Long reads built on primary sources: peer-reviewed research, official exchange documentation and regulators. Every number has a source; quotes are checked against the original.
Researchers read the leaked Mt. Gox trade history: trades at USD 0.81 and 49,338 on one day, accounts trading with themselves, and what it may mean.
Short answer: a 2019 preprint analysed the leaked trade history of Mt. Gox, April 2011 to November 2013, 6.7 million completed trades and 119,343 accounts. It found 14,916 accounts (12.5%) that at least once traded at prices outside any real range, for example USD 49,338.4 and USD 0.81 per bitcoin on a day when the real range was USD 128.56 to 142.76.
These accounts also traded with each other in unusual patterns: one account made 749 trades with itself on 7 February 2013, another made 322 sells to one account on 15 August 2013. Their trading graph is far more clustered (0.30 and 0.42) than that of normal accounts (0.03).
The authors read this as evidence of accounts controlled by one party and of market manipulation, and they note two possible purposes: fake volume, or providing liquidity. This is their interpretation of leaked, unverified data in an arXiv preprint, not a court finding.
The blog publishes long reads about market structure, derivatives, testing trading ideas and order flow. Articles are built on primary sources: peer-reviewed papers in journals such as the Journal of Financial Economics and the Review of Financial Studies, official documentation of exchanges, and publications of regulators and recognized research institutions. We read the original, check every quotation against it and cite it at the end of the article.
We do not publish news, price predictions, sponsored reviews, rewritten forum posts or lists of "best indicators". If an article states a number, the number has a source listed at the end of the article, and you can open it yourself.
What you will find here
Research covers large tests: the Quasimodo pattern over a year of data, long histories on higher timeframes, regimes and coin selection. Backtesting and overfitting explains how good-looking results are produced by chance and how to protect yourself: out-of-sample checks, the number of variants tried, forward tests with criteria written in advance. Order flow looks at delta, CVD, footprint and the order book with tick data. Market structure defines swings, BOS, CHoCH, order blocks, fair value gaps and liquidity precisely. Arbitrage covers price gaps between exchanges and what it takes to capture them after fees and transfers.
How articles are written
Every article starts with key takeaways, so you can see the conclusion in a minute. Numbers in the text link to notes and to a list of sources at the end. We explain the method behind a finding, not just the headline number, and we say where the evidence is weak. Articles are updated when new data changes the conclusion, and the update date is shown next to the publication date.
Our standard for facts and quotes
A quotation appears only if we have read it in the original source, and it is attributed to its authors with the publication and year. Our own numbers come with the sample size and, where it matters, the error band. We prefer short, checkable claims over sweeping ones, and when a result depends on an assumption, such as the fee level, we show how it changes when the assumption changes.
Questions and answers
Who writes the articles?
The OrderBlock.net research team, the same people who build the scanner. Every article is based on primary sources, which are listed at the end.
Are the articles investment advice?
No. They are research and education. Results on history do not guarantee future results.
How can I follow new articles?
Subscribe to the RSS feed of the blog; there are separate feeds for English and Russian.
Can I suggest a topic?
Yes, write to us on Telegram. Topics that can be checked on data are the most likely to become an article.
