$FUN
The position of $FUN dropped from 53 million to 42 million, but the fee rate increased from -0.6 to -2. There are two possibilities: 1. The institution directly closed more than 10 million long positions, which would definitely raise the negative fee rate. 2. While the institution closed long positions, it also opened short positions, for example, in a reduction of about 10 million, they closed more than 7 million long positions and added 3 million short positions. Retail investors who shorted were already liquidated before the position reached 53 million, so they are not included in this data. The remaining 1 million might be retail investors closing their long or short positions. These two scenarios have different trends. In the first scenario, the institution might consolidate to collect fees, and when the short sellers are mostly liquidated, those who want to go long come in to collect fees, and the institution may directly dump long positions. It could also continue to rise. In the second scenario, the likelihood of a crash is relatively high. In fact, regardless of the fee rate situation, the institution itself cannot earn much from the fees because the largest volume in the positions still belongs to the institution. Therefore, both long and short positions are dominated by the institution's volume. Whether the fee rate is positive or negative 2, the institution cannot earn much. The core of operating the fee rate is that when prices rise, short positions are liquidated faster, and the pressure to rise is smaller; when unloading, retail investors come in to take over the fee rates.
