How Leveraged Longs Amplified the September 23–24 Crypto Selloff

The September 23–24 crypto selloff exposed a familiar weakness in leveraged rallies: traders betting on further gains can be forced to close positions when prices turn. The liquidation figures show that bullish positions took substantial losses, although they do not establish that liquidations caused the initial decline. 3118

What the liquidation figures show

A September 23 report citing CoinGlass put market-wide liquidations at $504.62 million over 24 hours, affecting 121,934 traders. Long positions accounted for $359.45 million, or about 71% of the total. That supports the picture of a broad unwind of bullish bets, but it is a time-specific snapshot—not a total to add to later hourly or daily figures. 31

Ethereum provides a closer look. September 24 reporting put its 24-hour derivatives liquidations at $111.7 million, including $97.6 million in longs—about 87%. In the hour ending at 09:37 UTC that day, ETH fell 0.98% to $2,645 while $26.05 million in ETH longs were liquidated. The hourly figure may fall within the 24-hour total and should not be counted again. 1817

A liquidation occurs when a leveraged position no longer has enough margin to remain open. Closing longs during a decline can add selling pressure, creating a potential feedback loop. The ETH figures are consistent with that risk, but they do not reveal each trader’s leverage or prove how much of the price move resulted from forced sales. 1817

Why open interest needs context

The reported rise in perpetual-futures open interest to nearly $160 billion, said to be its highest level since late October 2025, is not independently confirmed by the available sources. Even if accurate, a large open-interest total would measure outstanding positions, not the share held by bullish traders: every contract has both a long and a short. Long-heavy liquidations offer clearer evidence of which side was vulnerable when prices fell.

The proposed comparison of roughly 60% growth in ETH open interest with a 70% price gain since late June is likewise unverified here. If measured on a comparable dollar basis, those figures would mean open interest grew more slowly than price—not that leverage intensified uniformly across the market. They would still leave room for vulnerable positions opened near the rally’s highs.

There was forced trading on the way up, too. September 21 reporting recorded $648.3 million in crypto short liquidations over 24 hours as Bitcoin moved above $85,000. That helps explain how a squeeze-driven rally can give way to a long-heavy unwind, without proving the same sequence drove every move in September. 3

What the decline means for Ethereum

September 24 analysis identified $2,626 as an ETH support level and a 20-day exponential moving average near $2,549 as a lower reference point. Holding or reclaiming those levels could support the case for a correction within an uptrend; a sustained move below them would weaken that case. Neither is a guaranteed floor. 18

Liquidating fragile positions could leave the market less exposed to another immediate cascade, but only if demand holds and leverage does not rapidly rebuild. The available sources do not verify the proposed $389 million 12-hour liquidation snapshot or establish that profit-taking was the principal trigger. The firmer conclusion is that the selloff punished leveraged bullish positions disproportionately—and that open interest alone cannot tell traders how resilient a rally is. 311817