Updated
Pin contracts

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.

44519 Jul23 Jul27 Jul31 Jul4 Aug8 Aug12 AugMODELLEDCLEARED BY PRICE$2.6M peak bar3
none$200K$400K≥ $476K

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 $717K. 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, $3.23, from a snapshot 0 minutes old. Two different ages, so neither is allowed to stand for the other.

$28.2Mmodelled notional price traded through inside this window
26.28%of modelled notional sits outside the drawn price range
$3.18 – $4.57the 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

#AssumptionValue usedObserved?
1Total notional modelledEqual to current open interest, $19.18Mobserved
2When positions were openedSpread over the bars of the window in proportion to each bar's traded volumeobserved
3Leverage mixBalanced — Weight spread across the range, tilted slightly to the middle. A deliberately unopinionated default.assumed
4DirectionHalf long, half short at every leverageassumed
5How long a position stays openA bounded life of 14 days, decaying in four tranches. Removed earlier if price trades through its level.assumed
6Maintenance margin5.000% at tier 1, from the published tableobserved
7Book before the window opens84 bars of warm-up are modelled off-screen, so the first drawn column already holds a full bookassumed
8Drawn price rangeFitted to the traded range, $3.18–$4.57, plus headroom. 26.28% 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.

LeverageShare of notionalModelled notionalLong level, from mark
9.00%$1.73M−47.4%
19.00%$3.64M−15.8%
10×27.00%$5.18M−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 — $2.22M across the ten listed. These are the numbers the bright bands stand for.

PriceDistance from markSide closedModelled notionalShare of open interest
$3.67 +14.30% shorts $384,466 2.00%
$3.66 +13.95% shorts $301,856 1.57%
$3.35 +4.50% shorts $264,307 1.38%
$4.01 +24.80% shorts $230,649 1.20%
$4.23 +31.79% shorts $193,185 1.01%
$3.68 +14.65% shorts $185,090 0.97%
$3.37 +4.85% shorts $179,581 0.94%
$3.71 +15.70% shorts $162,905 0.85%
$4.21 +31.09% shorts $159,979 0.83%
$4.59 +42.99% shorts $154,002 0.80%

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.

$2.50 $3.00 $3.50 $4.00 10× ±5.0% ±7.5% ±11.7% ±15.0% ±20.1% ±28.4% $3.23
LeverageInitial marginLong liquidationMoveShort liquidationMoveCorridor width
10× · max 10.00% $3.060 −5.26% $3.383 +4.76% 10.03%
12.50% $2.975 −7.89% $3.460 +7.14% 15.04%
16.67% $2.833 −12.28% $3.589 +11.11% 23.39%
20.00% $2.720 −15.79% $3.691 +14.29% 30.08%
25.00% $2.550 −21.05% $3.845 +19.05% 40.10%
33.33% $2.266 −29.82% $4.101 +26.98% 56.81%

Where UNI 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%.

TierNotional fromMax leverageMaintenance margin
1 · charted $0 10× 5.000%
2 $20.00M 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 → · UNI funding and margin tiers →