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.
Hourly candles to 17:00 UTC, refreshed every 2 hours and drawn here in 4-hour steps. The dashed line is the live mark, $43.72, from a snapshot 4 minutes old. Two different ages, so neither is allowed to stand for the other.
The assumptions, in full
| # | Assumption | Value used | Observed or assumed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Total notional modelled | Equal to current open interest, $10.25M | 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 | Positions before the window opens | 84 bars before the chart starts are modelled off-screen, so the first drawn column already holds a full position-life window of positions | assumed |
| 8 | Drawn price range | The traded range was quieter than the ±8% minimum, so the minimum set the axis — not the traded range. 56.12% 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 minimum of ±8% stops a very quiet window from zooming into noise, and in a quiet window it is that minimum 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×, 5× and 10×.
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 liquidation, % from mark |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2× | 9.00% | $922,365 | −47.4% |
| 5× | 19.00% | $1.95M | −15.8% |
| 10× | 27.00% | $2.77M | −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 — $2.62M 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $43.06 | -1.94% | longs | $379,289 | 3.70% |
| $47.63 | +8.46% | shorts | $356,837 | 3.48% |
| $42.76 | -2.62% | longs | $336,034 | 3.28% |
| $47.28 | +7.67% | shorts | $336,034 | 3.28% |
| $42.86 | -2.39% | longs | $328,269 | 3.20% |
| $47.43 | +8.01% | shorts | $312,260 | 3.05% |
| $42.81 | -2.51% | longs | $155,705 | 1.52% |
| $47.68 | +8.57% | shorts | $147,238 | 1.44% |
| $43.11 | -1.83% | longs | $146,406 | 1.43% |
| $47.13 | +7.33% | shorts | $126,603 | 1.24% |
How far price can move before each leverage liquidates — 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 down | Short liquidation | Move up | Corridor width |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10× · max | 10.00% | $41.414 | −5.26% | $45.797 | +4.76% | 10.03% |
| 8× | 12.50% | $40.264 | −7.89% | $46.838 | +7.14% | 15.04% |
| 6× | 16.67% | $38.346 | −12.28% | $48.572 | +11.11% | 23.39% |
| 5× | 20.00% | $36.813 | −15.79% | $49.960 | +14.29% | 30.08% |
| 4× | 25.00% | $34.512 | −21.05% | $52.042 | +19.05% | 40.10% |
| 3× | 33.33% | $30.677 | −29.82% | $55.511 | +26.98% | 56.81% |
Where LTC's margin tiers step 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 → · LTC funding and margin tiers →