Can Crypto Trading Ever Recover After October’s Liquidity Crash?

Crypto markets might look calmer after October’s leverage wipeout, but under the surface, liquidity remains absent.

Data from CoinDesk Research shows that order-book depth across major centralized exchanges remains structurally lower, suggesting a more cautious market-making environment heading into year-end.

This environment paves the way for thinner markets and sharper moves, increasing the likelihood that routine trading flows will produce outsized price swings.

Vanishing liquidity

The October liquidation cascade erased billions in open interest in a matter of hours, but it also triggered something more subtle and far more persistent: an exodus of resting liquidity from centralized exchanges.

The damage is most apparent in the two assets that anchor the entire market. In early October, just before the wipeout, bitcoin’s average cumulative depth at 1% from the mid-price hovered close to $20 million across major venues, according to CoinDesk Research data.

By Nov. 11, that same measure had slipped to $14 million, a decline of nearly one-third, the data showed.

Market depth is a metric used by traders to assess the scale of liquidity in a market. At a 1% range, this assesses how much capital would be required to move the market by 1%, taking into consideration the cumulative value of all limit orders on the book.

A thin book could deter traders looking to buy or sell higher volume as it would quite often cause slippage, which is where price deviates to an area where liquidity is sufficient.

Depth at 0.5% from the mid-price fell from close to $15.5 million to just under $10 million, while depth at the broader 5% range dropped from more than $40 million to slightly below $30 million.

Ether shows an almost parallel pattern. On Oct. 9, ETH depth at 1% from the mid-price sat just above $8 million, but by early November it had receded to just under $6 million.

There was also a significant drawdown in depth within 0.5% and within 5%, creating an entirely new market structure.

According to CoinDesk Research, this failure of BTC and ETH liquidity to recover is not a quirk of timing but a structural shift.

The analysts concluded that both assets suffered a significant decline in average depth that has not resolved, “suggesting a deliberate reduction in market-making commitment and the emergence of a new, lower baseline for stable liquidity on centralized exchanges.”

This is not just impactful to directional traders with long or short bias, but also for delta-neutral firms and volatility traders. Delta-neutral firms rely on strategies such as harvesting an arbitrage spread on funding rates; however, a lack of liquidity means that size will have to be reduced, potentially eating into profits.

Volatility trades may have mixed results as the lack of liquidity can ultimately lead to violent swings. This is ideal for those operating an options straddle, which involves purchasing a call and put option with the same expiration and strike price, as wide price movements in either direction will result in profit.

Altcoins rebound from panic, but not to prior strength

The liquidity crunch contrast between BTC and ETH versus major altcoins is stark.

A composite basket of SOL, XRP, ATOM and ENS experienced an even deeper liquidity collapse during the October washout, with depth at 1% diving from roughly $2.5 million to about $1.3 million overnight. Yet this group staged a rapid technical recovery, with market makers quickly restoring orders as volatility receded.

That rebound, however, did not restore liquidity to its early-October levels. Depth within the 1% band remains roughly $1 million below where it stood before the wipeout, and depth at broader bands shows the same pattern of partial repair without full restoration.

CoinDesk Research believes this divergence reflects two fundamentally different liquidity regimes: altcoins experienced a knee-jerk collapse that forced market makers to re-enter aggressively once the market stabilized, while BTC and ETH endured a slower, more purposeful withdrawal of liquidity as participants reassessed risk.

“The altcoin collapse was a temporary, panic-driven event requiring rapid order restoration,” the analysts noted, adding that the larger assets “underwent a more deliberate and enduring risk-off positioning.”

The pattern, a violent drop, a quick bounce, and a lower plateau, suggests that altcoins were shocked, while bitcoin and ether were re-priced in terms of market-maker commitment.

Macro is not a friend

If liquidity providers were already hesitant after October’s dislocation, the macro climate has given them little reason to re-risk.

CoinShares data showed $360 million in net outflows from digital asset investment products during the week ending Nov. 1, including almost $1 billion withdrawn from bitcoin ETFs — one of the heaviest weekly outflows of the year.

The U.S. accounted for more than $430 million of these outflows, reflecting the sensitivity of U.S. institutional flows to the Federal Reserve’s shifting communication on interest rates.

Market makers tend to reduce inventory, widen spreads and limit posted size when macro uncertainty clouds directional conviction. The persistence of ETF outflows, the ambiguity around December rate policy and the general lack of strong fundamental catalysts have all contributed to a cautious stance.

What does it all mean?

The practical consequence of this reduced depth is that crypto markets are more fragile than price charts imply.

Simply put: very sharp moves ahead for traders.

It now takes significantly less capital to move spot markets in either direction. Large trades from funds, arbitrage desks, or ETF intermediaries can create a disproportionate impact, while even routine macro releases, such as an unexpectedly strong CPI print, a shift in Fed commentary, or further ETF outflows, risk producing exaggerated price reactions.

Lower liquidity also leaves the system more vulnerable to liquidation cascades. Should open interest rebuild quickly, as it often does during periods of calm, the absence of a thick order book increases the odds that relatively small shocks could trigger another wave of forced selling.

In a more benign scenario, thin liquidity can also amplify upside moves. If risk appetite returns abruptly, the same lack of resting liquidity could fuel outsized rallies.

A fragile market ahead

What is clear from the data is that the October liquidation did more than unwind overleveraged positions. It reshaped the structure of the crypto market in a way that has yet to unwind.

Bitcoin and ether remain locked into a new, thinner liquidity regime. Altcoins, though faster to recover, are still far from the levels that characterized early October.

As the year draws to a close, crypto is now in a far more fragile position than it was at the start of October.

Whether this liquidity void becomes a brief chapter or a defining feature of the market’s next phase remains to be seen, but for now, that hole remains, and the market continues to find a way to work around it — with ample caution.