Crypto Market Regime Analyzer

How the regime score is built

The five components

Trend alignment earns thirty points from three yes-or-no checks: is price above its 20-day average, is price above its 50-day average, and is the shorter average above the longer one. Each check that passes adds ten. The construction is deliberately simple because the question is simple — has the path of least resistance been up or down — and because averages lag by definition, which is a feature when you want a reading that does not flicker.

Momentum takes twenty-five points and looks one month back: a thirty-day return of plus twenty percent or better earns full marks, minus twenty percent or worse earns zero, and everything between scales linearly. Volatility and drawdown each earn fifteen points, both scoring calmness. Realized volatility is the standard deviation of daily returns annualized, with thirty percent or less taking the full fifteen and a hundred percent or more taking none. Drawdown measures distance below the ninety-day peak: flat from the high earns fifteen, down forty percent or more earns zero.

Sentiment closes the set with the final fifteen points, straight from the Fear & Greed index on its natural zero-to-one-hundred scale. A reading of seventy-two contributes just under eleven points. It gets the smallest weight on purpose: sentiment moves fastest, is partly survey-based, and would otherwise let one emotional day swing the verdict.

Why these weights

Trend carries double the next-largest component because it is the most persistent condition of a market: trends last quarters while sentiment flips weekly. Momentum and volatility overlap by construction — both collapse together in a crash — so their weights stay modest to avoid counting the same fear twice. Drawdown sits in the middle as a measure of how much damage the market is still absorbing. Sentiment is a counterweight to the mechanical readings rather than a driver, which is why it caps at fifteen. None of the weights are fitted to history or tuned to produce a particular signal; they are stated, visible, and yours to disagree with in the component table.

Worked example

Suppose Bitcoin closes at $84,700 with its 20-day average at $83,900 and its 50-day average at $81,200. All three trend checks pass: thirty points. The thirty-day return is plus 11.8%, which maps to about 19.9 of the momentum points. Realized volatility over the last month prints 48%, earning roughly 11.1 points. Price sits 6.2% below its ninety-day high, good for about 12.7 drawdown points. Sentiment reads 72, adding 10.8. The total lands near 85, comfortably Risk-on. Now run the same page months earlier with price beneath both averages, a minus eight percent month and sentiment at 35, and the components collapse to roughly 40 — Neutral at best. Nothing about the future changed between those two snapshots; only the tape did.

Using it honestly

The score is useful for pacing and sizing: slowing scheduled purchases when everything reads Risk-on and the crowd is euphoric, or keeping conviction when a pullback leaves trend intact and sentiment merely cooled. It is also a mirror — if your read and the component table disagree, one of the two is wrong and the table shows its work. What it cannot do is forecast. Prices gap through all five inputs in a single session, the score lags by construction, and one asset stands in for a market that rotates between majors and the long tail. Treat it as a descriptive instrument like a thermometer: honest about what it measures, silent about what happens next, and never investment advice.