On June 5, 2026, Bitcoin briefly fell below the $60,000 mark during trading but quickly rebounded, closing at about $61,399.7 according to OKX quotes, with a daily increase of about 0.57%. The closing candle was not exaggerated, but the intraday volatility and speed were significantly amplified. Accompanying the price curve was a sharp liquidation of leveraged positions: Coinglass data showed that approximately $1.829 billion in contracts across the network were liquidated in the past 24 hours, including about $1.459 billion in long positions and approximately $371 million in short positions, a typical “bull squeeze at high positions” reshuffling. On the surface, this seemed merely like another technical fluctuation caused by high leverage being wiped out, but during this price shock, different institutions exhibited starkly different profit and loss results due to variations in holding structures, risk preferences, and leverage usage habits, making the differentiation of earnings among institutions a key entry point for understanding this Bitcoin tremor.
The Chain Reaction of Falling Below $60,000 and the $1.8 Billion Liquidation
On June 5, Bitcoin fell through the $60,000 mark due to pressure from selling and forced liquidations, then, supported by buying and short covering, rose back above $60,000, closing around $61,399.7, and recorded a daily increase of about 0.57% (OKX data). The price path exhibited a typical “downward sweep - rapid pullback”: the liquidity vacuum when breaking through the round number knocked out shallowly placed long high-leverage positions, triggering a chain of liquidations; once the price quickly returned above $60,000, the short-leveraged positions that had previously been forced to short were forced to cover, further amplifying the rebound.
Corresponding to this price tremor, the total network contract liquidations reached about $1.829 billion in 24 hours, including approximately $1.459 billion in long liquidations and about $371 million in shorts (Coinglass data). The losses were highly asymmetric between longs and shorts, reflecting that market leverage was previously more biased towards the long side. According to a single source, in this liquidation wave, Bitcoin contracts alone accounted for about $620 million in liquidations, while Ethereum contracts accounted for about $496 million, indicating that the vast majority of leveraged risk was concentrated on these two mainstream assets and was released in a single lightning strike. This high-leverage squeeze centered on Bitcoin and Ethereum completed a “clearing inventory” of excessive leverage in a short time, laying a new structural foundation for subsequent price movements.
Armstrong: Bitcoin Dropped but Crypto Didn't Collapse
While leverage was intensely squeezed out and Bitcoin briefly fell below $60,000 before returning to about $61,399.7 (OKX data), market sentiment was almost completely fixated on this single price curve. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong publicly reminded at this time that many still believe (or feel) that a drop in Bitcoin means a drop in the overall cryptocurrency market, but this equation has become ineffective in the current cycle. Bitcoin ultimately recorded a daily increase of about 0.57%, and the gap between this and the sentiment of a “crash” is what he tried to point out as a cognitive misalignment.
In the same segment, Armstrong specifically pointed out that derivatives, perpetual contracts, fiat-backed assets, and prediction markets are “all rising” in the current environment, meaning that when Bitcoin, as a pricing anchor, experiences severe volatility, other structural segments have not weakened in tandem, but instead show relative resilience in trading demand, risk hedging, and liquidity management. In other words, this round of turmoil is more a repricing of Bitcoin and its high-leverage positions than a systemic collapse of the entire crypto ecosystem.
DAT Holding Companies Under Pressure from Book Value Withdrawals
When Bitcoin briefly fell below $60,000 on June 5 and then rose to about $61,399.7 (OKX data), DAT companies represented by Strategy and Metaplanet almost simultaneously underwent a “momentary reassessment” of their balance sheets. As of that day, the core holdings of these DATs were highly concentrated in mainstream assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana, with the asset side's market value closely synchronized with the prices of these main chains. In an environment where Bitcoin dipped sharply and the prices of Ethereum and Solana also felt the pressure, this high concentration directly amplified market value fluctuations, rapidly compressing accumulated book profits, with some positions experiencing significant unrealized losses.
It should be emphasized that the impact on Strategy, Metaplanet, and others in this round is currently more reflected in floating profits and losses from an accounting perspective, rather than actual losses that have been realized. As long as these DATs were not forced to reduce holdings or proactively sell core assets during the turmoil, the substantial unrealized losses or profit withdrawals recorded on the balance sheet are still merely the result of fair value changes and do not equate to cash outflows or permanent capital losses. Therefore, from the data perspective, this looks more like a short-term valuation adjustment test that concentrated holding DATs were forced to accept, rather than a conclusion that their overall holding strategies have failed.
Hyperliquid Bets on HYPE with $1.1 Billion Floating Profit
Unlike Strategy, Metaplanet, and others mentioned earlier that suffered fair value adjustments during Bitcoin's volatility, Hyperliquid (token HYPE)-based Hyperliquid Strategies has become one of the few DAT institutions profiting against the trend. This institution does not focus on Bitcoin, Ethereum, or Solana as main holdings but instead concentrates on its own protocol token HYPE, with a reported holding size of about 23.7 million HYPE. During this round of Bitcoin turmoil, the overall account remains in a positive yield state.
According to the same source, Hyperliquid Strategies currently has a floating profit exceeding $1.1 billion, which is highly recognizable within the DAT sector: while most DATs primarily focused on Bitcoin are recording unrealized losses or significant profit withdrawals on their reports, Hyperliquid Strategies boasts billions in book profits on its own token. Combined with Armstrong’s observation that “derivatives, perpetual contracts, etc., are still rising”, this path centered on HYPE as a core asset appears more like an independent curve with significantly differentiated sources of returns and risk factors compared to the traditional DAT heavy on Bitcoin and other mainstream assets.
Institutional Strategy Divergence: Bitcoin vs. New Assets
Also in the environment where Bitcoin briefly fell below $60,000 and experienced severe fluctuations, DAT companies represented by Strategy and Metaplanet, with their assets mainly concentrated on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and other core assets, had their overall positions almost fully exposed to “mainstream asset β”, resulting in significant unrealized losses or a clear rollback of paper profits; on the other hand, Hyperliquid Strategies, based on about 23.7 million HYPE holdings, reportedly still maintains over $1.1 billion in floating profits, becoming one of the few DATs that can maintain overall positive earnings during this wave of volatility. Under a single macro shock, one side experiences balance sheet rollbacks in heavily weighted positions in Bitcoin and other mainstream assets, while the other side achieves balance sheet expansion relying on protocol tokens. The differentiation in earnings among institutions begins to explicitly manifest in balance sheets.
This resonates with Brian Armstrong's observations — many market participants still view Bitcoin’s drop as a “drop of the entire crypto market,” but he emphasizes that derivatives, perpetual contracts, fiat-linked tokens, and prediction markets are still rising in the current environment, indicating that asset structures are shifting from a “single Bitcoin exposure” to more complex multi-factor portfolios. For DATs and holding companies, this round of differentiation may change future asset allocation and treasury management paradigms: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and others will become more like “benchmark assets,” but on top of them, institutions will actively add protocol tokens, derivative strategies, and other different risk sources to hedge against the impact of single asset rollbacks on the balance sheet; at the same time, those companies that faced significant unrealized losses during this volatility will be forced to address a more concrete question at the board and shareholder level — will the future earnings curve track Bitcoin's single-line volatility, or will a new independent path related to Bitcoin be constructed through new assets and derivative instruments like HYPE that do not move in complete sync?
Accelerated Volatility Reshuffle: Who is Laying Out for the Next Round?
On June 5, after Bitcoin fell below $60,000 and returned to about $61,399.7, about $1.829 billion in contracts were passively liquidated across the network within 24 hours (Coinglass data), including $1.459 billion from long positions. This round of intense fluctuations completed a concentrated clearing of high-leverage positions and brought the differences in profit and loss among institutions to the forefront. DAT companies represented by Strategy and Metaplanet, with their assets concentrating mainly on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and other core assets, generally faced enormous unrealized losses or significant rollbacks of paper profits during this round of turbulence; conversely, Hyperliquid Strategies, relying on about 23.7 million HYPE holdings (according to a single source), has a floating profit exceeding $1.1 billion, making it one of the few DAT institutions that maintained overall positive earnings during the same time window. This provides a clear comparison: a single Bitcoin position translates to nearly complete following of Bitcoin's single-line price fluctuations; once the price sharply retreats, the balance sheet has nowhere to escape the pressure; meanwhile, adding protocol tokens, derivative strategies, and other multi-element configurations beyond Bitcoin carries additional complexity but provides the possibility of crossing Bitcoin's retreat in the same market and achieving an independent earnings curve. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong warns the market that a drop in Bitcoin does not mean the entire crypto ecosystem weakens in tandem, as derivatives, perpetual contracts, fiat-linked tokens, and prediction markets are still showing upward performance in the current environment — this perspective actually reinforces the new pricing framework of “Bitcoin ≠ entire market.” Standing on the back of this massive tremor, the core task for institutions in the future is no longer simply answering whether to overweight Bitcoin, but how to maintain a continuous dynamic balance among Bitcoin exposure management, derivatives tool utilization, and new asset allocation. Whoever can turn this combination into a repeatable risk budgeting and revenue structure will be more likely to become the true dominant force in the next round of the cycle.
Join our community to discuss together and grow stronger!
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: 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。
