Shorts on Bitfinex at a all time high!

[ensurance982]

yeah.
To say what this thread really is supposed be about: How overextend is the short/long side in comparison?
In context of the previous ATH that is 81.8% of the ATH for longs and 95.5% for shorts.

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

I think that's still not too dangerous at the moment, given the prevailing sentiment of a prolonged bear-market. This rate could easily go up big time, still. At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

[molecular]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

[Shatoshi]

I would absolutely believe it at this point

[pleaseexplain]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

I think it certain. Considering we had the libor scandal from what was considered a regulated/accountable/transparent system I think insiders are going at it as fast as they can. Its not being stopped by anyone. is is also a little ironic that one of the benefits of bitcoin was that it would stop "people clipping the ticket" on the way through eg fees from credit card companies. But at least we knew what they were. Who knows how much insiders are adding to the cost of doing business. bring on the twins asap ( assuming their exchange will be blocked from doing this)   

[dropt]

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

I would not be surprised in the least to find out that this occurring.

Regarding the swap rates:  Are you guys still considering the likely possibility that the total USD swaps also include those borrowed for LTC?  It's also very interesting that even on the recent crash down to $160 there were still ~14.5MM in USD longs.  So, If it were me, I'd probably just take ~14.5MM off the current level of longs giving us ~11.3MM longs which I think is a lot more realistic.  Still outweighs the shorts by ~4MM.

[molecular]

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

I would not be surprised in the least to find out that this occurring.

Regarding the swap rates:  Are you guys still considering the likely possibility that the total USD swaps also include those borrowed for LTC?  It's also very interesting that even on the recent crash down to $160 there were still ~14.5MM in USD longs.  So, If it were me, I'd probably just take ~14.5MM off the current level of longs giving us ~11.3MM longs which I think is a lot more realistic.  Still outweighs the shorts by ~4MM.

I wouldn't draw the conclusion that the 14.4 M USD are LTC longs. They can still be BTC longs with low leverage. It'll be interesting to see in case we break $160 to the downside (which I'm doubtful about, but what can I say, I'm a permabull and have been wrong for 1.5 years now).

[dropt]

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

I would not be surprised in the least to find out that this occurring.

Regarding the swap rates:  Are you guys still considering the likely possibility that the total USD swaps also include those borrowed for LTC?  It's also very interesting that even on the recent crash down to $160 there were still ~14.5MM in USD longs.  So, If it were me, I'd probably just take ~14.5MM off the current level of longs giving us ~11.3MM longs which I think is a lot more realistic.  Still outweighs the shorts by ~4MM.

I wouldn't draw the conclusion that the 14.4 M USD are LTC longs. They can still be BTC longs with low leverage. It'll be interesting to see in case we break $160 to the downside (which I'm doubtful about, but what can I say, I'm a permabull and have been wrong for 1.5 years now).

I agree, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that 14.4MM USD were LTC longs.

[molecular]

I agree, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that 14.4MM USD were LTC longs.

no harm done . Thanks for pointing out some of the USD swaps are likely for LTC longs. I hadn't considered that.

[gotmilk_]

33k shorts again... Will be interesting to see how will bitfinex trade engine manage next short squeeze.

[coinableS]

The fall after today's bizarre btc-e pump seems too obvious. Does that mean we'll be going back up?

[tokeweed]

What's the update?  Still ATH?

[Cconvert2G36]

What's the update?  Still ATH?

http://bfxdata.com/swaphistory/totals.php

Bookmark this.

Shorts down a bit, longs up a bit.

[tokeweed]

Thanks.

[ensurance982]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

You're implying something very important: Exchanges know their order book, they know the hidden order, they know the stops (if traders use the exchange stops), and may use these information for their own profit and gain. Sure, it would be more transparent, but would all exchanges be willing to implement it?

[molecular]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

You're implying something very important: Exchanges know their order book, they know the hidden order, they know the stops (if traders use the exchange stops), and may use these information for their own profit and gain. Sure, it would be more transparent, but would all exchanges be willing to implement it?

Would you rather trade on an exchange that implements this or some other exchange?

Seems to me we need more competition in exchanges regarding transparency and protection against such potential exchange malfeasance.

However, it seems customers most important criteria for picking an exchange to trade on seems to be the liquidity provided and its trading volume.

[ensurance982]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

You're implying something very important: Exchanges know their order book, they know the hidden order, they know the stops (if traders use the exchange stops), and may use these information for their own profit and gain. Sure, it would be more transparent, but would all exchanges be willing to implement it?

Would you rather trade on an exchange that implements this or some other exchange?

Seems to me we need more competition in exchanges regarding transparency and protection against such potential exchange malfeasance.

However, it seems customers most important criteria for picking an exchange to trade on seems to be the liquidity provided and its trading volume.

Granted, it would make the exchanges less shady and more trustworthy, yeah! But a lot of people may prefer the ability to place hidden orders right in front of / behind walls. If there was only one exchange left that offered those features, they would get all the customers requesting such a feature.

[RoadTrain]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

You're implying something very important: Exchanges know their order book, they know the hidden order, they know the stops (if traders use the exchange stops), and may use these information for their own profit and gain. Sure, it would be more transparent, but would all exchanges be willing to implement it?

Would you rather trade on an exchange that implements this or some other exchange?

Seems to me we need more competition in exchanges regarding transparency and protection against such potential exchange malfeasance.

However, it seems customers most important criteria for picking an exchange to trade on seems to be the liquidity provided and its trading volume.

I would certainly avoid an exchange that shows my stops to others. Yes, we need to make sure that exchanges don't profit on this information, but going all public is not a solution IMO.

[chmod755]

I would certainly avoid an exchange that shows my stops to others. Yes, we need to make sure that exchanges don't profit on this information, but going all public is not a solution IMO.

If an exchange started doing that you could still manually initiate a buy/sell at a certain price using their API - so that information would provide some new insights, but not the full picture of how people are trading.

[RoadTrain]

I would certainly avoid an exchange that shows my stops to others. Yes, we need to make sure that exchanges don't profit on this information, but going all public is not a solution IMO.

If an exchange started doing that you could still manually initiate a buy/sell at a certain price using their API - so that information would provide some new insights, but not the full picture of how people are trading.

I could. But I wouldn't I'd better go anywhere else.

[molecular]

The other thing is the ratio between shorts/longs that is more of a indicator of "how dangerous is a short squeeze" if you look right now that's at 21.1%

At what point do you think the risk of a short-squeeze may become too dangerous for shorters?

Yeah, this thread (for me at least) is about: how likely is a short squeeze.

Things is: we simply don't have the data to judge this. Aggregate amount of swaps just doesn't cut it. We'd need a list of positions with price and ideally leverage used. We jcould guesstimage when positions are opened (new swaps taken) and we'd know roughly the price. We could also guesstimate when positions are being closed (swap amount decreses) and we'd know roughly the price. But we'd miss a crucial piece of info: which positions are being closed?

I wish bitfinex (or other exchanges) was radically transparent with that kind of data. Why stop at the orderbook? I'd also like to see a list of stops. No hidden orders, either. That'd resemble a fair playing field.

The way it currently is, the exchange itself (or people working for it), have an unfair advantage against the 'normal' market participants.

Running a fractional reserve scheme or disappropriating user funds seem archaic compared to taking advantage of more detailed than published orderbook status, position and user balance information. That taking advantage would work wholly undetectably and without using special powers (just by making trades through the normal user api), too.

How likely do you guys think is this kind of "insider knowledge" being used by insiders of exchanges?

You're implying something very important: Exchanges know their order book, they know the hidden order, they know the stops (if traders use the exchange stops), and may use these information for their own profit and gain. Sure, it would be more transparent, but would all exchanges be willing to implement it?

Would you rather trade on an exchange that implements this or some other exchange?

Seems to me we need more competition in exchanges regarding transparency and protection against such potential exchange malfeasance.

However, it seems customers most important criteria for picking an exchange to trade on seems to be the liquidity provided and its trading volume.

I would certainly avoid an exchange that shows my stops to others. Yes, we need to make sure that exchanges don't profit on this information, but going all public is not a solution IMO.

And how would you want to do that?

Maybe one option would be to have the exchange not offer stop orders at all. People would use bots for that, so neither the public nor the exchange knows about the stop.