Preserve native time first
A chain advances by blocks. Venues use their own matching and reporting conventions. Disclosures refer to a period end that may be distant from publication.
I retain the original timestamp, time zone, frequency, and revision status before creating a shared analytical window. Early standardisation can erase the very sequence under investigation.
- Native timestamp and zone
- Sampling and aggregation interval
- Reporting cutoff
- Backfill and revision policy
Separate occurrence from observability
An on-chain transfer may be visible before its purpose or economic availability is known. Custody movements, bridges, venue credits, and internal treasury activity introduce delays.
Publication time creates another distinction. A later report may describe an earlier period, but it was not evidence available to the market at that earlier point.
Carry disagreement into the review rule
When spot activity, derivatives positioning, and on-chain flows fail to align, choosing the cleanest chart is tempting. I would rather keep the disagreement visible.
Different participants, venue coverage, settlement lags, or measurement rules may explain it. The mismatch can reveal structure even when it cannot support an immediate conclusion.
A conclusion should state its data cutoff, the evidence still pending, and which series may be revised. The next review then begins with a defined information set rather than hindsight.
Clock reconciliation looks like data preparation. In practice, it determines whether a scenario can be reproduced and whether causality has been claimed too quickly.