been a systemic bearish environment comparable to that of 2022, this scenario of "no obvious disaster, yet extremely low flow" is statistically relatively rare, laying greater uncertainty for subsequent market conditions.

Thinning Order Books and Market Making Retreat

● Market Making Retreat Signal: Several media outlets have pointed out in joint interpretations that "the continuous decline of this indicator means thinner order books and fewer arbitrage opportunities," which indirectly indicates that the market-making behavior providing continuous two-sided quotes is weakening. Traditional statistical arbitrage, cross-platform price difference capture, and inventory rebalancing are all reflected in higher internal flows; now that the value is compressed, it means that the frequency of these neutral strategies is decreasing, making it easier for the market to create gaps under the dominance of one-sided sentiment.

● Depth and Cost: When internal chip circulation is insufficient, market depth is the first to be affected: the number of order layers decreases, and the quantity available for each price level declines, leading to greater slippage for market orders of the same scale. Meanwhile, the bid-ask spread is more easily widened, and it becomes difficult to fill in the short term with market-making funds. Ordinary traders face not only rising costs in execution but also greater difficulty in completing large transactions at expected price levels.

● Sensitivity Amplification: A decrease in internal flow means that "chips that can quickly move to the order book to absorb or break through prices" are reduced, naturally increasing the market's sensitivity to large one-sided orders and sudden news. Under the same news impact, historically high liquidity phases might only bring a few percentage points of volatility, while in the current environment, the probability of prices being "pushed" out of their original range significantly increases, amplifying the immediate price feedback of both bullish and bearish news.

Historical Replay of Liquidity Pauses

● Typical Phase Analysis: Historical experience shows that when internal exchange flow is sluggish for a period, it often means that chips are in a wait-and-see or "static" state. Subsequently, as long as there are new macro events, regulatory signals, or large institutional orders entering, prices are likely to experience directional breakthroughs. Whether it is a volume-driven upward attack in the early bull market or an accelerated downward plunge in the later stages of a bear market, the previous phase often corresponds to a relative "dormancy" of exchange operations and market-making activities.

● Similarities to 2022: The briefing points out that this round of data shares some similar characteristics with the liquidity crisis before 2022, including a significant drop in internal flow, thinning market depth, and participants relying more on off-exchange sentiment and macro expectations. However, there has not yet been an extreme environment of on-chain explosions and credit contraction as seen that year, so a more reasonable interpretation is "similar characteristics but different causes and risk structures."

● Limitations of Patterns: It is important to emphasize that historically, "liquidity pauses" often accompany significant volatility, but the direction is not stable. Sometimes it is an upward breakthrough of resistance, while other times it is a volume-driven breakdown of key support; simply equating the current low flow phase with "inevitable surges" or "inevitable drops" is an overfitting. The current indicator provides more of a signal for "increased volatility" rather than a deterministic directional prediction.

The Link Between Exchange Holdings and User Behavior

● Internal Flow and Inventory Management: Changes in internal flow are highly related to the platform's strategies for short-term distribution, risk hedging, and inventory management. When overall market sentiment is cautious, platforms are more likely to reduce frequent reallocations between accounts, lowering leverage and market-making exposure, which is reflected in the indicator as low internal flow. This is both a precaution against potential risks and a passive adaptation to the current reality of thin trading.

● Sentiment Interpretation: Deep Tide TechFlow points out that "the market's sensitivity to shocks is rising," which corroborates the decline in internal flow. On one hand, institutions and market makers are reluctant to take on too much inventory in an unclear macro and regulatory environment; on the other hand, retail and small funds are also more inclined to reduce position volatility, and in the absence of confidence, most people choose to closely monitor news rather than actively place orders, resulting in an overall sentiment that is "sensitive but not proactive."

● Reverse Feedback of User Behavior: In such an environment, users often enhance their wait-and-see approach and reduce high-frequency trading, lowering the frequency of strategies that rely heavily on liquidity, such as grid trading and intraday trading. This "trading cooling" further compresses order book thickness and transaction activity, which in turn makes prices more vulnerable to sudden orders, creating a typical negative cycle: low flow → poor depth → large slippage → decreased trading willingness → even lower flow.

From Indicators to Strategic Responses

● Indicator Usage: In daily monitoring, investors can use "internal BTC flow of exchanges" as a forward-looking indicator of market available liquidity and market-making activity, combining it with on-chain large transfers, net inflows/outflows of exchanges, and open interest in futures to make comprehensive judgments. When observing that internal flow continues to approach historical lows, one should realize that prices are more likely to be dominated by extreme sentiment and adjust position structures and order methods in advance.

● Leverage and Execution Risks: In low liquidity phases, the importance of controlling leverage significantly increases. Even with the same multiple, under larger slippage and price gaps, liquidation risks are magnified. Whether in contracts or lending markets, investors need to pay special attention to liquidation prices, funding rate changes, and the impact of sudden large orders on the order book, avoiding passive exits during "technical spikes."

● Amplifier Rather Than Direction: The current internal flow data releases a signal of "amplifier effect"—that is, price fluctuations in any direction may be exaggerated by market structure, rather than providing certainty for either side. Therefore, rather than betting on direction, a more reasonable approach is to manage risks based on volatility thinking: moderately reduce position concentration, optimize stop-loss and alert mechanisms, rather than misreading low flow as a "buy signal" or "sell signal."

Low Flow Is Not Absolutely Bearish

● Liquidity Tightening and Sensitivity Increase: Overall, the drop in internal flow to 14,000 BTC indicates that market available liquidity is tightening, the order book's pressure capacity is decreasing, and prices are significantly more sensitive to inflows, outflows, and changes in sentiment. This structural change does not directly equate to a guaranteed price drop but objectively increases the likelihood of amplified volatility.

● Severe Volatility but Uncertain Direction: Historical experience shows that after phases similar to "liquidity pauses," the market often enters a period of severe volatility, but the direction of rise or fall depends more on subsequent macro events, regulatory signals, and the direction of incremental capital inflows, rather than being determined by low flow itself. Understanding it as "the eve of volatility" is closer to the truth than "the eve of one-sided movement."

● Preparing for Greater Amplitude: Before incremental market making and new capital have not yet significantly returned, investors need to prepare psychologically and strategically for greater price amplitude and potential tail events. From position management, leverage control to order execution, all should be cautiously optimized under the assumption of "limited liquidity and amplified slippage," rather than simply waiting for an "inevitable trend" in one direction.

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

OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits 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。