Market Depth Weekly compares the two most recent complete UTC weeks across price and volume, US spot ETF flows, funding rates and Fear & Greed. We read broadly across market data, research and public analysis, test the important claims against primary or reproducible sources, and then apply our own experience and framework. The published view is Market Depth Lab's synthesis, not a relay of other analysts' opinions.
Why does every issue use a complete calendar week?
Comparing two partial days with seven full days creates false acceleration or cooling. Each issue therefore uses Monday 00:00 through the following Monday 00:00 UTC and compares it with the preceding complete week. A formal conclusion is withheld if any market is missing one of seven daily candles, 168 hourly funding observations or seven sentiment readings.
What investment question does the weekly brief actually answer?
It is not a chronological list of everything that happened. The recurring question is whether price is being confirmed by participation and capital: did volume expand, did US spot ETFs add or remove exposure, did sentiment follow, and did leverage become more expensive? Divergence between those dimensions is often more informative than any one headline number.
How do we form the weekly view?
Each week we read broadly across market data, research and public analysis covering the macro backdrop, price and volume, ETFs, derivatives, on-chain flows and major events. The goal is not to compile opinions or list who said what. It is to identify questions worth testing, conflicts between indicators and market changes that one dataset might miss.
Every important claim is checked against an official endpoint, original announcement or reproducible dataset. We then apply our own market experience and a consistent analytical framework to decide what is noise, what may represent a trend and what would invalidate the view. The published conclusion is Market Depth Lab’s synthesis rather than any single source’s opinion.
Which market dimensions are reproducible?
Price, base-asset volume and funding come from complete Hyperliquid windows; sentiment comes from Alternative.me through the MDL data API; US spot BTC and ETH ETF flows come from five daily Farside Investors rows per trading week. Historical open interest, options flow and account-level positioning are not used as core issue evidence until MDL has a stable collection pipeline.
What appears in every issue?
- One investment question that the available data can answer.
- At least two chart images with dates, definitions and sources.
- A two-week comparison of price-volume, ETF flows, funding and Fear & Greed.
- Where price-volume, ETF, sentiment and leverage evidence confirm or contradict one another.
- One main interpretation and at least one competing explanation.
- Observable conditions that could invalidate the interpretation next week.
- Risks separated into fatal, painful but non-fatal, and background noise.
Every issue is a research record, not personalized investment advice or an automated trading signal.