Miidas NFT (MIIDAS) Coin Explained: Features, Tokenomics & Risks
A detailed look at Miidas NFT (MIIDAS) coin, covering its tokenomics, market performance, liquidity problems, and why it's considered a high‑risk token.
Read More
Every time Bitcoin swings wildly, traders scramble for a reliable signal that tells them whether the market is baked or busted. One of the most trusted tools in the on‑chain toolbox is the MVRV ratio. It reads like a thermometer for crypto sentiment, flashing red when greed peaks and blue when fear dominates. Below you’ll learn what the metric really measures, how to calculate it, which thresholds matter, and how professionals weave it into a broader analytical framework.
MVRV Ratio is a valuation metric that compares an asset’s market capitalization to its realized capitalization. It was introduced by Murad Mahmudov and David Puell in late 2018 after CoinMetrics popularized the realized‑cap concept. In plain English, it shows how the current price stacks up against the price at which most coins last moved on the blockchain.
The math is straightforward, but the insight is deep. You can compute the ratio in two equivalent ways:
Both formulas give you a dimensionless number that typically hovers between 0.5 and 5 for Bitcoin, depending on market mood.
Unlike price‑only indicators, MVRV reflects the collective profit‑and‑loss position of all holders. When the ratio climbs well above 1, a large share of the supply is in profit, indicating potential distribution pressure. When it falls below 1, most holders sit at a loss, suggesting capitulation and a possible buying opportunity.
Glassnode calls it a “thermometer for market cycles,” and the data backs that claim. Across every Bitcoin cycle since 2013, extreme MVRV levels have signaled tops and bottoms with remarkable consistency.
The community has converged on a few key cut‑offs. Below is a quick reference that summarizes the most cited levels and what they have historically meant for Bitcoin price action.
| Range | Typical Signal | Historical Example |
|---|---|---|
| > 3.5 | Late‑stage bull, high distribution risk | Nov 2021 peak (MVRV 4.2) → 77% correction |
| 3.0 - 3.5 | Early‑stage bull, profit taking probable | Dec 2017 (MVRV 3.2) → 80% drop in 2018 |
| 2.0 - 3.0 | Neutral‑to‑bullish, healthy price appreciation | Mid‑2022 rally (MVRV 2.5) - steady gains |
| 1.0 - 2.0 | Broad break‑even, mixed sentiment | Jan 2020 (MVRV 1.2) - sideways trend |
| < 1.0 | Market capitulation, potential accumulation window | Mar 2020 ‘Black Thursday’ (MVRV 0.82) → 670% rally |
These thresholds aren’t carved in stone; they shift slightly with each halving cycle. Glassnode’s “Dynamic MVRV Thresholds” released in 2023 now use >3.2 for early cycles and >4.0 for late cycles, addressing the criticism that static levels can become stale.
The raw number is handy, but it doesn’t tell you how unusual the current level is compared to history. The MVRV‑Z score, an off‑shoot created by Glassnode, measures how many standard deviations today’s MVRV sits from its long‑term mean. A Z‑score of +6, as seen in the 2017 bull run, signals an extreme overvaluation; a score of -2, like during the 2022 bear bottom, flags deep undervaluation.
CryptoQuant has taken the idea further with “MVRV Confidence Bands,” which attach a probabilistic confidence level (e.g., 89% chance of reversal) to specific ratio ranges using Bayesian statistics. These bands smooth out noise and help traders decide whether a signal is strong enough to act on.
If you want to treat MVRV like a pro, follow a repeatable process rather than reacting to a single spike.
By logging each step in a spreadsheet or a analytics dashboard, you build a repeatable signal that can be back‑tested across multiple cycles.
No metric is perfect. MVRV’s main weaknesses are:
To mitigate these issues, always pair MVRV with liquidity‑focused metrics (e.g., Exchange Netflow) and monitor the broader market environment.
Researchers at Fidelity Digital Assets predict that by 2027, 95% of institutional crypto strategies will embed MVRV within machine‑learning models that juggle 50+ signals. CryptoQuant’s confidence bands are already a step toward statistical rigor, and preliminary work on integrating Lightning Network settlement data could sharpen short‑term forecasts.
One caution: a 2023 MIT study warned that if more than 65% of traders act directly on MVRV thresholds, the metric could become a self‑fulfilling prophecy and lose predictive power. Current adoption sits around 48%, leaving room for the metric to stay reliable for the near future.
Most analytics platforms post hourly updates (e.g., Bitbo.io), while premium services like Glassnode provide near‑real‑time values and daily Z‑score calculations.
It works best on high‑liquidity assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. For smaller coins, sparse transaction data can produce noisy realized capital, reducing reliability.
MVRV measures market‑cap versus realized‑cap, while NUPL (Net Unrealized Profit/Loss) looks at the net profit or loss of all unspent outputs. Together they give a fuller picture of holder sentiment.
Dynamic thresholds adjust the “top” line based on the current halving stage. Early in a cycle the warning level might be MVRV > 3.2, while late in the cycle the same risk appears at MVRV > 4.0.
No. Historical back‑tests show about 90% accuracy for major tops and bottoms, but false signals still happen, especially during black‑swans. Use it as part of a multi‑metric strategy.
MVRV is just a fancy way of saying if everyone’s rich they’ll sell and if everyone’s broke they’ll buy dumbass it’s psychology not math
Love this breakdown honestly. I’ve been watching MVRV since 2020 and it’s crazy how often it lines up with the big swings. Even when I ignored it I ended up regretting it. Glad someone finally laid it out clean like this.
💯 This is the kind of post that actually helps. Thank you!
you missed the part where MVRV fails during black swans like 2020 when the whole market got wiped by a pandemic and everyone panicked and sold their keys to buy toilet paper
So you’re telling me the market is just a giant emotional feedback loop where people buy because they’re scared of missing out and sell because they’re scared of losing everything and we call that science
What if the real signal is that humans are terrible at math and even worse at patience
Maybe the only thing MVRV proves is that we’re all just monkeys with spreadsheets
And yet here we are still checking it every morning like it’s the oracle of Delphi
Fun fact: the first Bitcoin holder probably didn’t even know what MVRV meant
He just thought it was cool
Now we’ve turned it into a religion with charts and thresholds and Z scores
And still nobody can explain why the price goes up when the moon is full
But hey at least we have a number to feel smart about
Maybe the real metric is how much time we waste arguing about numbers that don’t matter
Still I’ll check it tomorrow
Because I’m just as dumb as the rest of you
While the MVRV ratio is undeniably useful, its reliance on historical thresholds without sufficient contextual calibration across macroeconomic regimes is statistically unsound; one must integrate it with volatility-adjusted liquidity metrics, such as the Exchange Netflow adjusted for institutional order flow, and account for regulatory shifts that alter on-chain behavior patterns-otherwise, one risks confirmation bias and false positives.
Furthermore, the notion that dynamic thresholds are a panacea ignores the fact that market structure evolves nonlinearly; the halving cycle model assumes cyclical stability, yet the increasing dominance of ETFs and derivatives has fundamentally altered holder behavior since 2021.
Therefore, MVRV should be treated as a heuristic, not a signal, and always paired with sentiment analysis from social media volume, funding rates, and options skew-otherwise, you are not an analyst, you are a chart worshipper.
And yes, the MIT warning about self-fulfilling prophecy is not speculative-it’s already happening in retail-dominated subreddits where MVRV > 3.2 triggers mass sell-offs regardless of fundamentals.
Do not trust the ratio. Trust the process.
Why are you using Bitcoin’s history to predict Bitcoin? That’s circular logic.
They’re all lying. MVRV is a tool for central banks to manipulate retail. The realized cap is faked. The data comes from exchanges that report to the Fed. Look at the timestamps-every bottom happens right after a Fed press conference. CoinMetrics? Owned by the same people who run the SWIFT network.
They want you to believe in numbers so you don’t ask who controls the blockchain.
They don’t want you to know that 80% of Bitcoin is held by 12 wallets. That’s not decentralization. That’s a puppet show.
MVRV is just the glitter on the cage.
Could you clarify the methodology behind Glassnode’s Dynamic MVRV Thresholds? Specifically, what time window and regression model are used to determine the adjusted thresholds per halving cycle? Is it a rolling 12-month moving average, or a Bayesian structural time series model with changepoint detection?
Bro I was just thinking the same thing about the ETFs changing the game. I saw a post from a hedge fund guy last week saying they’re using MVRV + ETF inflow rates now. The old thresholds are already outdated.
A detailed look at Miidas NFT (MIIDAS) coin, covering its tokenomics, market performance, liquidity problems, and why it's considered a high‑risk token.
Read MoreExplore Iran's latest crypto rules for businesses, licensing steps, taxes, FX Card usage, and future outlook on CBDC and stablecoins.
Read MoreA practical 2025 guide on tracking, allocating, rebalancing, and taxing your crypto portfolio with tool comparisons and step‑by‑step setup.
Read More
Comments (10)