Orbit Post Sitemap
$PEPE PEPE still has that $20 million free chip hanging over its head, and the hacker has only sold a quarter of it so far.
This is quite annoying; whenever there's a rebound, they are motivated to keep cashing out. When buyers try to push the price up, they first have to absorb these zero-cost tokens.
The remaining 75% hasn't been sold yet, so every short-term rally has to face this potential selling pressure. I think it's too early to call a reversal just based on a few green bars.
#PEPE
$PEPE
👇USDC on-chain transaction volume surged 151% Circle's earnings report tonight might be more interesting than expected
Tonight Circle will announce its Q3 earnings report. I think this time, what’s worth paying attention to is not just the stock price but how profitable the stablecoin industry really is.
According to last quarter’s official data, USDC circulation reached $73.3 billion, a 19% year-over-year increase. On-chain transaction volume even hit $14.8 trillion, up 151% year-over-year. But interestingly, the company’s combined revenue and reserve income only grew 7% year-over-year to $701 million.
Why is USDC usage growing so fast, yet revenue hasn’t exploded accordingly?
The key is that Circle still heavily relies on reserve asset income and also needs to pay substantial channel revenue shares. Related costs last quarter reached $412 million.
I actually believe Circle’s real opportunity is to transform USDC from an exchange funding tool into the infrastructure for corporate payments and global settlement.
If in the future it can generate substantial income without relying on interest, then the valuation method for the stablecoin industry might be completely different.
What do you think will be Circle’s biggest growth driver going forward: USDC issuance volume or payment business?
$CRCL #Circle財報在即，穩定幣成長能否轉化為收益？ This time, the story of $BTC was interrupted by the U.S. midterm elections. Preliminary results show that the Democratic Party is likely to control both chambers of Congress, and related bets have put pressure on the market: Bitcoin briefly dropped to $75,700, stock index futures and the dollar also fell, while U.S. Treasury bonds rose.
I tend to see this scene as a risk-off reaction triggered by political uncertainty, rather than bad news unique to the crypto space. Stocks and Bitcoin both under pressure indicate that the stress is not limited to the crypto market; the rise in Treasury bonds shows a preference for safety. The dollar also weakened, reminding me not to explain the crypto price solely by the strength or weakness of the dollar.
The story is not over yet; preliminary results do not equal the final outcome. My speculation is that if election expectations continue to change, cross-market volatility may repeat. The takeaway from this news is: first understand what the market is worried about, and don’t rush to write a long-term narrative based on a single sharp drop.Seeing "seeking cooperation with the Democratic Party," my first reaction wasn't about the market trend, but how long this statement will remain valid.
When politicians talk about cooperation, it's like telling us "start dieting tomorrow"—the attitude is genuine, but execution is another matter. However, the market doesn't care; it only recognizes one thing: the worst-case scenario won't happen for now. So for assets like $BTC, hearing "no more trouble" is enough to push prices up out of respect.
Interestingly, ordinary people often feel the opposite: the news is peaceful, but their accounts show no movement. That's because these things first affect expectations, then prices follow. $ETH hasn't caught up yet, which means this wave is about sentiment, not funds.Midterm Election Vote Counting: The "Seating" Ranking Battle in a Low-Volume Market
Midterm election vote counts are gradually coming in, with the Democratic Party currently leading. At this stage of the market, the hardest part is no longer guessing the direction but how to allocate positions. Everyone understands the big picture; the real difference lies in the "seating" ranking of who is stronger or weaker.
Let's review the three brothers after reassessment:
🔸 $BTC (Anchor Stone): In the past 24 hours, it has been grinding in a low-volume range between 76387 and 78064, with a trading volume of only 10,516 coins. The fear and greed index has returned to 34. Sentiment is slowly recovering, but no one is willing to add real money yet. Currently holding 60% of the base position, the remaining bullets are waiting for the election downside to fully play out.
🔸 $ETH (Flexible Position): Relatively resilient. The ETH/BTC rate has risen to 0.0294, outperforming BTC in a single day. The core support lies in the chip structure: the staking queue is congested, the exit queue is empty, and a large amount of chips are tightly locked. It is currently the best offensive flexible position.
🔸 $ZEC (Independent Defense Line): It retraced to 1250 without losing the 1200 level, showing strong independence. The governance turmoil actually caused nearly 100,000 tokens to exit free circulation, substantially reducing supply. 1200 is its holding lifeline; it will not move decisively unless broken.
The iron rule in a low-volume environment: the strong may not surge immediately, but the weak will definitely fall first.
The seating is already arranged: BTC defends the base, ETH plays the flexible role, and ZEC holds the defense line. The rest is to control your hands and leave it to patience and time!
#CFTC首次放行美国个股永续期货 Why does the market take the phrase "accept the midterm election results" seriously? Because in recent years, the pricing of risk assets in U.S. politics has always included a layer of "tail risk premium"—not fearing who wins, but fearing the uncertainty of the outcome. When the outcome is uncertain, money can only shrink into a few certain assets; now that the parties themselves have ruled out the worst-case scenario, the premium goes down, and valuations naturally rise.
Note, what changes is not the policy but the probability distribution. This is why high beta assets like $BTC often react more strongly to the phrase "dust settles" than to specific policies.
The second layer requires a calm perspective. "Seeking cooperation with the Democratic Party" is a posture, not a commitment. For it to materialize, it depends on budget and legislation, both of which are most prone to delays. If progress stalls, the imagination space for liquidity easing is limited, and assets like $ETH, which rely more on risk appetite expansion, will see reduced elasticity.
So my judgment: in the short term, it is an emotional repair; in the medium term, fundamentals still matter. The decline in political uncertainty provides a cleaner pricing environment, not a ticket to a new bull market. The old structure of BTC leading and altcoins following will repeat, but how far it can go depends on whether funds are truly willing to move out of defensive positions.
One question remains: if "cooperation" ultimately remains just talk, will the market add the premium back, or simply ignore it—after all, over the past two years, everyone’s immunity to political noise has become quite high. Some traders choose to close their $ETH and $SOL positions while continuing to hold $BTC positions. This operation focuses on risk allocation in a crowded environment rather than simply being bearish on Ethereum and SOL or bullish on Bitcoin. Ethereum ($ETH) entry average price is 2243.35, current price 2290.93, profit 42.41%, approximately +28.21U gain, with traders actively locking in this profit. SOL ($SOL) entry average price is 95.79, current price 93.55, loss close to -32.09U, stopped out due to weakening momentum. Bitcoin ($BTC) entry average price is 79432.1, current price 77851, with a floating loss of about -168.16U under 100x leverage, but the margin is still sufficient to support the position. The logic behind this operation comes from the crowded position issue, where many buyers concentrate in the same direction, creating high liquidation risk when prices move against them. $ETH has strong consensus, so profits are realized; $SOL, with crowded buying and weak momentum, is exited directly; Bitcoin ($BTC) is kept as a long-term bet on recovery, relying on margin to withstand drawdowns. It is worth noting that keeping a single high-leverage $BTC position actually concentrates risk rather than diversifies it. When leveraged traders reduce altcoin positions and hold Bitcoin, market liquidity changes, tightening liquidity for mainstream coins and thinning order books for others. Also, the crowded selling issue initially seen in $ETH and $SOL does not appear on $BTC.Another address single-handedly pushed Hakimi up by 10%. Do you remember the last brother who did the same? Let's take a look at the data!
Data changes of the top 40 Hakimi holding addresses on 2026.11.4
alpha: inflow of 16 million tokens
gate1: outflow of 6 million tokens
Lank: inflow of 3 million tokens
New entries in top 40: 5 people total, 1 newly opened position, 4 normal increases
Dropped out of top 40: 5 people total, 4 fully exited, 1 transferred out
Top 40 increased positions: 1 person, 1 transfer in
Top 40 decreased positions: 0 people
$Hakimi Daily Key Summary:
There are 5 new addresses entering the top 40, among which 1 made a real on-chain purchase. Of the 5 who dropped out of the top 40, 4 fully exited, selling about 20 million tokens. The addresses and amounts for top 40 position increases and decreases are very small and negligible. On the exchange side, alpha saw an inflow of about 16 million tokens, gate had a slight outflow of 6 million tokens. The token price has not fluctuated much since the last statistics, only a slight drop of about 5%. The overall market has entered a slow pace, with very little on-chain changes. However, the address that newly opened a position today kept buying for 4 hours, purchasing about $150,000 in total, single-handedly pushing Hakimi up by 10%. Otherwise, Hakimi would most likely have started with 16 million by now. Seeing this brother's purchase, I vaguely remember last time a similar address also single-handedly pushed Hakimi upU.S. midterm election voting enters the pricing window for crypto regulation.
According to reports, the 2026 U.S. midterm elections have entered the voting and counting phase, with changes in the Senate seat distribution. Trump expressed approval of the Democratic Party's victories in the Senate. Several candidates supported by crypto industry PACs are running in this election, and the final results will directly impact stablecoin legislation, market structure bills, and the regulatory stance of the SEC and CFTC on digital assets.
The outlook is neutral to slightly positive but with clear divergence between bullish and bearish views: if the pro-crypto camp expands seats in both the House and Senate, the likelihood of advancing market structure legislation and stablecoin yield rules increases, representing a midterm institutional benefit. Exchanges, DeFi, and stablecoin sectors would be the most direct beneficiaries; if anti-crypto forces control key committees, related legislation will likely continue to be delayed. This is not an intraday catalyst but a pricing benchmark for the U.S. compliance path over the next year.
BTC and ETH will be sensitive to vote counting progress in the short term, with the key being to wait for the final seat distribution to settle—do not mistake mid-count changes in swing states as final signals.
Source: Cointelegraph
Are you more concerned about the advancement of stablecoin legislation or market structure bills? The Democratic Party's sweep crushed expectations and caused a sell-off, but BTC bounced back.
At 11:00, it hit 75,736 (a 7-week low), and by 13:20 it had recovered to 77,470, with a 24h change of +0.8%.
Spot ETFs have seen net outflows for three consecutive days, but the scale is shrinking: -643 million → -399 million → -116 million USD (as of 11/3 Eastern US time).
The market fears the CLARITY Act will stall, yet selling pressure is decreasing——
Is this a bottom, or a bull trap?
$BTC $BTC ETH $ETH MSTR $COIN Rising after one year does not mean it won't drop now
Since 1950, in 19 midterm elections, the U.S. stock market has risen in the year following the election.
The average increase is 15.1%, the median 14.5%.
How this number is calculated:
This is the increase over 12 months after the election, not the three months after.
For $BTC those three times, the median drop in the first three months after the election was 31%.
Common misreading:
These three times all coincided with two and a half years after the halving.
The cycle and the election overlapped, so it's unclear whose credit it is.
Rising after one year is the direction; the middle period is what holders have to endure.
Legislation is still stuck in the Senate, one vote short.
#BTC现货ETF资金流出，企业财库增持放缓
#$BTC Today's market focus isn't the indexes, but where the money is moving.
The A-share Shanghai Composite only dropped 0.82%, the STAR 50 plunged 3.81%, turnover shrank to 1.7 trillion, with over 3,300 stocks closing in the red. Electronics saw 21 billion withdrawn in one day, communications lost 9.3 billion, and computing hardware took a hit; however, power equipment bucked the trend by absorbing 3.5 billion, while low-position sectors like batteries, food & beverage, and insurance pushed upward. Money squeezed out from the most crowded tech hardware sector and moved to places no one is fighting over.
Last night, US stocks also went their separate ways. The Nasdaq rose 0.83%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index jumped 2.63%, Nvidia gained 2.29%, and SanDisk nearly 5%. But Apple fell 1.9%, Tesla dropped 1.32%, and the Dow was dragged into the red. Those buying chips and those buying Apple did not have the same trading day.
$BTC hovered around 77,000, the fear index dropped eleven points in one day to 26, ETFs saw over 800 million USD redeemed in six days, with BlackRock alone redeeming 400 million. Yet on-chain whales reversed and increased holdings to 3.03 million coins, the strongest accumulation since February. $ETH also had an address buying 37 million USD worth in five hours at an average price of 2279, and hasn't stopped yet.
Those in suits are selling, those with cold wallets are picking up; the money hasn't left, it's just changing seats. If the Democratic Party simultaneously takes control of both the House and the Senate, the legislative space for the remainder of the Trump administration will significantly narrow. To be precise, the president's constitutional powers remain unchanged, but it becomes more difficult to turn policies into laws. Major domestic bills are easily stalled. Major actions such as tax reform, immigration, energy, and healthcare all need to go through Congress. The House controls the power of the purse, and the Senate is responsible for review; if one chamber opposes, the bill is hard to advance. The president can veto bills, but if both chambers have a two-thirds majority, they can override the veto. In reality, this usually requires bipartisan consensus, which is a high threshold. The budget will become the main bargaining tool. New fiscal year appropriations, government operating funds, and foreign aid are all controlled by Congress. The Democratic Party can include funding restrictions in appropriations bills to affect the execution of related projects. Therefore, the focus will shift from "who proposes the bill" to "who gets the money and under what conditions." Executive orders will be used more. The president can still continue to use executive orders, diplomatic powers, and pardons. These methods are fast but unstable: the next president may revoke them, federal courts may also halt them, and projects that require funding still depend on congressional appropriations. Oversight and personnel appointments will also tighten. The Senate majority party controls committee schedules and has greater influence over judges, cabinet, and agency appointments. The House can also initiate investigations, hearings, and impeachment procedures, increasing the White House's time dealing with Congress. The current relatively stable judgment is: the House results are basically clear, the Senate is still counting votes; if the Democratic Party ultimately gains a single-seat advantage, the U.S. will enter a typical "divided government," and the governing focus will shift from proactive legislation to defense, Seeing this, I want to give newcomers a lesson: two people solving the same problem with the same answer does not mean the answer has been verified. When I look at multiple people going long in monitoring, what I care most about is whether the risk is truly diversified, not just that there are a few more votes in favor.
This time, two wallets used 10x leverage to go long on ZEC within a short period, totaling 369.46 coins, with a nominal value of about $434,400. 📌 Assuming the position remains unchanged, if the price moves 1% in the opposite direction, ignoring fees and other costs, the combined unrealized loss of the two positions would be about $4,344, which will not offset each other just because they belong to two different wallets.
My judgment is: this only shows the direction is consistent, it cannot be taken as double confirmation. The same coin and same direction bear the same price fluctuation; monitoring also does not tell us whether each has hedged or how long they plan to hold. The most common misconception among newcomers is treating the number of wallets as independent evidence. If these two positions were changed to one long and one short, how would the risk differ? If anything is unclear, leave a message for Old Ma.$ZEC ZEC just made a blatant move on the market.
A whale directly spent 3.8 million USD to buy spot, then immediately placed 10 million USD worth of long contracts.
This is a typical strategy of building a base with spot and adding positions with contracts.
The spot market drains liquidity to support the price, and the low leverage clearly shows no fear of a shakeout.
With the NU7 upgrade coming next week, the clustered shorts in the market are most likely ready fuel, ready to be squeezed out by this dual-line push at any time.
#ZEC
$ZEC
👇$ARB
Scaling networks have cheap transactions, so why might the token valuation still lag behind usage?
Between network usage and token value capture, there are fee distribution, governance rights, and supply changes in between. Judging ARB cannot be based solely on transaction count.
If the increase in activity mainly comes from subsidies, retention after subsidies end becomes critical; if real fees and sustained users improve in sync, usage growth is more solid. If the network is busy but no explainable token demand forms, I would remain cautious about the valuation.Midterm election voting has ended; will the US-Iran situation still develop in a positive direction? Simply looking at the current dynamics of the US-Iran situation, there is a major premise: the US midterm elections finished voting at 8 a.m. today, so the idea that Trump would promote US-Iran peace talks to boost votes can basically be dismissed! During the negotiations, the Strait of Hormuz in Iran was suspected of being attacked, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard continues to attack cargo ships—why is this? #美伊谈判未突破，油价为何单日跌逾7%？ It's very simple: whether in the US or Iran, domestically or within the military, the hardline hawks prevail. Before a final agreement is reached and before orders from the top levels of government to restrain them, the military hardliners will proactively launch attacks under the pretexts of "defensive" or "regulatory" actions. This also indicates that strong hardline pressures exist domestically in both the US and Iran. What is the attitude of the US and Iran toward the Qatar agreement draft? Iran responded first with a tough stance, stating that the negotiations are not optimistic. The core threshold remains who acts first; Iran believes the US should first meet Iran's conditions before Iran can fulfill the agreement. On the US side, according to (rumors), on November 3, Forum Express cited sources from Qatar media Al-Araby Al-Jadeed saying the US has accepted a memorandum of understanding draft submitted by Qatar, and Saudi Arabia and the UAE have also been informed; the draft involves concessions on Iran's nuclear issue and partial release of frozen assets. Currently, Iran remains tough (which may also serve its domestic political direction), and non-mainstream media are also releasing$FIL FIL's actual daily storage revenue is only 4 yuan, yet its valuation is still hanging in the tens of billions.
This mechanism is so bizarre. Miners can't directly use the tokens they mine to pay for electricity or hardware costs; the first thing they do after receiving them is to dump them on the secondary market to exchange for fiat.
The more actively the business runs, the heavier the selling pressure from dumping to realize cash.
On the market, smart money shorts have pushed their positions up to $12 million, firmly holding the bulls halfway up the mountain.
In this kind of situation where it's just bleeding without any buying support, what can cause a rebound?
#FIL
$FIL
👇What’s most worth watching today isn’t $BTC’s sideways movement, but a structural misalignment behind an 18% single-day surge: Yushu’s circulating supply is almost equal to Changxin Storage’s, with no new unlocked tokens in the short term for either. However, since listing, the former has dropped 60%, squeezing short-selling sentiment to the extreme; the latter, dragged down by the AI narrative, has been consolidating at a high level, with a wave of unlocking scheduled for early next year. This contrast is the real anchor point for the long-short combination. My trading logic is straightforward: go long on Yushu while shorting an equivalent amount of Changxin Storage, similar to buying Tesla and shorting SpaceX—not betting on direction, but on the asymmetry of “sentiment elasticity” between the two assets. Yushu’s shorts have little room left to push down; the 60% drop has washed out most panic selling, so any marginal buying can trigger a sharp rebound, as evidenced by today’s 18% gain. Changxin, on the other hand, is the opposite: high-level consolidation means profit-taking hasn’t occurred, unlocking expectations hang like a sword overhead, and any AI sector pullback drags it down passively, making the short logic smoother. The key lies in capital efficiency. This hedging structure can be leveraged several times, with margins on both sides offsetting each other, occupying far less capital than a naked long position. When Yushu rebounds, the long side captures full elasticity; when Changxin falls, the short side adds to gains, contributing returns from both directions. Today’s Yushu rally means the overall portfolio is in positive feedback. Most people only see Yushu’s 18% rise and chase higher, ignoring the equal circulating supply relationship between it and Changxin—that’s the root of the pricing misalignment. When two assets have similar token structures but vastly different sentiment positions, the probability of price convergence is much higher than a one-sided move Order Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After amplifying orders for both tokens, slippage for both buying and selling increased significantly, with $AKE showing the highest simulated slippage at the 100,000 scale.
$AKE simulated slippage for 10,000 scale buy/sell is 0.26%/0.29%, and for 100,000 scale is 1.24%/1.19%. After amplifying orders, slippage on both entry and exit sides increased noticeably.
$AXIS simulated slippage for 10,000 scale buy/sell is 0.22%/0.22%, and for 100,000 scale is 0.98%/0.95%. This is a cost table, not a direction; simultaneous increase in cost on both buy and sell sides indicates overall shallow depth.There is a pretty important change in US regulation today 👀
CFTC has officially approved single-stock perpetual futures, and qualified US registered trading venues can now launch these products
I think this is worth discussing from Hyperliquid's perspective:
In the past, perpetual contracts were mainly active in the crypto market, and Hyperliquid further expanded this trading model to stocks and other traditional assets
Now US regulators are also starting to allow single-stock perpetual contracts into the domestic market
This indicates that perpetual contracts are gradually breaking through the boundaries of the crypto market
But for $HYPE, things are not that simple 🤨
On one hand, the product model has gained regulatory approval, and the entire market may continue to expand
On the other hand, compliant domestic US exchanges may also enter this field, making future competition even more intense
What I’m more concerned about is whether traditional financial institutions will choose to build their own trading venues or continue to use on-chain infrastructure
This might be more worth studying than short-term price fluctuations
#CFTC首次放行美国个股永续期货 I have been saying before that there is a major negative overhang in the crypto space: Trump is very likely to lose his influence in the midterm elections, and then the US will tighten policies on the crypto industry. So I am waiting for this dip to buy the dip. Today, the results of the midterm elections are gradually coming out, so let's talk about the subsequent trend of $BTC: Before discussing the trend, let me first explain what the midterm elections are about and what it means for Trump to lose influence, so it will be easier to discuss the price movements later. 1. Trump losing influence will bring panic to the crypto space This midterm election is for electing members of Congress. Since it happens in the middle of Trump's 4-year term, it is called the midterm election. This time, the seats up for election are 435 in the House of Representatives and 35 in the Senate. The House has a total of 435 members, each serving a 2-year term, so all seats are up for election this time; the Senate has 100 members, each serving a 4-year term, and 35 seats are up for election this time. In the US, there is a separation of powers: Congress (Senate + House) controls the budget, legislation, personnel approval, and oversight/impeachment; the President controls the executive and military; the courts handle the judiciary. Trump is a Republican. Before the midterm elections, the Republicans held the advantage in Congress: Senate Republicans to Democrats = 218 : 214 (plus 1 independent, 2 vacancies); House Republicans to Democrats = 53 : 45 (plus 2 independents). But in this midterm election, many people are dissatisfied with Trump (for example, the Iran war has caused living costs to riseGrinding for three days! Bulls and bears confront each other, quietly waiting for the first breakthrough ⚔️
Early market check: $BTC has returned to oscillate around 77,000, the previous momentum from 76,300 to 78,000 has already faded.
Market polarization: ETF outflows hit 643 million in a single day, a new high for June; Strategy continues to increase positions, acquiring another 811 BTC, holdings approaching 850,000 BTC, bulls and bears locked in a fierce battle.
The market is waiting for a catalyst: midterm elections or the fallout from Binance withdrawal issues. Withdrawal panic has eased, but funds remain cautious and hesitant to enter.
Indicators are nearing oversold, but that doesn’t mean an immediate rebound. Long-term chips are locked up, exchange inventories are low, those who wanted to sell have basically exited, purely grinding for direction.
This week’s lifeline is 76,000. Non-farm payrolls are key: only if data disappoints is there a chance for a rebound; if support breaks, look down to 73,000.
At this stage, control your hands, watch more and act less, don’t rush to bottom-fish, and don’t chase shorts.Based on the disclosed $2.51 million scale, the largest single liquidation of about $1.13 million accounts for approximately 45%; the total amount is marked as "at least," so the actual proportion could be even lower. What concerns me most is this concentration: a series of liquidation records looks lively, but the impact of large positions on the amount may be greater than the number of trades, so it cannot be directly interpreted as a widespread short squeeze failure.
① In the past hour, OKEx ETH USDT perpetual contracts recorded a total of 100 liquidations, with the largest single liquidation around $1.13 million. The number of liquidations does not equal the number of traders, nor does it imply similar position sizes; I would not interpret this as 100 independent players all misjudging the market direction simultaneously.
② Short positions account for 100% of the liquidation amount, with long positions approximately zero. This indicates the direction of forced exits within this window but does not reveal how much buying interest exists off-exchange, nor does it directly prove that the upward trend can continue.
③ This data only covers the past hour and comes from OKEx's public liquidation records. From another perspective, the shorter the window, the more easily a single large liquidation record can skew perception. Using this to judge a sustained trend, I think the evidence is insufficient.
My judgment is that this looks more like a signal of a localized leverage squeeze rather than proof that the trend has been confirmed. If subsequent liquidation amounts decline and the price remains strong, I will raise my evaluation of this rally. First distinguishing between forced liquidations and active demand is a reminder I give myself.#Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？
八格牙路Bitcoin is often said to have patterns like: a sharp drop in September and a sharp rise in October, even National Day rallies, Christmas rallies, and Spring Festival rallies. Essentially, these are cyclical patterns that try to find a fixed rule in a changing environment. Historical data does show tendencies, but they are extremely fragile. It looks like there is "seasonality," but statistically it is not significant. The sample size is too small (only once per year), and the volatility is too large. Randomly shuffling and rearranging the month labels many times often produces the illusion of "a particular month being especially strong." Academic research on the cryptocurrency market also repeatedly points out that the monthly effects in crypto are not robust. More importantly, these patterns have started to fail in the last two years: • October 2025: -3.9% • October 2026: about -7.3% (two consecutive years of a red October, a first in recent years) • September 2026 actually rose about +6.4%, breaking the inertia of "September must be weak." When market structures change (spot ETFs, institutional funds, macro interest rate environment, leverage liquidation mechanisms), the old calendar effects naturally become distorted. Why are these "rallies" especially prone to mythologizing? 1. Survivorship bias + narrative demand Market participants naturally like simple, shareable stories. "Uptober," "Black September" are easy to remember, easy to chant, easy to tweet, so they get constantly reinforced. Truly failing years are selectively ignored. 2. Confusing correlation with causation Past Q4 strength may just be a coincidence of overlapping factors like halving cycles, liquidity easing, year-end fund reallocation, rather than "because"To pour some cold water first, I do not agree with directly translating this message as "completely bearish for crypto." According to Cointelegraph, the Democrats claim to have gained control of the U.S. Senate, which could change the advancement path of the CLARITY Act, reshape committee leadership, and subject Trump's crypto business to stricter scrutiny. Here it is a "claim," not all changes have been implemented yet. What I am bearish on is the policy fulfillment expectations, not just seeing the word Democrat and turning bearish.
I have two concerns: if the committee leadership changes, the bill's scheduling and negotiation priorities may shift, and the sentiment betting on quick regulatory clarity could be disappointed; if scrutiny focuses on Trump's crypto business, political controversies might crowd out legislative attention. But scrutiny targeting specific businesses does not mean the entire industry will face tighter regulation, which is also a common market misinterpretation.
Of course, the bulls could also be right. If there is a clear bipartisan advancement plan later and the CLARITY Act does not stall due to the power shift, I will withdraw my concerns about delays in the process. Don't rush to get excited, nor panic prematurely. What I will be watching next is the committee arrangements and substantive progress of the bill, not the partisan wins or losses in the headlines.$ETH
The ETF had a net outflow of 85.34 million yesterday, marking the seventh consecutive day.
The price didn't follow this trend. At 11 o'clock, the 1H candle dropped to 2225.01, which was the 24-hour low, with a volume of 2.62 million contracts. The next hour saw 2.57 million contracts, rising from 2248 all the way to 2285.85, closing at 2279. Two candles with the same volume, one pushing down and the other pulling back up.
Currently at 2278.5, up 1.35% in 24 hours. Open interest is 1.42 billion, slightly down from 1.43 billion earlier this morning. The fee rate is +0.0088%, longs are still paying.
My view: The seven days of ETF selling pressure was absorbed by a single bullish candle of equal volume on the contract side, but after absorption, leverage did not increase, and open interest actually decreased. This is not a reversal, only a partial digestion of selling pressure. For a real upward move, we need to see open interest rise along with price.
It hasn't increased.
#美国中期选举进入计票阶段，国会控制权将如何变化？ I never understood it—how could people still be buying when prices have dropped so much?
Then I realized clearly: the people spending money here don’t even look at K-line charts. Tether holds a Bitcoin reserve of 150,000 coins, valued at $11.5 billion, bought up in October. BitMNR is even more aggressive, accumulating 6.06 million $ETH over a year and a half, locked in at an average price of 3329, and just added 5,000 more on Kraken a few days ago.
One relies on US Treasury interest behind stablecoins, the other on mining farm cash flow—money is coming in every day, so not buying feels worse.
So when they drop, it’s called a discount; when I drop, it’s called being trapped. Same price level, two different lives.There is something quite counterintuitive: the market is falling, but the wealthiest group is increasing their positions, and doing so very calmly.
Tether's Bitcoin reserve has risen to 150,000 coins, with a market value of $11.5 billion, making large purchases in October. BitMNR bought another 5,000 $ETH on Kraken, accumulating 6.06 million coins over a year and a half, worth over $20 billion, at an average price of $3,329.
These two have one thing in common: the money used to buy coins does not come from the crypto circle. One relies on the interest spread behind stablecoins and U.S. Treasury bonds, the other on mining machines and electricity costs. Both have cash flow from their main business daily, unrelated to market ups and downs.
This explains a question many find puzzling—why, after such a long decline, the bottom is still being supported. The support is not from bottom-fishing traders, but from allocation investors.
My own feeling is that this type of buying has almost no reference value for short-term trading. They can endure a 50% drop or wait three years; their pace is completely different. But it is indeed changing one thing: the circulating supply of $BTC and $ETH is thinning, with more and more coins lying dormant in cold wallets.
With fewer coins circulating, the market will be more volatile—stronger on the way up, and more fragile on the way down. This is neither bullish nor bearish; it is a structural change.
What is worth pondering is: when the most stable buyers do not need to sell, who is deciding the price? Today the index didn't fall sharply, but the structure was severely torn apart.
The A-share Shanghai Composite Index only dropped 0.82%, but the ChiNext Index directly plunged 2.73%, and the STAR 50 was even worse, down 3.81%. Trading volume shrank to 1.7 trillion, 80.3 billion less than yesterday. The electronics sector saw a net outflow of 21 billion in one day, communications withdrew another 9.3 billion, and computing hardware was crushed to the ground. On the other hand, the new energy sector attracted 2.5 billion against the trend, the battery sector rebounded in the afternoon, Huangtai Liquor had a 4-day limit-up, AI comic producers Dasheng Culture and Longban Media had 3-day limit-ups, and physical AI company Suochen Technology also touched 20cm. Money squeezed out from the most crowded tech hardware moved to low-position themes and defensive directions.
U.S. stocks also went their separate ways last night. The Nasdaq rose 0.83%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rebounded 2.64%, SanDisk rose over 4%, Broadcom and AMD rose over 3%, and Nvidia rose 2.26%. But Apple fell 1.97%, Tesla fell 1.32%, and the Dow was dragged into the red. Those buying chips and those buying Apple did not have the same trading day.
$BTC hovered around 77,000, with 338 million liquidated across the network in 24 hours, longs accounting for 265 million, and $ETH liquidated 48 million. The fear and greed index stayed at 33, ETFs ran over 800 million USD in six days, with BlackRock alone redeeming over 200 million. But on-chain whales reversed and added 303,000 coins, the fastest increase since February. Those in suits are redeeming, those holding cold wallets are picking up coins.
Money hasn't gone far, it's just changing seats, and changing seats is when it's easiest to get hit from both sides. When I look at this kind of order, I usually divide the position size by the leverage first, then calculate how much tuition fee you have to pay if the price moves against you a bit. A large number doesn't equal strong confidence; how much room to retreat you have is the real account.
This time, two wallets used 10x leverage to go long on $ZEC within a short period, with a combined nominal position of about $434,400. Roughly calculating by leverage, the initial margin is about $43,400. If the price moves 3% against them, the unrealized loss is about $13,000, which is about 30% of this initial margin, excluding fees and not representing the overall account loss ratio.
My judgment is: the direction has some agreement, but it's not yet stable. Two wallets moving in the same direction doesn't mean there are two independent bases; leverage amplifies the cost of trial and error; the data also doesn't show stop-loss or other account positions, so it's unclear how much they can withstand. I would choose to be cautious and not chase in based on this tip. Observing whether both sides reduce positions quickly next is more useful than just watching the opening position amount.#Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？ Circle's profit core relies on USDC reserve interest income. Growth in stablecoin circulation does not equal simultaneous profit realization. Incremental earnings are largely shared with channel partners, and combined with interest rate cuts lowering reserve yields, this erodes the interest margin. The key points of this earnings report are the USDC circulation scale, on-chain payments, and AI intelligent agent scenario implementation. In the short term, if circulation steadily rises and channel risk control improves, performance will be resilient; however, the interest rate cut cycle, tightening regulation, and USDT competition are all suppressive factors. A mere surge in trading volume is difficult to convert into profit; it is necessary to look at retained funds and fee optimization. Overall expectations are cautious, and growth realization is challenging.The CFTC clearance gives single-stock perps a regulated route, but the same-day lawsuit shows that classification remains the central constraint. Cash settlement and no expiry may appeal to traders seeking continuous exposure; scaling will depend on whether exchanges can fit that demand into an already crowded equity-derivatives market.
#CFTCSingleStockPerps $WLD WLD is stuck tightly below the 0.59 resistance level, with no decent pullback drop at all, all swallowed up by the buying pressure underneath.
Bears are now all clustered above this position with stop losses.
This dull knife-cutting loss pattern on the chart means that as soon as some volume comes in to break through 0.59, all the compressed short orders above will instantly turn into buy orders, triggering a chain reaction of forced liquidations and a stampede rally in minutes.
#WLD
$WLD
👇ETH perpetual current price 2246.16, total smart money traders 2,639, total open interest 2.02B, nominal long-short ratio 24.05%.
There are 879 long traders holding 393.20M, average entry price 2824.27, unrealized loss about 101 million USD, profit ratio only 24.23%, deeply trapped at high levels, difficult to actively push upward in the short term.
There are 1,760 short traders holding 1.63B, average entry price 2236.75, current price slightly rising, shorts also experiencing unrealized loss, unrealized loss 6.84 million USD, profit ratio 67.67%.
Short positions are significantly larger than long positions, but with the current slight price increase, shorts are under considerable pressure; long costs are much higher than the current price, making it very difficult to break even. Both smart money longs and shorts are simultaneously in loss, with no side having a crushing advantage. Consistent with BTC market rhythm, short-term market fluctuates repeatedly, with spike washouts continuously consuming leveraged funds, and blind chasing orders are easily stopped out. It is necessary to wait for the price to effectively break through key liquidity zones before a clear trend can emerge. The most heartbreaking thing about Apple's earnings report isn't poor performance, but that it performed well and still got hammered.
Revenue was 114.5 billion, up 12% year-over-year, iPhone up 17%, all exceeding expectations. However, the next quarter's gross margin guidance is 45%–46%, down from the recently reported 47.9%. New CEO Ternus directly said that memory price increases are "unprecedented." After-hours, the stock dropped more than 4%, and on Tuesday, the main stock closed down 1.9%.
My view: demand is not the problem; the problem is cost, and no one can solve that in the short term. The perpetual is now around 331, with 322 below as yesterday's low, and 345 above as the pre-earnings report level. Until it returns to 345, I consider it still digesting.
Do you think "a good company being wrongly punished" is an opportunity, or is the memory price increase just beginning?
$AAPL $MU
#USStocks #Earnings #Apple
Personal observation, not investment adviceThis morning's drop and rebound have only one cause: oil prices.
BTC fell from 78,063 last night to 75,736 this morning, a 3.0% drop.
The lowest hour saw $135 million in trading volume, the largest in two days.
Then it pulled back to 77,420 within an hour.
It’s not just BTC that fell.
Nasdaq futures at 27,700, down 2.14%.
S&P futures −1.24%, Dow futures −0.81%.
(U.S. stock market spot hasn’t opened yet.)
Why the drop? Look at oil.
The U.S.-Iran conflict escalates, Brent at $102.97, WTI at $95.31.
Goldman Sachs raised its December Brent forecast from 90 to 105.
At this level, inflation won’t come down.
If inflation doesn’t come down, don’t expect rate cuts; hikes might even be necessary.
So what’s being hit isn’t the economy, but valuations.
Why the rebound? Still look at oil.
On November 3, Trump told the Financial Times there’s no plan for an immediate strike on Iran.
After this statement, oil prices reversed from rising to falling.
The source of panic was oil; once oil turned, the panic disappeared.
At first glance, I thought this was uncertainty about the election, but after reviewing the timeline, I realized the main cause was the war premium.
This rebound doesn’t look like "bottom-fishing capital entering," but more like "bad news disproved by a single statement."
There’s a big difference: the former requires new buying, the latter just needs no one selling anymore.
Do you think we should focus on oil prices next, or on the election vote count?
$BTC ETH plays a role in transaction fees, staking and network security.
But there's a catch here too. More activity on Ethereum doesn't necessarily translate into proportional value accruing to ETH, especially as Layer 2 networks make transactions cheaper.
For the next decade, I'm more interested in two questions:
$BTC: How much global wealth will eventually find its way into Bitcoin?
$ETH: How much economic value generated across the Ethereum ecosystem will actually accrue to ETH?Today's market, the most striking thing isn't the drop, but the two sides slapping each other.
The A-share Shanghai Composite Index only lost 0.82%, the STAR Market Composite Index plunged 4.78%, and the electronics sector saw a net outflow of over 8 billion yuan in one day. But the power equipment sector absorbed over 6 billion yuan, food and beverage took in over 4 billion yuan, Huangtai Liquor had a 4-day winning streak, Maotai rose against the market trend, with a net inflow of over 6 billion yuan in five days. AI animation companies Dasheng Culture and Zhejiang Film Industry had a 3-day winning streak, with the highest order book at over 2 million lots; short drama users grew from 10 million to 400 million in less than three years. Semiconductor equipment is rising, but computing hardware is falling; Zhongji Xuchuang and Tianfu Communications turned green, money moved from the most crowded end to places no one is fighting for.
The US stock market was also split last night: the Nasdaq rose 0.83%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rebounded 2.64%, SanDisk rose over 4%, Broadcom and AMD rose over 3%. But Apple fell 1.97%, Tesla fell 1.32%, and the Dow Jones closed down. Those buying chips and those buying Apple did not have the same trading day.
$BTC touched 76,500 and was pulled back again; the fear index dropped eleven points in one day, directly down to 26. ETFs ran over 800 million USD in six days, with BlackRock alone redeeming 400 million, but on-chain whales reversed and increased holdings to 3.03 million coins, the strongest accumulation since February. On the $ETH side, an address also spent 37 million USD in five hours to buy, at an average price of 2,279, and hasn't stopped.
Those in suits are cutting, those with cold wallets are picking up; the money hasn't run away, it's just musical chairs.As analyzed earlier, after the rebound to 78830, it turned down to test 74909. This move has already played out, with 75690 completing the first test. What’s next? The second test at 74909! As for whether it will break through, it's a 50-50 chance. The midterm election outcome is settled, whether the US and Iran will still fight, the non-farm payroll data on the 6th, and whether there will be a rate hike in December are all variables. So, it’s not time to get overly bullish yet; contracts around BTC 76000 can be entered with a small position.The midterm elections are expected to cause another dip in the market, but it won't fall too much. After this event passes, the market will start to form a bottom.
In the past three Bitcoin cycles, the bottom appeared after the US midterm elections: 71 days after in 2014, 39 days after in 2018, and 13 days after in 2022.
If this pattern repeats, the time window for Bitcoin's next cycle bottom could be from the end of 2026 to early 2027.
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $BTC 🔥BTC has rebounded as expected, reaching around 78000 as I mentioned yesterday. What’s next, up or down?
Yesterday I posted a warning that there were too many short positions below 78000, which is the easiest situation for a rebound.
🔺 If the rebound is weak and ends around 78000, it’s because many short positions are there, forcing a short squeeze to stop losses, then it can’t go higher.
🔺 If the rebound is stronger, it will try to reach the liquidity above 79000, but the rebound was too weak and couldn’t go beyond 78000.
So what happens next?
First, the bulls are still relatively weak and haven’t reached the liquidity near 79000. It can’t go higher from the short positions at 78000. The current price is around 77000, where there are no trading conditions. The price is stuck in a no-man’s land, so I suggest staying flat and waiting.
🔺 For going long, I consider it only after breaking below the parallel bottom at 76000 or the bottom at 75000, then showing a strong recovery, bullish divergence, or a large number of short positions.
🔺 For going short, I consider shorting near 78800, the parallel top, because there is liquidity above 78800 and a gap above 79000, making it a good shorting condition.
So I will be watching when the price reaches 78800 to take out the parallel top liquidity and fill the gap around 79200-79600.$BTC has now moved below $75,819, hitting the yellow support level.
Meanwhile, the long liquidation cluster around $75,000 has been significantly reduced.
Liquidity is getting cleared. How many more downside targets will price hit before we see a reaction?$ZEC has gone completely crazy, blinking and already hitting 1232 again!
Brothers, good afternoon, I am Siqing
Did you see the breaking news above? The whale openly bought spot and contracts to go long. The market maker is riding this wave, plus someone is stubbornly holding the bottom at 77300 on BTC, forcing the shorts to get squeezed hard.
No more nonsense, here’s what to do next:
For those wanting to short:
Don’t try to top pick now. Wait for it to surge up to 1240 - 1245 (near previous highs). If it can’t break through and closes with a long upper shadow, and BTC at 77500 also weakens, then flip to short directly. Set stop loss above 1250, take a small pullback and exit.
For those wanting to go long:
Don’t chase at 1232 now, the deviation is too large, entering now means catching the falling knife. Wait patiently for a pullback. If it can hold steady around 1205 - 1210, showing a stabilization signal on the right side, then get on board to go long. If it breaks down below 1200 with heavy volume, don’t go long, follow the shorts.
This market is too wild, hold your USDT tight, don’t get greedy, don’t shoot the eagle without seeing the rabbit. Wait for it to reveal its flaws before acting!
⚠️ Personal operation, don’t blindly follow.
👇 Brothers, did you follow this whale’s open buy to pump the market? 🍵$SUI
On-chain funds increase: how to distinguish between genuine adoption and short-term parking?
Cross-platform migration can change on-chain balances, but an increase in balance does not mean users are willing to use the application long-term. The key is whether the funds enter continuous settlement, lending, and consumption scenarios.
If the scale of funds increases but usage frequency does not improve, it should first be regarded as liquidity migration; if new address retention and application revenue both rise simultaneously, then the judgment of ecological expansion is strengthened. The usage situation after subsidy withdrawal is especially important.Something's wrong, this world is really crazy as hell. Someone borrowed $140 million just to squeeze out 110,000 from a small vault 😂
This morning, something exploded on-chain. On BNB Chain, there's a small project called CoreVault, with an InsurancePool next to it, originally meant as an insurance pool to cover depositors.
The attacker first used a flash loan to borrow about $143.6 million worth of WBNB, then used this money to make large swaps in the pool, forcibly crashing the price. The contract redemption was based on this spot price, so the amount that should have been compensated was amplified about 33 times. The insurance pool spat out 260.21 BNB at once, worth about $180,000 at the time.
Then he swapped those tokens back the same way, repaid the flash loan with interest, all done in one transaction. After costs, he netted about 160.26 BNB, roughly $110,000, gas fees not included.
The insurance pool lost even more, with a net outflow close to $180,000. It's called insurance, but in the end, it became someone else's ATM, quite ironic.
The $140 million principal was in his hands for only a few seconds: borrowed, crashed the price, withdrew money, repaid the loan, barely spending any of his own money. Using a price that can be easily manipulated as a quote—this kind of trap happens to projects every now and then. Watching this really makes you feel sorry for the people who deposited their money.
For beginners, it's recommended to watch more and trade less; when buying coins, only buy $BTC The rally looks strong, but the data tells a different story.
$BTC saw $33.74M in short liquidations vs just $6.7M in longs, suggesting a short squeeze rather than genuine buying pressure.
$ETH showed the same pattern, with $34.87M in shorts wiped out. Forced buying pushed prices higher, but fresh spot demand remains unproven.
$CORE also showed how quickly a squeeze can reverse, wiping out both shorts and longs.
#USMidtermsCongressWatch "Ranking Match in a Low-Volume Market" (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
The midterm election vote counting is still ongoing, with data leaning towards the Democrats, but at this point in the market, direction is not the hardest part; the challenge is how to position your holdings. In a low-volume environment, strength and weakness matter more than price moves (￣▽￣)
$BTC has been grinding between 76387 and 78064 over 24 hours, with only 10,516 coins traded, a fear-greed index of 34, sentiment recovering, but funds reluctant to chase. It acts like a ballast stone—stable but temporarily lacking elasticity. Allocate 60% in the portfolio, keep the rest waiting for election-related negative news to unfold before moving (｡•́︿•̀｡)
$ETH ranks second. ETH/BTC has risen to 0.0294, outperforming by nearly half a percent in a day; staking queues are congested, exit queues bearish, chips are locked up, making it more suitable for an elastic position (๑•́ ₃ •̀๑)
$ZEC is the most independent. It bounced off around 1250 and still holds 1200; governance turmoil caused nearly 100,000 coins to exit free circulation, tightening supply. 1200 is the lifeline—no break, no move (ง •̀_•́)ง
The rule in a low-volume market is straightforward: the strong don’t necessarily rise immediately, the weak often fall behind first. Arrange your seating well, then leave the rest to patience～ (´▽｀)ノ♪
#美国中期选举进入计票阶段，国会控制权将如何变化？ Reviewing $ETH, I just got off yesterday
Today I bought back nearly $40 cheaper at a cost of 2257
The intraday low was 2225
Previous low was 2237
Once broken, it breaks
I thought breaking the level would take a long time before there was a chance to buy the dip
But the market returned the position in half a day
It’s really scary that it broke below the previous low, even lower than where I sold yesterday
A 15-minute candle released the largest volume of the session
Before the price even landed, I started buying
After buying, it kept dropping
Dropped to 2225 before stopping, now the 15-minute candle has already bounced back
The unrealized profit isn’t much but the direction is right
If the bulls don’t leave at this position, I won’t mess around
Hold when you should hold
Stop loss when you should stop loss
Set the stop loss just below the 2225 spike
Preserve the position first, then talk
The most satisfying moment in trading
Is not catching the absolute bottom
But when you personally sold yesterday’s position
And today the market gives it back to you at a discount