Liquidation map

Where liquidation levels would sit if positions were opened the way the assumptions below describe — and, the part that matters, where price has already cleared them. The dark corridor the price path carves through the field is not empty space; it is the levels the market has already taken out. This is a model, and it is labelled as one inside the picture, not only underneath it.

Modelled notional standing at a price, at a moment. Scaled against the 99.5th percentile so one dominant cluster cannot drag everything else to the floor; the peak cell is $567K. A band ends where price trades through it — drawn in white, both as scars on the field and as the strip beneath — or fades out in four steps as the positions behind it age past the 14-day turnover window. Hover any point for the value band it sits in.

Hourly candles to 15:00 UTC, refreshed every 2 hours and drawn here in 4-hour steps. The dashed line is the live mark, $0.08343, from a snapshot 1 minutes old. Two different ages, so neither is allowed to stand for the other.

$25.9Mmodelled notional price traded through inside this window

39.44%of modelled notional sits outside the drawn price range

$0.07696 – $0.09824the range that actually traded in this window

This surface is a model, and the assumptions below drive it. No venue publishes the distribution of open positions by leverage and entry price, so nobody can observe this — not us, and not anyone shipping a similar picture. Change the leverage mix in the form above and the bands move: that is the honest version of being handed someone else's Model 1, 2 and 3. What is not modelled is the price path drawn over the field, and the claim the picture actually supports is a checkable one — that price traded through where the model puts levels. See it happen on 5 February 2026 →

The assumptions, in full

#	Assumption	Value used	Observed?
1	Total notional modelled	Equal to current open interest, $19.28M	observed
2	When positions were opened	Spread over the bars of the window in proportion to each bar's traded volume	observed
3	Leverage mix	Balanced — Weight spread across the range, tilted slightly to the middle. A deliberately unopinionated default.	assumed
4	Direction	Half long, half short at every leverage	assumed
5	How long a position stays open	A bounded life of 14 days, decaying in four tranches. Removed earlier if price trades through its level.	assumed
6	Maintenance margin	5.000% at tier 1, from the published table	observed
7	Book before the window opens	84 bars of warm-up are modelled off-screen, so the first drawn column already holds a full book	assumed
8	Drawn price range	Fitted to the traded range, $0.07696–$0.09824, plus headroom. 39.44% of modelled notional liquidates further away than this and is not drawn.	observed

Row 8 is the one most worth reading twice. Tying the axis to what actually traded is what gives the price path presence — the previous version spanned a third of the price to accommodate 2× levels half a market away, and flattened real movement into a squiggle. A floor of ±8% stops a very quiet window from zooming into noise, and in a quiet window it is the floor rather than the traded range that sets the axis. Either way the cost is that low-leverage levels fall off the picture. Here that is 2× and 5×.

Leverage mix used: Balanced

The exact weight vector behind the picture. Every other profile is one form submission away.

Leverage	Share of notional	Modelled notional	Long level, from mark
2×	9.00%	$1.74M	−47.4%
5×	19.00%	$3.66M	−15.8%
10×	27.00%	$5.21M	−5.3%

Where the model puts the biggest clusters

Price levels still carrying modelled notional at the right-hand edge of the chart, largest first — $1.65M across the ten listed. These are the numbers the bright bands stand for.

Price	Distance from mark	Side closed	Modelled notional	Share of open interest
$0.08083	-1.92%	longs	$235,628	1.22%
$0.08940	+8.49%	shorts	$235,628	1.22%
$0.09746	+18.27%	shorts	$165,812	0.86%
$0.08100	-1.71%	longs	$151,322	0.78%
$0.07586	-7.95%	longs	$151,077	0.78%
$0.09489	+15.15%	shorts	$148,250	0.77%
$0.09197	+11.61%	shorts	$147,060	0.76%
$0.09455	+14.73%	shorts	$141,245	0.73%
$0.07603	-7.74%	longs	$138,224	0.72%
$0.09437	+14.52%	shorts	$136,791	0.71%

The corridor each leverage permits — derived, not modelled

No assumptions here. Given the tier table and a mark these prices are arithmetic: the upper cap is where a short is closed, the lower cap where a long is closed.

Leverage	Initial margin	Long liquidation	Move	Short liquidation	Move	Corridor width
10× · max	10.00%	$0.07904	−5.26%	$0.08741	+4.76%	10.03%
8×	12.50%	$0.07685	−7.89%	$0.08939	+7.14%	15.04%
6×	16.67%	$0.07319	−12.28%	$0.09270	+11.11%	23.39%
5×	20.00%	$0.07026	−15.79%	$0.09535	+14.29%	30.08%
4×	25.00%	$0.06587	−21.05%	$0.09933	+19.05%	40.10%
3×	33.33%	$0.05855	−29.82%	$0.10595	+26.98%	56.81%

Where ENA steps down

Maintenance margin is set by the tier the notional falls in. Above $20.00M the corridor widens, because maintenance margin rises to 10.000%.

Tier	Notional from	Max leverage	Maintenance margin
1 · charted	$0	10×	5.000%
2	$20.00M	5×	10.000%

What is deliberately absent

No liquidation totals and no cascade tracker. Those need an event feed, and every available one is throttled — Binance publishes at most one liquidation per symbol per second, so a sum over it understates by an unknown factor, worst exactly when the number is most quoted. The full reasoning →

The 5 February sweep, on real candles → · Leverage survival — nothing modelled → · ENA funding and margin tiers →