This week, in East 8 Time, Zhu Su, co-founder of Three Arrows Capital, once again discussed the trading risks in the crypto market after "selling at the top," shifting the focus from price itself to the fluctuations of human sentiment. His comments came at a time when institutional holding data was frequently making headlines: on one side, Strategy (MSTR) has accumulated approximately 713,502 BTC, valued at about $54.263 billion, and increased its holdings by 855 BTC last week; on the other side, BitMine holds 4,285,125 ETH, accounting for about 3.55% of the total ETH supply, but is facing an unrealized loss of about $6.5 billion. This stark contrast between "buying more as prices drop" and "being deeply trapped at high levels" brings an old question back to the forefront: why do even those top players who seem to have successfully cleared their positions at the peak frequently stumble when trying to re-enter and seek the next opportunity, even shattering their recently built "mythical" image?
From Selling at the Peak to Emotional Reversal in Re-accumulation
● The emotional trajectory often goes like this: after accurately selling near a phase high, traders are initially overwhelmed by the joy of "successfully escaping the peak," which quickly drowns out their fears of a crash and concerns about a pullback. This massive emotional shift can rapidly transition from tension and defense to excitement and boasting, leading them to frequently revisit their selling point screenshots, compare subsequent trends, and reinforce the impression in group chats and social platforms that "they were right."
● According to Zhu Su (information marked as pending verification), "the excitement of selling at the top can lead traders to become overly confident in themselves." This statement reveals a key point: traders may misinterpret a successful peak sale as a true mastery of the cycle's rhythm and the market's essence. The outcome, shaped by luck and risk control, is simplified to "I see through the market," laying the groundwork for subsequent aggressive actions.
● Driven by this self-admiration and the residual thrill of victory, traders instinctively seek the next "equally spectacular" perfect trade, fearing they might miss another top-tier operation. The result is that before the trend stabilizes and macro and on-chain data show clear turning points, they rush to bottom-fish, increasing their positions and leverage, betting their previously accumulated safety net on an immature judgment.
● This mentality is not exclusive to retail investors; it is also common among institutional traders and fund managers. Whether in personal accounts or team accounts, as long as trading decisions are tied to personal reputation and performance bonuses, the self-amplification after successfully selling at the top becomes unavoidable. The difference lies in the fact that institutions have processes and compliance measures that provide some level of safety net, while retail investors often accelerate towards the "second battlefield" driven by their emotions without any checks and balances.
The Contrast Between MSTR's Buying More as Prices Drop and BitMine's Deep Trapping
● According to a single source, Strategy (MSTR) currently holds approximately 713,502 BTC, valued at about $54.263 billion, and continued to increase its holdings by 855 BTC last week. This data point outlines an extreme "buying more as prices drop" stance: regardless of how the market swings, MSTR seems to always view each pullback as an opportunity to accumulate more, thus being packaged as a representative sample of "faith-based accumulation" on a narrative level.
● In stark contrast is the data from BitMine, also from a single source: it holds 4,285,125 ETH, about 3.55% of the total ETH supply, but its overall position is currently facing an unrealized loss of about $6.5 billion. Earlier, BitMine added 41,788 ETH, but this did not change the deeply trapped situation, making it easier for the market to interpret it as a typical failure case of "buying high and continuously averaging down."
● On one side is a legendary company praised for "navigating cycles and adhering to long-termism," while on the other side is labeled as "greedily leveraging and unable to extricate itself from being trapped." Both are institutions with heavy positions, yet their holding curves are read as two entirely different stories. MSTR's continued buying is interpreted as a firm belief in BTC's value, while BitMine's large ETH holdings are seen as "stubbornly holding on to the wrong rhythm."
● In the reflection of narrative halos, the market naturally raises the question: why is one side, with a massive heavy position facing severe volatility, hailed as a legend, while the other is viewed as a cautionary tale? This labeling reflects the market's extreme preference for "result-oriented" evaluations—but it also reminds us that selling at a high point or heavily buying at a low does not simply equate to long-term success or failure; what matters more is the overall planning ability regarding risk, cycles, and position sizes behind it.
Misjudgments in Re-accumulating ETH After Selling at the Top
● In market discussions, some viewpoints suggest that a certain leading trader's "premature bullishness on ETH after selling at the top was a judgment error," a characterization stemming from Yi Lihua's public statement (also marked as pending verification). Regardless of the specific details about the individual, such evaluations reveal a common pattern: after successfully avoiding a major drop, traders quickly shift their focus to the next track, attempting to replicate their previous peak operation on ETH.
● The underlying logic often follows this chain: since they successfully identified the top of the market or mainstream assets, they believe they can judge how funds will rotate into ETH and accurately hit the next major upward wave. Successfully selling at the top becomes a "general authorization" for their timing ability across assets and varieties, thus extending the escape experience from BTC to the trend reversal judgment on ETH.
● However, considering the size and market value, ETH, as the second-largest asset by market cap, has liquidity depth and participant structure that dictate the trend-switching rhythm is often slower than individual subjective expectations. The real recovery of macro liquidity environment, regulatory signals, and on-chain activity requires time to reflect in prices; this mismatch between "subjective excitement rhythm" and "objective market rhythm" can easily push traders who prematurely re-accumulate ETH into a prolonged drawdown period.
● The greater risk lies in the fact that when traders are still in a state of high confidence, they are more likely to ignore confirmation signals such as the deterioration of the macro environment, contraction of risk appetite, and the lack of significant capital inflow on-chain. Driven by this mindset, risk control thresholds are continuously lowered, and the discipline of position management is diluted, making re-accumulating ETH no longer a decision based on a systematic framework, but rather an impulsive act driven by the need to "prove themselves right again."
How Institutional Data Amplifies Retail Illusions
● Once large holdings like MSTR and BitMine are disclosed, they are quickly amplified and relayed by media, data platforms, and social networks, becoming important material for "whale dynamics." The numbers 713,502 BTC and 4,285,125 ETH provided by a single source are neutral, but after being restructured through headlines, interpretations, short videos, and KOLs, they are often packaged as emotional triggers of "smart money has already positioned" or "institutional bottom-fishing signals are full."
● For retail investors, seeing institutions continue to accumulate BTC or stubbornly hold ETH can easily lead to a subconscious equation of "massive scale" with "inevitably correct," resulting in a herd bias of "as long as I follow and buy, I won't be wrong." The so-called "mindless bullish" herd mentality does not stem from in-depth research on the assets themselves, but from blind trust in those who seem more professional and better informed than themselves.
● During the same period, trading platforms like Bybit and Binance launching new coin trading also provide additional "new funding story" material—new narrative tracks, potential hundredfold coins, institutional incubation halos, etc., further diluting investors' attention to fundamentals and cycle positions. These new coin messages are mentioned here only as background, but in actual market sentiment, they are often stitched together with whale holdings to create a complete picture of "a comprehensive bull market is about to restart."
● When investors interpret these fragmented pieces of information as "insider signals" rather than viewing them as part of the noise, what often gets sacrificed is risk control and position management. Following so-called "smart money" to go all-in, chasing highs before and after new coin launches, and ignoring massive unrealized losses can lead to a delay or even cancellation of stop-loss discipline when the market reverses because "they are still holding on," ultimately forcing liquidation in a series of drawdowns, completing a cycle from blind faith to disillusionment.
Top Players Who Sell at High Points but Lose in Review
● For top traders, after successfully clearing positions at high levels, a common psychological bias is to actively downplay the role of luck, attributing the outcome entirely to their insight into the cycle structure. This narrative of "I see through the market" is not only reinforced when presented externally but also exists in their self-review, raising the internal pressure that every subsequent trade must maintain the same level or even more extreme performance.
● In the age of social media, a beautiful escape from the peak or a precise bottom-fishing is often quickly screenshot, shared, and mythologized, with traders' achievements becoming part of their personal brand. The resulting reputational burden can unconsciously bind their subsequent decisions—acknowledging a mistake, choosing to wait, or trying small positions can all be interpreted by fans as "losing their edge," leading them to lean towards making extreme and clear stances to maintain their persona and influence.
● "Admitting mistakes and going to cash" is often harder for top players than for ordinary retail investors. On one hand, they need to explain to their teams, investors, and even the public why their views have changed; on the other hand, being in cash for a long time means giving up any chance of "becoming a legend again" in the short term. In this tug-of-war, the pace of re-accumulation is often advanced, and position sizes are more likely to lean towards aggressive, seeking to quickly prove they still possess the ability to "read the market" in the next wave.
● Because the temptation of personal heroism is so strong, institutionalized risk control and team checks and balances become particularly important. Whether it is setting mandatory reduction lines, limiting the maximum exposure to a single asset, or requiring significant decisions to be reviewed by an investment committee or risk committee, these mechanisms that seem to "slow down efficiency" are precisely what help traders resist emotional impulses. Those who truly navigate cycles are often not some genius individual, but those willing to use rules to combat self-inflation.
Returning from Legendary Stories to the Calm of Slow-Paced Trading
Selling at the top is not a permanent safety pass but more like a certificate for the next psychological exam. Every successful escape from the peak will invisibly increase the psychological burden of the next decision—from how to choose the timing for re-accumulation to whether to dare to accept that they might have "misjudged this time." These dilemmas exist for both individuals and institutions. Legendary stories often only record a few glamorous trades but rarely present the countless hesitations, misjudgments, and passive beatings behind them.
In the face of large holdings like MSTR and BitMine, ordinary investors should maintain a sense of awe rather than deification. Their scale is enough to shake emotions but not sufficient to replace each person's own risk control framework. The numbers from a single source can serve as clues for observing market structure but should not be viewed as a one-size-fits-all operational template. What truly needs to be built seriously is a clearly defined trading plan in advance—covering entry logic, conditions for increasing or decreasing positions, stop-loss thresholds, and time windows, rather than seeking excuses for their decisions by following the views of big influencers or mimicking institutional movements after the fact.
In the next cycle, emotions and data will continue to intertwine: changes in whale addresses, institutional earnings reports, new category narratives, and on-chain activity indicators will be repeatedly stitched together to create new market myths. As for the "crash after selling at the top" scenario, it is likely to be replayed with different characters and assets. For every participant, what is truly worth practicing is not how to leave the most perfect mark at the peak, but to maintain a slow rhythm and clear discipline in trading throughout the long ups and downs, pulling one's fate as much as possible from the climax of legendary stories back to a calm reality that can be executed long-term.
Join our community to discuss and become 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。
