Week of 19 September 2022: BTC and ETH each fall about 3% after a wide Wednesday swing
When both assets swing more than 10% inside a single day yet close the week only 3% lower, what does that week say about direction, and what does it leave open?
BTC fell from 19,417.45 to 18,807.38 (-3.14%) and ETH from 1,334.51 to 1,294.63 (-2.99%). Both set their weekly high and low within four hours on Wednesday 21 September, a 10.10% span for BTC and 15.48% for ETH. Both then posted their best day on Thursday 22 September.
What the data shows. The week's range was made almost entirely on Wednesday 21 September. BTC reached 19,956.00 at 18:00 UTC and fell to 18,125.98 by 22:00 UTC, a 10.10% span; ETH traced the same hours, from 1,408.90 to 1,220.00, a 15.48% span. ETH's largest hourly move, -4.71%, came at 21:00 UTC that evening; BTC's largest hourly move, -3.51%, came much earlier, in the hour starting 02:00 UTC on Monday 19 September. Thursday 22 September then gave both assets their best day (BTC +5.09%, ETH +6.48%). Both closed in the middle third of their weekly range. Hourly moves were closely aligned (correlation 0.88), and the ETH/BTC ratio changed only +0.16%. Dollar volume was 1.51 times BTC's prior twelve-week average but only 0.75 times ETH's.
What it does not show. The candles give no reason for the Wednesday swing and say nothing about who was trading or whether the selling was forced. The near-identical weekly returns indicate a joint move, not one asset leading the other in a lasting way. One week cannot establish whether the Wednesday low was a floor or a pause inside a longer decline: BTC remained 72.60% and ETH 73.29% below their 52-week highs.
What a careful desk would check. Realised volatility, the size of the swings that actually happened scaled to a yearly figure, was 71.70% for BTC and 91.80% for ETH. BTC's weekly return ranked at the 27th percentile of 240 weeks of history, so the outcome was ordinary while the path was not. A desk would test whether its stops could be filled inside a 4.71% hour, and whether the volume split — BTC above its twelve-week average, ETH below — points to different participation in the two books.
Funding. BTC perpetual funding averaged +0.0015% per eight hours, close to flat, between a high of 0.0078% and a low of -0.0118%. ETH averaged -0.0064%, with a low of -0.0242%. Longs paid shorts marginally on BTC while shorts paid longs on ETH, a small pricing divergence against near-identical price moves.
What would change this reading
- If BTC trades below its weekly low of 18,125.98 in a later week, the Wednesday swing reads as a step down rather than a shakeout.
- If ETH volume recovers above its prior twelve-week average while BTC's falls back towards it, the participation gap seen this week closes.
- If ETH funding stays negative while BTC funding stays positive, the pricing gap between the two perpetual books matters more than the +0.16% ratio move.
Terms
- realised volatility
- how much the price actually swung over a period, expressed as a yearly percentage
- percentile
- the share of past weeks with a lower value; the 27th percentile means 27% of the 240 prior weeks were lower
- perpetual funding
- a regular payment between long and short holders of a perpetual futures contract; positive means longs pay shorts