The Anti Market Consensus Indicator in Judging the Trend Direction of Bitcoin ——The practicality of anti human reverse thinking and reverse operations in BTC trading The bottom judgment of this bear market, in addition to technical analysis, I have been thinking about another dimension: market sentiment and public consensus. When the public consensus is highly consistent, the true direction of market operation is often opposite to the public consensus. For example, during the temporary peak of 87.2K this time, when the market was unanimously bullish, including two consecutive days of large net inflows of ETF spot, the price of Bitcoin plummeted. I was thinking, why not turn the market consensus itself into a reverse indicator to predict the trend direction of Bitcoin? I call this indicator the 'anti humanity indicator'. 1. How are anti human indicators composed? Three level indicators, with a maximum score of 10 points. The first level is the emotional layer. If the Fear Greed Index is greater than 75 (extreme greed), 2 points will be added; if it is less than 25 (extreme panic), 2 points will be added. Retail investors with a long short ratio greater than 1.5 will receive 1.5 points, while those with a ratio less than 0.7 will receive 1.5 points. If the funding rate is greater than 0.05%, 1.5 points will be added; if it is less than 0, 1.5 points will be added. The second level is the position layer. Large holders with a long short ratio greater than 1.9 will receive 1.5 points, while those with a ratio less than 1.0 will receive 1.5 points. If the active buying and selling ratio is greater than 1.2, add 1 point; if it is less than 0.8, add 1 point. A significant net inflow of ETF will earn 1 point, and a significant net outflow will earn 1 point. The third level is the consistency layer. More than 80% of analysts in the same direction will receive 1 point, single media narrative dominance will receive 1 point, and a widely recognized entry point will receive 1 point. 2. How to determine signal strength? Total score greater than or equal to 7 points, strong reverse signal, high probability of reversal. 5 to 6 points, moderate reverse signal, need to be vigilant. 3 to 4 points, weak signal, for reference only. Less than 3 points, no consensus, go with the flow. 3. Practical verification of anti human indicators Top on September 22nd (86-87K): Fear and Greed 78+2 points, Long Short Ratio of Large Investors 1.93+1.5 points, ETF inflow of 1 billion+1 point in a single day, and FOMO bullish view of media+1 point. Total score of 5.5, moderate reverse signal. Then callback 4.5%, partially verified. If the phenomenon of "latecomers entering" is added, the score is close to 7 points, which is more in line with reality. June bear bottom (57800): Fear and greed less than 25 points plus 2 points, low long short ratio of individual investors plus 1.5 points, negative fund rate plus 1.5 points, public consensus of 40000 to 50000 yuan plus 1 point. Total score of 6 points, moderate to strong reverse signal. 57800 bottomed out and rebounded, verified. 4. Dialectical usage of ETF flow I used to say that ETF spot institutions are like wall grass institutions, chasing gains and selling losses, swaying left and right. Why is it possible that the significant net inflow of funds from ETF spot trading is a reverse indicator? Because ETFs are funds that chase price increases, the public pursues price increases through ETFs, and the time when the inflow is the hottest is when emotions are at their peak. On September 22, when ETF inflows reached 1 billion, 87396 peaked. But it should be distinguished that trend inflows (such as a continuous inflow of 3.8 billion yuan for 18 days in August) are trend funds and are bullish. The chasing rise pulse inflow (1 billion yuan per day) is emotional funds, in the opposite direction. Xiaolong's core judgment: The core value of anti human indicators is to supplement the dimension of "whether the public consensus is overheated" in the system. When the emotional, position, and narrative levels all lean towards one side and score above 7 points, it is time to be vigilant. On September 22nd, the top score was 5.5, indicating moderate risk; At the end of June, there were 6 points, indicating a bottom opportunity. This indicator will be solidified into modules in the future, and when judging the top and bottom, in addition to looking at quantity, on chain, and structure, there is also an additional tool for quantifying public consensus. Do you think this inhumane indicator is effective?