Fualnguyen

The crypto market is not merely a sequence of price increases and declines; it is an ongoing process of evolving investor mindset. Each cycle leaves clear fingerprints in the data - how capital flows, how risk is priced, and how conviction is tested. When these data points are viewed together across time, it becomes evident that crypto has not matured simply because time has passed, but because investors have collectively paid heavy tuition fees in every cycle.
2010–2013: Belief Comes Before Data

In crypto’s earliest phase, analysis barely existed. Bitcoin’s price rose sharply while total market capitalization remained extremely small, trading volume was thin, and institutional participation was nonexistent. On long-term charts, Bitcoin appreciated exponentially even as on-chain data were rudimentary and the market consisted almost entirely of BTC.
This perfectly reflected investor thinking at the time: people bought because they believed in a new idea, not because of models, indicators, or cycle theory. There was no real concept of risk management, nor any urgency to take profits. Alpha in this cycle came from being early and holding long enough, not from investment skill. The market rewarded conviction, not sophistication.
2014–2017: Narrative Dominance and the Collapse of BTC Dominance

After the post-2013 crash, crypto entered its first true awakening. Ethereum emerged, ICOs exploded, and capital began rotating out of Bitcoin into new narratives. During this period, Bitcoin dominance declined sharply while the market capitalization of “Others” surged, clearly showing speculative capital shifting away from BTC.
The dominant mindset was the belief that technology automatically translated into profit. Whitepapers, roadmaps, and long-term visions were treated as guarantees of valuation. The decline in Bitcoin dominance signaled rising systemic risk, even as surface-level enthusiasm remained extremely high. This cycle delivered a crucial lesson: narratives can push prices rapidly, but when capital reverses, valuations collapse without protection.
2018–2021: Cleansing, Accumulation, and the Power of Liquidity

The 2018–2019 crypto winter was a brutal cleansing phase. Market capitalization shrank dramatically, trading volume dried up, and most altcoins lost nearly all their value. Yet this was precisely when data began to speak more clearly. Market cap did not disappear entirely, Bitcoin dominance gradually stabilized, and long-term holding behavior improved.
From 2020 to 2021, global monetary easing flooded risk assets with liquidity, and crypto became one of the primary beneficiaries. Market capitalization expanded in waves, volume surged, and the Fear & Greed Index swung violently between extreme fear and extreme greed. The data showed that the market no longer moved linearly, but according to a clearer capital-flow structure.
Investor thinking also diverged sharply. One group believed “this time is different,” while another focused on liquidity, volume, and capital cycles. The core lesson of this phase was clear: crypto rallies hardest when money is cheap, not when the story is the most compelling.

2022–Present: Maturity, Risk Management, and Survival

From 2022 onward, the market entered its most profound transformation. After a series of systemic collapses, capital became far more selective. Bitcoin dominance rose and remained elevated, reinforcing BTC’s role as the system’s anchor asset. Market capitalization became clearly layered: Bitcoin as the core, stablecoins as liquidity reservoirs, and altcoins as highly cyclical, high-volatility instruments.
The Fear & Greed Index repeatedly dropped into extreme fear, yet total market capitalization no longer collapsed as it had in prior cycles. Fear no longer signaled the end of the market, but rather periods of redistribution. Long-term cycle indicators such as the Pi Cycle Top suggest that the market has not yet entered its final euphoric phase, despite meaningful price recoveries.
Investor mindset in this era has shifted from “being right” to not losing big. Position sizing, cycle awareness, and capital preservation have become the new alpha. Crypto is no longer a playground of blind faith or collective FOMO—it is a survival game for those who understand where they stand within the market structure.
🚀🚀🚀
Looking back from 2010 to today, crypto does not repeat prices, but it repeats human behavior, each time in more refined forms. Investment thinking has evolved from belief, to narrative, to liquidity, and finally to disciplined survival. The market does not reward the smartest or the fastest participants ==> it rewards those flexible enough to adapt their thinking as data and conditions change.
In crypto, surviving multiple cycles is far more important than winning big in any single one.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermAnalysis

In the crypto market, fear rarely comes from bad news. It comes from time. Time without a rebound. Time watching red numbers sit on your screen. And time listening to the same question echo around you: “What if this time is different?”

Managing fear is not about eliminating emotion. It’s about understanding what you are afraid of—and where that fear sits within the market cycle.
1. The First Fear: “What if this isn’t the bottom yet?”
When price declines deeply and for a long time, the greatest fear is not losing money—it’s buying too early. The NUPL (Net Unrealized Profit/Loss) reflects this state perfectly.
In past cycles, whenever NUPL moved into negative territory, the majority of the market entered a phase of unrealized losses. Not everyone sold immediately, but confidence quietly eroded. What matters is this: deep negative NUPL zones usually appeared before the bottom was confirmed, not after.
This fear is purely psychological. There is no confirmation, no certainty—only the same thought repeating itself: “What if it goes lower?” Those who cannot tolerate uncertainty stay on the sidelines. Those who can endure ambiguity begin to build positions slowly.
2. The Second Fear: “I’m already too deep in the red”
If the first fear is doubt, the second is pain. Drawdown shows how much damage the market has absorbed, while SOPR reveals whether participants are selling at a profit or a loss.

When SOPR stays below 1, it means most selling is happening at a loss. This is no longer theoretical fear—it is fear reflected directly in portfolios. At this stage, emotions shift from anxiety to exhaustion. The dominant desire is no longer to optimize, but simply to escape.
Historically, deep drawdowns do not end with sudden panic, but with prolonged fatigue. People sell not because of new bad news, but because they can no longer endure waiting.
Managing fear here is not about predicting the bottom. It’s about position sizing. An oversized position turns normal volatility into a psychological crisis.
3. The Final Fear: “Everyone is selling”

When fear spreads, it becomes visible on-chain.
Rising exchange inflows signal one thing clearly: coins are being moved to exchanges to be sold.
Major inflow spikes often coincide with sharp declines, when the crowd stops thinking in terms of long-term strategy and focuses solely on capital preservation. The paradox is that selling pressure does not last forever. Once most fearful participants have sold, supply begins to dry up.
At this stage, fear is no longer individual - it becomes collective. And that is often when the market starts to stabilize - not because good news appears, but because there is no one left who urgently needs to sell.
🚀🚀🚀 Fear Never Disappears—It Only Changes Shape. In crypto, fear is constant:
• Fear of buying too early
• Fear of being deeply underwater
• Fear of selling at the wrong time
The difference between those who survive cycles and those who leave the market is not the absence of fear, but the ability to understand where that fear comes from.
Charts do not remove fear. But they reveal whether your fear is shared by the crowd.
And when fear becomes common, the advantage often belongs to those who remain patient ==> long after patience feels uncomfortable.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

The halo never disappears, it only fades when belief runs ahead of reality. In every market cycle, investors ask the same question - too early and almost always for the wrong reason. They wait for the halo to return as if it were a signal, a permission slip to believe again. But the market has never worked that way. The halo does not return when prices stop falling; it returns when the market truly stops bleeding.

History is brutal, yet remarkably consistent: the halo never appears at the bottom. After every major Bitcoin drawdown, belief only begins to recover once price has already reclaimed 30–50% from the lows. By then, fear is no longer strong enough to force selling, but not weak enough to inspire confidence; it mutates into doubt and hesitation. The crowd is no longer panicking, yet no longer certain that staying on the sidelines was the right decision. The halo does not emerge at the point of maximum despair, but at the moment people realize they may already be late. Price is forgiven before belief has time to return.

On-chain data exposes a truth many charts prefer to hide: markets do not recover when volatility subsides, but when losses are actually realized. The Realized Profit/Loss Ratio makes this painfully clear. At cycle peaks, profits dominate, the ratio expands, and confidence grows loud; when cycles break, that ratio collapses - sometimes violently. As of early 2026, the Realized Profit/Loss Ratio has fallen sharply from the euphoric levels of mid-2025 and now hovers around a zone where profits barely exceed losses. This is not recovery; it is digestion. The halo cannot return while the market is still swallowing its own mistakes. Only when realized losses slow - when sellers are no longer forced but exhausted - does the market regain the capacity to believe.

The most misunderstood phase of every cycle is the quiet one. After the crash, after the headlines fade, and after even the optimists grow tired of explaining why “this time is different,” the market slips into silence. Volatility compresses, price moves sideways, and nothing seems to happen - until it does. The halo does not arrive during explosive rallies or moments of capitulation; it forms during prolonged indifference. When the market forgets how to scream, it slowly remembers how to trust.
The halo does not belong to those who perfectly call the bottom or exit at the top, but to those who survive the middle. They are the investors who preserve capital, who manage position size instead of chasing conviction, and who remain present when belief has disappeared. The halo does not reward bravery ==> it rewards endurance.

The halo will return - this has never changed. But it will not return because the market suddenly feels optimistic again; it will return because the market no longer needs optimism to function. And by the time everyone can see it, the halo already belongs to those who waited without asking for permission.
#Fualnguyen
#LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

In times of heightened market volatility, statements from high-profile figures and large corporations can easily lure retail investors into a dangerous trap: comparing themselves to players who operate under completely different conditions.

Michael Saylor’s company, Strategy, currently holds 713,502 BTC and is carrying an unrealized loss of more than $4.5 billion. Thanks to its long-term capital structure, access to financing, and multi-year investment horizon, this level of drawdown does not create immediate liquidation pressure.
Saylor can continue to hold, communicate his thesis, and maintain conviction without being forced to react to short-term price movements. Strategy stated that its financial position remains sound; according to CEO Phong Le, the balance sheet would only face serious debt risk if Bitcoin fell to around $8,000 and stayed there for 5–6 years. Recent losses are largely accounting losses on paper rather than real cash stress or forced selling, and Michael Saylor believes threats such as quantum computing are still far off and can be mitigated through protocol upgrades.

Similarly, Tom Lee’s Bitmine holds approximately 4.2 million ETH and is currently facing unrealized losses exceeding $7.5 billion. Tom Lee has openly stated that he does not focus on short-term price action, as his strategy is built around long-cycle theses and a level of drawdown tolerance that retail investors simply do not have.
But they are not like us.
Retail investors cannot afford to absorb multi-billion-dollar losses. We operate with personal capital, face direct psychological pressure from market swings, and lack the financial buffers, cheap leverage, and time flexibility available to large institutions. A 30–40% drawdown is often enough to distort decision-making; a 50–60% loss can permanently impair an account within a single cycle.
On-chain data reinforces this contrast. Bitcoin exchange inflows on Binance have risen sharply during recent price weakness, indicating that coins are being moved to exchanges as fear increases -a classic sign of selling pressure from retail and short-term holders. In contrast, exchange outflows have not increased meaningfully, suggesting an absence of aggressive accumulation by large funds or long-term holders at this stage.

This divergence reveals a clear reality: short-term pressure is being borne by retail participants, not by institutions. While companies like Strategy or Bitmine can continue to withstand massive unrealized losses on paper, retail investors do not have the luxury of repeated mistakes.
The real question, then, is not whether Bitcoin or Ethereum will eventually recover. The real question is whether we will still be in the game when they do.
Retail investors must reassess their true position and act accordingly: reduce position size, prioritize risk management, trade with discipline, and accept that institutional strategies are not meant to be copied.

They can afford to hold through billions in losses. We cannot. Different position.
Different rules. Not like us.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

On Binance charts, AVL (Average Value Line) is not merely a line that shows the average cost. At a deeper level, AVL represents the strongest price conflict zone between buyers and sellers, the area where market control is decided in each phase of the cycle.
Unlike MA or EMA - which simply smooth price data - AVL is updated on every single candle, directly reflecting trading behavior and the profit–loss state of the majority of participants.

How AVL Is Formed and Why It Moves
AVL is continuously recalculated based on:
The transaction price within each candleTrading volumeThe balance between new buyers and sellers
Every candle close represents a re-pricing of the market’s average cost basis.

High-volume candles can shift AVL significantly, while low-activity sessions barely move it.
That is why AVL is not a short-term trading tool, but rather a map of market psychology and capital flow.
AVL as the Market’s Strongest Conflict Zone
AVL represents the price level where:
Buyers consider the price “fair”Sellers see an opportunity to “get back to breakeven”
As a result:
Above AVL: buyers are in control, most holders are in profit, selling pressure is lowBelow AVL: sellers dominate, most holders are at a loss, and every rebound faces selling pressure
For this reason, AVL is always the most intense battleground, and how price behaves around it determines the next trend.
Reading Price Behavior Around AVL

Price Below AVL – AVL Sloping Down
The majority of the market is in a losing positionSellers control price actionAVL acts as dynamic resistance
This is the typical structure of a bear market or markdown phase.

AVL Hugging the Lower Body of Candles
Price opens and is sold continuously, closing near the lowsAVL fails to move up and often declines alongside price
This signals:
Buyers lack the strength to absorb supplyNew buyers accept progressively lower pricesThe downtrend is confirmed, not just short-term volatility
Price Testing AVL From Below
AVL becomes the direct collision point between buyers and sellersRejection → technical rebound / bull trap
Sustained acceptance above AVL → early cycle transition

Applying AVL to BTC and BNB
BTC
Price remains below AVLAVL is sloping downward and consistently rejects reboundsLong red candles appear alongside rising volume
This indicates:
Holders from the prior uptrend are underwaterEach rebound triggers “sell-to-breakeven” pressureBTC is in a distribution → markdown phase
==> The downtrend is confirmed, with no transition signal as long as AVL keeps falling.
BNB
Price is below AVL by a wider margin than BTCAVL is declining faster and shows no reaction to reboundsStrong bearish candles suggest forced position exits
This reflects:
BNB is underperforming BTC in terms of capital flowNew buyers lack convictionSelling pressure is more aggressive
==> BNB is weaker than BTC and more vulnerable during the decline.
Quick Comparison via AVL
BTC: weak, but still the market’s core anchorBNB: structurally weaker, under greater stress
Both assets are trading below the AVL conflict zone, where sellers currently dominate.

AVL is not just an average cost line - it is the frontline where buyers and sellers collide.

#Fualnguyen

In investing, a manchild is not someone who lacks knowledge, nor someone with limited capital.
A manchild is someone who cannot tolerate prolonged uncertainty ==> who constantly needs the market to validate their emotions on a daily basis.
They may understand technical analysis, read on-chain data, and even memorize past market cycles - yet they fall apart when price fails to move in their favor quickly enough. When the market drops, they buy out of fear of missing the bottom. When price goes sideways for too long, doubt creeps in. And when the market dips again, they are exhausted - right before real opportunity appears.
Manchildren are not eliminated by one violent crash. They are eliminated by time - by psychological erosion, and by repeated decisions driven by emotion rather than discipline. That is why the current market is not for manchildren.

A –50% Drawdown Won’t Kill You. Time Will.
Bitcoin peaked near $126,000 in October 2025, before correcting to the $63,000–$68,000 range—roughly a –50% drawdown.
Historically, this does not qualify as a full-fledged bear market. It is better described as a mid-cycle drawdown. For comparison:
2013–2017: ~–84.5%, recovery ~24 months2017–2020: ~–84%, recovery ~24 months2021–2024: ~–77%, recovery ~16 monthsCurrent cycle: ~–50%, not yet resolved
The real danger here is not the depth of the decline, but the duration of the pain. The market does not need to crash further to do damage ==> it only needs to drag on long enough.

Who Is Selling, and Who Is Buying? On-Chain Data Is Very Clear
Santiment data reveals a structure that is typical of weakening markets:
Whale & shark wallets (10–10,000 BTC): Now hold only 68.04% of total BTC supply, a 9-month low, after selling approximately 81,068 BTC in just 8 days. This suggests that large capital has no urgency to defend price, nor any pressure to reaccumulate yet.Shrimp wallets (<0.01 BTC): In contrast, small retail wallets have increased their holdings to 0.249% of total supply, a 20-month high. The absolute number is small, but the psychological signal is clear: retail continues to buy the dip.
In short, smart money is distributing while retail is trying to stay hopeful ==> a structure that has preceded nearly every bear phase in Bitcoin’s history.
Retail Has Not Capitulated - and That’s the Problem
Indicators such as Net Realized Profit/Loss show that realized losses are increasing, but true capitulation has not yet occurred. Retail participants continue to buy dips, convinced that prices are already “cheap,” and expecting a fast recovery. Historically, durable market bottoms rarely form while the crowd still believes. Markets usually bottom only when:
Confidence is fully erodedBuy-side liquidity dries upAnd the majority of retail participants accept defeat and leave
Until that happens, there is little incentive for smart money to step back in aggressively.

This Is Where Manchildren Get Eliminated
In investing, manchildren tend to:
Break down during prolonged drawdownsDCA emotionally, without proper position sizingConstantly ask “Is this the bottom yet?” instead of “Can I survive this?”Exit the market right before conditions truly improve
Mature investors, by contrast, understand that:
Survival matters more than short-term returnsDoing nothing is also a decisionAnd patience is an edge - not passivity
This cycle does not reward those who buy the most, shout “hold” the loudest, or act the bravest.
It rewards only one group: Those who survive the painful phase. And that is why: The current market is not for manchildren.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

#Fualnguyen
The crypto market is entering a critical phase in which price movements are no longer driven purely by greed or fear, but by a broader process of rebalancing after a major trend. At this stage, no one can accurately predict the market’s fate, yet higher-timeframe structures suggest several possible scenarios ahead.

The first scenario is the Bottoming Phase, where price moves sideways within a wide range and volatility remains elevated but increasingly controlled. Selling pressure gradually fades as weak hands are forced out, while smart money quietly accumulates with a long-term mindset, focusing on position building rather than catching the exact bottom. This phase often feels slow and unrewarding, but it lays the groundwork for the next growth cycle.
Within this broader process, the market may also experience a Dead Cat Bounce, characterized by sharp relief rallies following extended declines. These moves often create the illusion that a new uptrend has begun, driven by short covering and short-term retail optimism, while the underlying market structure remains fragile. As price approaches key resistance levels, liquidity returns and distribution takes place, turning apparent strength into a technical rebound rather than a genuine trend reversal.

The final scenario is the Breakdown Phase, which occurs when long-term support levels fail, triggering widespread liquidations and panic-driven selling as leverage is flushed out of the system. Although emotionally painful, this phase often represents the final cleansing of a cycle, where excess risk is removed and true value begins to emerge.
The fate of the market is not decided in a single trading session, but shaped over time by cycles and capital flows. While investors cannot control which scenario ultimately plays out, they can control their exposure to risk. In the most uncertain periods, the primary objective is not to maximize profits, but to preserve capital, maintain discipline, and remain in the game long enough to participate in the next cycle. You can’t decide the fate of the market, but you can decide your own survival.
#Fualnguyen

In a prolonged market downturn, the hardest part is not taking losses, but controlling behavior once the trend has already broken. Over the past period, Bitcoin has repeatedly led investors into “bottom-fishing” attempts. Each decline looked deep enough to believe a bottom was in place, yet in reality, those moves were merely lower steps within a broader, weakening structure.

From the peak around $97,000, Bitcoin successively broke through major support levels at $86,000 and $73,000, before dropping toward the $60,000 area and staging a technical rebound back to roughly $66,000–$76,000. The issue is not how many percentage points price has fallen, but the fact that the market continues to form lower lows, indicating that current buying pressure is still insufficient to reverse the trend.
On the weekly timeframe, the technical picture becomes clearer. Bitcoin has lost its long-term uptrend structure after decisively breaking below the MA50 and MA100. This is no longer a standard pullback within an uptrend, but a signal that medium- to long-term momentum has materially weakened. In previous cycles, when price traded below these moving averages, the market typically required an extended consolidation phase or further downside before a true bottom was formed.
At present, the weekly MA200 around the $57,000 level stands as the last remaining long-term support. This is not a guaranteed buy zone, but rather an area where a technical reaction may occur due to the convergence of long-term defensive flows. However, MA200 only acts as support as long as it holds. In a more negative scenario, if MA200 fails decisively, the long-term defensive structure would be invalidated.
In that case, based on higher-timeframe Bollinger Bands, the lower band around the $53,000 region becomes a technically plausible area for the market to search for a new equilibrium. This is not a price prediction, but a reasonable technical scenario should the downtrend extend and selling pressure remain unresolved.

It is precisely in this environment that DCA must be re-examined carefully. DCA during a prolonged downtrend is not inherently wrong, but DCA without discipline is extremely dangerous. The most common mistake is allocating capital evenly over time and buying most aggressively during sharp sell-offs under the assumption that price has already “discounted enough.” This approach does not reduce risk—it only increases position stress while the trend remains unfinished.

Proper DCA in a weakening market must be executed based on confirmation, not emotion. When the trend is weak and volatility remains high, position sizes should be small. Only when price demonstrates the ability to hold long-term support levels, volatility compresses, and the market stops making lower lows should exposure be increased. DCA volume matters more than DCA frequency, because deploying the largest capital when uncertainty is highest is simply another form of catching a falling knife.
Even if the market appears exhausted after an extended decline, that does not mean a bottom has formed. In this phase, patience matters more than bravery. Bottom-fishing is not about aggressive buying, but about observing, preserving capital, maintaining psychological resilience, and waiting until probabilities begin to shift in your favor. A bottom is only confirmed after it has passed, and those who survive long enough are the ones who get to participate in the next cycle.
Don’t catch a falling knife. Let the knife settle on the floor - then pick it up.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

The past four months have been exhausting. Bitcoin kept breaking support, bouncing weakly, then selling off again. Every drop came with the hope of “this must be the bottom,” and every rebound failed to confirm a new trend. Many investors were right a few times early on, yet still ended up with heavy losses ==> Not because they were wrong, but because they were wrong too big.
In phases like this, the problem is no longer whether your analysis is right or wrong.
The real question is: How many times can you be wrong and still have capital left to continue?
That answer lies in position sizing.

Position sizing is not about how many coins you buy. Most investors confuse position sizing with splitting capital neatly or buying smaller amounts “to be safe.” In reality, position sizing revolves around one single question: If this scenario is wrong, how much money am I willing to lose?
In a downtrend, being wrong is normal. Being wrong by a small amount is the skill.

NAV - the foundation of every decision
NAV (Net Asset Value) is the total value of your portfolio at the current moment: cash plus the market value of all open positions. Position sizing must always be calculated as a percentage of NAV, not based on emotion or “bottom intuition.”
A survival rule:
Risk per decision ≤ 0.5%–1% of NAVDuring bottom-hunting phases: 0.25%–0.5% of NAV
This ensures that: Multiple mistakes won’t knock you out of the game. Your psychology doesn’t collapse after a few bad trades

Three concepts that must be clearly separated
Position size: how much capital you allocateRisk size: how much you can lose if you’re wrongExposure: how exposed you are to the market
The most common mistake: “I only used 5% of my account, so the risk is low” ==> WRONG
Without defined risk limits, your risk equals that full 5% of NAV, which is huge in a downtrend.

Position sizing when hunting for a Bitcoin bottom
Bottom-hunting is the highest-risk scenario because:
The trend is not confirmedYou only know the real bottom in hindsight
The correct approach:
Treat each entry as an independent experimentRisk per attempt: 0.25%–0.5% of NAVNever compound conviction
You can be wrong 8–10 times in a row and still lose only a few percent of NAV ==> while most investors mentally collapse after the third mistake.

DCA is not risk-free
DCA in a downtrend is not wrong. DCA without risk control is the real danger. Principles:
Each DCA entry is a separate decisionTotal risk of the entire DCA sequence ≤ 2%–3% of NAVNever DCA just because “price is cheaper than yesterday”
Proper DCA is a strategy: DCA because you refuse to cut losses is hope disguised as discipline.

Cash is also a position
When the market lacks clear direction:
Holding 50%–80% in cash is not missing outIt is a defensive position
Cash allows you to:
Stay emotionally stableAvoid forced holding through deep drawdownsHave ammunition when a real bottom finally forms

The math of survival
A 50% loss requires a 100% gain to break evenA 70% loss requires a 233% gain—almost impossible within one cycle
Good position sizing doesn’t help you win big. It prevents you from falling into an unrecoverable zone.

The mandatory questions before every trade
Before clicking buy, answer:
If I’m wrong, what percentage of my NAV do I lose?If I’m wrong 5–10 times in a row, can I still stay in the game?Is this trade truly worth that level of risk?
If you can’t answer these clearly → don’t enter the trade.

🚀🚀🚀 The market doesn’t kill you. Oversized positions do.
After four of Bitcoin bottom-hunting, the biggest lesson isn’t about calling the exact bottom ==> it’s about who still has capital and mental clarity when the real bottom finally appears.
Position sizing doesn’t make you smarter than the market. It keeps you alive long enough for the market to reward you.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

When markets turn volatile, headlines about “whales fleeing” always surface first.
But the data tells a more nuanced story - not all whales are the same, and not every sell-off comes from the same kind of weakness.
Figure 1 clearly illustrates a classic panic-phase behavior: large wallets rapidly depositing BTC into Binance, with multiple transactions worth hundreds of millions of dollars within hours. This is no longer technical wallet reshuffling or routine rebalancing =>> it is explicit loss realization. As prices fall sharply, whales with leverage exposure, poor risk management, or liquidity pressure are forced to exit at any cost. The news calls it “whales running,” but in reality, this is capitulation ==> the surrender of weak capital.

Figure 2, however, tells a very different — and far heavier - story. According to the latest data, the top 20 publicly listed companies holding digital assets are collectively sitting on more than $17 billion in unrealized losses. This is not short-term speculative capital. These are institutions that have embedded crypto directly into their balance sheets, meaning they simply cannot “go away.”

Leading the losses is Bitmine Immersion, associated with Tom Lee, accounting for nearly 44% of total unrealized losses, or over $7.5 billion, driven primarily by ETH purchases at an average price around $3,900. While these losses remain unrealized, they represent immense financial and psychological pressure as Ethereum moves through a prolonged drawdown cycle.
Following closely is Strategy, led by Michael Saylor, currently holding more than $2.2 billion in unrealized losses, with an average BTC acquisition price near $76,000. Despite Saylor’s unwavering long-term conviction, the P&L data makes one thing clear: even the strongest ideological holders are not immune to cyclical market stress.
Placed side by side, the contrast becomes obvious:
• On-chain whales: cutting losses quickly, exiting when pressure exceeds tolerance.
• Corporate whales: unable to exit, forced to endure losses and ride out the full cycle.
So when the news says whales are running and bleeding, the real question is not where the market goes next - but: Will you go away with the crowd, or choose the opposite when fear peaks?

Markets are not driven by headlines. They are decided by who still has the strength to remain when fear has fully played out.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermAnalysis #LongTermInvestment

I once did what many people hope for: I sold Bitcoin near the top. It was a disciplined and rational decision. But shortly after that, I made another decision driven not by cold analysis, but by confidence built on prior success. I moved all that capital into averaging down ONDO, believing I was optimizing my portfolio and positioning ahead of the market.

Six months later, the market delivered a clear answer. Bitcoin corrected and moved sideways within a controlled range, maintaining the structure of an early-cycle asset. ONDO, on the other hand, continued to decline despite its narrative and expectations. The outcome needs no embellishment: I am currently down around 70%.

This was not because the market betrayed me, nor because Bitcoin or ONDO were inherently bad choices. The mistake was a sequence of decisions made under a familiar psychological condition - overconfidence after being right. The market does not punish you for selling the top, it tests you on the decision that follows, when you start believing you can outsmart it again.

In hindsight, the issue was not choosing an altcoin, but trading safety for higher expected returns while risk appetite was deteriorating. Bitcoin can decline, but it rarely loses its structural integrity. Altcoins do not share that privilege. The market does not care about narratives; it responds to liquidity and risk preference.
The market does not need forgiveness, because it never made promises. Charts have no emotions and bear no responsibility for anyone’s decisions. The only one who needs forgiveness in this story is myself - for confusing a correct decision in the past with the ability to always be right in the future.
Forgiving yourself is not about forgetting losses. It is about not trading in revenge mode, not trying to prove yourself right against the market, and not carrying the ego of the previous cycle into the next one. Anyone who stays long enough in the market will sell correctly and buy incorrectly, win big and lose deeply, be right on direction but wrong on allocation. The difference is not how often you were right, but what you learned after being wrong.
The market will offer new opportunities, but only those who know how to forgive themselves will remain clear-headed enough to recognize them ==> and survive long enough to take part.
#Fualnguyen #LongTermInvestment

Despite recent market drawdowns, liquidity has not exited the crypto ecosystem but is instead being actively repositioned. Over the past seven days, Binance has overwhelmingly led exchange inflows with $949 million, far surpassing Deribit and Gemini, each recording around $214 million. In contrast, OKX, Gate, and Crypto.com have seen combined outflows of approximately $149 million, clearly indicating a rotation of capital toward the market’s largest liquidity hub. A net positive inflow suggests that traders and institutions remain engaged, moving capital onto exchanges to prepare for action rather than exiting, placing the market in a sensitive zone ahead of a potential major move.

More importantly, Binance is not merely a destination for inflows => it has become a direct buyer of Bitcoin itself. As part of its plan to convert the SAFU insurance fund from stablecoins into Bitcoin, Binance executed its first BTC purchase of 1,315 BTC, worth roughly $100.7 million. Shortly after, according to Bitcoin Magazine, Binance added another 1,350 BTC, valued at around $102 million, directly into the SAFU Fund. In a short period of time, more than 2,600 BTC have been accumulated, steadily advancing Binance’s plan to convert $1 billion of SAFU reserves into Bitcoin. At a time when the market is correcting, choosing to increase exposure to Bitcoin rather than retreat into stablecoins sends a clear strategic message.

Alongside these moves, BNB has demonstrated standout performance among platform tokens. While Bitcoin is down roughly 21% over the past 30 days and both ETH and SOL have fallen more than 30%, with many Layer 1 and Layer 2 platforms underperforming the broader market, BNB has declined by only about 19%. This makes BNB the best-performing major platform token during the period, reflecting capital preference for ecosystems with real cash flows, confidence in Binance as the financial backbone of crypto, and BNB’s role as a proxy for the overall health of the Binance ecosystem. It is no coincidence that Binance leads inflows, SAFU is anchored in Bitcoin, and BNB exhibits superior resilience relative to its peers.
Taken together, capital remains within the market, Binance continues to function as the core liquidity hub, SAFU evolves into a Bitcoin-backed shield, and BNB mirrors the strength and confidence in the ecosystem. In times of uncertainty, the strongest players do not stand aside ==> they act.
And today, Binance is demonstrating exactly why it remains a pillar of the global crypto market.

Reference: CoinMarketCap, BeinCrypto