Traders offload $4.3 billion in BTC on Binance as the exchange sells more Bitcoin than all other platforms combined.

Binance accounted for 42.8% of the overall spot volume in the past week while absorbing 79.7% of net selling pressure across five leading exchanges, as per data from Traderview.

This disparity prompts the inquiry of whether a trading venue must manage “most of the market” to influence pricing for the entire market.

The response is negative. A venue needs to be where the market predominantly establishes the price.

Between February 2 and 3, Binance experienced the highest Bitcoin (BTC) inflows of the year, with approximately 56,000 to 59,000 BTC deposited onto the platform while Bitcoin was trading around $74,000, according to CryptoQuant contributor Darkfost.

At current valuations, this amount exceeds $4.3 billion in notional terms. Data from CoinMarketCap indicates that Binance’s 24-hour spot volume is approximately $18.5 billion and 251,758 BTC, suggesting that the inflow constituted about 22% to 23% of a single day’s Bitcoin spot activity on the exchange.

Deposits enhance sell-side optionality by making inventory readily saleable, yet they do not serve as timestamped sell orders. CryptoQuant defines exchange inflow as coins transferred into exchange wallets and explicitly warns that increased inflows do not always lead to immediate sell-offs.

These inflows may represent liquidity provisioning for derivatives, collateral movement, or internal settlements. The premise is not that Binance “dumped” Bitcoin, but rather that the exchange became the marginal seller even without controlling the majority of the market’s volume, as it governs the market’s most significant prints.

Bitcoin exchange inflows across all platforms surged to over 58,000 BTC on February 2-3 as prices fell from $97,500 to $76,500.

Why the marginal seller is more significant than the largest seller

By “net selling pressure,” Traderview refers to net taker volume: the discrepancy between market sells and market buys.

This is frequently monitored as the cumulative volume delta (CVD), which is a continuous total of taker buy volume minus taker sell volume.

A negative CVD indicates more aggressive selling than buying, with market sells elevating bids rather than passive limit orders being executed. It concerns who crosses the spread, not merely who appears in headline volume.

According to Traderview’s calculations, Binance sold 3.9 times more Bitcoin than all other major exchanges combined, despite handling less total volume than those venues collectively. This concentration is significant because Binance functions as a structural price-discovery center.

An academic working paper from 2024 identifies Binance spot and perpetual futures as the main sources of Bitcoin price discovery, attributing their leadership to lower costs and higher trading volumes.

Research from Kaiko, referenced by Binance itself, describes the exchange as providing “deep, resilient liquidity.”

Price discovery does not occur uniformly across all venues. It takes place where liquidity is most abundant, where derivatives risk unwinds most rapidly, and where arbitrageurs monitor closely. Binance fulfills all three criteria.

Perpetual futures constituted approximately 68% of all Bitcoin trading volume in 2025, according to Kaiko, with Binance, Bybit, and OKX collectively holding nearly 70% of open Bitcoin perpetual contracts.

The chart illustrates Bitcoin spot cumulative volume delta across five major exchanges from January 28 to February 3, with Binance showing the steepest negative trend.

When perpetual risk unwinds, spot becomes the hedge leg. That order flow prints the tape, and others adjust their prices accordingly.

The connection between Binance and other exchanges is mechanical.

Arbitrage traders reduce discrepancies across exchanges by purchasing Bitcoin where it is less expensive and selling it where it is more costly. When this connectivity functions properly, prices align within seconds. When it fails, premiums widen and persist.

The Coinbase Bitcoin premium, which tracks the difference between Coinbase’s BTC/USD and Binance’s BTC/USDT, serves as an example.

This premium is not solely due to demand, as it reflects variations in the mechanics between USD and USDT, funding costs, and transfer frictions.

However, the behavior of the premium indicates how closely linked the venues are. When the premium compresses, arbitrage is re-engaging. When it widens, connectivity is under pressure.

How quickly Binance-led movements propagate

Cross-venue premium tracking offers a real-time measure of arbitrage health.

The CoinGlass Coinbase Bitcoin Premium Index characterizes the spread as a measure of connectivity rather than a gauge of sentiment. A widening premium indicates that arbitrage balance sheets are constrained or that plumbing has become obstructed.

Compression signifies that the market’s nervous system is functioning effectively.

Liquidity depth assesses how much size the market can accommodate before the price shifts. Kaiko employs 1% market depth, the dollar value of bids and offers within 1% of the midpoint, as a practical measure of absorption capacity.

When depth diminishes, the same sell imbalance can lead to larger price movements. Kaiko-linked research noted market depth exceeding $600 million at recent peaks, but liquidity capacity can collapse during periods of stress.

The speed at which a Binance-led move propagates relies on how swiftly arbitrage capital reacts. Under healthy conditions, a premium shock typically mean-reverts within minutes.

In times of stress, dislocations can persist and widen. Academic studies document recurring arbitrage gaps in crypto markets, suggesting that when arbitrage capacity is robust, prices converge. When it is constrained, segmentation occurs.

Binance’s role as a marginal seller does not necessitate a conspiracy. It requires three elements: deep liquidity, dominance in derivatives, and arbitrage connectivity. All three are structural characteristics of the current market.

Three scenarios for future developments

Binance retains the $4.3 billion inflow as inventory at risk. Whether it translates into actual selling pressure depends on flows, liquidity, and connectivity.

In the base scenario, inflows are collateral or positioning, selling pressure diminishes, and cross-venue premiums compress toward zero. Connectivity improves.

This scenario becomes more probable if broader flows turn favorable. Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $561.8 million in net inflows on February 2, according to Farside Investors, although $272 million in outflows followed on February 3.

If institutional demand stabilizes, Binance’s role as a marginal seller could diminish.

In the bear scenario, Binance continues to dominate negative net taker flow, liquidity thins, and premium volatility increases. Segmentation rises.

The potential for this scenario exists: CoinShares reported over $1 billion in Bitcoin outflows in the week ending January 23. If outflows continue, Binance could remain the marginal seller for an extended period.

In the stress scenario, premiums persist and widen as arbitrage balance sheets become constrained. Plumbing becomes obstructed, and price discovery concentrates further.

This reflects the narrative surrounding USD/USDT frictions, funding costs, and transfer constraints. Reuters quoted Binance’s CEO in late 2025 as describing broader drawdowns as deleveraging alongside risk aversion, a situation where forced selling, rather than opportunistic buying, determines the price.

A simple calculation illustrates the leverage involved. If even a portion of the $4.3 billion inflow is aggressively sold while depth is thin, Binance can dictate the market’s marginal price.

The point is not that Binance “crashed” Bitcoin, but that when one venue captures the majority of the negative taker flow, arbitrage forces compel all others to adjust their prices accordingly.

Scenario	Traderview net selling pressure share	CoinGlass Coinbase Premium Index	1% market depth	Perp risk proxy (OI concentration / funding stress)	ETF flow tape	“Tell”
Base case: connectivity recovers	Binance share falls significantly from extreme; selling pressure disperses across venues	Premium compresses toward ~0 and volatility decreases; deviations mean-revert quickly	Depth stabilizes or rebuilds; impact per unit sell imbalance shrinks	Funding normalizes; OI concentration eases; fewer forced hedges	Flows stabilize / turn positive; outflow streaks break	Premium snaps back within minutes; Binance ceases “printing” the dump for others.
Bear case: Binance remains marginal seller	Binance share stays high (dominant negative taker flow) even if volume share doesn’t increase	Premium volatile; compresses then widens again; mean reversion slower	Depth declines in risk-off periods; small shocks move price more	Funding frequently skews negative; OI remains high/clustered; hedging demand continues	Mixed-to-negative tape; recurring outflows maintain pressure	Same pattern most days: Binance leads the downturn, others adjust afterward.
Stress case: segmentation / clogged plumbing	Binance share remains very high or becomes erratic with one-way bursts	Premium widens and persists (structural dislocation), volatility spikes, mean reversion breaks	Depth collapses (especially during off-peak times); liquidity becomes fragile	Funding dislocates; OI concentration spikes; liquidation risk increases	Sustained outflow streaks; risk-off regime prevails	Premium stops “snapping back”; venues drift apart and price discovery concentrates where liquidity remains.

The plumbing question

The narrative is not about Binance engaging in unusual activities. The narrative concerns what occurs when the market’s marginal seller is located at the venue that also leads price discovery, dominates derivatives, and anchors arbitrage.

ETF flows are significant because they alter who becomes the marginal seller, such as authorized participants and market makers, and where that selling manifests.

Stablecoin mechanics are important because BTC/USD versus BTC/USDT does not represent a straightforward spread, but rather a structural difference in how dollars are transferred. Kaiko positions stablecoins as essential market infrastructure for this reason.

When risk-off conditions arise, deleveraging and liquidity thinning often provide more explanation than any single venue’s order flow. However, the mechanisms by which that deleveraging translates into price require a marginal seller.

This week, that seller appears to be Binance. Not due to manipulation, but because it is the venue where the market seeks to ascertain the price of Bitcoin.

The post Traders dump $4.3 billion BTC on Binance as exchange sells more Bitcoin than other exchanges combined appeared first on CryptoSlate.