2026-01-15 23:27:58

BTC Daily: Liquidity Trap Below 94K

If BTC can't hold above 94K, we're likely entering bearish territory. What's happening here is textbook liquidity hunting—the market is setting up to shake out weak hands below support.

Once 94K breaks, expect a cascade: 85K and 80K become the next logical targets as stops get triggered and leverage gets liquidated. This is how whales operate—create the illusion of strength, then pull the rug when retail is fully loaded.

Watch the daily close. If we close below 94K, the setup changes dramatically.

BTC-0,24%

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SchrodingerWallet

· 01-15 23:50

If 94K can't hold, this wave might really drop... Whale tactics are just like this, waiting for retail investors to all get on board before dumping the market.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityWitch

· 01-15 23:47

94k's just the veil, innit... whales brewing their sacrifice ritual below. the real alchemy happens when retail thinks they're safe—that's when the transmutation begins. dark pools whispering, liquidation spells locking in. we're watching the setup, not the outcome yet.

Reply0

degenonymous

· 01-15 23:47

That 94K threshold is really hard to hold onto, feels like I'm about to get cut again.

View OriginalReply0

YieldHunter

· 01-15 23:38

ngl, if you look at the data on these liquidation cascades... 94k is basically a correlation trap waiting to happen. degens loading leverage rn are literally just funding whale positions, and the risk-adjusted metrics don't even make sense. actually watching closely for that daily close.

Reply0

CountdownToBroke

· 01-15 23:35

94K broken, and it's over. I've seen this trick many times. Still the same saying—retail investors are always the ones getting harvested.

View OriginalReply0