Over the last few months I’ve been trying to build a Bitcoin framework that combines macro liquidity with market structure instead of relying primarily on RSI, moving averages, or trend lines.
My current base case is this:
If Bitcoin cannot reclaim and establish acceptance above ~$67k, I think the probability of a much deeper repricing increases.
I’m saying $67k is the level that determines whether I stay constructive or become materially more defensive.
Here’s why.
First Principle: Stop Looking Only at Price
Most technical analysis answers one question:“Where has price been?”
That’s useful.But I think institutions care far more about another question:
“Where is everyone’s money?”
If you’re managing billions of dollars, you’re less interested in where Bitcoin printed candles six months ago than you are in where capital actually changed hands.
That’s where:large inventory was accumulated,participants became profitable or underwater,trapped positions developed,and supply/demand tended to emerge.
That’s why my framework revolves around Volume Profile and Anchored VWAP.
1. Fixed Range Volume Profile (FRVP)
For anyone unfamiliar with it:
Imagine Bitcoin trades between $60k and $70k for several months.
Price visits every level, but volume isn’t evenly distributed.
Maybe:very little Bitcoin trades at $62k,a huge amount trades at $67k,moderate volume trades at $65k.
FRVP ignores time.
Instead it asks:“Where did the market actually conduct the most business?”
The largest volume node is called the Point of Control (POC).
Think of it as the market’s fair value for that specific auction.
It’s where buyers and sellers agreed more than anywhere else.
Institutions watch these areas because they represent genuine inventory not arbitrary lines on a chart.
2. Anchored VWAP (AVWAP)
Anchored VWAP is probably my favourite institutional tool.
Instead of calculating a simple average price, it calculates the volume-weighted average price from a specific event.
I anchored mine to two structural events:
Spot Bitcoin ETF approval (January 11, 2024)
Bitcoin Halving (April 2024)
The question AVWAP answers is:
“What is the average volume-weighted cost basis of participants since this event?”Why does that matter?
Because markets behave differently above and below average cost. When the price trades above the AVWAP:The average participant is in profit.
Psychology is generally constructive.
When price trades below AVWAP:The average participant measured from that anchor is below cost basis.
Some investors hold. Some reduce risk. Some wait for breakeven. Some add.
The point isn’t that everyone reacts the same way.
The point is that cost basis matters.
Right now both of my Anchored VWAPs are sitting around $85k.
Current price is around $64k.
That’s a meaningful gap. Every BITCOIN holder from SPOT BITCOIN ETF approval to BITCOIN HALVING holder is underwater.
3. Anchored Volume Profile (AVP)
AVP asks a different question.
Instead of:“Where has volume traded recently?”
It asks:“Where has volume accumulated since this structural event?”
That allows you to estimate where longer-term inventory has actually been built.
Again…
We’re not looking at price.
We’re looking at inventory.
Why ~$67k Matters
Here’s where it gets interesting.
Three completely independent methodologies all converge in almost exactly the same place.
Fixed Range Volume Profile
Point of Control:
~$66,961
Anchored Volume Profile
Largest inventory node:
~$67k
Anchored VWAP
Lower statistical band from the ETF/Halving Anchors:
Again…
~$67k
One indicator can be noise.
Two can be coincidence.
Three independent methodologies identifying essentially the same level immediately gets my attention.
To me, that isn’t simply “resistance.”
It’s an area where:maximum business has been conducted,significant inventory exists,and institutional cost basis begins interacting with current price.
The Macro Problem
Charts don’t exist in isolation.
This market structure is developing during a quarter that could present several liquidity headwinds.
Among the things I’m watching:
Significant U.S. Treasury borrowing needs.
A Federal Reserve that still appears committed to restrictive policy.
The possibility that higher yields continue to compete with risk assets.
Japanese capital repatriation and its potential effect on global liquidity.
None of these guarantee lower prices.
But collectively they make me question whether Bitcoin has enough macro support to absorb heavy inventory overhead.
My Confirmation Trigger
I’m deliberately keeping this simple.
I don’t care about intraday wicks.
I don’t care about a four-hour breakout.
I want to see:
Two consecutive daily closes above ~$67k.
Why?
Because one close can simply be emotion.
Two consecutive closes suggest the market is beginning to accept value above that region instead of merely testing it.
That’s a concept borrowed from Auction Market Theory. Price can visit a level. Acceptance is different.
If We Fail There…
If Bitcoin repeatedly rejects ~$67k while macro conditions remain restrictive, my working hypothesis is that the market remains in distribution rather than beginning a new expansion phase.
The next major area I’m watching is approximately:
$43k.
Why?
Because that’s where I see the next significant historical value area based on the ETF-era volume profile.
Markets often move from one area of accepted value toward another.
Again…
I’m not saying Bitcoin has to trade there.I’m saying that’s the next area I would consider structurally important if the current auction fails.
How This Thesis Dies
This is the most important section.
I’m not emotionally attached to this idea.
I’d abandon it if the evidence changed.
Specifically if Bitcoin:
achieves two consecutive daily closes above ~$67k,establishes sustained acceptance above that region,continues seeing strong ETF inflows,and does so alongside improving liquidity conditions.
If that happens, I’ll revise the framework.
Good analysis shouldn’t be about defending a prediction.
It should be about updating probabilities as new information arrives.
Final
Price tells you where the market is.
Volume Profile tells you where business has been conducted.
Anchored VWAP estimates the average cost basis since important structural events.
Macro liquidity tells you whether the environment is becoming more or less supportive.
When those four things begin telling the same story, I pay attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment