One Trader Took 80% Profit. Here’s the Difference. What @MMCrypto’s $27M leveraged exit, @CryptoMichNL’s bottoming thesis, and the lowest Fear & Greed readOne Trader Took 80% Profit. Here’s the Difference. What @MMCrypto’s $27M leveraged exit, @CryptoMichNL’s bottoming thesis, and the lowest Fear & Greed read

586,053 Traders Got Liquidated in 24 Hours. One Trader Took 80% Profit. Here’s the Difference.

2026/02/15 13:47
7 min read

One Trader Took 80% Profit. Here’s the Difference.

What @MMCrypto’s $27M leveraged exit, @CryptoMichNL’s bottoming thesis, and the lowest Fear & Greed reading in history tell us about surviving crypto’s worst crash since FTX.

There’s a conversation on X right now that perfectly captures both sides of this market.

On one side, @MMCrypto is posting receipts — a $27 million BTC/USD long position at 17x leverage, entry at $72,126, profits taken at $118,000. Total profit taken: 80%. He wrote: “EVERYONE LAUGHED AT ME!” And honestly? He earned that. The man closed the majority of his position months before Bitcoin lost half its value.

On the other side, 586,053 traders were liquidated in a single 24-hour period on February 5. $2.65 billion gone. $2.2 billion of that from long positions. The largest single-day liquidation event since FTX collapsed. According to CoinGlass, this was the fourth-largest 90-day liquidation flush in crypto history.

Same market. Same leverage tools. Radically different outcomes. The difference wasn’t intelligence — it was risk management. And that's what I want to break down today: after 5 years in Web3, I’ve watched this exact pattern repeat in every cycle.

What Actually Happened on February 5

Let’s establish the timeline. Bitcoin had already been sliding — from $126,000 ATH in October 2025 to the low $70Ks by early February. But February 5 was different.

BTC dropped 17% in 24 hours, flash-crashing to $60,000 at 7:20 PM ET before partially recovering to $64,100. VanEck’s analysis measured it as a -6.05σ move on the rate-of-change Z-score — one of the fastest single-day crashes in crypto history. For non-quants: a move this extreme statistically “shouldn’t happen” more than once in millions of trading days.

The cascade was mechanical, not emotional. Kronos Research CIO Vincent Liu described it as “a perfect storm: forced liquidations from over-leveraged longs, ETF/institutional outflows, and a broader risk-off macro backdrop.” BTC Markets analyst Rachael Lucas added: “Traders are no longer trying to catch falling knives. They’re prioritizing capital preservation.”

Bitcoin’s market depth — the amount of liquidity available on order books — had fallen to just 30% of its October peak. The Kobeissi Letter noted that the total crypto market cap dropped $2.2 trillion from October levels, and BTC had erased ALL of its post-election rally.

The CMC Fear & Greed Index hit 5 — the lowest reading ever recorded. Lower than Terra’s collapse. Lower than FTX. @Cointelegraph confirmed it today: “the lowest level on record.”

The Two Types of Leveraged Traders

Here’s what separates @MMCrypto from the 586,053:

@MMCrypto’s position: 17x leverage, $27.3M position size, entry at $72,126, mark price at $117,784 when he took profits. Estimated liquidation price: $68,707. He took 80% profit across multiple exits — $118K, $114K, $104K, and $98K. Realized P&L: ~$13M. Unrealized at peak: $17.2M.

The critical detail: his liquidation price was $68,707. Bitcoin is currently trading around $67K. If he hadn’t taken profits, that entire position would be underwater or liquidated right now.

The 586,053 who got liquidated: Most were long positions (83% of the $2.65B). Many were using leverage without defined exit points, without calculating their liquidation prices relative to realistic drawdown scenarios, and without the discipline to take profits when the trade was working.

@CryptoMichNL shared what he calls “the best chart in Crypto & Bitcoin” — a BTC vs Business Cycle vs Liquidity Cycle overlay showing that markets peaked in December 2024, are bottoming this month, and could see a strong bull market ahead. The thesis has data behind it. But even if the macro thesis is right, the timing is what kills leveraged traders. Being right about direction but wrong about timing when you’re at 17x leverage is the same as being wrong about everything.

The Mechanics of Liquidation Cascades

Here’s why February 5 escalated so fast, explained from an engineering perspective.

When BTC dropped below key support levels ($70K, then $65K), it triggered automated liquidation of long positions on exchanges. Those forced sales added selling pressure, which pushed the price lower, triggering more liquidations. This is a positive feedback loop — and it’s entirely mechanical.

VanEck’s research noted that $3–4 billion in total liquidations occurred over the past week, with $2–2.5 billion concentrated in Bitcoin futures alone. But critically, they also noted that “leverage has been reduced alongside price rather than driving a disorderly unwind” — meaning the market hasn’t experienced a classic capitulation event yet.

Peter Brandt (@PeterLBrandt) suggested Bitcoin could find support near $42,000 based on his “Bitcoin Power Law” model, while @PeterSchiff went full Schiff and called for $10K (which @LarkDavis correctly pointed out is absurd — at $10K the institutional buy wall from ETFs, Strategy’s 714K+ BTC holdings, and sovereign funds would be massive).

The point isn’t who’s right about the bottom. The point is that the range of analyst predictions — from $10K to $150K (Bernstein’s year-end target) — tells you how much uncertainty exists. And uncertainty at high leverage is how accounts go to zero.

What 9 Years in Tech Taught Me About Risk

I’ve been building software for over 9 years and working in Web3/crypto for 5. The engineering mindset applies directly to trading:

1. Never deploy without a rollback plan. In trading, that’s your stop-loss or your predefined exit strategy. @MMCrypto had exit points at $118K, $114K, $104K, and $98K. That’s a rollback plan. Most of the 586,053 didn’t have one.

2. Stress-test for edge cases. VanEck measured Feb 5 as a -6.05σ event. Your position sizing should survive events that “shouldn’t happen.” If a 17% single-day drop liquidates you, your position is too large.

3. Uptime matters more than features. During the Feb 5 crash, multiple exchanges experienced withdrawal freezes and API throttling. When 586,053 traders are being liquidated simultaneously, the difference between an exchange that stays operational and one that returns 504 errors is literally the difference between managing your risk and watching helplessly.

This last point is where infrastructure becomes personal. I trade derivatives on Bitunix — they maintained full operations throughout February 5, including withdrawals and sub-millisecond execution, while other platforms were degrading. Ranked in the top 10 on CoinGlass for open interest, $5B+ daily volume, 200x leverage available, Proof of Reserves verified on-chain, and backed by a 30M USDC Care Fund.

If you’re trading leveraged positions during extreme volatility, your exchange’s infrastructure IS your risk management. Code BITUNIXBONUS gets you up to 7,700 USDT in bonuses, 77.7% fee discount, and instant VIP 2 for 30 days

What @BenjaminCowen Gets Right

@intocryptoverse posted this week: “The death of speculative excess isn’t bearish long term. It’s how markets mature. Capital eventually flows toward durability.”

He’s right — but there’s a nuance most people miss. The speculative excess that’s “dying” isn’t crypto itself. It’s reckless leverage. The traders who survived this crash will be the ones who build the next cycle. Those who were liquidated will either leave or come back with the same habits and be liquidated again.

Spot volumes on major exchanges are down 30% since late 2025, per Kaiko. Retail participation is fading. But the infrastructure is expanding — Fidelity FIDD, Tether MiningOS, European banks under MiCA, @elikiamusk’s X Money hitting external beta in 1–2 months. The market is contracting in price and expanding in plumbing. That divergence resolves eventually. It always does.

The Uncomfortable Math

Crypto bear markets average 13–15 months. This one started around January 2025. We’re 12–13 months in.

Bernstein maintains a $150,000 BTC target by year-end 2026. Zacks says $40K is possible. Polymarket gives 40% odds of sub-$60K in February. Ray Youssef (CEO of NoOnes) says sideways until summer 2026 with 20–30% relief rallies that may be bull traps.

Nobody knows. But here’s what you can control: your leverage, your exit strategy, your exchange infrastructure, and your fee structure. Those four things determine whether you end up posting receipts like @MMCrypto or become one of the 586,053.

The crash will end. The question is whether you’ll still be in the market when it does.

Disclaimer: This is not financial advice. Trading leveraged digital assets involves significant risk of total loss. Do your own research.

Follow me: bintangtobing.com/links


586,053 Traders Got Liquidated in 24 Hours. One Trader Took 80% Profit. Here’s the Difference. was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Role of Blockchain in Building Safer Web3 Gaming Ecosystems

The Role of Blockchain in Building Safer Web3 Gaming Ecosystems

The gaming industry is in the midst of a historic shift, driven by the rise of Web3. Unlike traditional games, where developers and publishers control assets and dictate in-game economies, Web3 gaming empowers players with ownership and influence. Built on blockchain technology, these ecosystems are decentralized by design, enabling true digital asset ownership, transparent economies, and a future where players help shape the games they play. However, as Web3 gaming grows, security becomes a focal point. The range of security concerns, from hacking to asset theft to vulnerabilities in smart contracts, is a significant issue that will undermine or erode trust in this ecosystem, limiting or stopping adoption. Blockchain technology could be used to create security processes around secure, transparent, and fair Web3 gaming ecosystems. We will explore how security is increasing within gaming ecosystems, which challenges are being overcome, and what the future of security looks like. Why is Security Important in Web3 Gaming? Web3 gaming differs from traditional gaming in that players engage with both the game and assets with real value attached. Players own in-game assets that exist as tokens or NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens), and can trade and sell them. These game assets usually represent significant financial value, meaning security failure could represent real monetary loss. In essence, without security, the promises of owning “something” in Web3, decentralized economies within games, and all that comes with the term “fair” gameplay can easily be eroded by fraud, hacking, and exploitation. This is precisely why the uniqueness of blockchain should be emphasized in securing Web3 gaming. How Blockchain Ensures Security in Web3 Gaming?
  1. Immutable Ownership of Assets Blockchain records can be manipulated by anyone. If a player owns a sword, skin, or plot of land as an NFT, it is verifiably in their ownership, and it cannot be altered or deleted by the developer or even hacked. This has created a proven track record of ownership, providing control back to the players, unlike any centralised gaming platform where assets can be revoked.
  2. Decentralized Infrastructure Blockchain networks also have a distributed architecture where game data is stored in a worldwide network of nodes, making them much less susceptible to centralised points of failure and attacks. This decentralised approach makes it exponentially more difficult to hijack systems or even shut off the game’s economy.
  3. Secure Transactions with Cryptography Whether a player buys an NFT or trades their in-game tokens for other items or tokens, the transactions are enforced by cryptographic algorithms, ensuring secure, verifiable, and irreversible transactions and eliminating the risks of double-spending or fraudulent trades.
  4. Smart Contract Automation Smart contracts automate the enforcement of game rules and players’ economic exchanges for the developer, eliminating the need for intermediaries or middlemen, and trust for the developer. For example, if a player completes a quest that promises a reward, the smart contract will execute and distribute what was promised.
  5. Anti-Cheating and Fair Gameplay The naturally transparent nature of blockchain makes it extremely simple for anyone to examine a specific instance of gameplay and verify the economic outcomes from that play. Furthermore, multi-player games that enforce smart contracts on things like loot sharing or win sharing can automate and measure trustlessness and avoid cheating, manipulations, and fraud by developers.
  6. Cross-Platform Security Many Web3 games feature asset interoperability across platforms. This interoperability is made viable by blockchain, which guarantees ownership is maintained whenever assets transition from one game or marketplace to another, thereby offering protection to players who rely on transfers for security against fraud. Key Security Dangers in Web3 Gaming Although blockchain provides sound first principles of security, the Web3 gaming ecosystem is susceptible to threats. Some of the most serious threats include:
Smart Contract Vulnerabilities: Smart contracts that are poorly written or lack auditing will leave openings for exploitation and thereby result in asset loss. Phishing Attacks: Unintentionally exposing or revealing private keys or signing transactions that are not possible to reverse, under the assumption they were genuine transaction requests. Bridge Hacks: Cross-chain bridges, which allow players to move their assets between their respective blockchains, continually face hacks, requiring vigilance from players and developers. Scams and Rug Pulls: Rug pulls occur when a game project raises money and leaves, leaving player assets worthless. Regulatory Ambiguity: Global regulations remain unclear; risks exist for players and developers alike. While blockchain alone won’t resolve every issue, it remediates the responsibility of the first principles, more so when joined by processes such as auditing, education, and the right governance, which can improve their contribution to the security landscapes in game ecosystems. Real Life Examples of Blockchain Security in Web3 Gaming Axie Infinity (Ronin Hack): The Axie Infinity game and several projects suffered one of the biggest hacks thus far on its Ronin bridge; however, it demonstrated the effectiveness of multi-sig security and the effective utilization of decentralization. The industry benefited through learning and reflection, thus, as projects have implemented changes to reduce the risks of future hacks or misappropriation. Immutable X: This Ethereum scaling solution aims to ensure secure NFT transactions for gaming, allowing players to trade an asset without the burden of exorbitant fees and fears of being a victim of fraud. Enjin: Enjin is providing a trusted infrastructure for Web3 games, offering secure NFT creation and transfer while reiterating that ownership and an asset securely belong to the player. These examples indubitably illustrate that despite challenges to overcome, blockchain remains the foundational layer on which to build more secure Web3 gaming environments. Benefits of Blockchain Security for Players and Developers For Players: Confidence in true ownership of assets Transparency in in-game economies Protection against nefarious trades/scams For Developers: More trust between players and the platform Less reliance on centralized infrastructure Ability to attract wealth and players based on provable fairness By incorporating blockchain security within the mechanics of game design, developers can create and enforce resilient ecosystems where players feel reassured in investing time, money, and ownership within virtual worlds. The Future of Secure Web3 Gaming Ecosystems As the wisdom of blockchain technology and industry knowledge improves, the future for secure Web3 gaming looks bright. New growing trends include: Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs): A new wave of protocols that enable private transactions and secure smart contracts while managing user privacy with an element of transparency. Decentralized Identity Solutions (DID): Helping players control their identities and decrease account theft risks. AI-Enhanced Security: Identifying irregularities in user interactions by sampling pattern anomalies to avert hacks and fraud by time-stamping critical events. Interoperable Security Standards: Allowing secured and seamless asset transfers across blockchains and games. With these innovations, blockchain will not only secure gaming assets but also enhance the overall trust and longevity of Web3 gaming ecosystems. Conclusion Blockchain is more than a buzzword in Web3; it is the only way to host security, fairness, and transparency. With blockchain, players confirm immutable ownership of digital assets, there is a decentralized infrastructure, and finally, it supports smart contracts to automate code that protects players and developers from the challenges of digital economies. The threats, vulnerabilities, and scams that come from smart contracts still persist, but the industry is maturing with better security practices, cross-chain solutions, and increased formal cryptographic tools. In the coming years, blockchain will remain the base to digital economies and drive Web3 gaming environments that allow players to safely own, trade, and enjoy their digital experiences free from fraud and exploitation. While blockchain and gaming alone entertain, we will usher in an era of secure digital worlds where trust complements innovation. The Role of Blockchain in Building Safer Web3 Gaming Ecosystems was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story
Share
Medium2025/09/18 14:40
Knocking Bitcoin's lack of yield shows your ‘Western financial privilege’

Knocking Bitcoin's lack of yield shows your ‘Western financial privilege’

                                                                               Macro analyst Luke Gromen’s comments come amid an ongoing debate over whether Bitcoin or Ether is the more attractive long-term option for traditional investors.                     Macro analyst Luke Gromen says the fact that Bitcoin doesn’t natively earn yield isn’t a weakness; it’s what makes it a safer store of value.“If you’re earning a yield, you are taking a risk,” Gromen told Natalie Brunell on the Coin Stories podcast on Wednesday, responding to a question about critics who dismiss Bitcoin (BTC) because they prefer yield-earning assets.“Anyone who says that is showing their Western financial privilege,” he added.Read more
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 14:22
Vitalik Buterin wants to build ‘the next generation of finance’ – Here’s how

Vitalik Buterin wants to build ‘the next generation of finance’ – Here’s how

The post Vitalik Buterin wants to build ‘the next generation of finance’ – Here’s how appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Journalist Posted: February 16, 2026
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/16 11:01