BTC 1W ATM volatility leads repricing

BTC options repriced most sharply at 1W ATM as spot fell, putting 1W implied volatility above the supplied 2W and 1M levels. RR25 became less negative at both 1W and 1M, while BF25 premiums widened at 1W and 2W but narrowed slightly at 1M. The evidence points to greater near-term volatility pricing without a corresponding deepening of downside asymmetry.

Derivasys Research

Report date05 Nov 2026

Current snapshot05 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC

CoverageBTC

Comparison snapshot04 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC

The reading

What the evidence says

BTC’s daily options adjustment was strongest at 1W ATM: implied volatility rose by +5.83 vol points ^[1] to 40.71% ^[2]. The 2W ATM increase of +3.90 vol points ^[3] shows that the adjustment extended beyond 1W. At 1M, ATM rose by +2.43 vol points ^[4] to 38.42% ^[5]. The resulting 1W ATM level exceeded both the supplied 2W and 1M levels, indicating a front-end inversion across these maturities. This supports a thesis of increased near-term volatility pricing, with a meaningful supporting adjustment at 2W rather than an isolated 1W move.

The smile adjustment qualifies that volatility thesis. Over the same daily comparison, 1W RR25 increased by +0.59 vol points ^[6], becoming less negative while retaining a downside bias. The matched 1M RR25 also increased, by +0.65 vol points ^[7], to -2.43 vol points ^[8]; downside asymmetry eased at both maturities without a sign crossing. Butterfly premiums followed a different tenor pattern: 1W BF25 rose by +0.11 vol points ^[9] to 1.05 vol points ^[10], and 2W BF25 rose by +0.12 vol points ^[11] to 1.15 vol points ^[12]. By contrast, 1M BF25 changed by -0.02 vol points ^[13] to 1.08 vol points ^[14]. Thus BF25 widening extended through 2W, whereas RR25 relief extended to 1M. BF25 describes the average wing premium over ATM, so these changes do not independently establish absolute wing volatility or directional demand.

The absolute daily 1W ATM move ranked at 96.2nd percentile ^[15] within the supplied rolling-window comparison, whose observed sample size and bounds are 26 observations (observed sampling; 06 Oct 2026–04 Nov 2026) ^[15]. That rank concerns the absolute 1W ATM change, not the rarity of the combined ATM, RR25 and BF25 configuration. BTC spot changed by -5.50% ^[16] over the matched daily interval. Trailing weekly realized volatility, recomputed from canonical minute returns, was 40.76% ^[17]. Forward 1W ATM minus trailing weekly realized volatility was -0.05 vol points ^[18]. The higher 1W ATM endpoint therefore remained close to the measured trailing realized level; its daily increase alone does not establish an unusually expensive forward volatility premium.

Broader BTC volatility benchmarks provide a separate perspective: the model-free monthly DS30 measure was 43.72 vol points ^[19], while BVIV was 42.33 vol points ^[20]. BVIV minus DS30 was -1.39 vol points ^[21]. These independently selected intraday benchmarks measure different constructions from fixed-tenor ATM volatility and cannot replace the matched 1W–1M ATM comparison. Decrypt reported crypto selling alongside AI-equity weakness during the news window. That chronology is consistent with a risk-appetite explanation, but does not establish why 1W ATM rose faster than 1M ATM while RR25 became less negative at both maturities.

Qualifications and limits

Historical ranks describe selected observed changes within their stated sample bounds; gaps and selection can affect the rank, which is neither a population probability nor joint significance.
Forward 1W implied and trailing weekly realized volatility cover different periods. The realized measure uses complete canonical minute-return coverage and calendar-day annualization; their spread is descriptive, not a forecast or trading edge. DS30 and BVIV have distinct native timestamps, and historical DS30 ingestion timing is unverified.
Reported news chronology and option-price changes do not establish causation, investor positioning or executable demand. News coverage ends before the options endpoint.

Verified market snapshot

Current levels and changes over each recorded native interval. Only receipt-matched quotes are shown; an em dash marks a missing matching quote.
Asset · tenor	ATM IV	ATM IV change	RR25	RR25 change	BF25 change
BTC · 1W	40.71 %^[2]	5.83 vol pts^[1]	-2.19 vol pts^[22]	0.59 vol pts^[6]	0.11 vol pts^[9]
BTC · 2W	38.75 %^[23]	3.90 vol pts^[3]	-2.56 vol pts^[24]	0.40 vol pts^[25]	0.12 vol pts^[11]
BTC · 1M	38.42 %^[5]	2.43 vol pts^[4]	-2.43 vol pts^[8]	0.65 vol pts^[7]	-0.02 vol pts^[13]

Weekly versus monthly curve

Matched native endpoints; inverted means monthly ATM IV is below weekly ATM IV. Regimes compare verified levels; no numerical slope is inferred.
Asset	Prior 1W	Prior 1M	Current 1W	Current 1M	Curve regime
BTC	34.88 % ^[26]	35.99 % ^[27]	40.71 % ^[2]	38.42 % ^[5]	Upward sloping → Inverted

BTC BF25 curve

Current · 05 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC · Comparison · 04 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC. Tenors are equally spaced categories, not elapsed time. Gaps remain unconnected.

Figure sources: ^[35] ^[36] ^[37] ^[38] ^[39] ^[40] ^[41]

BTC: size of daily changes in the 1-week at-the-money implied volatility

Observed samples in teal. Current statistic: 5.83 vol pts (red). Change sizes ignore direction: increases and decreases of the same size are ranked together. n=26; 2026-10-06 to 2026-11-04; source-selected observed sample, no fill.

^[15]

BF25 change by tenor

BTC · 04 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC → 05 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC · 24h. Own-run receipt-matched changes; missing or ambiguous points remain gaps.

Figure evidence: ^[9] ^[11] ^[13]

What to watch next

Each monitor describes a verified component or central counterexample of the selected story; observation tests, not a joint forecast.
Story component	Next snapshot	Observed condition	Comparison period	Evidence
BTC · 1W ATM implied volatility	06 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC	Current level: at or above 40.71 % (current level). Between current and prior: strictly below 40.71 % and strictly above 34.88 %. Prior level: at or below 34.88 % (prior level).	04 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC → 05 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC	^[2] ^[26] ^[1]
BTC · 1W 25-delta butterfly premium	06 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC	Current level: at or above 1.05 vol pts (current level). Between current and prior: strictly below 1.05 vol pts and strictly above 0.94 vol pts. Prior level: at or below 0.94 vol pts (prior level).	04 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC → 05 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC	^[10] ^[43] ^[9]
BTC · 2W ATM implied volatility	06 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC	Current level: at or above 38.75 % (current level). Between current and prior: strictly below 38.75 % and strictly above 34.85 %. Prior level: at or below 34.85 % (prior level).	04 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC → 05 Nov 2026 · 17:31 UTC	^[23] ^[44] ^[3]

Historical sampling methodology

Each rank describes its supplied population. Exact consecutive daily endpoints use fixed UTC anchors and 24 elapsed hours, including across daylight-saving changes. Missing pairs are omitted without interpolation; their absence does not establish why the provider omitted them. Full captured history is bounded by this run. Different captures and windows can have different denominators even when their ranks agree.

Measure	Population	Observed pairs or levels	Requested window	Excluded pair or level endpoints
BTC 1W.atmIv.absolute_move^[15]	rolling 30 calendar days (UTC)	26	2026-10-05T17:31:00+00:00 to 2026-11-04T17:31:00+00:00	2026-10-10T17:31:00+00:00, 2026-10-11T17:31:00+00:00, 2026-10-22T17:31:00+00:00, 2026-10-23T17:31:00+00:00

Source reporting

Bitcoin Erases Election Rally as AI Stocks Plunge, $428 Million in Crypto Longs Get Wiped Out · Published 2026-11-05T16:29:11+00:00

BF25 = (25-delta call IV + 25-delta put IV) / 2 − ATM IV. Levels and changes are measured in volatility points.

Retrospective report: native market dates are distinct from later retrieval and run clocks. Later capture does not establish availability at the original cutoff.

Source notes