At the beginning of June, Bitcoin suddenly dropped after reaching a high of about $74,000, falling more than 10% in a short time, with the price pushing back to a relatively low range near this year's platform area, and the market's optimistic sentiment quickly switched to panic. In contrast to the sharp price drop, the leverage on the derivatives level did not clear in sync: the open interest of Bitcoin-denominated contracts rose against the trend during the decline to about 773,000–784,400 BTC, approaching historical highs, indicating that large directional bets were still accumulated in the market. Over the past four years, Bitcoin has often followed a rhythm of “rapid surges completing major increases, followed by sharp declines + long-standing sideways consolidation or systematic corrections to digest pressure.” Thus, this round of movement is dissected within the same framework: Is the current sharp decline a typical retest of a key support level in the upward structure, or a precursor to accumulated leverage, volume expansion at high levels, and a peak in trends? Coupled with the fact that the U.S. CPI in April 2024 was higher than expected when announced in May, concerns about MicroStrategy potentially selling Bitcoin and subsequent selling pressure, and discussions about institutional funds flowing from Bitcoin to AI-related assets, this round of divergence between price and leverage, alongside macroeconomic and financial resonance, is pushing the differences between bulls and bears into a new round of concentrated contention.
Sharp Decline at High Levels: Bullish Sentiment Instantly Reverses
Before entering June, Bitcoin had been consolidating near the high at around $74,000 for several weeks following the previous rapid surge, with most movements being narrow fluctuations and optimistic expectations of "the strong getting stronger," with bulls generally viewing this area as a consolidation zone before a breakout. However, at the beginning of June, the price suddenly turned downward from about $74,000 without significant buffering, and a continuous increasing bearish candle directly extended the decline to over 10%. This represented a typical "sharp decline at high levels" rather than a gradual downward structure, breaking the earlier consensus of stability at high levels in a short time.
As the price was rapidly knocked back from the high range, the platform near this year's relatively low range began to be tested again, and the market sentiment also switched accordingly: the previous greed surrounding “continued upward movement after high-level fluctuations” was quickly replaced by discourse on “top” and "peaking," and the narrative of "adding positions on dips" yielded to open debates about trend reversals. This shift from the high-level surge phase to testing the low-level platform fluctuations not only revisited this year’s low range in terms of price but also pushed bulls from confidence to caution and panic emotionally, laying greater uncertainty for whether it would follow the existing rhythm to complete a one-time release of downward pressure or evolve into a peak formation.
Leverage Increases Rather than Decreases: Bitcoin-Denominated Positions Approach Peak Levels
From the market data, this round of over 10% decline from around $74,000 did not bring about a typical “deleveraging.” On the contrary, the open interest of Bitcoin-denominated contracts did not decrease but increased during the decline, maintaining a range of about 773,000–784,400 BTC, which is nearly at historical peak levels. More crucially, this increase in open interest occurred during the price retreat phase rather than the upward phase, indicating that a large amount of capital chose to increase leverage against the trend during the decline, resulting in further concentration of contract positions in the high price range.
Combining past market experiences, Bitcoin-denominated positions nearing peak levels often occur near phase tops and are areas where significant volatility and concentrated forced liquidations frequently arise. The current buildup of high leverage at high levels means that if the price continues to fall or experiences sharp short-term fluctuations, the risks of minor cascading liquidations and chain liquidations could be amplified, which is one reason some institutions emphasize that the current leverage level is “too high.” Consequently, market interpretations have diverged: the cautious group views the near-peak Bitcoin-denominated positions as a typical “top signal,” believing any subsequent downward fluctuations could trigger a new round of forced liquidation chains; the optimistic group, however, emphasizes that every time high leverage passively deleverages, the remaining contracts and positions forcibly liquidated tend to transform into “ammunition” for the next rebound, whether the current high open interest corresponds to a top or accumulation remains the core focus of subsequent discussions regarding price action.
How Concerns Over MicroStrategy's Selling Amplify Panic
As the price rapidly plummeted from around $74,000 and leverage was high, market sentiment began to concentrate on amplifying another narrative: whether MicroStrategy would sell some Bitcoin positions at high levels. As a publicly listed company holding a large amount of Bitcoin and a representative of "Bitcoin on the balance sheet," any discussions about "potential sales” naturally amplify into foresight signals for future selling pressure. Institutions like BIT Official, while analyzing this round of correction, have listed concerns about MicroStrategy's potential sales and subsequent selling pressure as one of the influencing factors, causing this expectation to rapidly spread from institutional research reports to broader trading levels.
It is crucial to emphasize that from the current publicly available information, we can only confirm the market's “existence of expectations and concerns about selling.” The research reports do not provide any verifiable data on actual quantities, amounts, or holding ratios that MicroStrategy may sell, with all these variables marked as “to be verified,” not supporting deterministic judgments about specific scales and timing. However, given that the price dropped by over 10% in a short period while Bitcoin-denominated open interest remained close to the range of 773,000–784,400 BTC, which is near historical highs, traders are more inclined to interpret this kind of unverified sentiment as evidence of “accelerating peaks”: on one hand, viewing MicroStrategy's potential actions as a “weather vane” for major holders reducing positions; on the other hand, combining the imagined institutional selling pressure with the high leverage forced liquidation chain, thus subjectively amplifying future selling pressure before the objective data has shown corresponding changes. This has been a typical amplifier in this round of correction where emotional fluctuations have clearly exceeded the on-chain and spot data themselves.
Funds Shifting Tracks: Who is Attracting Capital, Bitcoin or AI?
Alongside worries around inflation and MicroStrategy, several Chinese media outlets and English market comments have recently mentioned a consistent clue: there are signs of institutional funds rotating from Bitcoin and other crypto assets to AI-related assets. The research reports on this portion of fund direction only provide a vague description of “AI-themed assets” without confirming specific targets or percentage increases, but the expression of “funds shifting tracks” has been continuously reinforced in market discourse, once being packaged into the so-called background narrative of an “AI capital supercycle.”
From a trading structure perspective, even without precise flow statistics, as long as marginal funds make relative allocation adjustments among assets, the buying depth of Bitcoin will be directly affected: during the period when the price quickly retreated from around $74,000 and Bitcoin-denominated contracts remained near historical highs, if some institutions choose to reduce their Bitcoin allocation and increase their allocation to AI-themed assets, the support power of spot and low leverage long-term buying would be weaker than before, making high-leverage bulls easier to break through below key support levels, thus amplifying the short-term correction amplitude. It should be emphasized that the “AI capital supercycle” currently remains at the conceptual level of a market label and has not been validated by long-term statistical data; what can currently be observed is merely a phase of capital rotation that has emerged in the context of macro pressure and high leverage, rather than a structural rule that proves to long-term suppress Bitcoin performance.
Historical Scripts Replayed? Support and Uncertainty After the Sharp Decline
Over the past four years, Bitcoin's major increases have often been completed within a few time windows, followed by prolonged sideways movements or stepwise corrections. Many institutions’ reviews view the rhythm of “first concentrated surges, then dragging time to digest” as a typical model. In the down phase, the price often experiences a rapid decline, releasing most of the downward pressure at once, and then gradually stabilizes during emotional recovery and reallocation of holdings. This round, with a sharp drop of over 10% from around $74,000, quickly returning to this year’s relatively low platform consolidation, combined with an emotional switch from excitement to panic, superficially aligns quite well with this historical trajectory of “concentrated releases,” but this appearance is not sufficient to conclude directly that it is a healthy correction or a peak signal.
Unlike many historical phase adjustments, during and after this price sharp decline, Bitcoin-denominated open interest increased rather than decreased, maintaining a near historical high level of about 773,000–784,400 BTC, indicating that high leverage positions are still accumulating, and whether a trend reversal occurs depends more on the subsequent deleveraging rhythm rather than the magnitude of a single decline itself. Currently, the market has not reached a consensus on specific price support ranges, so a more reasonable observational framework is: first look at time—whether this round of correction is just a brief “flash crash” followed by a rapid recovery, or evolves into a sideways digestion at weekly or even monthly levels; then look at structure—whether high leverage in Bitcoin-denominated positions has begun to substantively retreat or continues to increase during rebounds. Coupled with the uncertain path of U.S. macro data, and some institutions possibly continuing to make minor adjustments to their positions, and the cascading liquidation risks caused by remaining high leverage, the volatility amplitude in the short term still has the potential to be amplified, and the true trend direction will only become clearer after the liquidation of leverage and the repricing of macro expectations.
Join our community, let’s discuss and become stronger together!
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid perks: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster perks: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
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。
