Funding Rate History — Per Pair
Historical funding rate trajectory for the top BTC perpetual pairs across major venues. Persistent regimes (positive/negative) reveal sustained leverage bias.
What is it?
Multi-line temporal evolution of Bitcoin perpetual contract funding rate on the 10 largest pairs (covering Top 7 exchanges plus 3 complementary pairs: Bitget, MEXC, Gate.io). Each line represents daily average funding rate (mean of 3 cycles 8h for standard exchanges, or mean of 24 cycles 1h for Hyperliquid) on the concerned exchange. Daily granularity, minimum 365-day rolling history. The curve enables distinguishing structural regimes (sustained positive funding = healthy bull market, sustained negative funding = depressed bear market) from one-off extreme pressure episodes (paroxysmal peaks at cycle tops or capitulations). Coinalyze source /funding-rate-history endpoint, 24h Postgres cache.
How to read
Y-axis: funding rate as a percentage per 8h interval (linear scale centred on 0). X-axis: daily time, available timeframes 90d/1y/2y/all. Each exchange is identified by a distinct, persistent colour. The horizontal zero line visually separates the longs-pay zone (positive) from the shorts-pay zone (negative). Green and red bands delimit the normal zone around zero (typically ±0.05%). The interactive legend allows temporarily hiding an exchange to focus the reading. The BTC price overlay (right Y-axis, toggleable from the toolbar) enables crossing funding with price movement.
Key zones
Observed structural regimes: healthy bull market (average funding between +0.005% and +0.02% for months, sustainable indication of moderate long demand), late euphoria (funding > +0.05% sustained for several weeks, historical short-term cycle top), normal correction (funding returns around 0 ± 0.01% in days), capitulation (funding plunges below -0.05% for 3-7 days, typical local bottom), accumulation (funding oscillates around zero with low amplitude for months). Statistically extreme thresholds (>= ±0.05% per 8h) have historically marked either short-term tops (positive sign) or short-term bottoms (negative sign), with a contrarian success rate around 65-70% on the available historical sample of modern cycles.
What to observe
Informative patterns: (1) inter-exchange divergence above 0.02% for 7+ days — pure funding arbitrage opportunity (cross-reference with Funding Rate Dispersion Z-Score #10 Performance to quantify extremity); (2) Top 10 average funding > +0.03% for 30+ days — long market saturation, historical cycle top configuration; (3) average funding below -0.03% for 7+ days — capitulation, typical local bottom; (4) frequent inter-exchange inversion (Hyperliquid at +0.02% when Binance at -0.01%) — cross-venue crowd positioning fragmentation indication; (5) historical event markers annotated on chart (FOMC dates, April 2024 halving, November 2022 FTX, etc.) enable visualising how funding reacts to macro catalysts.
Historical context
Macro funding evolution observed across modern cycles: 2018-2019 deep bear market (average funding often negative -0.005% to -0.02%, reflecting dominant pessimism), post-COVID rebound March 2020 (average funding shifts to +0.02-0.05% in months, nascent institutional accumulation), April 2021 (paroxysmal peaks +0.10% on many days pre-Elon Musk correction), 2022 bear (average funding returned near zero, moderate oscillations), November 2022 FTX capitulation (consensus extreme negative funding on altcoins, BTC less affected), gradual post-bear recovery (average funding ~+0.005-0.01%), post-spot-ETF January 2024 (funding +0.02-0.04% structural for months, moderate euphoria), structurally more moderate post-halving regime vs 2021 (reduced amplitude thanks to institutional maturation and venue diversification).
Expert notes
Historical funding reading is one of the most valuable crypto sentiment indicators — it captures the opportunity cost traders are willing to pay to maintain their direction. For exhaustive cross-layer Trinity reading, cross-reference with: (1) TFPI Trinity Funding Pressure Index (Layer B z-score adaptive composite) which normalises current funding vs its historical baseline to qualify 'extreme for this cycle'; (2) MACD Weekly BTC (Price Intelligence) — price momentum confirmation; (3) 4Y cycle position — halving proximity and historical phase. Backtesting caveat: the available historical sample remains limited (only a few complete cycles), contrarian success statistics should be read with caution. Funding provides a context indication, not a prediction.
Common mistakes to avoid
Common mistake: trading every funding spike as automatic contrarian indication. NO — high funding can persist for weeks during a sustained uptrend without immediate correction. Profitable contrarian requires persistence (3+ cycles minimum) AND contextual qualification (TFPI z-score) AND macro timing (cycle position). Another trap: comparing 2020 funding to 2024 without considering structural maturation. Pre-ETF perpetual market was dominated by speculative retail (more volatile and extreme funding), post-ETF integrates institutional and neutral market-makers (more moderate funding, reduced amplitude). 'Extreme' thresholds evolve with regime. Finally, don't confuse daily average funding (this metric) with current point-in-time 8h cycle funding (#6 snapshot) — daily smooths, snapshot captures short-term derivative.
Programmatic access
REST API
curl -sS \
'https://api.trinityinsights.io/api/v1/exchange-intelligence/derivatives-fr-history-per-pair/history?days=90' \
-H 'X-API-Key: $TRINITY_API_KEY'MCP server
{
"tool": "get_chart_value",
"metric_id": "derivatives-fr-history-per-pair",
"timeframe": "1y"
}Required tier: pro. See the pricing grid for the tier list and the MCP documentation for multi-client configuration.
Related metrics
Institutional disclaimer
Trinity Insights is an educational and analytical tool. The metric above does not constitute investment advice. Trinity Insights is not a Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) registered under MiCA Regulation (EU) 2023/1114. See the full disclaimer.