Long vs short
Why a short is not a mirror of a long once spread, funding and fees are in.
The two formulas
A long earns exposure multiplied by (mark − entry) ÷ entry. A short earns exposure multiplied by (entry − mark) ÷ entry. That looks symmetric and is not, for three reasons.
One: the spread is always charged the wrong way
A long opens at the ask and closes at the bid. A short opens at the bid and closes at the ask. Either way you cross the spread twice, and any simulator that uses the last traded price for both sides is flattering itself. This site uses ask to open a long, bid to close it, and the reverse for a short, which is why the entry shown on a market page is never exactly the chart price.
Two: percentage moves are asymmetric
A 50% fall needs a 100% rise to undo. For a short, the maximum gain is bounded at 100% of exposure because the price cannot go below zero, while the loss is unbounded. At high leverage this matters less than it sounds, because liquidation arrives long before either extreme.
Three: funding is usually directional
Perpetual-style products charge a periodic funding payment between longs and shorts. When the crowd is long, longs pay. That cost accrues on exposure, so at high leverage it compounds against the stake quickly. Holding a leveraged position through a funding-heavy stretch can cost more than the price move.
What the data says about direction
Across the 45 markets here, the largest intraday drop from an open in the last 30 sessions ranges up to 11.42%, and the largest intraday rise up to 33.54%. Downside excursions cluster tighter and arrive faster, which is why short liquidations and long liquidations do not happen at the same tempo even at identical leverage. Check both columns on the market page before assuming a short is the safer expression of the same view.