Bitcoin's share of the crypto market appeared to collapse from about 60% to roughly 24% on TradingView on Monday, a move that did not reflect actual market conditions. The charting platform's own market total had broken, producing a false signal that a major altcoin rally was beginning.
Bitcoin dominance measures Bitcoin's portion of the total value of the crypto market. When it falls, money is typically moving into other coins, a pattern traders call altcoin season.
How a broken chart looked like an altcoin boom
According to its support page, TradingView builds its market total from the 125 largest coins, and dominance is calculated by dividing Bitcoin's value by that total. On Monday, the total suddenly jumped above $6 trillion. A larger total shrank Bitcoin's share on paper, even though Bitcoin itself never moved.
TradingView data showed Bitcoin dominance falling to 24.12%, down 60.30%. The apparent crash drew attention from traders, including Crypto Rover, who asked whether the parameters were glitched or market makers were hinting at a massive altseason.
What the real numbers say
Other trackers did not show a collapse in dominance. CoinMarketCap still put Bitcoin dominance at 60.3%. Its Altcoin Season Index read 40 out of 100, while CoinGlass showed 44.
The index counts how many of the top 100 coins have beaten Bitcoin over 90 days. Altcoin season requires a score of 75, meaning most altcoins are still losing to Bitcoin.
The gap is not new. BeInCrypto reported a year ago that dominance passed 60% while fewer than 5% of altcoins beat Bitcoin, and analysts were already split on altcoin season months earlier.
When will TradingView fix it?
TradingView had not publicly explained Monday's error at the time of writing. Its help page notes that a large coin entering or leaving its top 125 can jolt the total. Whether that happened in this case is unconfirmed.
The same page says large spikes can be smoothed out by hand later. Until then, viral posts continue to ask whether altcoin season has arrived, while the index built to answer that question says no.
