Orbit Post Sitemap
Before $AMZN's earnings report on Thursday, how will AWS growth and AI infrastructure spending be balanced? Cloud business expansion is expected to drive long-term revenue, but data center investments will initially pressure cash flow, and the market is questioning the return cycle. High interest rates make financing and depreciation costs more sensitive. If AWS growth accelerates and free cash flow improves, capital expenditures can be accepted; if spending rises and margins are pressured, I will downgrade my assessment of AI investment.#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？
SK Hynix will announce its Q3 2026 earnings before 8 AM Beijing time on October 28, with the official conference call starting at 8 AM. The results are very close, and I am optimistic that SK Hynix ($SKHY) will exceed expectations this quarter!
My optimism is not just based on the AI hype, but because SK Hynix is in the most direct beneficiary position of this AI computing power expansion cycle. AI servers' demand for high-bandwidth memory HBM continues to grow, while prices for traditional DRAM and NAND are also rising. With both demand and prices pushing up, revenue growth is more easily converted into profit growth.
Looking at market expectations, analysts currently forecast SK Hynix's operating profit for Q3 to be around 77 trillion KRW, with revenue close to 99 trillion KRW. Compared to Q2's approximately 79.32 trillion KRW revenue and 60.54 trillion KRW operating profit, the market is already expecting a significantly accelerated quarter. As long as HBM shipments and storage prices perform better than expected, there is room for profits to continue climbing.
Another point worth noting is that the company will also announce shareholder return measures this time. The combination of fundamental growth and potential shareholder return benefits may further strengthen market confidence in the company's profitability and cash flow. Looking forward to SK Hynix delivering the results!
$SKHYNIX $xSKHY Brothers, the real thing to watch out for in this week's Federal Reserve meeting is not whether they raise rates, but whether there will be a sudden shift in December.
The market is now focused on the October rate decision, but I am more concerned about three things afterward:
1. No rate hike in October does not mean safety later.
Even if the Fed holds rates steady this time, it doesn't mean good news. Officials still disagree internally on inflation and rate paths. If the statement and press conference keep emphasizing inflation risks, the market will have to reassess the possibility of a rate hike in December.
2. GDP and PCE are the real tests.
If the US economy continues to grow strongly but inflation stubbornly remains high, the Fed has no reason to rush to cut rates and might even reconsider raising them. A strong economy combined with persistent inflation is the toughest scenario for the market.
3. December expectations are the key to the next market moves.
The market has already started pricing in the risk of a December rate hike. If expectations continue to rise, the dollar and US Treasury yields may get support, putting more pressure on risk assets like BTC and ETH, and gold may not easily rally either.
My view is simple: don’t rush to see the October no-hike as a positive.
The focus now is on what the Fed says and how economic and inflation data evolve. If December rate hike expectations keep rising, the crypto market’s current rebound should be approached with caution. What really determines the market direction may not be whether rates change this time, but whether the market suddenly realizes that high rates will be maintained longer.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 20261027
7. When you see institutions buying, don't rush to jump in; DWF Labs analyzed 694 days and concluded straightforwardly: these institutions are chasing highs and selling lows
1. In 8 major drops, they sold 7 times; in 9 major rises, they bought 9 times. They run fast when prices fall and chase even faster when prices rise
2. A very typical case: In April 2025, Bitcoin rebounded 9.7%. Institutions kept withdrawing money daily, $40 million; only after the price stabilized did they start rushing in with $436 million per day
3. Among the 8 major drops, 5 times they specifically cut losses in the last 5 days before the bottom, choosing the cheapest moments to exit
4. Can institutional buying be taken as a buy signal? The answer is no
5. In the 20 days after large purchases, Bitcoin's probability of rising is only 51%, even lower than the usual 57%
6. Remember: institutions buying is not a buy signal; rather, be a bit cautious
7. There's an even stranger phenomenon: institutions keep withdrawing money, but Bitcoin's rate of decline has slowed. The daily drop rate fell from 1.37% in 2021 to 0.69%. Major drops over 15% decreased from 8 times a year to 2.9 times
8. The more aggressively money is withdrawn, the lighter the coin's drop. This question currently has no solution
8. Has the program originally released by Satoshi Nakamoto been recreated by AI?
1. The thing Satoshi Nakamoto wrote and sent to the world to get Bitcoin running, for the following 17 years, everyone only had its snapshot; no one could recreate an identical one. The file is like printing money, the mold is slightly different#Strategy Earnings Preview: BTC Book Gains Rebound Sharply Latest news, Strategy will release its Q3 earnings after the U.S. market close on October 29. The most explosive figure is that its fair value gains on digital assets this quarter are expected to reach $20.9 billion! It currently holds tightly about 848,000 BTC. Interestingly, it hasn't been making large-scale purchases recently; instead, it spent $176 million to buy back its preferred shares. Influenced by this news, tokenized MSTR and xMSTR on the market dipped about 1.8%. Personal view from Xiao Ma: This $20.9 billion gain looks impressive, but folks need to understand this is "book wealth," a paper profit brought by accounting standards, not actual cash earned from business operations. Can Wall Street pros not see this? So a slight stock dip is normal. More importantly, it has slowed down buying coins recently and turned to buy back preferred shares, indicating a shift in its strategic focus. It needs to stabilize its off-exchange financing and reduce leverage costs; otherwise, interest on borrowed money could crush it. It's like a gambler who just won a big pile of chips at the table—his top priority now isn't to keep betting but to use some chips to pay off high-interest loans at the table to ensure he can leave alive. Impact: In the short term, Strategy's earnings release will be a huge sentiment amplifier. Its stock price is now highly correlated with Bitcoin, and even Wall Street's target prices follow suit.$ENA
Ethena highlights a different side of stablecoin growth: the design of the yield and collateral system behind the dollar peg. Growth in circulating supply can indicate demand, but it also raises questions about collateral quality, hedging execution, counterparty exposure, and redemption conditions. ENA analysis should distinguish ecosystem expansion from risk reduction, because a larger system is not automatically a more resilient one.$HYPE
For Hyperliquid, trading activity is only one part of the performance story. Market participants should also examine liquidity depth, execution quality during volatility, open interest, and how much activity persists beyond speculative bursts. HYPE’s connection to an active trading ecosystem gives it a distinct market narrative, but derivatives volume can fluctuate quickly. Durable usage matters more than a single record-breaking session.📋 Pricing the day before the decision:
Traders price about a 90.6% probability that the interest rate will remain unchanged on October 28 (CoinGecko, Analytics Insight cited)
Federal funds rate target: 3.75% to 4.00%, after the 25 basis point hike effective September 17 (altii)
About 9.4% left for other outcomes (my own calculation)
🔥 The hold is mostly priced in, so market reaction may depend on the wording rather than the decision itself
📅 October 28: Federal Reserve decision
Probabilities change hourly, different tools show different readings, so only rough comparisons can be made. I can't judge how the market will react and might be wrong.
📍 Reference levels: BTC $80,000 / ETH $2,300
If the hold is already priced in, what will drive the crypto market?
$BTC $XAUT $OKB $ETH $ZEC #CanBTCHold80K #OctFOMCDecisionThisWeek $ETH $ZEC $ETH Ethereum Foundation-associated wallet's ETH, the numbers are really precise.
On October 26 from 10:15 to 11:09 AM, it sold 2,785 tokens in 5 transactions on CoW Swap, at an average price of about $2,304 each. On-chain records show this wallet received about 17,785 ETH between August 16–19, 2025, when ETH was around $4,300–4,440, and then it remained untouched for 14 months.
17,785 − 2,785 = 15,000, exactly a whole number left after selling.
Is this selling a small portion according to plan, or the start of the next batch? These 15,000 tokens are worth watching.$ZEC
Zcash raises an important question for crypto adoption: how much demand exists for financial privacy when transparency is the default? Its shielded transaction technology offers a distinct use case, but adoption depends on usability, wallet support, liquidity, and regulatory constraints. ZEC’s development is worth evaluating through actual privacy-feature usage rather than treating privacy narratives alone as proof of lasting demand.This week, the total Bitcoin transfer amount was $5.5 billion.
The fees miners received: 185,000.
It's not that they got ripped off.
Miners don't rely on fees to make a living; they rely on the new coins the system gives for free.
That means what they actually get are new Bitcoins.
The fees are less than 1% of their income.
The biggest problem is in 2028: the new coins given for free will be halved.
Fees won't make up the difference, so miners will have to shut down.
When miners shut down, all transfers get stuck, and Bitcoin essentially comes to a halt.
To put it simply:
What miners earn is the coin price minus electricity costs.
If the margin exists, they keep mining; if not, they shut down.
So the real bottom price of the coin isn't shouted out by anyone,
it's the miners' electricity bills.After stocks and crypto can be placed in the same account for perpetual contracts, my habit of watching the market has changed: I used to only watch crypto, now I have to first distinguish whether the position I hold follows stock logic or crypto logic. Let me give some background first. This month, perpetual contracts for stocks like Eli Lilly and Texas Instruments have been successively launched on OKX, and the number of stock underlyings is increasing. More underlyings don’t mean more opportunities, but more chances to miscalculate—because the volatility of stocks and crypto is fundamentally different. The first difference is the rhythm of news. Stocks have earnings seasons and pre-market/post-market news, with volatility often concentrated around earnings days; crypto trades 24/7 continuously with no close, and news can come at any time. Before trading stocks, I first check the earnings calendar; before trading crypto, I first check the news. Using crypto trading methods for stocks will miss earnings, the biggest source of volatility; using stock trading methods for crypto will underestimate the impact of a sudden news-driven K-line at midnight. The second difference is the illusion about leverage. Stock volatility is usually smaller than that of speculative crypto, which makes people think “stocks are stable, so I can use higher leverage.” But leverage depends not on the asset type but on the volatility itself. No matter how stable the asset, a sudden spike hurts just the same. Before increasing leverage, ask yourself: if there’s a sudden spike, how much will I lose? If you can’t answer, don’t increase leverage. The third difference is that positions must be calculated separately. Stock and crypto positions each have their own risk limits and cannot be mixed. If one side loses, don’t try to recover it from the other; if one side profits, don’t directly add that profit to the other side’s position. Two markets, two sets of books, mixing them together to calculate,When checking ETF fund flow numbers, I now always ask three questions first, without looking at the headline conclusion: Which trading day's numbers are these? Are they aggregated for the entire market, or just for one fund? After returning to the cumulative amount for the month, is it positive or negative? Comparing with today's data: on Monday, the total net inflow was $110 million, but it all came from IBIT; the cumulative net outflow for October is still about $202 million. Just reading the first sentence might make you think the funds have returned, but the third sentence reveals it's only a single-point inflow. Which step do you usually check first? $BTC does not constitute investment advice.Powell is very likely to perform the classic act again next week: on one hand, raising the bar for rate cuts extremely high, while privately watching the overnight reverse repurchase (RRP) exhaustion and the tightening liquidity of U.S. Treasuries with a gasp.
Currently, the market's expectation for a 25bp rate cut at the Fed's November FOMC meeting is basically locked in, but this 25bp is not the main point. The real hidden line lies in the turning point of the balance sheet (QT). If Powell slightly hints at slowing down the balance sheet reduction (QT Taper) during the press conference, or if there is an anomaly in the overnight rate indicator (SOFR), the liquidity premium of altcoins and the Crypto system will be instantly repriced.
For Crypto, everyone doesn't need to obsess over the obvious 25bp rate cut; the key is to watch two practical signals:
First, whether the reverse repo funding pool is completely depleted, forcing the Fed to start "implicit QE" to inject bank reserves; second, the speed of withdrawal of high-yield dollar carry trades after the rate cut. The liquidity released from this fund clearing is the real fuel to drive BTC surges and jumps in On-Chain capital scale.
Don't be fooled by the large funds playing dead on the surface every day; smart money is all waiting for the final liquidity inflection point of this rate hike cycle. Before the meeting, reduce leverage, focus on SOFR rates and the Fed's latest statements on reserve adequacy. Once the signal is confirmed, just watch which leading chain the funds flow into directly.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 To start with the result: The spot ETF had a net inflow of $110 million on Monday, but the price did not return to $80,000, remaining around $79,900. Some might say that the inflow signals a trend reversal, but I'll present a counterexample first: This $110 million all came from BlackRock IBIT alone, with a cumulative net outflow of about $202 million in October, while Ethereum ETFs had a net outflow of $89 million during the same period. A single-day inflow, a single fund, and a negative monthly total—these three points combined mean there is still no evidence of a trend reversal. How would you judge: by the single-day direction, or by the cumulative and structural data? $BTC $ETH This is not investment advice.When reading on-chain indicators, I first pass through three checkpoints before making a judgment. Checkpoint one: Definition — STH profit ratio is the proportion of short-term holders who are in a profitable state, currently about 70%, close to 100% at the end of September; don't rush to call a top just because of a high-level pullback. Checkpoint two: Comparison — placing the same indicator at the same position in the previous cycle; the absolute value of the position ratio is important. Checkpoint three: Invalidating conditions — if the inflow volume to exchanges simultaneously expands, it indicates selling pressure is being realized, so the conclusions from the first two checkpoints should be discounted. Method precedes conclusion. Do you usually set invalidating conditions first when looking at on-chain indicators? This does not constitute investment advice. Can $GOOGL's earnings tomorrow prove that AI has not eroded the search business model? Advertising monetization and cloud business are key points to watch. If AI product usage growth does not bring higher conversion, it may instead increase inference costs. The earnings report and FOMC meeting are on the same day, and macro discount rates will also amplify the reaction. If search revenue, cloud growth, and profit margins are all stable, concerns can be eased; if costs rise faster than monetization, I will turn cautious. [Pharaoh's Market Watch]
Why did Strategy suddenly hit the brakes, while Strive and BitMine stepped on the gas? What exactly is going on in this treasury circle?
Pharaoh says directly, this is called "Big Brother repairing the city walls, little brothers stockpiling provisions." Although their actions differ, their calculations are all precise.
First, look at Strategy, the "Big Brother." Last week, they didn’t buy a single BTC, holding steady at 847,700 coins. Seller turned around and spent $139 million to repurchase their own preferred shares. Why? Because the current stock price premium is gone, issuing new shares to buy coins would dilute shareholder value.
Now see how aggressive the little brothers are. Strive spent nearly $10 million last week, buying 122 BTC at an average price of $83,846, bringing total holdings to 7,514 BTC. BitMine is even more ruthless, with ETH holdings breaking through 6 million coins, accounting for nearly 5% of Ethereum’s total supply.
What does this mean for BTC? In the short term, the biggest "coin-buying machine" Strategy has hit the brakes, removing the most stable buying force from the market, causing BTC to linger around $79,000. In the long term, the treasury companies’ model is evolving—from "mindless buying" to "price-watching buying" and even "buyback support." Although buying has become more precise, the underlying logic remains unchanged—they still have a bullish outlook on BTC. $ETH $DOOD $SOL #Strategy暂停增持，Strive与BitMine扩大储备 The most crowded consensus in the market is often not about direction, but about timing. Many are currently eager to short $BTC, and their reasons sound plausible—the first phase of the bull market has dragged on for a long time, and a correction and consolidation are bound to come. But the real question is not "if it will fall," but "when it will fall." Between these two lies the distance of a monetary policy meeting. My judgment is clear: opening a short position now is betting against the upcoming event-driven rebound. The author’s suggested correction range is 72,000 to 76,000, which is not casually mentioned; it corresponds to a relatively deep shakeout in this round of the upward structure. But pay attention to the sequence of events—first comes the upward push after policy implementation, then the subsequent window worth shorting. If the order is wrong, even if the direction is right, you will be forced out. Why might the market underestimate this? Because most people interpret "no rate cut" directly as bearish. But in the current environment, maintaining the interest rate unchanged is itself a certainty signal, and uncertainty is the real cause suppressing risk appetite. The end of the meeting means the boot has dropped, and funds that were previously on the sidelines have the motivation to re-enter, forming an emotional corrective surge. This surge may not change the mid-term structure, but it is enough to put early short positions under floating loss pressure. $ETH usually follows this rhythm with amplified volatility, greater elasticity, and is more likely to produce exaggerated spikes during the event window. So a more reasonable path is: wait for the policy results to be announced, wait for that upward momentum to be fully released, then consider entering short positions. At that time, prices will be higher, sentiment fuller, and the risk-reward ratio better Brand Authorization Revoked: Dogecoin's Most Substantive Governance Action
Dogecoin's most substantive governance action this year centers on its trademark. The foundation terminated the exclusive brand authorization with its partner and simultaneously demanded a payment of $400,000; according to arrangements, a renaming is also involved before the end of the year. This is not an ordinary business dispute; it touches on the issue of who ultimately controls the Dogecoin brand.
Exclusive authorization means exclusive usage rights. Once such cooperation expands, the commercial interpretation rights of the Dogecoin brand tend to favor the authorized party. Revoking the authorization means the foundation has taken back the final control of the brand, while also clearing up the entangled interests accumulated during the cooperation. The $400,000 compensation and renaming arrangements are all supporting actions for this separation.
For holders, the significance of this matter is not about the money. Projects grown in decentralized communities often have loose governance, and the ownership of real-world assets like trademarks and brands remains ambiguous for a long time. Ambiguity means risk—if the authorized party encounters problems one day, the brand will suffer accordingly. This confirmation turns ambiguity into clarity. In the short term, it is a dispute; in the long term, it is an institutional fix: $DOGE is learning to manage its name like a proper institution.$NEAR NEAR's current situation is really incredible.
Across the entire network, there are over 54 million contract positions, and a single large holder named Mk4 alone accounts for more than 25 million long positions.
It seems impressive with an unrealized profit of over 12 million, but with this kind of liquidity, his long position volume completely blocks the exchange's order book.
Short sellers are paying interest daily to hold on, while the large holder can't find liquidity to close positions and take profits.
This extreme long crowding means that if the market trembles even slightly or shorts apply a bit of pressure, a long squeeze and liquidation would happen instantly.
Those with the largest unrealized profits are actually the closest to being liquidated.
#NEAR
$NEAR
👇$UNITREE This is the last time I'll talk about Unitree recently, consider it a bit of fortune for those who see this post. Why the last time? Because posts with real substance get no traffic, and I have no motivation to continue writing.
As usual, I'll get straight to the point: in the next few days, you can gradually start shorting. Why these days? Because the Shanghai Composite Index showed a significant volume drop today, which is a big negative. To push the robotics sector to rally, incremental funds need to enter the market, not just empty talk.
And in these days, it's obvious that funds are hyping the stock while simultaneously unloading shares. Plus, the index can't hold up here; even if it recovers later, it's unlikely that the robotics sector will be the main theme. So I'm quite confident about this. The reason I didn't short at 80 or 90 before was that Unitree was carrying the sector effect and mission. Now that logic has been disproved, naturally, the short position should be opened.
Looking back, I started shorting at 100, took profits at the lowest point of 65. From advising everyone to wait at the rebound of 75, to executing the short at the highest point yesterday, everything was recorded, so I feel I owe those who follow me.
After successfully taking profits on this trade, I planned the next shorting point months ago. I'll post again when the time comes to share my views.
Finally, during the holding period, I will no longer share any opinions about Unitree. Instead, I will share more about mindset and trading habits, basically self-cultivation. That's all.After midnight tomorrow night, it's very critical because there are still 2 more hours left, which is the Federal Reserve interest rate decision. Basically, there will be no rate hike. This is good news. However, this good news has basically been mostly priced in around mid-month, which caused the rebound rally in mid-month. So the question arises: will the rate announcement and the subsequent speech by Fed Chair Waller cause prices to rise or fall? Theoretically, it should fall. After all, the good expectations are realized, the boot has dropped, and essentially this is a small negative factor. But the key still depends on Waller's remarks. Although inflation data is strong, Waller's speech on October 16 (before the quiet period prior to the decision) has already set the tone for the market. His tendency in the speech after this decision can be inferred from his recent behavior pattern: downplaying hawkish signals and guiding rate hike expectations to cool down. Against the backdrop of September's core CPI exceeding expectations, Waller did not strengthen the hawkish stance accordingly. His statement directly caused the market's probability expectation for an October rate hike to plummet from about 27% to below 15%. Some economists have explicitly pointed out that Waller will not make any remarks that could be interpreted as hawkish. Also, previously Waller devoted a large portion of his discussion to the long-term structural changes brought by artificial intelligence Ai, believing that AI will constitute a positive supply shock in the medium to long term. Perhaps his policy vision may focus more on long-term structural factors rather than short-term inflation fluctuations. But it should be noted and made clear that Waller's "dovish" tendency is more reflected as "refusal" $BTC's dip to 79,506 in the evening didn't go lower; at 8 PM Beijing time, it directly surged over 650 dollars, reaching a high of 80,497, and now around 80,250, it has stood back above 80,000.
$ETH followed even stronger, bouncing from a low of 2,297 to 2,341.9, now at 2,329, turning from red to green with a 0.5% increase in 24h.
However, this rally isn't shorts running away; on OKX, BTC contract open interest increased from 3.43 billion USD to 3.57 billion in 24h, ETH from 1.8 billion to 1.9 billion, funding rate remains at 0.01%, with long-short account ratios BTC 2.2, ETH 2.39.
CoinDesk reports 133 million USD liquidated across the network in the past 24 hours. The Federal Reserve starts its two-day rate meeting today, with FedWatch showing about a 90% chance of no change. On Monday, BTC spot ETF also saw an inflow of 110 million USD.
My view is that the pullback to 80,000 before the rate decision looks more like bulls rushing in, positions getting increasingly full; shorts above 81k and longs below 79.5k, one side will be swept before tomorrow night.Anthropic's official IPO filing is indeed exciting. An AI company that has been discussed for so long is finally starting to undergo more detailed scrutiny from the public market.
However, there is one sentence in the official announcement that is particularly worth noting: the number of shares issued and the price range have not yet been determined.
In other words, the "potential record valuation" is still just an expectation at this point. The company is strong, and buying in at any price is a different matter. Popular IPOs tend to mix these two ideas, creating the illusion that if you miss the first day, you will never have another chance.
I actually think the research only begins after the prospectus is made public.
How revenue is recognized, why customers continue to pay, how inference costs change—these issues will all affect valuation later. Leading model capabilities are certainly exciting, but the public market will ultimately ask: how much profit can the increased usage retain?
I am willing to seriously consider this company and admit that I am attracted by the scale of this listing. But the more I like the product, the more I have to remind myself to separate the investment price for evaluation.
Users of Claude and holders of Anthropic stock do not have exactly the same expectations. The former hope for stronger capabilities and lower prices, while the latter also care about how these changes affect returns. Waiting for the issuance terms to come out before deciding whether it is worth participating is, in my opinion, not late at all.
#Anthropic正式申请IPO，或创上市估值纪录 Waiting for Robinhood's earnings report tonight, I want to focus on the structure of trading revenue.
The company's Q2 options revenue was $342 million, and cryptocurrency revenue was $100 million. This gap is very straightforward: when we talk about Robinhood, we often follow the crypto price, but its trading business is far more than just cryptocurrency.
The issue is that different trading categories have different monetization methods and revenue levels. Stock trading volume, options contracts, and cryptocurrency trading volume cannot be lumped together to conclude that "the busier, the more profitable."
If trading volume increases but revenue doesn't keep up, we need to see whether the business structure has changed or if the revenue per unit of trading has changed. Conversely, even if total trading volume isn't particularly impressive, growth in high-revenue-contributing businesses can still lead to results exceeding expectations.
I am optimistic about the platform enriching its products, but just looking at a screenshot of trading volume and shouting about explosive performance really skips the process.
Users open the app, complete trades, and the company ultimately retains profit, with clearing, service, and operating costs in between. The faster the expansion, the more these details cannot be ignored.
Robinhood has already shown the market many growth stories. Next, what I want to see is whether these new businesses actually make each unit of revenue more solid or just add more items to the financial report.
#Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ The US and Iran discuss a plan to open the Strait of Hormuz, and oil prices fall; this reaction is easy to understand. As long as the possibility of easing the conflict increases, the market will first remove some risk premiums.
But when I see this kind of news, I increasingly care about whether the plan includes an arrangement of "who acts first."
Iran hopes to lift the blockade, while the US demands free passage through the channel. Both sides are willing to talk, but there is a big difference between both sides accepting the same execution order. Especially when each step requires the other side to act first, negotiations can easily stall, while prices have already moved ahead.
For oil prices, a very frustrating trend may follow: prices drop a bit when there is progress, then rise back when execution gets stuck. You think you are judging supply and demand, but in reality, you are guessing the next diplomatic news every day.
I don’t want to directly write "discussion of the plan" as the end of the supply crisis, nor do I think oil prices must rebound just because they fall. What’s more worth tracking is whether both sides have a clear timetable and which actions can be independently verified.
The most annoying part of this market phase is that the viewpoint may be correct, but the timing of entry is completely off. Peace expectations are welcome, but the market can trade in advance, while reality needs to be fulfilled step by step. The time gap between the two is enough to torment those chasing rallies and selling off multiple times.
#美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 Tomorrow we will look at SK Hynix's earnings report, and the conclusion I most want to avoid is a lazy one: profit growth is all thanks to HBM4.
The company has already disclosed that HBM4 began mass shipments in Q2 and will continue to ramp up in the second half of the year. But within the same results, rising prices of traditional DRAM and NAND, as well as increased sales of high-value products, are also driving profitability. Several forces combined ultimately present a nice figure, which should not be casually attributed to the hottest concept.
This time I will pay special attention to whether management clearly explains the contributions of product mix and pricing.
If profit improvement mainly comes from a higher proportion of more competitive products, I will be more confident; if it mainly relies on industry-wide price increases, then we need to continue to assess how long this price level can hold. Both types of growth can be profitable, but their sustainability requires different evidence.
There is also an easily overlooked issue: after suppliers increase shipments, are customers accelerating usage or stocking up in advance? This will affect the rhythm of subsequent orders and cannot be directly extrapolated just because this quarter's deliveries are lively.
I have expectations for HBM4 and am also willing to acknowledge the contribution of traditional memory. When spending money to buy stocks, there is no need to be a fan of a certain technical term. The better the earnings report looks, the more we should break down the reasons for making money clearly, so as not to end up betting on the right industry direction but misjudging the source of profits.
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ For this rate decision, I plan to pay less attention to the debate over whether "holding steady is good news" and focus more on U.S. Treasuries.
The reason is simple: the Federal Reserve's announced policy rate remaining unchanged does not mean that market financing conditions haven't changed. If the press conference makes investors feel that high interest rates will be maintained longer, bond yields could still rise, and valuation pressure on risk assets would increase accordingly.
So, rushing to buy BTC just because the "rate is unchanged" seems a bit hasty to me. What you're really trading is whether money will become more expensive in the coming months. Focusing only on whether there was an adjustment this time easily misses the latter part.
After the decision is announced in the early hours of October 29 Beijing time, I will observe BTC alongside the two-year U.S. Treasury yield. If BTC rallies first but yields continue to rise afterward, whether this rally can hold is questionable. Of course, the two won't move in a fixed relationship every minute.
I understand everyone is hoping for a breather. After such a long period of volatility, everyone wants a clear direction.
But there is a gap between "results meeting expectations" and "worth rising afterward." Rather than rushing to label the meeting as dovish or hawkish, I care more about which direction the market re-prices future interest rates after hearing the news. This calculation will ultimately be reflected in the price.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #ClearRegulatoryBoundariesForStablecoinYields in the US and Canada
The leader has something to say
The US and Canada have simultaneously clarified the regulatory boundaries for stablecoin yields. Canada released a draft on October 24 proposing to prohibit issuers from directly or indirectly paying yields to holders, but allowing transaction rewards, requiring 1:1 reserves, redemption within three business days, and a 1% fee cap. The US OCC announced the final implementation rules of the GENIUS Act on October 21, similarly banning issuers from directly paying interest but leaving room for third-party rewards that meet regulatory requirements.
I believe this essentially puts a tight leash on the "interest-bearing" function of stablecoins. Previously, a lot of funds sat in stablecoins waiting to earn interest; now that path is blocked or restricted. A comment in the discussion section hit the nail on the head: the US and Canada are tightening the leash on stablecoin interest, making Bitcoin's store-of-value status more solid.
When stablecoins can no longer provide risk-free yields, funds will either buy US Treasuries or seek truly scarce store-of-value assets. This is a substantial support for Bitcoin's long-term narrative.
However, the short-term market reaction is very muted, with USDT down slightly by 0.03% and USDC down slightly by 0.01%. This is a slow-moving institutional factor, not a short-term catalyst. $BTC $ETH $DOOD
Bitcoin took a waterfall drop last night; now we watch if the 80,000 level can hold. If it doesn't hold, expect a deeper pullback, with resistance above at 84,000 to 85,000. Do not chase the rally or panic sell; set your stop-loss orders properly.
The above analysis is time-sensitive; make sure to set your stop-loss orders. Good luck.Bull and bear data completely diverge: The more retail investors go long on BTC and ETH, the stronger the short-term selling pressure becomes. The current market shows a clear "retail long vs. large holders/active trades biased bearish" divergence, especially for BTC and ETH. ZEC is relatively independent, with signs of large capital absorption.
The latest 5-minute active trades show BTC, ETH, and ZEC are all dominated by bears, but capital attitudes have clearly diverged.
$BTC long-short ratio is only 0.769 (long 43.47% / short 56.53%). Large holders are bearish, while retail accounts have a long-short ratio exceeding 2.3. Short-term selling continues to dominate, yet retail investors keep buying long. Without volume support during a rebound, it can easily become a bull trap again.
$ETH long-short ratio is only 0.6658 (long 39.97% / short 60.03%), showing the strongest bearish advantage among the three coins. Retail accounts have the highest long-short ratio at 3.40, with large holders and retail investors continuing to bet against each other. If BTC weakens, ETH may lead a sharp decline.
$ZEC long-short ratio is 0.846 (long 45.83% / short 54.17%). Short-term active selling still dominates, but large holders are clearly bullish, forming a stark contrast with BTC and ETH.
BTC and ETH are typical cases of "retail buying long, large holders/active selling dominating," making rebounds prone to bull traps when lacking volume. ZEC shows a pattern of large capital bullishness and retail accounts bearishness. Gold and ETH: Bearish Pressure Is Shifting Gears
Gold bears currently hold considerable unrealized profits, so some partial covering is not surprising. But taking profits only brings short-term fluctuations and does not equal a trend reversal, so I still do not view gold's rebound as a bullish signal.
In contrast, ETH deserves closer attention. Earlier, short positions were heavy, and as the price rises, the shorts' profits have been significantly compressed. At this point, as long as ETH continues to rise moderately, shorts may shift from "comfortable" to "passive," and covering or stop-loss actions will quickly amplify upward pressure. In other words, ETH's current short structure is more fragile than gold's and more prone to triggering a squeeze.
However, this does not mean I will immediately go long. A trading opportunity is not an entry signal; the key is whether the price can force a short reaction with a moderate rise. If such a sign appears, ETH's odds will be better than gold's. Gold is currently just a stage for shorts to take profits, while ETH may be where short pressure is repriced. Going forward, I prefer to wait for ETH's short squeeze window rather than rush to take sides.
$ETH $XAU
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 The most worth watching in $MSFT's earnings report tomorrow is whether AI investment can turn into cloud revenue. The market is already discussing data center spending by large tech companies, and investors will compare Azure's growth rate, capital expenditures, and depreciation returns. The FOMC decision on the same day may amplify valuation reactions. If cloud revenue accelerates and investment returns are clear, the AI narrative is realized; if capital expenditures continue to accelerate but revenue does not keep up, I will lower my valuation tolerance.$BEAT
Have any of you actually played this Audition IP? 🤔
It peaked at 11 yuan
Official data says Audition has 600 million registered users worldwide
Telegram mini program, mobile rhythm game, AI music studio
Also two AI virtual idols, Kira and Ray
The coin is used for playing games to earn coins, creative incentives, community voting
CertiK score just over 4
But there are a few things that must be said
First, the team is not public
The 1inch entry directly states the issuer is undisclosed
No named founders, no corporate entity
The official website contact page only has one X account and one email
The linked GitHub organization has no public repositories
Second, governance is not launched
The whitepaper says there will be community governance in the future
Right now, the foundation and team call the shots
Third, audit does not equal security
The most critical point, after 5 days
Team holds 8%
Advisors and early investors 13.07%
Totaling 21.07%
Do you have BEAT? At what price did you enter? A structure worth pondering: HYPE contracts have a 24-hour trading volume of $1.99 billion, while spot trading is only $800 million, with the former being 2.5 times the latter. In other words, this price is mainly driven by the derivatives market, while the spot market mostly confirms the orders.
There are pros and cons to derivatives dominating pricing: the advantage is deep liquidity and fast price discovery; the downside is that prices include leverage distortions, and a strong liquidation can push prices beyond the range supported by actual supply and demand, making it look lively but not necessarily solid. Under this structure, a simple way to judge a strengthening market is to see if spot buying returns. An increase in contract volume might just be more long-short betting and does not mean someone truly wants to hold the asset; only when spot volume continuously rises and buyers pay to withdraw coins does the price rise have a solid foundation.
Therefore, when monitoring the market, don’t just look at total volume; break it down: a decline in $HYPE contract share and a rise in spot share means the structure is repairing; if the 2.5x gap continues to widen, be cautious of any rebound, as the leverage-built platform can collapse quickly.ETF funds fluctuate between "large outflows followed by small inflows," and whether buying stabilizes depends on if inflows continue for several days, not just a single-day rebound.
Hard data: The US spot $BTC ETF saw a net inflow of about $110.3 million on Monday (almost all from IBIT), but the previous two trading days combined had outflows of about $770 million; since October, there has been a net outflow of about $202 million (SoSoValue). The current price of $BTC is around $80,200, almost flat over 24 hours. A single-day inflow can only be called a stopgap; the monthly figure is still negative, and after large outflows, it remains to be seen if institutions truly replenish.
Do you believe more in "continued inflows pushing the price back above $82,000," or "repeated outflows indicate that buying demand is still fragile"? #BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ $BTC Diplomatic rhetoric can suppress oil prices to some extent, but that doesn't mean the Hormuz risk premium has been unloaded.
Hard data: On Tuesday, Brent was roughly between $114.6–116.3 per barrel, WTI about $100.7–102.2, having dropped about 1% in early trading due to expectations of a US-Iran deal and Tehran quadrilateral talks, then rebounded due to continued Houthi disruptions in Saudi Arabia. Hormuz flow remains at about 60% of normal; the Iranian "about 7 days to reopen the strait" plan is still stuck on US conditions regarding port unblocking, sanctions, and war, and has not yet materialized. Supply figures are being revised, the premium hasn't been cleared, so oil prices "can rebound a bit" but are unlikely to return to 80. High oil prices continue to suppress risk appetite, also posing macro headwinds for $BTC.
Do you believe more in "the deal will push oil prices below 100" or "the premium will stick above 110"? #美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 $CL $BZ $BTC #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
Short-term trading growth is expected to continue. In August 2026, stock trading volume increased by 68% year-over-year, options by 50%, and market trading volume is expected to grow about 15 times, but cryptocurrency trading volume declined by 38% year-over-year. Diversified business is reducing dependence on the crypto market, and sustainability still depends on market activity, user growth, and profitability.$CAP is advised not to short, this person has been buying continuously#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议
"Fed Decision Imminent, Bitcoin Consolidates with Low Volume"
This Thursday early morning, the Federal Reserve will announce the October interest rate decision. Many expected the market to be bustling on the eve of this major event, but Bitcoin has been quieter than anyone else these past two days.
After dropping from $84,539 all the way below $80,000 to a low of $79,803, bulls have pulled it back above $80,000, but the total network trading volume has shrunk sharply from $553 million to $201 million, with major players collectively stepping back to observe.
Currently, spot price is hovering around $80,379, and everyone is waiting for the interest rate decision at 2 AM Thursday to set the direction. $BTC Calculating, 18 months is one and a half years. This "early bull market" judgment focuses on old coins that have been dormant for at least one and a half years. Bitcoin analysis reported by Cointelegraph suggests that the share of realized market cap held by this batch of coins is declining, indicating an early bull market and expecting a strong rise accordingly. I think it can be interpreted as somewhat bullish, but there is still a lack of evidence to confirm the market trend.
① The threshold is coins unmoved for 18 months or more; the observation target is not all $BTC. It describes changes in a specific coin-age group and cannot be directly equated with the buying and selling intentions of the entire market.
② What is declining is the share of realized market cap, not the exact quantity of old coins sold as explicitly given by the source. To calculate the proportion, both numerator and denominator must be considered. Based solely on the share decline, I would not directly conclude that long-term holders are concentrating on selling.
③ The source provides an 18-month screening line but does not give the extent of the decline or the comparison period. The term "decline" could vary in weight; if it is just a short-term fluctuation, then using it to judge the bull market phase seems premature to me.
I prefer to treat this information as a bullish clue pending verification, rather than a countdown to a market trend. Next, I will monitor whether this share change can continue and whether there is more complete data on the extent and period, to first fill in the gaps and then improve the confidence of the judgment.I just came across "£22 billion currency fund on XRPL" and initially thought the entire fund had been moved on-chain.
After checking Aviva Investors' original text from yesterday, what was put on-chain is a newly created tokenized share of this fund. Aviva itself first invested £50 million. Comparing £50 million to the £22 billion fund size, that's just over 0.2%. Including the previous USD fund, the total on-chain shares of the two funds amount to just over £86 million.
The on-chain layer is just an access point; the fund itself remains off-chain, with assets still custodied at BNY Mellon in New York. Coincidentally, Ripple obtained the final approval from the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for a national trust bank on the same day, and the main custodian for RLUSD's $2.5 billion reserve is also this BNY.
So don't hype this as "institutions massively going on-chain". The headline is flashy, but the money is still watched by the old banks, with only a small opening on-chain.
If by the end of the year Aviva's two on-chain shares exceed £200 million in total, then consider me conservative. #Ripple获美国国家信托银行最终批准 18,600 coins, this is the net inflow of Bitcoin by short-term holders into exchanges in the past 24 hours, mostly at a loss.
The market is cooperating as well, OKX is now hovering around 79,800, with a 24-hour low of 79,400, just grinding below the 80,000 mark. Those who chased above 80,000 and got in are now selling at a loss, no surprise there.
Last time I bet it would break through at a similar threshold, but it just got ground down for three days with no reaction. This time I’ve learned my lesson; at this kind of level, I won’t make a move—neither cutting losses nor adding.
Also, the original Bitcoin DEX, the old version V1 of DotSwap, was hacked; within four hours, 8.5 BTC were drained from the pool, about 685,000 USD, due to the outdated server-side signature mechanism. The amount isn’t large, but the old protocol managing the custody pool is like this—when something goes wrong, it’s a total mess.
The sell-off orders are piling up at the doorstep, either triggering a wave of accelerated decline or grinding into a bottom. I’m betting on the latter. The 80,000 integer level has always been formed by grinding, not by breaking through.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 📉 Downward unchanged: Short covering can't support the second leg, 80,850 can't be reached, first return to 79,800.
Reconciliation: At 18:17 bet on down, low point 79,505 missed by 49, no break, pulled back to 80,313, coordinate not reached.
This hour exploded 9.81 million, shorts account for 91.1%; 12 hours longs are 57.1%, switched sides.
Fee rate all three periods 0.01000%, premium −0.037% discount. Discount still pays full rent, money is supported by interest rate, not grabbed by longs.
Turnover 162.1 billion +22.51%, open interest 143 billion +1.97%, liquidations 145 million −6.96%. Volume increase with position adding, fewer deaths, both sides adding waiting for open.
Mr. Nameless's wallet increased from 266 to 1,703.98 coins, 137 million USD, previous two times piled to 2,000 coins were pushed back at 23:00.
Contrary evidence: ETF daily NAV +110 million turned positive, 30 days still −279 million, can't change direction.
Coordinates: first watch 79,800, if broken watch 79,505.
Invalidation line: 1H close above 81,300 means I'm wrong, this week's box top, until 10-28 08:00.
Personal review, not advice.
In the first hour of the open, do you bet on touching 80,850 first, or returning to 79,800 first?
$BTC #OctoberFOMCRateDecisionToBeAnnouncedThisWeekZEC rose about 2.9% today to 1266, while BTC is still hovering around 80,000. I won't chase this relatively strong wave for now.
Noticed: Crypto Economy wrote this afternoon that ZEC held above 1200 even when BTC fell below 80,000, mentioning that high derivative positions and short squeezes could amplify volatility.
TokenPost also noted on the same day that ZEC rose over 3%, approaching 1250.
At this moment (10/27 ~21:03), OKX spot is about 1266, 24-hour high 1278, low 1211.5; perpetual nominal positions about $157 million, funding rate slightly negative.
The top hot topic on Orbit remains this week's October FOMC, with the decision on Wednesday.
My view: This is relative strength before the FOMC, not confirmation of a privacy coin trend; with leverage piling up, it looks more like an observation window.
First, watch if it can hold above 1250 and reclaim today's high of 1278; if it breaks today's low of 1211 and falls back below 1200, this observation fails.
Do you think it can hold 1250 before the FOMC, or will it first retest 1200?
$ZEC $BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ On October 26, the US BTC spot ETF saw a net inflow of about $110.3 million, ending the previous trading day's net outflow of $137.9 million. The ETH spot ETF had a net outflow of about $88.58 million, and the SOL spot ETF also had a net outflow of about $8.2 million.
BTC received $110 million in buying, so why am I still not in a hurry to be bullish? The latest ETF funds show a clear divergence.
On the surface, institutional buying for BTC has returned, but this is not a comprehensive strengthening; rather, funds continue to concentrate on BTC.
BTC: The ETF inflow again indicates that there is still capital support around the $80,000 level. However, a single-day scale of $110 million is not strong, and the funds that flowed out the previous trading day have not been fully recovered. If the price does not keep up with the capital inflow, it actually indicates that selling pressure above remains.
ETH: ETF outflows are close to $90 million, clearly weaker than BTC. BTC can maintain consolidation with capital support, but ETH lacks incremental buying. Once BTC falls again, ETH is more likely to break key support.
SOL: ETF continues small outflows, indicating that high-volatility funds remain cautious. The market may have some resilience during rebounds, but sustainability cannot be overestimated for now.
The real signal from this data set is not that institutions are bottom-fishing comprehensively, but that funds are only willing to take on BTC and are unwilling to expand risk exposure.
Therefore, I remain short-term bearish. Unless BTC firmly reclaims key resistance levels, ETH and SOL rebounds should be viewed as weak recoveries, and there is no rush to chase longs. SkyAI was formerly known as Sharps Technology. In August 2025, it raised over $400 million to convert into a SOL treasury, and in the following month, it purchased more than 2 million SOL tokens, becoming at one point the fifth largest publicly listed SOL holding company.
By October 16, all these tokens had been sold off. According to company disclosures, about 1 million tokens had been sold by the time the buyback was announced on October 11. Later SEC filings showed around 600,000 tokens remaining, which were then completely cleared out. The company had $223.8 million in cash on hand, of which $201.3 million was allocated for the buyback at $3 per share, with the offer ending on October 29.
An interesting detail: initially, the buyback came with a condition that SOL had to stay above $100, but this condition was later removed. By the end of 2025, the company's holding cost was about $194 per token, while $SOL has been hovering around $100 this month, roughly half the cost. Bastion Trading, holding nearly 10%, felt $3 was too low and requested $3.5 and an independent review, choosing not to participate.
Such companies had a combined unrealized loss of $1.5 billion as of February this year. Those able to convert tokens into cash and return it to shareholders might be emulated, or it could be an isolated case. How other SOL treasury companies choose to proceed will be the next point of focus.482,228 tokens, 49 million USD, three days. There is a SOL whale selling off in batches, this is the most solid data today.
SOL is now at 100.1, it broke 100 intraday, dropped to a low of 99.17 and then pulled back, down 1.4% in 24 hours. The bulls are struggling to hold the 100 level.
Selling over three days instead of dumping all at once indicates they are looking for liquidity and don't intend to kill the order book. But conversely, it does mean there are serious sellers above 100, so don't confuse a rebound with a reversal.
By the way, Marinade said the Agave validator margin deduction exemption after the slot jump is confirmed, so the ecosystem side has no substantial damage; this is not negative news.
I thought the rebound could hold at 102, but I was proven wrong. Now I've learned to be cautious, leaving the longs above 100 to others and waiting until the selling is done.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 The 5 to 7-year roadmap for silver now seems more like a period of speculation rather than a phase of chasing gains, right? At first glance, when I saw the $37 to $39 retracement zone, I felt a bit intrigued because the $36.57 to $38.82 range aligns perfectly with a cluster of Fibonacci levels and wave structures, like a pre-drawn catch point✨. But looking further ahead, $269 in 2029 and $410 to $569 between 2032 and 2033, assuming gold reaches 18,000 and the gold-silver ratio compresses to 30 to 40, this is no longer just a technical chart; it’s a macro narrative being staked as well. What concerns me more is the rhythm: once these ultra-long-term targets become part of the market narrative, short-term positions tend to get crowded first, leverage heats up, and spot positions become passive. Silver and BTC are very similar in this regard; the price hasn’t finished moving yet, but the funding rates, open interest, and liquidation bands on the contract side have already started telling a story💫. If the $37 to $39 zone is truly tested, the key isn’t whether it’s reached or not, but whether positions are reduced or increased during the retracement, and whether funding rates cool down or continue to peak—this determines if it’s a shakeout or a fragile balance before a squeeze. The bullish path is also clear: as long as $29.86 holds, the wave count remains valid, retracements don’t break previous lows, and positions moderately decline, it’s easier to wash out floating positions and leave room for what’s next. The risk lies on the other side: high targets themselves attract chasing orders, and once the macro assumptions loosen, it’s often not the spot sentiment that crashes first but the highly leveraged layer. Altcoins and risk appetite will also be affected accordingly; if volatility expands for a "slow asset" like silver, patience for high beta assets will be even shorter. Tired of looking at the $BTC 4-hour chart, switched to 1-hour and found that the dog whale is just torturing me on a different scale.
Falling down from 84,900, each rebound is lower than the last. Now it's grinding around 80,000. I don't think it's gearing up for a big move; it feels more like both buyers and sellers are waiting for news, and no one wants to make the first move.
The short moving averages are stuck near 80,100, and the price hasn't reclaimed that level yet. Although the MACD isn't as ugly as before, it only means the drop isn't as severe; it doesn't prove the bulls are ready to enter.
My thinking is simple:
First, the 80,600–80,900 range needs to be reclaimed and held on a pullback before I consider entering a small position, initially targeting around 81,300. If I chase in and it falls back into the original range, I'll admit I was wrong and exit.
Next, watch 79,220. If it really breaks below that and the rebound can't recover, don't comfort yourself with washouts; be prepared in advance for 77K and 75K.
This week is packed with news: the Fed decision early Thursday morning, followed by GDP and PCE in the evening.
I'd rather buy a bit later than risk another stop loss just to chase a few hundred dollars of rebound.