Understand the Market Like a Puzzle: Decoding the Inner Logic of Liquidity, Spread, and Market Movement
Original Article by: TradeStream | Improve Your Trading
Original Article Translated by: DeepFlow Tech
Trading: If we choose to act in a place where most people are willing to trade based on common sense... then this may mean that we do not have more valuable information than others.
One Metaphor of Market Behavior: Jigsaw Puzzle
I like to use a jigsaw puzzle to describe market behavior. You can imagine the overall market as a person trying to complete a puzzle, with the trading volume being the puzzle pieces. The market will strive to put all the pieces together. By analyzing the distribution of trading volume, we can more clearly see where "pieces" are missing. When the market finds areas with more pieces (i.e., higher trading volume and time accumulation), it will try to allocate these pieces to areas with fewer pieces (i.e., lower trading volume and time).
How the Market Chooses Direction
Sometimes, when both sides of the market lack "pieces," how can we determine which side it will fill first?
This reminds me of a theory about human behavior in the book "Atomic Habits." In such situations, we need to focus on two key points:
Attraction: People usually hope that their actions will bring rewards, and the market is the same because it reflects human behavioral patterns. As we discussed earlier, we tend to avoid overly crowded trading scenarios, and a more attractive strategy is often trading against the majority of mispositioned participants, especially when we have clear structural reasons.
Reducing Resistance: According to the "law of least effort," the more effort something requires, the less likely it is to happen. If the resistance is too high, the difficulty of achieving our goal will also increase.
Another Metaphor of Market Behavior: Trolley Problem
Imagine the market as a train, and this train is like an "executioner" eager to "hunt." When we take action in the fair value area, both sides of the market are crowded with participants, making it difficult to predict which side the market will "hunt" more people. However, once the market chooses a side, the other side becomes the only choice, making our decision-making simpler.

What is Liquidity?
Liquidity refers to whether there are enough counterparties in the market to trade with. When we trade, we are either consuming liquidity or providing liquidity. If the price is stable in a certain area (i.e., a balance area) or unable to fluctuate smoothly, it is because buyers have not consumed enough liquidity; conversely, if the price can fluctuate smoothly, it means that buyers have successfully consumed enough liquidity.
Limit Order vs. Market Order
A limit order is a tool for "adding liquidity," while a market order is a tool for executing a trade and consuming this liquidity. Passive liquidity (limit orders) is often more impactful because limit orders typically determine market structure, while aggressive market orders will be absorbed at key points.
Why is a limit order more impactful? Because when you execute a market order, you need to cross the bid-ask spread, which means you will immediately be in an unrealized loss position after placing the order.
What is the Spread?
The spread is the difference between the asset's buy price (advertisement bid) and sell price (advertisement ask). Market makers provide liquidity through the spread, meaning the price to immediately buy an asset is usually slightly higher than the market price, while the price to immediately sell is slightly lower than the market price.

Let's assume an asset's current price is $10.00, and an asterisk (*) represents one contract. If we want to buy immediately, there is no $10.00 quote in the market because if there were, the market maker would not profit. Therefore, they would set the advertised liquidity slightly higher, for example, placing four contracts at $10.01 to capture this small difference.
If we decide to buy three contracts, we would transact at the $10.01 price. But what if we want to buy more, say 15 contracts? We would need to cross the spread until we find enough orders to fulfill the trade. As a result, the price would eventually be pushed to $10.03 because only at this price level are there enough contracts to meet our demand.

Through this example, we can understand why limit orders are usually more impactful. Small-scale traders have a negligible impact on the price as they will not encounter significant slippage. However, if someone wants to buy 500 contracts and there is not enough liquidity nearby, they will have to cross a significant spread, causing substantial price fluctuations.
If traders choose to place orders where liquidity is abundant, they can avoid significant slippage. So, where is liquidity usually concentrated? The answer is above swing highs and below swing lows. This is because most technical analysis-based traders exhibit similar behavior in setting stop-loss orders, and these locations are often where stop-losses cluster, making price reversals likely at these points.
So, their stop-loss is your entry point? Indeed.
Summary
· Impatient buyers or sellers are driving the price through market orders (taker), consuming liquidity.
· More patient buyers or sellers are preventing price fluctuations through limit orders (maker).
We can use a metaphor to describe this: market orders are like a hammer, while limit orders act as the floor or ceiling of a building. Breaking through the floor or ceiling requires sufficient hammer force to do so.

What happens when the floor is broken? The price quickly moves to the next floor.

Once the price reaches the next floor, upward movement becomes easier because the ceiling has been broken, creating a "gap" that allows the price to more easily fluctuate in areas of scarce liquidity.

Liquidity cascading is a very effective way to make money because at this point, we are trading with a price-insensitive group that is forced to transact (e.g., liquidated traders). But we need to be clear about what we are trading.
If you are trading liquidity premium, this effect is usually very short-lived, lasting a maximum of 10-15 seconds. In a cascading environment, this situation changes. In this case, you need to assess whether liquidity has fully recovered from the initial volatility.
Although the chain reaction of momentum shifts is not as reliable as liquidity premium, its sustainability is stronger (many people think they are trading liquidity premium when, in fact, they are trading this momentum effect).
The first method (liquidity premium) is more suitable for PNL attribution (i.e., analyzing the reason for making money) and is also the more ideal way to operate. The second method (momentum effect) captures the core part of large fluctuations but comes with greater volatility and looser risk control.
Overall, liquidity cascades lead to a supply-demand imbalance as a large number of price-insensitive traders enter, causing the order book to not withstand so many aggressive traders. But once the market stabilizes, the price will more easily return to those areas that failed to accumulate enough volume due to rapid fluctuations.
After all, the market is a two-way auction mechanism that usually tests low-volume areas for two reasons:
· There is less path resistance;
· The market seeks efficiency and will test these areas to see if anyone is willing to trade at those price levels.
As a result, the market will experience a "mechanical bounce back," as the order book needs time to rebalance. During this time, only a small amount of trading volume is needed to drive price fluctuations. Once the market settles, price movements will rely more on momentum, accompanied by increased volatility, but also allowing for greater profit potential.
Remember, high volatility often begets high volatility, while low volatility often begets low volatility, a phenomenon known as volatility clustering. Therefore, seize the opportunity and adjust your risk management strategy based on each change in market conditions.
You may also like

WEEX LALIGA Partnership 2026: Where Football Excellence Meets Crypto Innovation
WEEX becomes official crypto exchange partner of LALIGA in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Discover how this partnership brings together football excellence and trading discipline.

AI Apocalypse, a massive short squeeze

The "Second Truth" of the Luna Crash: Jane Street Exits Ahead of Plunge

Jane Street Market Manipulation, Stripe Considering Acquiring PayPal, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Talking About Today?
WEEX × LALIGA 2026: Trade Crypto, Take Your Shot & Win Official LALIGA Prizes
Unlock shoot attempts through futures trading, spot trading, or referrals. Turn match predictions into structured rewards with BTC, USDT, position airdrops, and LALIGA merchandise on WEEX.

a16z: Why Do AI Agents Need a Stablecoin for B2B Payments?

February 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?

Web4.0, perhaps the most needed narrative for cryptocurrency

Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday

Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report

$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?

Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?

WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?

Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link

Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?

A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028

When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges

Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…
WEEX LALIGA Partnership 2026: Where Football Excellence Meets Crypto Innovation
WEEX becomes official crypto exchange partner of LALIGA in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Discover how this partnership brings together football excellence and trading discipline.
AI Apocalypse, a massive short squeeze
The "Second Truth" of the Luna Crash: Jane Street Exits Ahead of Plunge
Jane Street Market Manipulation, Stripe Considering Acquiring PayPal, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Talking About Today?
WEEX × LALIGA 2026: Trade Crypto, Take Your Shot & Win Official LALIGA Prizes
Unlock shoot attempts through futures trading, spot trading, or referrals. Turn match predictions into structured rewards with BTC, USDT, position airdrops, and LALIGA merchandise on WEEX.