Orbit Post Sitemap
10,452 ETH, about 24.6 million USD, Bitmine's weekly buying record continues!
Total holdings surged to 6,051,900 ETH, accounting for 4.95% of ETH circulation. The "5% alchemy" is 99% complete. But the cost of this "faith" is glaring: the average cost is about 3,331 USD, and at a market price around 2,360 USD, the unrealized loss reaches 6.1 billion USD, a drop of 30.3%.
Tom Lee's response is very "Lee style": $ETH has pulled back 13% from its high, while US semiconductor stocks fell 20% in the same period, so the crypto correction is "relatively shallower," which is exactly evidence that the bull market is still ongoing. He even boldly stated that in the next cycle, ETH conservatively estimated at 25x would target 62,000 USD. Believe it or not, but he is buying with real money.
However, the truly alarming signal is hidden in the capital flow: in the same week, Bitmine spent about 45.9 million USD repurchasing shares, nearly twice the amount spent increasing ETH holdings. The weekly purchase volume also slid from 15,112 ETH down to 10,452 ETH, the lowest since mid-August. The hard 5% cap is within sight, with only about 55,000 ETH remaining. When the "largest buyer's" buying engine is about to shut down, ETH loses not only a bullish symbol but also a solid marginal buy-side support.
Faith remains, but the direction of the bullets is already changing the chamber
#Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ Where did the 69 million abnormal coins go? Behind the CORE hard fork lies the harshest on-chain battle
In the August vulnerability incident, a few validators exploited a protocol loophole to unlock future block rewards early, releasing a total of 255 million CORE tokens ahead of schedule. This was not a new issuance beyond the 2.1 billion total supply cap, but rather an early release of rewards that were originally meant to be gradually unlocked over many years. On September 3rd, an emergency hard fork was executed to clean up: 186 million tokens still held in addresses related to the vulnerability were directly erased and destroyed on-chain; however, about 69 million CORE tokens had already been transferred out to external independent wallets before the fork execution, escaping the project team's direct cleanup scope. The hard fork could not trace or destroy this portion of the tokens, which the community has long feared as "ghost tokens."
This is the cruelest aspect of this on-chain battle:
1. Historical transactions cannot be rolled back: This hard fork is a forward fix and does not revoke already confirmed transfers. Once abnormal tokens are transferred to external wallets, the project team has no simple means to forcibly reclaim them;
2. After token dispersion, selling pressure remains long-term: The 69 million abnormal tokens have already been released, and holders can sell them off in batches when the market recovers. As long as these tokens are not fully absorbed, the market will always worry about sudden dumps;
3. Vulnerability fix ≠ root cause resolution: Although the reward loophole was patched, this incident indirectly reflects flaws in the protocol's economic model. Coupled with the ongoing withdrawal of official validator nodes, market confidence is further undermined. Many investors mistakenly believe that once the hard fork is implementedI look at on-chain opening positions, and I usually first place them within the framework of liquidity and risk appetite: whether capital is willing to take risks is more important than which side a single wallet is betting on. Core Trader 57 just opened a short position on $BTC with 7x leverage, with a notional value of about $166,900. This is a new position, and the outcome is not yet revealed.
My judgment is that this trade is more suitable as a clue to observe defensive willingness and is not enough to indicate an overall shift of capital toward risk aversion. The reason is practical: the notional position includes the leveraged portion and cannot be directly treated as an equivalent principal outflow; also, we cannot see the wallet's other assets, so the short position may also serve a hedging function.
According to my speculation, if US dollar liquidity tightens, the willingness to take on risk assets may weaken, making such short positions more likely to benefit from macro tailwinds; if liquidity expectations improve, then shorts will have to bear the pressure of rising risk appetite. With 7x leverage, a price move of about 1% in the opposite direction corresponds to an initial margin loss of about 7%, not counting fees, and directional judgment also requires time.
So I tend to first observe whether the macro environment can validate this short position, and I am not in a hurry to label it as "smart money." What are you most concerned about now: the US dollar trend, US Treasury yields, or rate cut expectations? Which of these changes would most affect your judgment of this BTC short position? Some people's $BTC faith is truly engraved on their lips but trapped in their accounts.
ETF outflows reached $773.5 million, long-term holders reduced supply by 50,017 BTC, while ETF purchases were only about 3,700 BTC.
Comparing both sides, how exaggerated is the gap? $BTC
The reduction in supply by long-term holders is about 13 times the amount purchased by ETFs!
Yet some people keep shouting every day: institutions are coming, the bull market is secured, and corrections are just free points. $BTC
The problem is, institutional money is still money, not an unlimited ATM.
Strategy holds 848,517 BTC, which is indeed a lot. But after two consecutive weeks of buying, the pause in accumulation also shows that past purchases cannot be directly taken as a promise of future buys.
More ironically, BTC and gold have both become two of the worst-performing major assets since 2026, down 7.3% and 7.5% respectively.
What was once touted as a safe-haven asset is now getting hit together.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ The Truth About the CORE Hard Fork: Fixing the Faucet Without Chasing the Dirty Water? Understand These 3 Points, Don't Be Fooled by the 'Rollback'
Core DAO previously had a validator reward vulnerability, where a few validators exploited the flaw to mine a large amount of excess CORE ahead of time. Subsequently, the project team initiated an emergency hard fork to fix the vulnerability. Many mistakenly believe the hard fork would roll back transactions and recover the stolen minted tokens. In reality, it only plugged the source of the vulnerability; some tokens already distributed were not fully recovered, meaning "the faucet was fixed, but some dirty water already flowed into the market."
✅ Understand these 3 core truths:
1. This is not a transaction rollback but a forward upgrade
This hard fork does not revoke historical transactions already on-chain, completely different from Ethereum's DAO event which fully rolled back funds. It simply closes the vulnerability to prevent further excess rewards. Tokens already distributed to external wallets remain in circulation, known in the community as "ghost chips." 2. Burning tokens does not equal full recovery
The hard fork executed partial token burns, but not all excess CORE minted from the vulnerability were zeroed out. Some excess tokens have already been dispersed to external wallets, posing ongoing potential sell pressure. This is a key reason why the market continued to dump after the fork. 3. The hard fork only fixes a single vulnerability and cannot solve long-term fundamental issues
Even if the reward vulnerability is plugged, it does not address core risks like continuous validator withdrawals, SatPay delays, and lack of on-chain revenue. Fixing the vulnerability ≠ network security or a fundamental ecological transformationI am the mid-term intelligence guy.
Today, combining capital flow and liquidation data, I will walk everyone through the game and risks of BTC, ETH, and SOL.
$BTC short-term spot inflow, but 30-day contracts have a net outflow of 7.69 billion. Short-term buying has returned, but mid-term selling pressure is not over; don't blindly chase the highs.
$ETH has the weakest overall structure, with a 30-day contract net outflow of 8.39 billion, exceeding BTC. Both spot and contract have outflows in 24 hours, with funds concentrated on selling.
$SOL spot is being bought, with a 24-hour net inflow of 13.86 million, but 30-day contracts have a net outflow of 1.99 billion. Leveraged funds have not returned, so keep a close watch.
The entire market saw 118 million liquidated in 24 hours, with 55,000 people wiped out. Long positions account for 69.2%, and high-leverage longs were liquidated, with BTC and ETH as the hardest hit.
4-hour and 24-hour data only show short-term trends; 30-day data defines mid-term pressure. It seems funds are being redistributed after the decline. Control your positions, avoid high leverage, and wait for signals.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #三星Q3利润预增近8倍，完整财报即将揭晓
On October 29, Samsung will release its full Q3 earnings report. This profit increase of nearly 8 times holds the market code for the entire AI storage sector for the next two months:
This profit surge is not just an ordinary cyclical rebound; it is entirely driven by AI demand directly boosting performance: HBM4 shipments tripled quarter-on-quarter, DRAM and NAND chip prices have risen for four consecutive quarters, and Samsung's quarterly operating profit surpassed 100 trillion Korean won for the first time, pushing the entire storage industry's prosperity to a historic high.
But there is also a key signal that is easy to overlook: since the end of August, analysts have already lowered profit expectations by nearly 8%. The pace of storage chip price increases has begun to slow, and with Samsung and SK Hynix's combined 55 trillion won stock buyback just completed, the short-term buying momentum in the Korean semiconductor market has experienced a gap.
The upcoming earnings night will focus on two key points: first, whether the revenue share of HBM4 business exceeds market expectations; second, whether the storage price hike guidance for Q4 has shifted. These two figures will directly determine whether the AI storage sector's current rally continues as a main upward wave or peaks and falls in the short term. #Strategy Earnings Preview: BTC Book Gains Rebound Sharply
Strategy will release its Q3 earnings report on October 29. The digital asset book gains reached $21 billion, ending four consecutive quarters of losses, with analysts expecting an EPS of $17.98. On the surface, it looks like a turnaround.
But this money was not "earned," it was "calculated." The new FASB rule requires BTC holdings to be accounted for at fair value in profit and loss. Bitcoin rose 43% in Q3, causing the reported profits to surge; in Q2, when BTC fell, the same company recorded a net loss of $8.32 billion. The income statement swings wildly with the BTC closing price at quarter-end, while operationally there was almost no change—Q2 revenue was only $122 million.
More telling details lie in the holding actions. In Q3, the company only increased its BTC holdings by 334 coins, while spending $193 million to repurchase STRC preferred shares, with the buyback authorization raised to $3 billion. The preferred shares have an annual dividend of about 12%. Stopping "unlimited accumulation" and shifting to buybacks to reduce leverage essentially means using real cash to repair the capital structure rather than continuing to expand exposure.
A word from old Mo: The $21 billion on the earnings report is the effect; stopping accumulation is the cause. What the market should really watch is not how much the EPS jumps, but whether the mNAV discount can narrow and whether preferred share buybacks can continue. When a company known for "never selling" starts calculating dividend accounts, its narrative is quietly shifting.
$ETH $ZEC $BTC The number of non-empty Bitcoin addresses decreased by 30,000 over 10 days. According to Santiment data, on October 26, there were about 59.95 million non-empty addresses, a net decrease of 30,000 compared to October 16. This is not a crash, but a slow, painful exit.
What happened? Small holders are "frustrated and exiting" during a long sideways market, but addresses do not equal people; one person can control multiple wallets, so this only indirectly reflects retail behavior.
Why is this worth attention? Stablecoins are also "shrinking" during the same period—USDC's market cap evaporated by $4.69 billion in one month, but the funds are not exiting the market; rather, they are being intensely redistributed among different issuers. The disappearance of addresses and stablecoin migration point to the same thing: chips are changing hands, not funds being liquidated.
Which observation is currently more supported? It is more supported that "retail investors are disarming, but there is no evidence that institutions are absorbing, nor does it constitute a reversal signal." The ETF saw a single-day outflow of 2,123 BTC, but a net inflow of 3,344 BTC over 7 days; short-term disturbances are greater than trend reversals.
Next, focus on one thing: Are these 30,000 disappearing addresses surrendering, or are they "another pocket of the same person" merged into large wallets? BTC is stuck near 80,000, and the answer will soon emerge.
Do you think this is a bottom signal or a bull trap? Let's discuss in the comments. $BTC Accumulated 10,452 $ETH
10,452 ETH, approximately $24.6 million, Bitmine's weekly buying record continues. Total holdings surged to 6,051,900 ETH, accounting for 4.95% of ETH circulation, with the "5% alchemy" nearly complete at 99%. But the cost of this "faith" is glaring: an average cost of about $3,331, and at a market price around $2,360, the unrealized loss reaches $6.1 billion, a drop of 30.3%.
Tom Lee's response is very "Lee style": $ETH has retraced 13% from its peak, while US semiconductor stocks fell 20% in the same period, so the crypto pullback is "relatively shallower," which is exactly evidence that the bull market is still ongoing. He even boldly stated that in the next cycle, ETH conservatively estimated at 25x, targets $62,000. Believe it or not, but he is buying with real money.
However, the truly alarming signal is hidden in the cash flow: in the same week, Bitmine repurchased stock spending about $45.9 million, nearly twice the amount spent on increasing ETH holdings, and the weekly coin purchase volume slid from 15,112 to 10,452, the lowest since mid-August. The 5% hard cap is imminent, with only about 55,000 ETH remaining to reach it. When the "largest buyer's" buying engine is about to shut down, ETH loses not only a bullish symbol but also a solid marginal buy-side. Faith remains, but the direction of the bullets is already changing chambers. $BTC $ZEC
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ 【Market is poor, but it doesn't stop Sun from making money】
A suspected address related to Sun Yuchen has moved out 4.65 trillion $PEPE, worth about 20.32 million USD. Since October 17, the total amount transferred out has reached 48.76 million USD, holding about 11.8 trillion tokens, with an unrealized profit of 2.085 million USD.
The $PEPE contract's 24-hour trading volume is about 374 million USD, spot about 67 million USD, and open interest contracts about 289 million USD. Contract trading is about 5.6 times the spot, showing clear speculative activity, but this does not yet prove bulls are dominant. Previously, from October 19 to 22, after net outflows from exchanges, 2.11 trillion PEPE flowed back, increasing potential selling pressure.
In the short term, the key is whether the $0.0000042–$0.0000043 level can hold. On the upside, first watch $0.0000046, then the previous high at $0.0000051. Large holders adding positions provide some room for imagination but are not enough to reverse the retracement structure. Holding support accompanied by increased spot trading volume is the only chance for a renewed rally; if support fails and contract open interest remains high, be cautious of a bull stampede. Chasing the rally now risks buying into a party others are ready to cash out from.The 7-day average funding rate dropped to -1.8%, the lowest since 2023. Long positions no longer pay fees, shorts start collecting money.
What happened? Bitcoin's funding rate flipped from positive to negative, with the overall market average rate turning negative. However, mainstream platforms like Binance, OKX, and Bybit are still struggling around the zero line; the negative value is dragged down by extreme readings from a few platforms.
Why is this worth attention? VanEck dug up historical data: since 2020, during periods of negative funding rates, BTC's 30-day average return was +11.5%, with a hit rate of 77%. But the crack this time is that the retail long-short ratio has dropped to 0.4861, with massive liquidations, while the large traders' long-short ratio is 0.77, indicating they are flat or watching, with shorts dominating. The funding rate turning negative is true, but long positions have not been completely cleared.
Which observation is currently more supported? It favors "leveraged longs are being forcibly deleveraged" rather than simply "negative funding rate = free money signal." ETF weekly inflows just turned positive at 301 million, but the cumulative outflow in October is still 314 million, and the spot side hasn't caught up.
Next thing to watch: whether weekly ETF inflows can continuously cover the monthly outflow gap, and whether the retail long-short ratio of 0.4861 will wash out the last stubborn batch of longs.
Is the negative funding rate a "historic buying opportunity" or "the prelude to the final drop"? Feel free to discuss in the comments. $BTC $ETH Anthropic’s filing puts an unusual tension in view: H1 revenue of $16.3B grew roughly 14x year on year, while potential long-term compute spending may reach $750B. The reported $80.7B net loss is largely noncash, but the $693M operating loss still matters. A Nasdaq debut would test whether growth can convert fast enough to carry that capital burden.
#AnthropicIPOFiled For today's set of leverage data, I only focus on one point:
Long leverage has clearly accumulated.
In the past month, the overall long-short leverage ratio has risen, especially for BTC, ETH, and SOL, with the amount of borrowed coins for long positions significantly exceeding that for short positions.
$BTC: Long borrowed amount 1356.11 BTC, short borrowed amount 75.21 BTC
$ETH: Long borrowed amount 16,600 ETH, short borrowed amount 772.03 ETH
$SOL: Long borrowed amount 108,100 SOL, short borrowed amount 4241.84 SOL
This indicates that market sentiment is concentrating in the same direction.
However, I would not directly take this as a bullish signal.
The more concentrated the leverage, the easier it is for the market to experience short-term liquidations, especially near news events and key levels.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 $BZ Persian Gulf crude oil exports have recovered to 90% of pre-war levels, with Saudi exports even stronger, yet Brent stubbornly fluctuates around $110.
The key is: it can be shipped out, but it's too expensive to ship. Rerouted shipping lanes, ship-to-ship transfers, plus costly war insurance have pushed Middle East to Asia sea freight rates to more than twenty times normal levels, directly raising refinery landed costs.
Combined with the continuous drawdown of U.S. crude inventories, below the five-year average, the thin inventory makes the market especially sensitive to any stir in the strait. Oil prices have always carried a geopolitical risk premium, with funds speculating on changes in the Middle East situation after the midterm elections.
High oil prices continue to support inflation, making it difficult for the Federal Reserve to ease monetary policy, keeping liquidity tight. This suppresses high-beta risk assets like Bitcoin. The so-called "digital gold" behaves more like a tech asset highly sensitive to funding costs in the short term, easily pressured when liquidity tightens.
Trading cannot just look at supply numbers; freight, inventories, and geopolitical news are the true hidden mainlines of this market cycle.
#MiddleEastCrudeTransportRecovery WhyOilPricesRemainHigh
$BZ $CL $BTC $ZEC ZEC has pulled back to around 1200, and the market already feels like a short squeeze.
The price hasn't dropped much, but the open interest has sharply surged.
Retail traders' long-short ratio has fallen to 0.85, almost all crowded into short positions.
The price can't be pushed down, yet the short positions keep piling up.
This kind of chip structure is what the 'dog whales' love most to reverse with a strong bullish candle, wiping out all the shorts.
#ZEC
$ZEC
👇If the account only has $661 left, what you should really focus on now isn’t the candlestick chart, but the phase signals given by sector strength and weakness. Have you recently felt that frustration of being shaken out back and forth with no patience left? I’ve felt this fatigue watching the market these past couple of days—BTC is repeatedly tugging around 80k, ETH is sweeping up and down along, and ZEC occasionally pops up then goes quiet again. But more worth reading than the price is the temperature difference between sectors: major coins are holding firm without deep drops, while some altcoins lack the volume even to rebound. This structure doesn’t look like a start, but more like a phase of divergence—some are testing, others are still using rebounds to sell off. The repeated taking back of short profits is indeed frustrating, but this precisely shows that the short-term rhythm is dominated by high-frequency shakeouts, and the direction hasn’t been voted on by the market yet. The more bullish path is: 80k is repeatedly defended, sentiment warms before the FOMC, funds tentatively refill from defensive positions, majors stabilize first, altcoins follow later; the bearish risk is: support is worn thin and then a false breakout occurs, leveraged longs get liquidated, and sector strength differences widen further. I won’t rush to catch that line in the original text "Is 80k ready to go to 120k" because if expectations are priced in too early, it can easily turn into a distribution window. Conclusion: it looks more like a divergence period than a start period now; first confirm sector strength and weakness, then talk about direction. The rhythm around the FOMC may be faster. Which scenario do you lean toward: defending then refilling, or a false breakout shakeout? Disclaimer: The above is personal market observation and does not constitute any investment advice. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #FOMC #CryptoMarket #Google Cloud business grows 82%, how is the AI investment return? SanDisk’s impressive growth cannot be attributed solely to rising AI-driven storage demand. Even with strong demand, customer ordering patterns and contract structures play a crucial role in determining how sustainable the business really is. The company previously announced five new business model agreements in April and has since signed another five. Of these, three involve new customers, while the other two expand existing partnerships. One important distinction: five additional agreements doRepeated support at the lower edge, 79,000~82,000 grinding — 45% (benchmark): The decline from the low has narrowed to the $100 level, with consecutive small bodies, reduced volume, and a sharp drop in liquidation volume, all indicating "support is still present." Execute the 1st and 2nd levels, do not chase highs, reduce one level when rebounding near 81,700.
Breaking below 79,000, probing 77,600~76,100 — 35%: The basis is the four consecutive lower highs, 50-day moving average resistance, and the current price already below the two cost lines of ETF/vault (once the cost line is broken, it becomes supply rather than support). Only execute the 3rd level and must meet the "quick recovery" condition.
Recovering 81,700 and attacking 83,000 — 20%: Requires overall risk asset warming. At this time, the $85,000~87,500 range above is a dense trapped position (Glassnode), the first target is only 83,000, do not expect a direct return to 85,000. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ The real moment of truth for a barbecue stall isn't when there's a long queue at the door, but when the owner uses the calculator after closing. Sweating profusely just means someone is spending money; only after settling the accounts do you know if there's any money left. Even if the neighboring owner comes over for a photo, it won't help you pay the rent.
The same logic applies to RWA projects. It's not hard to list assets, but three things are difficult: who really pays, who manages the risk, and whether there is any income at the end.
I'm willing to take a closer look at ZIG Finance because it places something reconcilable between the cash register and the token. ZIG Markets builds, distributes, and services real financing products, earns service fees, and then uses part of the income to buy $ZIG on the open market.
The official disclosure shows they have bought four times, totaling 5,369,300 tokens. Note this is buying, not equivalent burning—don't confuse the two concepts.
Zamanat aims for a private credit fund of up to $100 million, with ZIG Markets acting as the distribution agent. The dish is prepared, but someone still has to be willing to pay to eat it; the target number of tables doesn't equal being fully seated.
Going forward, there are two things to watch: whether the income can be sustained and whether the money spent on buying tokens will keep increasing. The lunchtime rush lasts half an hour, but running a store for ten years is a completely different matter.80,000, 2300, 100 Three Defensive Lines in Crisis: On the Eve of the Federal Reserve Decision, the Crypto Market Collectively "Hedges"
At 3:30 PM, the crypto market is awash in green, signaling a retreat. Bitcoin tests the 80,000 USD boundary, Ethereum falls below 2320 USD, and SOL clings to the 100 USD defense line. Funds retreat to safer havens, with price fluctuations reflecting macro uncertainty.
$BTC: The battle to defend 80,000. Currently at 80,060 USD, down slightly by 0.67%, once dipping to 79,800. Bitcoin ETFs have seen net outflows of 770 million USD over two consecutive days, needing to reclaim 82,500 USD to stabilize sentiment. The core factor is the Federal Reserve decision, which will determine capital inflows or withdrawals.
$ETH: Weakness follows. At 2319 USD, down 1.01%, weaker than BTC. Ethereum ETFs have net outflows of 221 million USD over a week, with RWA shrinking. The 2300 support level is critical; breaking it points to 2200. Hawkish expectations suppress high-valuation assets.
$SOL: The 100 USD long-short line. At 100.61 USD, down 0.95%, tightly holding the threshold. The 95-100 range is the last demand zone; losing it opens the downside. Weekly inflows of 453 million USD, yet selling first amid macro risks. The fate of 100 USD decides correction or consolidation.
Macro expectations override fundamentals. The three major thresholds are under pressure due to pre-Federal Reserve risk aversion. AI stock pullbacks weaken preference, with crypto hit first. The Fed's wording is key: hawkishness may push BTC to test 78,000, dovishness may trigger a rebound. Caution respects the macro rhythm.
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ After finishing up my current tasks, I quickly checked the overall market data, and the first numbers I saw were quite surreal 📦
Exchange BTC net inflow is 6,534 coins, with a total amount stacking up to 2,505,000 coins.
Moving coins to exchanges usually isn't a sign of holding with confidence; I interpret this as potential selling pressure on the way.
Interestingly, the market hasn't crashed directly.
Daily-level positions: BTC +1.26%, ETH +1.26%, SOL +1.05%, ZEC surged +5.54%.
Long-term funds are still adding positions, but prices are weakening; BTC fell below 80,000, fluctuating around 79,939.
A typical conflicted market: long-term funds haven't fled, but short-term funds have already started to withdraw.
Looking at hourly positions: BTC shrank 0.17%, ETH shrank 0.28%, ZEC shrank 0.40%, only SOL remained flat with a slight increase of 0.03%.
Chips moved to exchanges but haven't concentrated into a sell-off yet; short-term positions are shrinking first, and no one is willing to reveal their bottom cards at this point.
My thinking is very clear ⚖️
① Firmly no shorting below 80,000. Daily positions are still increasing; shorting means betting against long-term funds;
② Also no bottom-fishing or going long at this level. Hourly positions keep shrinking; entering now means absorbing potential selling pressure that hasn't been released yet;
③ Just wait for resonance signals: BTC stabilizes above 80,000 + hourly positions simultaneously turn bullish. Both conditions are necessary; if not met, continue to stay out and observe.
$BTC $ETH $SOL $ZECTom was still shouting on Monday that the bull market has already started,
but BitMine only bought 10,452 $ETH last week, worth $24.5 million, at an average price of $2,344;
however, it spent about $46 million to buy back its own shares.
Just 58,000 $ETH short of the small goal of holding 5% of the total $ETH supply,
but in the end, this hesitation actually slowed things down a bit.
But it's still okay, giving the E-Guardians 5 more weeks to mentally prepare?🤪On Friday, about $12 billion worth of Bitcoin options will expire.
I checked the table: approximately 152,000 contracts, accounting for over 30% of the total open interest in the market. The largest cluster is at the 95,000 call strike, which is far from the current price. The pain point is roughly at 79,000 — in other words, many contracts are already far from being in the money.
Currently, BTC is around 79,800, just slightly above the pain point. In between, there is the Fed decision on Wednesday, meaning we first hear from Powell, then settle two days later.
On days like this, prices tend to move quietly. It’s not that no one is active; both sides are waiting for a number.
If I underestimate volatility: if the decision night breaks below 79,000, the options side will get chaotic. Conversely, if the price is pinned between 79,000 and 82,000 until Friday, it looks more like the typical squeeze before expiration.
After expiration, we’ll have more opportunities.
$BTC $ETH $SOL
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #Meta launches $35 billion financing to support AI infrastructure
The leader has something to say
Meta has launched a $35 billion securities financing, with a potential additional $6 billion later, totaling $95 billion. Nvidia, AMD, and Broadcom even plan to subscribe up to $5 billion. All the money is being poured into AI data centers and computing power.
But look at the fundamentals. Q3 revenue increased by 26%, but free cash flow turned negative, and the full-year capital expenditure guidance is as high as 135 billion to 145 billion. Financing at this scale will inevitably dilute existing shareholders' equity.
I believe this marks the AI giant falling into a "capital abyss." Even Meta, a money-printing machine, has to rely on large-scale issuance and convertible bonds to build infrastructure, dragging chip suppliers to subscribe together. On the surface, this is deep binding, but in reality, it is internal cyclical financing and risk-sharing within the industry chain. The comments section has two completely different interpretations. On the optimistic side, the giants are backing it, and the AI arms race continues; on the pessimistic side, even the landlord's family has no surplus, and the money-burning model is unsustainable.
On the market, META rose slightly by 0.01%, xMETA fell slightly by 0.04%, with extremely cautious capital.
This is indirectly bearish for crypto. Giants are desperately extracting funds for infrastructure, draining market liquidity, with Bitcoin lacking incremental growth, so the short term depends on macro conditions.
There was a waterfall drop last night; now let's see if the 80,000 level can hold. If it doesn't hold, expect a deeper correction, with resistance above at 84,000 to 85,000. Do not chase the rise or kill the fall; set stop losses properly on orders.
$BTC $ETH $ZEC Test conclusion first: At the same moment, the BTC price from two free sources can differ by 174 USD.
Process: First check CoinGecko's figure at about 80,178 USD, then Finnhub's current price at 80,004 USD, the two numbers differ by about 0.2%. It's not that either is wrong, but the snapshot time and methodology differ.
Reusable approach: In future posts when writing prices, uniformly write "about 80,000–80,200 USD (morning of October 27, CoinGecko/Finnhub)" instead of a precise number down to the unit.
When you write research posts, do you usually write a single point price or a range? This is not investment advice.
$BTC🚨 Japanese capital is flowing back, potentially becoming a new source of pressure for the global bond market!
Japanese investors have net sold overseas long-term bonds for 5 consecutive weeks, with a cumulative scale reportedly reaching ¥3.43 trillion.
The key factor behind this is the rise in Japanese government bond yields, increasing the attractiveness of domestic assets.
If this trend continues, markets like the US may face pressure from weakened overseas buying and rising government bond yields, which could then impact the stock market, mortgage rates, and corporate financing costs.
However, capital repatriation does not necessarily mean a global debt crisis will inevitably erupt; the actual allocation changes by Japanese investors will need to be observed.
As global liquidity begins to shift, $BTC also deserves attention, but it may not necessarily remain unscathed amid risk shocks.[Bought another 10,452 $ETH, Tom Lee calls for $10,000]
Tom Lee's BitMine bought another 10,452 ETH last week, about $24.29 million, bringing total holdings to 6,051,900 ETH, approximately 4.95% of ETH's circulating supply, valued at about $14.3 billion. Large holders continue to accumulate, which indeed provides demand support for ETH.
Tom Lee's $10,000 target is for the next 12 months, not an immediate price. For ETH to rise from about $2,356 to $10,000, it needs to increase more than 4 times. BitMine buying around ten thousand ETH weekly is clearly not enough. In the past week, ETH dropped about 3.34%, BTC dropped about 2.39%; during the same period, the US spot ETH ETF saw net outflows of about $225 million, and institutional buying has not fully emerged.
There are real money bets on ETH's long-term story, which is clearly stronger than BTC this round. If the ETH/BTC ratio stops falling and rebounds, and ETF capital flow turns positive, it will look more like funds are starting to recognize this logic; otherwise, treat $10,000 as a target price first, not as navigation guidance. #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ Brent at $110-120 is Iran's strategic comfort zone,
and it is also the most fragile equilibrium point in the current long-short structure. Downward movement requires seeing "actions" rather than "words" of conflict de-escalation, while upward movement requires a confirmed physical supply loss.
Before either occurs, headlines about transportation resuming cannot change the underlying pricing logic of oil prices.1. The US Dollar System 2.0 is a "Four-in-One" Combination
US Dollar itself: It still holds the dominant position in global trade and foreign exchange reserves, with the depth of the US Treasury market as its foundation.
Oil and key energy: The US continuously strengthens its control over the global energy market through military and other means; the dollar settlement right in energy trade is the basis of traditional hegemony.
AI chip semiconductors: The US leads in high-end chips and foundational models, but we are catching up quickly; the next 2-3 years are a critical competitive window.
Cryptocurrency and stablecoins: This is a new variable in the digital era. After the US "Genius Act" officially takes effect next January, progress will accelerate. Stablecoins will be deeply linked with the dollar and US Treasuries, becoming an extension of the dollar in the digital world.
#The FOMC interest rate decision for October will be announced this week
2. Our response logic is very clear: first defend safety, then seek opportunities
Currently, the mainland is a major financial country but not yet a financial power, so the top priority is to maintain the financial safety bottom line.
Hong Kong’s positioning is an "offshore testing ground": it has the foundation of an offshore market and can isolate financial risks from the mainland, effectively serving as a "firewall" for us.
Keep up: If stablecoins and tokenized markets truly become the trend in the future, we can gain voice and opportunities through Hong Kong.
Fall back: If development falls short of expectations, risks will not transmit to the mainland, avoiding major damage.
$BTC
3. Judgment on the time window
This year, the US has accelerated progress on these four elements because it feels that it itself#中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？
The resumption of transportation is a "flow narrative," but oil prices are priced based on a "cost narrative" and a "risk narrative."
Iran replaces blockade with threats, passing costs onto freight and insurance; physical damage to refineries shifts shortages from crude oil to refined products; low inventories eliminate the buffer for price drops.
The crowded long positions mean that amplifiers for short-term volatility are already in place. This week, the US stock market will face several key events that could significantly influence market trends, with all eyes on the Federal Reserve's policy signals.
At 2:00 AM on Thursday, the October FOMC interest rate decision will be announced, followed by a press conference with Powell at 2:30 AM. The market widely expects the benchmark interest rate to remain unchanged, with the main focus on Powell's tone. If he signals dovish indications such as continued inflation decline and the possibility of future rate cuts, growth sectors like Nasdaq and storage-related stocks will likely attract capital; conversely, if his language is hawkish, suggesting inflation rebound risks and a delayed timeline for rate cuts, high-valuation stocks may face corrections and pressure.
At 8:30 PM, GDP and core PCE inflation data will also be released. GDP data reflects economic health; if it significantly exceeds expectations, the market will view the economy as resilient and further reduce short-term rate cut expectations.
Core PCE is a key inflation indicator closely monitored by the Fed. If this data rises again, market hopes for rate cuts will quickly cool, potentially causing a pullback in US tech stocks; if core PCE falls further by 0.2% compared to the previous value, rate cut expectations will reemerge, providing upward momentum for growth sectors.
$BTC $ETH $SOL #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ From October 6 to 12, decentralized exchange trading volume dropped by 30% to $6.35 billion, but from September 30 to October 12, the total value locked (TVL) of drfi rose to $1.058 billion. The lending protocol Morpho holds $486.8 million in outstanding loans there, so lending has now become an important use case, not just trading After BTC's short-term rebound, will it continue to pull back?📉
BTC is currently still fluctuating around $80,000. My view is: the weekly trend is generally weak, but a short-term rebound is not ruled out; the key is whether the resistance above can be effectively broken.
From the 4-hour candlestick chart, short-term buying has warmed up, and the price has a chance to test around $81,500 again. If the rebound strength is sufficient, further exploration around $83,500 is possible.
However, the trend reversal cannot be confirmed yet. The focus next is whether the price can effectively hold above $81,500, which will be an important signal to judge if the rebound can continue.
Regarding contracts, open interest has recently increased, and the funding rate remains positive. Compared to directly chasing longs, I prefer to first observe the rebound strength and then assess the selling pressure near resistance levels.
If the price rises and open interest increases simultaneously, attention should be paid to the volatility risk brought by new leverage; if the price weakens while open interest continues to rise, beware of further accumulation of downward pressure.
Additionally, ETF capital flows, Federal Reserve interest rate policies, and policy expectations brought by the U.S. midterm elections may all affect market sentiment. But news is only a reference; ultimately, it depends on whether capital flows and price trends validate each other.
Overall idea: weekly trend is weak, short-term focus on rebound. Watch $81,500 above first, further resistance at $83,500; below, pay close attention to around $79,300—if it breaks down effectively, the market needs to be reassessed.
What do you think, can this rebound effectively hold above $81,500?📊[Multiple Exchanges' TVL "Plunges" 30-40% on the Same Day: Most Likely a Statistical Event, Not a Bank Run]
Today's hottest news in the on-chain data community: DefiLlama shows a sharp downward revision of TVL (Total Value Locked) across several major exchanges within 24 hours—OKX dropped from about 30.4 billion to 18.1 billion (-40.5%), Bitget from about 6.9 billion to 4.2 billion (-38.4%), Gate from about 7.5 billion to 5.7 billion (-23.8%), Europe's Bitvavo -39.2%, and smaller exchanges like VALR, BitKan, Ourbit also fell synchronously by 24%-44%.
If you only screenshot one chart and post it, the headline easily becomes "Exchanges Bleed Collectively." But first, consider three facts: First, synchronicity—six exchanges unrelated and under different jurisdictions all dropped by similar margins on the same day, which is almost impossible with real capital flows; genuine large-scale outflows usually happen staggered and with varying degrees. Second, mirror anomalies—on the same leaderboard, Gate US surged inversely by +237.3%, perfectly mirroring Gate's main site decline, a typical sign of wallet assets being reclassified between related entities. Third, zero accompanying evidence—a real bank run would come with official announcements, on-chain withdrawal spikes, stablecoin discounts, and contagion among peers; none of these four appeared today, and mainstream media coverage is zero.
Our judgment: this is a data-level statistical calibration (wallet ownership reclassification), not a liquidity event. But this does not mean "nothing needs to be done"—keep a verification checklist: wait for explanations from DefiLlama or related exchanges; review the data after 7 days to see if it stabilizes; independently verify with on-chain net inflows. For content creators, the value of today's topic lies not in the news itself but in demonstrating a discipline: a single-day TVL anomaly should not be reported as news immediately; first ask, "Did the funds move, or did the measuring stick change?" "AI Data Verification · Issue 2" First, let's clarify a widely circulated claim this week: "The US spot BTC ETF had a net inflow of $300 million last week, institutional funds are back." This statement is only half correct. My verification process is as follows: 1. Prompt: "Summarize the daily fund flows of US spot BTC/ETH ETFs last week, using only the numbers from the Farside table, without inferring reasons for fund inflows or outflows; write weekly and monthly totals separately." 2. Cross-check each item with the original source (Farside Investors table, verified by Cointelegraph report on 2026-10-26; the single-day data for October 26 was not yet published when the post was made, the latest complete data is for the trading week ending October 23): Monday +526.7 million, Tuesday +23.2 million, Wednesday +524.8 million, Thursday -635.6 million, Friday -137.9 million, weekly total +301.2 million. 3. Found two contradictions: BlackRock IBIT had a net inflow of 565.7 million for the week, exceeding the total for all categories — excluding IBIT, the other funds combined had a net outflow; the entire month of October still had a net outflow of about $314 million. ETH was even weaker, with a net outflow for the fourth consecutive week, last week -220.7 million. One mistake AI made: the initial draft wrote "weekly net inflow" as "turned positive in October." After verification, corrected to: weekly$BNB 'S SLOW BLEED AFTER THE $810 SPIKE TELLS A STORY
BNB tagged $810.10, then sold off hard to $705.80. Now it's stuck near $738.51, printing small, indecisive candles.
That's the 30D at -5.18% while 90D still shows +29.11%.
I'd rather watch this range than force a trade.
Is this consolidation or just a pause? Is it truly full of potential or just a flash in the pan? Although robinhood CEO Tenev stated that this chain is a company priority, the data shows a different picture[Pump.fun Integrates X Layer, New Developments for OKB]
Pump.fun now supports X Layer under OKX, allowing users to use the same USDC balance to discover, deposit, and trade tokens on X Layer without manually cross-chain or switching wallets. This is not just an additional entry point; X Layer also gains access to a mature trading platform's user reach. For $OKB, this is a solid ecological bonus.
X Layer already has a foundation: as of October 26, DeFi TVL is about $164 million, with DEX trading volume around $218 million in the past 7 days, a weekly increase of 19.5%. However, the stablecoin scale is about $1.495 billion, with USDG accounting for over 88%, indicating a relatively concentrated capital structure.
The key logic for OKB lies here: it is the native Gas token of X Layer, and growth in on-chain activity could drive actual demand. However, integration with Pump.fun does not mean these trading volumes have been realized, nor does it guarantee an increase in OKB price.
Next, it depends on whether new users, DEX trading volume, and on-chain fees can continue to rise. If the data keeps up, X Layer can be considered truly developed; if there is only cooperation news without changes in on-chain activity, then for OKB it is more of a narrative boost for now, not a fundamental reversal.$BTC perpetual annualized fee rate rose to about 11.0% today, open interest returned to $7.65B, and the price briefly broke above $80k before returning to yesterday's median level. Spot CVD is flat + fee rate rising + OI rising, it's clear this rebound is of poor quality, all built up by leverage. Unless spot follows, it usually can't hold for more than a day or two before falling again. Let's see if spot CVD turns positive in the next couple of days. #BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ "US stocks rose, gold also rose, only Bitcoin didn't move"
What’s worth noting today is not Bitcoin’s price, but that it didn’t follow.
Overnight, the three major US stock indexes all closed higher: Nasdaq +0.82%, S&P +0.70%, Dow +0.28%. Spot gold rose 0.53% back to 4,017, after briefly dipping below 3,980 overnight and then rebounding. Anthropic filed an S-1, directly targeting this round of sentiment at tech stocks.
One rose, another also rose, the third didn’t move.
Bitcoin’s high today was 80,845, low 79,369, with a full range of less than a thousand points. It rose 0.4% in 24 hours, but the weekly is down 3.65%, monthly down 4.27%, and year-to-date down 8.65%. It has been sideways around 80,000 for the second consecutive day, while risk appetite is recovering elsewhere.
This is neither suitable to be explained by "safe-haven failure" nor by "risk appetite rebound." A more accurate description is: funds are returning to the market but bypassing it.
The cost of bypassing is heavier than it seems. Within 24 hours, the entire network liquidated $174 million, 72,305 people were forcibly liquidated, with long positions accounting for $106 million or 60.7%. Despite a range of less than a thousand points, 70,000 people were liquidated, which is a pinpoint forced liquidation during narrow volatility, not caused by market trends. Binance accounted for 47% of the liquidation share, with the largest single directional liquidation on ETH/USDT at $3.48 million.
Ethereum is weaker. It dropped to 2,304 today, effectively breaking below the technical support at 2,330, down 14.4% in 30 days. Also a thousand-point level sideways, its monthly decline is more than three times that of Bitcoin.
On the macro side, the FOMC meets today, with results due early tomorrow, and the probability of no change is very high; but September inflation annual rate returned to 3.7%, oil prices hit a five-month high, and the probability of another rate hike before year-end remains 75%. The 10-year US Treasury yield is 4.99%. This is a combination of "passing this hurdle but not the next."
So my judgment is: today’s sideways movement is not a balance, but a gap between the previous relief and the early pricing of the next hurdle. The price doesn’t move because both bulls and bears are still willing to wait; waiting continuously is actually a cost.
Key levels remain unchanged: up 80,700–81,200, down 79,000–79,500, after breaking 77,500–77,700.
Discussion: Since "it doesn’t follow when rising," will it follow when falling?
This is the question I most want others to answer today.
My inclination is: it will follow the fall, and follow faster. Because when funds bypass it, it’s an active choice; but if US stocks and gold both turn down and liquidity tightens together, then it’s no longer a choice but a forced sell—and forced selling never has the option to "bypass."
Poll: The most abnormal thing today is—A. US stocks rise but BTC doesn’t; B. 70,000 people were harvested in a thousand-point range; C. 75% probability of a rate hike by year-end; D. None are abnormal, this is the norm this month.
I choose B. It completely dismantles the mildness of the word "sideways."
Not investment advice, risk at your own discretion. #MarketAnalysis $BTC $ETH#Strategy暂停增持，Strive与BitMine扩大储备
"MicroStrategy Pauses Additional Purchases, New Bitcoin Buyers Take Over"
MicroStrategy slows down its buying pace, with daily transaction volume shrinking from $537 million to $106 million. The spot price also retraced from $84,000 down to $79,700.
No panic observed in the market. Asset management firm Strive and mining company BitMine are expanding their Bitcoin reserves below the $80,000 mark, taking over part of the spot liquidity.
The market is closely watching MicroStrategy's November interest payment. As long as the cash cost of new chips stays below the $80,000 threshold, new buyers will continue to build positions in batches until next week's settlement day. $BTC The market is all red, but ENA has risen by more than ten points in the past two days.
Noticed: On October 23, Ethena's USD stablecoin USDe was launched on OKX's X Layer and OKX Wallet, with Aave v3 being the first integration.
ENA rose for two consecutive days on Sunday and Monday, each day up about 8%, reaching around 0.21.
At the same time, Arthur Hayes' related address transferred out about 28 million ENA over two days, but the buying pressure still held.
However, DefiLlama data shows that USDe supply is still shrinking, about $4.58 billion, with only about 4.7 million on X Layer.
My view: This wave looks more like short covering plus resistant funds, not a real improvement in business.
ENA buybacks will start only when USDe rises to 7.5 billion, still nearly 3 billion short.
Before Wednesday's FOMC, watch and don't chase.
Invalidation conditions: If USDe supply turns back up and ENA volume breaks above 0.23, it means the narrative is starting to play out, and I will be wrong.
If it falls back below 0.20, the gains of the past two days will most likely be given back.
What do you think about this wave of ENA—is it a new starting point or just a short covering breath?
$ENA
#ENA #Ethena #USDe This morning, while waiting in line by the roadside to buy pancakes, a breaking news alert popped up on my phone saying Elon Musk was live again, directly stating: crypto traders who don’t buy DOGE are "small fish," and he emphasized his continued support for Dogecoin at its long-term support level.
I stared at the screen, holding ten yuan in my hand, and paused. The group chat instantly exploded; some shouted, "Elon Musk has spoken, take off immediately," while others cursed, "All talk, no use if you don’t buy."
Honestly, hearing the term "small fish" made me a bit suspicious. When a big shot like him opens his mouth, we retail investors get excited, but it often ends in a mess. But when I switched back to the market, $DOGE was at 0.07753, down slightly by 0.33%, with the lowest point holding firm at 0.07599. The market didn’t jump around because of his shoutout; instead, it stubbornly hovered around 0.077.
I suddenly found it quite interesting. Before, whenever he casually tweeted, Dogecoin could instantly jump dozens of points. Now? The price only slightly fluctuates around the long-term support level. What does this mean? It means Dogecoin’s foundation now can’t be easily shaken by anyone’s words. Whether Elon Musk considers us "big fish" or not doesn’t matter; the chips underneath are solidly stacked. I stuffed the pancake in my mouth and continue holding $DOGE.🔍The computing power standard hasn't been unified yet, but the derivatives case is already on the table? I'll start with a question mark. Arthur Hayes proposed in "The Trifecta" to build a computing power market for AI agents through the Flop Network, using FLOP tokens for payment, and then developing forwards, futures, and perpetual contracts based on spot prices. This is a proposal, not a finalized achievement.
An interesting detail here: the payment medium is not the pricing benchmark. I judge that this design's significance for both computing power supply and demand sides is more worth studying than just stimulating token sentiment. Using a unified token for payment doesn't necessarily smooth out service differences among different hardware; but if spot trading can reliably fulfill contracts, then derivatives might help both sides manage cost volatility.
This is my speculation: it aims to compete not only for the payment gateway but also for the pricing power of computing power risk. I will continue to watch what computing power the contracts correspond to and who bears the delivery responsibility, not treating the proposal as a finished product.A single leveraged session is being read as a market verdict, and the numbers tell a more interesting story than the excitement suggests. $DOGE moved from an average entry of 0.0757199 to 0.0779203, a gain of roughly 2.9% on spot. Yet the position's return on investment is quoted at +58.12%, with a margin ratio of 1099%. That gap is the whole story: the direction was right, but the magnitude of the win came from leverage, not from an extraordinary breakout. $SOL shows the same mechanics with a sBitcoin and gold have both bottomed out together this year, something that has never happened before.
By late October, Bitcoin had dropped 7.3% for the year, gold fell 7.5%, ranking last two among 21 major asset classes. During the same period, the US large-cap stocks rose about 12%, commodities increased by more than 50%, the gap is obvious at a glance.
Bitcoin is now hovering around 80,000. This week, with the Fed's interest rate decision and major corporate earnings reports coming together, the market is waiting for direction. Don't fully load your positions before the rate decision; saving some bullets is more important than guessing the direction.Brothers
In 24 hours, the entire network liquidated $151 million, with 68,160 people being taken out. The largest single liquidation was a BTC short position on Hyperliquid, liquidated at 80,700 for $1.85 million. Binance accounted for 47% of the liquidations, where the most people got harvested.
Focus on the structural changes: in the 24-hour dimension, longs liquidated $79.85 million, shorts liquidated $70.67 million, roughly half and half, 53% to 47%, a typical churning market.
But looking shorter term is interesting— in the last 4 hours, shorts liquidated $8.57 million, more than longs’ $7.34 million; in the last 12 hours, shorts liquidated $36.21 million, also more than longs’ $29.09 million. This shows the recent rebound first swept out the shorts.
As a result, in the last 1 hour, longs liquidated $2.85 million again, shorts only $1.37 million. See? The market just finished sweeping the shorts and then turned to sweep the longs downward.
This is a typical up-and-down pin action washout—liquidating shorts when prices rise, liquidating longs when prices fall, eating fees back and forth. 68,000 people got liquidated, both longs and shorts, showing that no matter your direction, heavy positions mean death.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ $BTC $ETH $ZEC First, a bit of cold water: I lean bearish, but seeing a large short position doesn't automatically make me nod in agreement. Core Trader 57 just opened a short on ZEC with 7x leverage, with a nominal position of about $50,400. This trade is a bet on a decline, not proof of a decline; my judgment is that the direction can be discussed, but right now it can't be taken as evidence of bearishness.
I'm stuck on two points. One is that monitoring only shows the opening action, not the full account picture. This could be a one-sided bet or a hedge; you can't infer how bearish it is just from this address's action. Two, judging direction and enduring the path are two different things: roughly calculating with 7x leverage, if the price first rises 10% against the position, the loss would consume about 70% of the initial margin, excluding fees and margin adjustments. This isn't an exact liquidation line, but it shows that if the market first squeezes upward, the shorts who need to add margin or are forced to reduce positions will suffer.
Of course, this trader might be right. The condition for me to change my view is if the price weakens afterward and the rebound fails to recover near the reference price of this opening; that convinces me more than just looking at the position size. Until then, I'd rather admit I haven't seen clearly. Around this ZEC short, are you bullish or bearish? Please give one reason: do you trust the short opening action more, or do you want to wait for price confirmation?