2026-01-09 16:29:11

The past day’s market activity really didn’t make things easy. The total liquidation amount in the cryptocurrency futures market exceeded $145 million, a figure that’s truly alarming. Both longs and shorts weren’t spared, with over $74 million and $71 million respectively being liquidated, making it a fierce battle with equal losses on both sides.

Which area was hit hardest? Bitcoin took the biggest hit, with liquidations totaling $39.42 million in one day, making it the biggest victim. Ethereum also fared poorly, with liquidations reaching $34.49 million, closely following behind.

This wave of market activity exposed the market’s fragility. In the current environment of increasing global economic and policy uncertainties, the risks of leveraged trading are becoming more and more apparent. Many traders are caught or forced to cut losses in this kind of market, prompting a reflection on their risk management strategies. For investors involved in futures trading, this lesson is worth remembering—staying vigilant and controlling risks will never go out of style.

BTC0,39%

ETH0,9%

View Original

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

down_only_larry

· 01-09 16:52

Here we go again, this time directly hitting 145 million in a burst, oh my... --- Bull and bear both lying down together, this is outrageous --- BTC and ETH taking turns getting hit, no wonder I didn't dare to place an order yesterday --- Leverage is truly a double-edged sword, it’s great when you make money, but when you lose, you clear your positions immediately --- Looking at these numbers, I can’t help but think of that order I got liquidated on, a bloody lesson --- The market is like this, one careless move and it’s gone, a bit scary --- Risk management sounds easy, but when you're in the market, who can really control their greed?

View OriginalReply0

FrogInTheWell

· 01-09 16:48

Here we go again. Every time there's a market like this, we witness a group of people getting liquidated. It's exhausting to watch. Contracts are truly a double-edged sword; leverage can be both exhilarating and deadly. 1.45 billion in one day without movement—who knows how many people are eating dirt now... When will they learn their lesson? High leverage is basically gambling with your life. Both Bitcoin and Ethereum haven't been spared; this market can turn around suddenly, making it truly unpredictable.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainTherapist

· 01-09 16:44

He got wiped out again, this market really doesn't give any room for buffer.

View OriginalReply0

SmartContractPlumber

· 01-09 16:42

145 million liquidation, to put it simply, means someone didn't do proper risk checks, using leverage as a knife. I've seen this happen too many times. --- Both longs and shorts are being liquidated, with BTC and Ethereum taking the biggest hit. It's clear that the "audit checklist" for contracts wasn't properly followed. --- Just looking at these numbers is frustrating—many people still haven't realized that poorly controlled positions are more deadly than reentrancy vulnerabilities in code. --- Another round of bloodshed. Ultimately, it's because they didn't understand the true cost of leverage, which is similar to the integer overflow bugs I found during audits—details determine life or death. --- What does 145 million tell us? Risk management has become formalized. It's just as dangerous as projects that only perform surface checks without in-depth audits. --- Is the market fragile? No, it's the traders who are fragile. Contract trading without position management strategies is even more dangerous than code without validation.

View OriginalReply0

New_Ser_Ngmi

· 01-09 16:38

Another terrible market situation, with contract liquidations of 145 million. Talking about it just brings tears.

View OriginalReply0