Orbit Post Sitemap
According to NewsBTC, digital asset investment management company CMCC Global plans to cooperate with Tether and an exchange called Securities to integrate its Crest and Liberty Bitcoin
Regulatory news affects whether business can be conducted, who conducts it, and how compliance costs change. Consultation documents, formal rules, enforcement, and litigation are at different stages; filing a case does not equal a judgment, and allowing custody does not mean endorsing all token investments.
The same policy direction may result in different costs and conveniences for trading platforms, stablecoin issuers, and ordinary holders. The applicable regions, entities, and effective dates determine the scope of impact and cannot be directly extrapolated as a global uniform change.
I will interpret this news based on actual new or canceled restrictions, rather than labeling the entire market as bullish or bearish just because of the word "regulation".
#BTC $BTCVitalik mentioned an interesting cost difference: in Bitcoin mining, the costs of computing hardware and electricity each account for about half; whereas in AI inference, the costs are almost entirely concentrated in computing capital expenditure.
Both rely on computing power, but BTC mining requires considering miner procurement, electricity costs, and equipment efficiency simultaneously; AI inference depends more on the investment, utilization, and depreciation of computing devices like GPUs.
This also affects how each responds to cost changes. Rising electricity prices directly squeeze miners' profits, while the unit cost of AI inference largely depends on whether expensive computing equipment can continue to operate efficiently.
Although both are computing power businesses, their underlying cost models differ: one continuously consumes energy to compete for block rewards, the other transforms computing infrastructure into inference services. We cannot conflate the economic logic of these two businesses just because they both require chips. $ZEC
Zcash will change its block time on November 5, cutting it from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, and simultaneously burning 60% of the transaction fees into reserves. Most people don't even glance at such obscure technical details, but I have been watching closely for a while.
The market hasn't been kind. OKX current price is 1159, 24-hour low is 1119, opened at 1250, dropping 7% in one day; Binance's low is 1118, almost the same figure. Perpetual positions stand at $125 million, with the fee rate still positive at 0.018%.
Here's the contradiction: in the same week, ZEC funds had a net inflow of $42 million, with $20.52 million in a single day, clearly money is coming in; yet the price is falling, open interest dropped by 12%, and over 90% of the short positions are held by top traders. Some are buying, some are selling, and neither side seems wrong.
I was proven wrong in the last round on ZEC, so this time I won't rush to conclusions. Before November 5, I'll keep my hands tied.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ First, looking at BTC, the current price is about $80,520, down 1.18% in 24 hours. 80,000 is no longer just a "psychological barrier." Glassnode estimates that companies holding BTC on their balance sheets have an average cost around $80,000. This means that once the price effectively falls below this level, those "corporate holdings" will collectively shift from unrealized gains to unrealized losses. More subtly, Bitfinex's leveraged long positions have piled up to about 89,650 BTC, while short positions account for only 0.168%—almost no one is on the opposite side. A short squeeze requires shorts to exist; without shorts, the remaining risk is just long holders trampling over each other. Next, looking at ETH, the current price is around $2,369, unable to reclaim $2,400. On-chain data from whales is straightforward: the average cost of long whales is concentrated around $2,684, with less than 19% of positions currently profitable; short whales have a larger volume, with an average price near $2,335, and over 66% of their positions are still in profit. This means that when the rebound approaches the upper side, selling pressure will be more proactive than support from below. The price is falling, yet long accounts remain crowded; under this structure, bottom guessing is not betting on "enough decline," but on "others giving up first." Finally, looking at PEPE, the current price is about 0.00000437, down 12.60% in 24 hours. During the previous rally, exchanges replenished over 2.11 trillion PEPE, reversing 10Next week will be the busiest week of this earnings season for the U.S. stock market, with about one-third of the S&P 500 components set to report results. Tech giants' earnings and the Federal Reserve's interest rate decision will test the recently pressured AI trading.
The impact of macro news on risk assets is not simply that good data leads to gains and bad data leads to losses. Stronger data may improve growth expectations but could also raise the interest rate path; these two forces do not always align.
How much the market has already priced in also determines the reaction. Data that meets consensus and data that significantly deviates from expectations, even if the reported values are the same, should not be interpreted in the same way.
My observation sequence is to check whether interest rate expectations have changed, whether the dollar and U.S. Treasuries respond, and then see if risk assets continue. The initial volatility right after the release alone cannot represent the completion of the entire pricing process.
#Cryptocurrency $BTCDamn, 846 million liquidated in 24 hours, with the bulls alone taking on 702 million, almost 83% of it long positions.
BTC liquidations hit 236 million, ETH 183 million, and Binance had an ETH position that got liquidated for 11.85 million in a single trade. I really don't know how much leverage this guy was using.
The worst off are probably those who kept adding longs all the way at 80500 and 80000. They thought every dip was a bargain, but kept adding until their margin was gone.
I was watching 79700 before, and since this level has been broken now, don't rush to call a bottom. If BTC rebounds back to 79700–80000 but can't hold, I still want to look for shorts, with a stop loss at 80350, first target 79200, and if that breaks, then 78500.
For ETH, I'm watching 2310–2330; if it can't rebound above that, I'll consider shorting, with a stop loss at 2355, targeting 2280 and 2250. For SOL, if it can't close back above 100–100.5, I'm also bearish, stop loss at 101.3, looking down at 98 and 96.5.
But so many longs have already been cleared this round, so a sudden rebound wouldn't be surprising. Especially on weekends when liquidity is thin, a few hundred points up with mostly shorts is easy.
Right now, the last thing I want is to see such huge liquidation data and get emotional and go all in short.
Those who thought 80k was an easy buy last night probably already paid the tuition for everyone. Today, wait for the right position before trading, don't rush.As the U.S. midterm elections on November 3 approach, investors may overlook the recurring Bitcoin pullback phenomenon observed in previous election cycles. He believes this election may again be accompanied by significant volatility, with downside risks worthy of attention, focusing on a key support level around $73,000. According to his statistics, Bitcoin experienced pullbacks of 72%, 65%, 52%, and 27% during the 2010, 2014, 2018, and 2022 U.S. midterm election cycles, respectively. However, he emphasizes that correlation does not imply causation; the election itself may not be the cause of the declines, as these pullbacks are also influenced by Bitcoin's overall market cycle, liquidity conditions, and investor sentiment. Fourth-quarter returns show similar characteristics: in 2014, 2018, and 2022, Bitcoin declined by 16.70%, 42.16%, and 14.75%, respectively. The only exception was 2010, when it rose 391% that quarter, but Bitcoin was still in its early development stage then. Therefore, in the past four midterm election years, three recorded negative returns in the fourth quarter. Regarding subsequent trends, the area around $73,000, close to the average purchase cost of short-term Bitcoin holders currently, can be used to observe the position status of recent investors. He points out that in an established bull market, after a significant Bitcoin correction, support is often found near the short-term holders' cost basis. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC UNI and AAVE are both rebounding today, while CRV has pulled back; however, CRV has risen over 8% in the past 7 days, clearly outperforming the other two. The DeFi sector is showing divergence between short-term fluctuations and weekly strength.
$AAVE is currently around $148, up about 1.6% in 24 hours, but still down about 2.5% over the past 7 days. The $145–147 range is the first support, with resistance at $150–152. Regaining and holding above $158 is needed to improve the structure, while falling below $144 risks further testing $140.
$UNI is currently around $7.07, up about 2% in 24 hours, and basically flat over the past 7 days. The $6.9–7 range is the initial support, with major resistance at $7.3–7.45. Breaking above $7.6 is required for further recovery, while losing $6.8 calls for reassessing the short-term trend.
$CRV is currently around $0.37, slightly down in 24 hours but clearly leading on the weekly chart. The $0.358–0.364 range is the first support, with resistance at $0.39–0.40. Only breaking above $0.41 offers a chance to extend gains, while falling below $0.35 risks giving back the previous rebound. CRV has shown stronger recent resilience but short-term profit-taking has begun.#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？
SK Hynix is about to reveal its Q3 earnings on October 28. According to the market data forecast in the image, 75% of people are betting that its earnings will exceed expectations.
The market's optimistic logic is straightforward: AI server demand is still booming, HBM4 mass production is advancing, so the performance should not be bad. But the problem lies precisely in this 75% expectation. Recently, memory chip stocks have been on a roller coaster every day. The news a few days ago that Solidigm paused its IPO has already revealed the bottom line. At the current high valuation, the market no longer buys into pure cash-burning stories, and financing pace is clearly hindered.
When the earnings report comes out, there are basically two scenarios. First, if HBM4 shipments are indeed astonishing and profits greatly exceed expectations, the tech stock sentiment can stabilize. Second, if profit growth slows even slightly, or if there is any flaw in HBM4's mass production pace, then this 75% of funds will turn into the main force selling off. Expectations are set too high, leaving very little room for error.
This matter greatly impacts our broader market. Hynix is a global semiconductor bellwether; whether it can hold steady directly determines the risk appetite of the US tech sector. If tech stocks stabilize, BTC can catch a breather; if tech stocks get hit on valuation due to earnings, Bitcoin’s liquidity will also be drained, and the defense pressure at the 80,000 level will only increase.
In terms of strategy, I absolutely won’t gamble on this kind of blind box. I will focus strictly on the earnings release on the 28th. $SKHYNIX $SKHY During the recent escalation in the Middle East, "buying gold to avoid risk" on OKX has been losing money.
From the close on 10-21 to the close on 10-24: $XAU perpetual fell from 4139 to 3990.5, down 3.59%; $XAG silver dropped from 57.65 to 53.39, down 7.4%; $BTC fell from 84502 to 79755, down 5.62%, with 27 rising and 226 falling across the entire market.
But oil is rising: Brent surged from 108.82 to 116.72 in three days, hitting a 3-month high (Cointelegraph 10-23); CoinDesk reported on 10-24 that US troops withdrew from the Middle East, and crypto prices fell below 80,000.
This is not a safe haven move, but stagflation trading—war pushes oil prices, oil prices push interest rate expectations, and non-yielding gold and BTC fall together.
The most painful way to buy: $XAU perpetual 24-hour trading volume is $118 million, while $XAUT spot is only $7.63 million, a 15x difference—you are effectively buying with 100x leverage.
Signal: $XAU funding rate turned positive starting 10-20, peaked at +0.0423% on 10-23, then reset to zero for three consecutive periods starting 08:00 on 10-24, with the premium for long positions evaporating in one day.
When you can't avoid it, what you hold is crypto, not gold.
Do you use $XAU as a hedge position? $XAU What’s most worth watching today isn’t the price increase, but the "dislocation" where prices should have risen but didn’t: $BTC stayed almost flat all day, $ETH also fluctuated narrowly, only showing a very slight upward tilt in the evening. $BTC returned to around $81,600, and $ETH hovered near $2,400. On the surface it looks calm, but underneath lies a repeatedly discussed macro variable — the probability of interest rate hikes is close to zero, and market expectations for rate hikes are extremely low. With expectations gone, why hasn’t the price immediately been pushed up? 🤔 This is exactly the signal most easily misread right now. Most people treat "good news materializing" as a switch for "immediate surge," but market digestion of expectations is never instantaneous. The fading of rate hike worries is a typical slow variable: it first changes the opportunity cost of capital, then alters position structures, and only finally reflects in price. The current sideways movement looks more like the market taking time to fully understand this logic, rather than rejecting it. In other words, the real divergence isn’t in direction, but in pace. What the crowd underestimates is that when rate hike expectations slide from "very low" to "almost zero," marginal changes have actually occurred, but prices haven’t fully priced it in yet. If in the next few trading days the market fully accepts this expectation, bullish momentum will likely be released accordingly. This is also the core reason I believe there’s still a chance this year for $BTC to challenge the 90k range and $ETH to reach the 28k range — not a trade call, but a judgment based on an expectation gap not yet fully priced in. 📈 What to look for as confirmation? First, whether this slight upward tilt in the evening can continue into consecutive closes higher; second,Uniswap governance token UNI has dropped 29% over the past four weeks, underperforming Bitcoin and Ethereum. Meanwhile, the total liquidity of the Uniswap decentralized exchange remains around $4 billion. (The Defiant)
Project updates need to distinguish between technical completion and commercial realization. Code release, testnet launch, mainnet deployment, and actual user payment are several different stages; progress in an earlier stage cannot be used to endorse results in a later stage.
The reputation of partners does not automatically translate into income for token holders. Whether business growth is passed on to tokens through mechanisms that rely on additional issuance or subsidies determines if project development and token holder returns can be linked.
My focus is on delivered products and sustainable usage, rather than converting a single announcement into an unfounded target price.
#UNI #BTC #ETH $UNI $BTCWild Swings for October $BTC
*BTC ETF Oct — whipsaw:*
- *Oct 7:* -$485M crash — biggest outflow since June
- *Oct 14-16:* -$343M more, cumulative -$915M low
- *Oct 19-21:* +$1.08B flip — Mon +$527M (IBIT $665M), Wed +$528M — BTC touched $84.8k, cumulative back to +$146M
- *Oct 22:* -$636M — erased entire rally in one day, largest since June 25
- *Oct 23:* -$138M follow-through
*Net Oct:* *-$175M to -$620M* depending on data source, vs +$2.65B Sep. Weekly volume still $2.6B+ — trading. The real highlight of this UNI move is not "how much was bought," but that "the path is clear" 🚦
Hayden personally confirmed that the first large UNI transaction executed through regulated traditional financial channels has landed. This is the first time a DeFi token has gone through this compliant settlement channel. Note, this is different from the UNI futures bulk trade completed by FalconX and GSR on CME — futures are cash-settled and do not touch the spot market. But looking at both together, the signal is clear: UNI is being integrated into the compliant toolbox of traditional finance.
For retail investors, don’t rush to interpret this as "institutions scooping up and locking chips" in the short term. The first layer of meaning behind opening the compliant channel is to provide institutions that previously wanted to participate but dared not, with legal participation and hedging tools, not to guarantee they immediately buy at the bottom. The real long-term variable is that UNI is gradually transforming from an "on-chain governance token" into an asset that can be allocated, hedged, and settled within the traditional financial framework. The logic of valuation is indeed changing, but what’s changing is the "entry qualification," not a "guarantee of price increase."
Compliance is a slow variable, not a pump button. After this channel opens, do you think UNI will first hold above 8, or first retest 7? Place your bet on the direction in the comments 👇BTC spot ETF funds fluctuate repeatedly, batch strategy under 80,000 support
I believe single-day ETF subscriptions and redemptions should not be overinterpreted. After net inflows from October 19-21, there was a slight outflow on the 23rd. The key is not the "outflow" itself, but that the outflow scale has significantly narrowed, indicating that short-term selling pressure is weakening. The repeated fund movements resemble chip redistribution within a key range rather than a systematic institutional withdrawal.
BTC has been consolidating around 80,000 for a week, with the previous dense trading area forming support. If continuous outflows only cause a quick dip followed by a rapid recovery, it is more likely a shakeout rather than a reversal. Long-term allocation funds will not change their strategy based on two or three days of data; what really needs to be monitored is whether the outflow continues to expand.
ETH's consolidation period actually provides a window for positioning: once BTC stabilizes, funds may spill over to ETH, whose ETF expectations have not yet been fully priced in. I continue to hold my long positions, betting on a catch-up rally after risk appetite recovers.
In terms of operations, do not chase highs or sell in panic; build positions in batches. If the ETF returns to sustained net inflows, consider it a signal to add positions. Currently waiting for support confirmation and fund inflow resonance. (Not investment advice)#HOODQ3TradingGrowth 3 keys for $HOOD & $xHOOD on Oct 27 (#HOODQ3TradingGrowth):
1. Bearish: On-chain txs & active addresses dropped sharply.
2. Bullish: 150K+ accounts activated the new AI Agent.
3. Catalysts: Robinhood chain support + Middle East expansion.
Odds sit at 72¢ for a Q3 beat. Longing the AI hype or shorting the on-chain drop? 🚀 or 🩸? 👇#亚马逊AWS增长提速，Q3能否延续？ Amazon's Q3 earnings report (after market close on October 29) focuses not on revenue but on cash flow.
First, AWS is indeed accelerating, with Q3 growth expected to reach 41% (Q2 was 37%). Demand is very strong, with nearly $500 billion in backlog orders. The main bottlenecks now are capacity and power supply, not a lack of customers.
Second, advertising revenue is expected to be about $20.8 billion, remaining steady.
However, behind the attractive profit figures is massive cash burn. The company's annual AI capital expenditure is close to $220 billion, directly causing free cash flow to turn negative over the past twelve months, reaching -$7.6 billion.
In short, this earnings report will likely show a split picture of "revenue and profit both exceeding expectations, but the cash flow deficit continuing to widen." The rebound in AWS growth can indeed boost confidence, but whether the market is still willing to buy into this "crazy cash burn for the future" story is the real variable that will determine the stock price direction after the earnings.$UNI at 6.8 has been tested several times but hasn't broken through; the market is very strong. The phase of heavy unlocking pressure is finally over. Now, not only has the Hooks plugin been launched, but it can also convert competitors' liquidity into its own revenue to burn tokens. This veteran leader has finally balanced the supply and demand relationship, and the bottom support is visibly strong.
#UNI
$UNI
👇#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ SK Hynix's Q3 earnings do not rely on HBM4; HBM4 is a long-term growth driver, not a short-term performance mainstay
The core of Q3's strong performance comes from the high-priced long-term contracts for HBM3E and the price increase of general DRAM. Institutions expect operating profit to surge significantly both quarter-on-quarter and year-on-year, with the report likely to exceed expectations.
HBM4 is currently only in the early stage of capacity ramp-up, with small-scale mass production deliveries to NVIDIA starting in July. Its revenue and profit contribution in Q3 is minimal and cannot effectively boost this quarter's earnings.
The real value of HBM4 lies in 2027: its unit price is significantly higher than HBM3E, combined with NVIDIA's Vera Rubin platform scaling massively and securing long-term contracts, making it a core pillar of high gross margin next year.
Short-term risks are clear: NVIDIA's memory specification adjustments, Samsung's rapid yield improvements squeezing market share, and slower-than-expected ramp-up in mass production will suppress HBM4's short-term realization capability.
Summary: Q3 performance is supported by existing HBM3 and traditional storage price increases; HBM4 only provides valuation narrative. The key focus of this earnings report is on HBM4 yield, 2027 capacity guidance, and customer order status, which are critical for subsequent profit explosion.📊 Selling pressure emerges above Hyperliquid: bulls taking profits and shorts opening coexist
BTO is temporarily reported at about $81,850. Today, 7 key addresses on Hyperliquid placed 90 limit sell orders in the $83,400–$85,112 range, totaling about 510.22 BTC, with a nominal value of approximately $42.896 million, about 1.9%–4.0% above the current price ⚠️
Structurally, bulls taking profits early is the main theme: 5 bullish addresses placed $30.846 million "reduce only" sell orders, planning to reduce long positions after a rise. At $83,583, there is another $5.349 million regular sell order to sell 64 BTC; this account holds 124 BTC long positions, so if the position remains unchanged, the transaction will reduce holdings by about 51.6% 📉
At the same time, at $83,700 and $83,820, there are $6.701 million short opening sell orders; the corresponding accounts currently hold no BTC positions and plan to establish 80 BTC short positions after a rebound. The largest cluster of position reductions is located between $83,500 and $85,000, covering 150 BTC, about $12.638 million, accounting for about 29.5% of the total amount in the range; at $84,666, there is another approximately $8.365 million "reduce only" sell order 🧐
Overall, the sell orders above are densely layered; in the short term, attention should be paid to rebound resistance and position changes 🚨Don't be led by the "run fast" hype in the group😮💨, first separate the two issues.
BlackRock transferred $356 million in assets to Coinbase Prime, which is alarming but doesn't mean they hit the sell button🧐. Custody rebalancing, market-making arrangements, and redemption preparations can all look like this; the transfer is a fact, but a dump is just speculation.
More attention should be paid to the "direction" of ETF outflows. DWF data shows that $BTC ETF fund flows have a 0.54 correlation with the price in the previous 5 days, but only 0.03 with the following 5 days — it looks more like redemptions following price weakness, not institutions rushing ahead🏃. The $635 million single-day outflow looks fierce but is essentially a pro-cyclical retreat.
Don't lump $BTC and $ETH together. $BTC is a short-term tightening of liquidity, not a mid-term structural collapse; 81,200–81,500 is near-term support, 80,700–81,000 is stronger defense, if volume breaks don't occur, the whale logic still holds💪. $ETH is more straightforward: October ETF net outflows of $1.08 billion, partly like adjusting carriers, but the liquidation zone below 2,286 needs attention, and the $676 million long liquidation intensity is the real test⚠️.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 10.25 Crash Review: Not a Single Negative Factor, But a Triple Squeeze
Macro View Hot: Stagflation Trading Returns
Brent crude oil broke through $116, with high oil prices reinforcing the Fed's hawkish expectations, causing risk assets to be collectively drained. Coupled with AI infrastructure credit pressure (CoreWeave bond yields soaring to 15%) transmitting to tech stocks and the crypto market, the Nasdaq dropped 2.6%, and BTC followed down relentlessly.
Institutional Withdrawal: Continuous Large ETF Outflows
$BTC spot ETFs saw a net outflow of about $774 million over two days, with BlackRock IBIT single-day outflow of $254 million, showing a clear weakening of institutional buying. ETH is even worse, with October ETF cumulative outflows exceeding $1 billion, led by BlackRock's sell-off, collapsing institutional demand.
Leverage Liquidation: Death Spiral of Longs Killing Longs
BTC lost support at 79,277**; $ETH dropped to $2,296, down 4.6% for the day. In 24 hours, the entire network liquidated $260 million, with ETH long liquidations exceeding $40 million. High-leverage longs were liquidated in a chain reaction: drop → liquidation → further drop.
My Perspective:
The next key support for BTC and ETH is 2,282; if broken, $2,200 will be tested. Don't rush to catch the falling knife; wait for ETF outflows to slow + liquidation volume to shrink, which will be the right-side signal. Before the Fed decision on 10/28, cash is also a position.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ In the first three days, over one billion just came in, but on Thursday alone, 635 million was lost.
This is the real force pushing BTC back below 80,000 in this wave. The US spot Bitcoin ETF had a net outflow of about 635 million USD in one day, wiping out about 60% of the 1.07 billion inflow from the previous three days. On Friday, there was another outflow of about 138 million, turning October into a net outflow month again.
Many blame the oil prices. Brent closed at 116.72 USD on Friday, indeed the highest since April, and the Middle East news is chaotic. But I prefer to see it as an amplifier: expensive oil drags down rate cut expectations, and risk assets shrink together. The real turnaround came from the institutional funds that were originally buying.
CoinGecko now shows BTC around 79,700, about a 6% pullback from this week's high near 84,800. Saying "crash" is a bit exaggerated, and saying "no problem" is also dishonest—both the 80,000 level and the ETF cost band have been breached.
If I'm wrong, it would be like this: ETF turns back to net inflow on Monday and Tuesday next week, and the price steadily recovers to 81,500. Conversely, if outflows continue and the Fed turns hawkish again next week, then 80,000 will just be a passing point.
From now on, just focus on one thing: the direction of ETF funds is more reliable than watching K-lines.
$BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ SanDisk's revenue up 372% but halved, can the next earnings report keep exploding?
First, a contrast: Last quarter $SNDK revenue was 8.965 billion, up 372% year-over-year, with a gross margin of 84.6%. Data center revenue surged 437%. The earnings report was explosive, yet the stock price fell from 2354 to 1238, nearly halving.
It will release a new earnings report in early November. Can the high growth continue? Let's break it down into two layers.
Year-over-year numbers will likely still look good. The CFO said the global NAND market will exceed 300 billion by 2026, tripling, and reach 500 billion by 2027, with AI inference as the core driver; 8 long-term contracts locked in a floor price guaranteeing 93.9 billion minimum, covering half of 2027 and two-thirds of 2028 shipments, with the largest customer adding more after signing.
But the market fears exactly this 93.9 billion. Locked-in floor prices in long-term contracts are a double-edged sword: they raise the floor to a historical ceiling, but the ceiling is nailed down too. NAND price increases and excess profits are locked into contracts, and 93.9 billion is only about half of its current annualized revenue. Last quarter's guidance missed expectations, dropping 8% after hours, which was already a warning.
My judgment: Year-over-year high growth can continue, but the period of the steepest quarter-over-quarter price increases is over. A 15x PE and analyst target price of 2173 means institutions are betting it’s not done yet; the halved stock price means some are betting the cycle has peaked. For the next earnings report, don’t focus on revenue growth rate, focus on gross margin and prices in new long-term contracts.
#闪迪存储业务高增长能否延续？ What is the most profitable business in the crypto world? Just look at the fee rankings 💸
Today's top five fee rankings are out, and the answer lies in the "retention rate" 👇
1️⃣ $PUMP: 24h fees 5.78 million, revenue 1.94 million, retention 34% — long-time leader, but buyback and burn intensity is weaker than HYPE 🔥
2️⃣ Aethir: fees 3.75 million, revenue 750,000, retention 20% — AI + gaming GPU computing power DePIN debuts on the list, a strong dark horse 🚀
3️⃣ $HYPE: fees 3.64 million, revenue 2.78 million, retention 76% — high revenue and retention, strongest buyback and burn, a real money printer 💰
4️⃣ Polymarket: fees 2.88 million, revenue 520,000, retention 18% — prediction market is lively, but retention is relatively low 🤔
5️⃣ $UNI: fees 1.77 million, revenue 160,000, retention 9% — most revenue goes to LPs, weakest buyback and burn, making face but not money 😅
Conclusion: The most profitable business in crypto is not the one with the highest fees, but the one with high revenue retention and strong buyback and burn. HYPE currently looks like a "good business," PUMP relies on traffic, Aethir relies on narrative, and UNI and Polymarket seem more like working for LPs. 📊 Understanding retention rate is more important than chasing rankings ✨Let's recharge everyone's faith, Bitcoin $BTC How high can this bull market really go?
In the past three times, buying 535 days before the halving and holding until the halving day always resulted in gains.
2015: +185%
2018: +100%
2022: +222%
Median 185%, starting from $80,000, this means about $228,000 by April 2028.
Minimum 100%, starting from $80,000, this means about $160,000 by April 2028.
Maximum 222%, starting from $80,000, this means about $250,000 by April 2028.
So, stop torturing yourself by staring at those few lousy candlesticks all day. From $80,000 to $200,000+, there will inevitably be countless spikes and shakeouts in between, but as long as the big cycle logic doesn't change, there's really only one thing you need to do: make more principal, buy, add positions, go heavy, hold on, and then wait for the wind to come.Grayscale's list reveals an industry truth: protocol profits and token holder profits are separated by a value capture gap 📊
Grayscale separates "token holder yield" (staking + buyback - new issuance) and "adjusted profit yield," resulting in a sharp divergence. $HYPE tops token holder yield at 8.0%, relying on **99% of protocol revenue automatically used for buyback and burn**, the shortest and most solid value path. CAKE leads adjusted profit yield at 14.4%, but looking closely at the mechanism, its V3 main engine has stopped buyback and burn, with deflation relying entirely on the old V2 version—earning more does not mean distributing more.
$UNI ranks in the top ten for both, but token holder yield is only 0.8%. The fee switch is indeed on, and revenue is used for buyback and burn, but it only deflates without distribution; holders receive the "indirect benefit" of reduced supply, not cash flow. More painfully, in the latter half of the list: AAVE has a profit yield of 3.7% but a token holder yield of -1.0%; JUP 3.5% versus -2.6%. New issuance directly eats up buybacks and dividends.
💡#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 #Strategy Earnings Preview: BTC Book Gains Rebound Sharply It is completely different from Netflix and Meta: Essentially, it is a Bitcoin holding tool stock; the software main business profit is negligible, and earnings fluctuations almost entirely depend on BTC holdings, coin purchase plans, and liabilities.
✅ Four Core Earnings Tracking Points (Priority from High to Low)
1. New BTC Purchase Quantity (Most Important)
The market buys MSTR betting on its continuous accumulation of Bitcoin. If the earnings report announces fewer coin purchases this quarter than market expectations, even if BTC price does not fall, MSTR is likely to drop; exceeding expectations in accumulation tends to push it up. Latest Q3 holdings: 848,000 BTC
2. Liabilities and Financing Plans
It relies on issuing bonds and stocks to borrow money to buy BTC. Key points: whether there are new bond issuance or stock increase plans, and interest pressure. If liabilities are too high, once BTC crashes, the market will worry about liquidation risk, severely cutting valuation.
3. Fair Value of Digital Assets (Unrealized Gains/Losses)
Current accounting standards require BTC price changes to be directly recorded in the profit and loss statement, so its net profit often shows tens of billions in huge losses or gains. This profit is book unrealized gains or losses, not cash, so it is for reference only and cannot be treated as ordinary company performance. BTC rising means profit; BTC falling means huge losses.
4. Management Guidance: Future Coin Purchase Budget
Saylor said in the conference call how much money is planned to be used to buy coins next quarter, which is the core expectation of the capital gameIf we treat this week as a sector stress test, then the strength ranking has quietly been set. When BTC is moving sideways, who is secretly falling behind? The most intuitive feeling from watching the market these past two days is: quiet, but not the kind of quiet that brings reassurance. BTC is grinding around 80680, trapped intraday between 80509 and 81079. Weekend volume is already thin, and this narrow range feels more like a pause than a decision being made. It actually dipped below 80000 mid-month, but buying quickly pulled it back, indicating that there is spot and institutional support below this round number, so it doesn't seem likely to be easily lost in the short term. What really concerns me is ETH. Currently around 2375, it only fluctuated between 2368 and 2384 intraday, with even smaller volatility than BTC, but this is not stability, it's weakness. ETH/BTC has reached 33.96; since October, BTC has outperformed ETH by more than 9.2%, and the exchange rate has steadily declined, indicating that capital prefers to stay in BTC when choosing, and ETH has not yet gained the initiative. This signal is more important than the price itself because it reflects preference, not noise. Looking at OKB, it ranges from 110.70 to 111.70, having retraced about 4.5% to 5.2% over 7 days, slowly sliding down from the weekly high of 118.13. Spot 24-hour trading volume is roughly 30 to 41 million USD, and the perpetual funding rate is 0.0034%, slightly neutral to low.The crypto market broadly declined over the weekend, with BTC falling below 80,000 and ETH dropping under 2,300. The core reasons are the rise in US Treasury yields and the delay in rate cut expectations, combined with continuous outflows from spot ETFs. Weekend liquidity was poor, and after breaking key levels, a chain reaction of leveraged liquidations accelerated the sell-off.
In the short term, a strong reversal is unlikely; the market will most likely consolidate and bottom out through oscillations. If the Federal Reserve adopts a neutral stance and selling pressure eases, an oversold rebound could occur, but heavy resistance above mostly comes from short-covering, so a rebound does not equal a trend reversal. If hawkish signals emerge, there is still room for further downside.
Going forward, focus on the Federal Reserve's FOMC decision, ETF fund flows, and US Treasury trends. Currently, this is a high-volatility trading range, unsuitable for heavy positions or leverage. Short-term trading must include stop-losses, and long-term investors should avoid bottom fishing in one go. $BTC $ETH #10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ According to Farside Investors data, the US Bitcoin spot ETF saw a cumulative net inflow of approximately $301.2 million this week, with BlackRock IBIT net inflows of $565.7 million, making it the main source of capital inflow this week.
Regarding institutional-related news, the most confusing aspect is who is bearing the risk. Whether the company buys with its own assets, asset management products allocate for clients, or platforms provide custody for clients, the names may be the same, but the ownership of funds and the impact on the balance sheet are completely different.
The financing amount is not a token purchase. Financing may be used for operations, research and development, or debt repayment; it cannot be assumed that these funds will enter the secondary market just because the company received money.
I only record disclosed actions as facts and do not add any purchases not announced by institutions. The larger the news scale, the more specific the capital flow needs to be explained.
#ETF #BTC $BTCIn the past two days of the sharp plunge, there have been widespread rumors that "whales are bottom-fishing." The data doesn't support this.
In the past 24 hours, about 32,000 $BTC flowed into exchanges, equivalent to 2.6 billion USD at current prices — the largest single-day inflow since April. At the same time, 40 new addresses withdrew 9,458 coins from the market maker Wintermute, worth over 700 million USD. With 2.6 billion coming in and over 700 million going out, the net inflow is close to 1.8 billion.
The withdrawal story spreads widely because it sounds like "big players are accumulating"; the data on moving coins around doesn't get shared because it sounds less appealing. But what determines the next trend is the net amount, not those few flashy withdrawals.
There's another layer: spot ETFs have also seen outflows in the past two days, totaling over 700 million USD. Institutions and whales are on the same side this time.
So this drop looks more like distribution rather than accumulation. To confirm that whales are truly buying, we need to see when these coins flow out of exchanges again — that would be real accumulation; right now, the coins have just been moved to the counter.
$ETH is weaker, with ETF outflows even more concentrated than BTC. The 2,350 trendline is its last dignity. On October 24, Bitcoin's seven-day average hash rate surpassed 1,000 EH/s, reaching 1,131 EH/s. On October 16, difficulty increased by +5.92% to 140.58T, and another +6.44% is expected on October 29.
Hash rate hits a new high. At the same time, a group of the most efficient miners are collectively exiting:
IREN announced it will exit mining by December 31, transferring all 23.2 EH/s. Cipher's Odessa (11.6 EH/s) will most likely exit by the end of 2027. Core Scientific paid a $41.9 million penalty to cancel an order for 15 EH/s mining machines, sold 3,136 BTC within the year, and cut reserves from 2,400 BTC to about 200 BTC, a 91.7% reduction.
The reason is a simple arithmetic problem: the weighted average pre-tax cash cost for listed mining companies in Q2 was about $75,500 per BTC, while the hashprice dropped to $27.7 per PH per day during the same period. Under the same electricity meter, AI yields an annualized profit of about $1.5 million per megawatt, while mining yields about $500,000—three times less.
Even harsher is the valuation: mining companies with AI contracts have an EV/NTM Sales multiple of 12.9, while pure mining companies have 3.7. If they don't pivot, they can't get cheap money.
The cost is also evident: contracted IT capacity exceeds 4GW, but actual billing is only 550MW; in the first half of the year, 12 mining companies collectively wrote down about $1.1 billion.
The paradox is explained as: large miners are leaving, and small operators are taking over. Hash rate is shifting from "capital that needs to be explained to shareholders" to "capital that doesn't need explanation."
The real test comes in 2028: the halving will cut the breakeven electricity price in half, from 12.2 cents to 6.1 cents. More than half of global capacity will suddenly become physically unviable.
The most decentralized moment for Bitcoin may also be its most undignified moment.
Not investment advice, risk at your own discretion.
#BitcoinMining $BTCFour Major Dimensions Supporting the Possible Collapse of the Bitcoin Myth
I. Scientific Basis (Cryptography, Quantum Information Science)
1. Bitcoin signatures use the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). Under the condition that a fault-tolerant quantum computer runs Shor's algorithm, the private key can be derived from the public key. This is a rigorous mathematical cryptographic conclusion, not a conjecture. BTC in addresses with exposed public keys is at risk of theft.
2. Bitcoin does not have a built-in, seamless, quantum-resistant signature scheme. Upgrading the entire network protocol requires consensus among miners, nodes, exchanges, and whales, which is a highly challenging governance task; assets in many dormant old addresses or with lost private keys cannot be migrated to a new quantum-resistant signature system.
3. AI is accelerating the development of quantum error correction, quantum circuits, and cryptanalysis algorithms, compressing the time window for "quantum cracking feasibility."
Key point: It is not that it can be cracked now, but that this underlying cryptographic system has a scientific boundary that can be breached.
II. Mathematical Basis
1. Bitcoin's total supply of 21 million coins and halving model are artificially defined mathematical rules set by code, not natural laws. "Scarcity" is scarcity defined by code, not an immutable mathematical axiom; once consensus collapses, this numerical cap loses value.
2. The mathematical essence of value pricing: coin price = capital absorption ÷ circulating supply. When continuous unlocking, whale concentration selling, and capital outflows occur, supply exceeds absorption, and prices will continue to decline; there is no natural mathematical floor supporting the price.
3. The mathematical law of network effects: network value rises with user growth but can also decline with participant loss; network effects are not a unidirectional, perpetually increasing function. Once exits exceed new entries, network value continuously shrinks.
III. Philosophical Basis
1. Entropy increase and cyclical philosophy: all self-organized human consensus and credit systems tend to age, differentiate, and dissipate. Historically, all credit bubbles detached from physical backing have ended. Consensus is a subjective human belief, which changes across generations and can be replaced by new things; consensus does not have eternal attributes.
2. Replacement evolution philosophy: the norm of technological evolution is that more adaptive and safer solutions replace old ones. If a new generation of value coins with quantum resistance, privacy, and higher efficiency (such as post-quantum routes like STRK) emerges, logically there is a possibility of value center shift; first-mover advantage does not equal permanent advantage.
3. Subjective theory of value: Bitcoin itself does not produce goods, services, or cash flow; its value comes entirely from collective human subjective recognition. Once group cognition changes, its value foundation will be shaken. It has no intrinsic inherent value; value is granted by consensus.
IV. Monetary Theory Basis
1. The three classic functions of money: unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value.
- Bitcoin's volatility is extremely high, making it difficult to serve as a stable unit of account;
- Transfer costs, confirmation speed, and compliance thresholds limit daily circulation;
- The premise of store of value is long-term stable credit consensus, but it lacks sovereign, tax, or physical asset backing.
2. Modern monetary credit logic: mainstream fiat relies on state taxation and sovereign enforced circulation. Bitcoin is a private spontaneous credit asset, not debt money; it has no lender of last resort and no crisis backstop mechanism. In the event of a bank run panic, no entity will intervene to stabilize.
3. Monetary competition theory: the currency market has always been competitive. Historically, countless once-popular currencies and precious metal substitutes have exited the mainstream stage due to technology, regulation, and credit reasons; digital assets are no exception.#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？
The October FOMC is very likely to "hold steady," but don't rush to interpret this as a dovish turn. Current data puts the Federal Reserve in a dilemma: nonfarm payrolls increased by only 29,000, unemployment rose to 4.2%, showing signs of cooling in employment; however, CPI remains at 3.7%, and core inflation is sticky. Rushing to raise rates again risks crushing employment and long-term yields, while pausing risks inflation expectations becoming unanchored.
The real uncertainties focus on four areas: first, whether core PCE and wage growth can continue to cool; second, if Middle East tensions and oil prices flare up again, the inflation narrative could quickly resume; third, if long-term U.S. Treasury yields tighten on their own, the Fed will have more room to wait and see; fourth, if data heats up again before December, the "pause" could turn into a "late rate hike."
Therefore, October looks more like a hawkish pause: watching the situation first, with the possibility of a follow-up move in December. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #HOODQ3TradingGrowth robinhood chain, robinhood's blockchain where users trade stock tokens, saw dex volume drop 30% to $6.35b in the week from October 6-12. But defi TVL increased to $1.058b from September 30 to October 12, and Morpho, a lending protocol, holds $486.8m in open loans there. So lending is now a major application, not just trading. In that week, borrowers paid about $417k in interest and liquidation bonuses on Morpho, but Morpho recorded revenueFour Major Dimensions Supporting the Possible Collapse of the Bitcoin Myth
I. Scientific Basis (Cryptography, Quantum Information Science)
1. Bitcoin signatures use the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). Under the condition that a fault-tolerant quantum computer runs Shor's algorithm, the private key can be derived from the public key. This is a rigorous mathematical cryptographic conclusion, not a conjecture. BTC in addresses with exposed public keys is at risk of theft.
2. Bitcoin does not have a built-in, seamless, quantum-resistant signature scheme. Upgrading the entire network protocol requires consensus among miners, nodes, exchanges, and whales, which is a highly challenging governance task; assets in many dormant old addresses or with lost private keys cannot be migrated to a new quantum-resistant signature system.
3. AI is accelerating the development of quantum error correction, quantum circuits, and cryptanalysis algorithms, compressing the time window for "quantum cracking feasibility."
Key point: It is not that it can be cracked now, but that this underlying cryptographic system has a scientific boundary that can be breached.
II. Mathematical Basis
1. Bitcoin's total supply of 21 million coins and halving model are artificially defined mathematical rules set by code, not natural laws. "Scarcity" is scarcity defined by code, not an immutable mathematical axiom; once consensus collapses, this numerical cap loses value.
2. The mathematical essence of value pricing: coin price = capital absorption ÷ circulating supply. When continuous unlocking, whale concentration selling, and capital outflows occur, supply exceeds absorption, and prices will continue to decline; there is no natural mathematical floor supporting the price.
3. The mathematical law of network effects: network value rises with user growth but can also decline with participant loss; network effects are not a unidirectional, perpetually increasing function. Once exits exceed new entries, network value continuously shrinks.
III. Philosophical Basis
1. Entropy increase and cyclical philosophy: all self-organized human consensus and credit systems tend to age, differentiate, and dissipate. Historically, all credit bubbles detached from physical backing have ended. Consensus is a subjective human belief, which changes across generations and can be replaced by new things; consensus does not have eternal attributes.
2. Replacement evolution philosophy: the norm of technological evolution is that more adaptive and safer solutions replace old ones. If a new generation of value coins with quantum resistance, privacy, and higher efficiency (such as post-quantum routes like STRK) emerges, logically there is a possibility of value center shift; first-mover advantage does not equal permanent advantage.
3. Subjective theory of value: Bitcoin itself does not produce goods, services, or cash flow; its value comes entirely from collective human subjective recognition. Once group cognition changes, its value foundation will be shaken. It has no intrinsic inherent value; value is granted by consensus.
IV. Monetary Theory Basis
1. The three classic functions of money: unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value.
- Bitcoin's volatility is extremely high, making it difficult to serve as a stable unit of account;
- Transfer costs, confirmation speed, and compliance thresholds limit daily circulation;
- The premise of store of value is long-term stable credit consensus, but it lacks sovereign, tax, or physical asset backing.
2. Modern monetary credit logic: mainstream fiat relies on state taxation and sovereign enforced circulation. Bitcoin is a private spontaneous credit asset, not debt money; it has no lender of last resort and no crisis backstop mechanism. In the event of a bank run panic, no entity will intervene to stabilize.
3. Monetary competition theory: the currency market has always been competitive. Historically, countless once-popular currencies and precious metal substitutes have exited the mainstream stage due to technology, regulation, and credit reasons; digital assets are no exception.As long as they can't kill me, I will keep holding onto $BTC $ETH
Just had a long discussion with a brother about why this round of sell-off happened? Neither of us could convince the other, viewpoints clashed, welcome to discuss.
My view leans more towards detaching from the macroeconomic side, purely a sell-off to liquidate longs, killing off leveraged long positions, lightening the load to continue moving north.
Because the macro interest rate hike expectations were actually anticipated long ago, this is definitely not the reason for this sudden sell-off. War is even less of a factor, basically no impact on the market.
The only factor is US Treasuries, but their yields have recently been falling, so funds should be flowing out of bonds somewhat, which logically is bullish for crypto and $BTC, so this can also be ruled out.
So I still blindly remain bullish on crypto, I am a loyal believer!
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ This FOMC meeting landed in the early morning of the 29th Beijing time. The rate was just raised to 3.75%-4.00% in September. The mainstream market expectation is to hold steady this time, with almost no chance of a rate cut.
Focus on two points: whether the statement retains room for future rate hikes, and how Powell guides for December.
The probability of a hawkish pause is the highest; if the wording softens, it is positive for Nasdaq tech; if it signals more hikes in December, high-valuation sectors will be under pressure.
There is no dot plot this time, so information is limited. A single decision should not change long-term investment plans, only serve as tracking reference, and does not constitute investment advice. #SK Hynix Q3 Earnings Report Approaching, Can HBM4 Boost Profitability? In the Q3 report, HBM4 is not the main driver of this quarter's profits and is unlikely to directly and significantly lift Q3 earnings; it is the "valuation and main growth line from Q4 onwards." Q3 profits mainly rely on HBM3E long-term contracts + server DRAM price increases.
1. Why HBM4's boost to Q3 is limited
1. Ramp-up pace: Q3 is early-stage small batch delivery, shipment volume is not large
HBM4 only started mass supply in Q2, and Q3 is still in the customer validation and capacity ramp-up phase, not a large-scale volume release period; many orders and certifications are delayed by NVIDIA's new chip schedule, resulting in shipment volumes below earlier optimistic expectations. HBM3E remains the fundamental base for HBM revenue and profit.
✅ Core of Q3 profitability: HBM3E long-term contracts + server DRAM price increases
⚠️ HBM4: Limited contribution in Q3, it is a "growth signal" of validation progress, not a profit engine for this quarter;
📌 Market watershed: Look at the earnings report for HBM4 shipment guidance, yield rates, and next year's order volume to decide whether to revise Q4 profits upward or downward. $NEAR vs $SOL : Smart Money Reveals Two Different Risks
Both assets are heavily shorted, but the difference is profitability.
SOL bears remain firmly in control, while longs face significant losses. This suggests continued selling pressure.
NEAR tells a different story. Despite falling nearly 9%, its massive short exposure is underwater.
My view: SOL remains structurally weaker, while NEAR offers greater short-squeeze potential if buyers regain control. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
I am not optimistic about the sustainability of Robinhood's trading business growth. The core contradiction is: the largest growth comes from event contracts, which are the most vulnerable to regulation, and capital inflows have already slowed down.
Event contracts are being regarded as gambling rather than derivatives by multiple states. Ohio requires compliance by October 16; the Sixth Circuit Court allows state gambling laws to apply to sports contracts; the Ninth Circuit Court's stance exposes Robinhood to criminal liability risks; platforms have already exited in Connecticut. The spread of state-level enforcement will narrow accessible markets, and Rothera's vertical integration is also restricted by exchanges.
The capital base is loosening simultaneously: net deposits in July were only about $4 billion; BTIG tracks about $12 billion in Q3, far below approximately $19 billion in the same period last year; the annualized growth rate of net deposits in August dropped to 14%, half of Q2's 28%. Crypto revenue in Q2 fell 38% year-over-year, shrinking its share from 27.2% at the beginning of 2025 to 12.6%.
The event contract surge also includes seasonal effects driven by the World Cup; sports contracts "are seasonal and bounded." When the hottest category faces regulatory risks and the most basic deposit growth simultaneously show red flags, high growth in trading revenue is unlikely to become the norm and looks more like a one-time pulse.Order Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After magnifying orders for ORDER and CT, slippage for both buying and selling increased significantly, with ORDER's simulated slippage at the 100,000 scale being the highest.
$IRYS large buy cost decreased, small buy cost remained almost unchanged. Simulated slippage for a 100,000 scale buy dropped from 1.26% to 0.96%. A 10,000 buy still hovers around 0.25%. Depth is improving, and the same order size is now cheaper.
$ORDER simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage is 0.19%/0.19%, and 100,000 scale is 0.73%/0.72%. Both sides became more expensive; consider reducing volume or splitting orders first.
$CT simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage is 0.11%/0.09%, and 100,000 scale is 0.56%/0.51%. A sign of thin depth is simultaneous increase on both sides. Why does money only flow to $BTC within the same ETF channel? 🤔
$ETH saw a net outflow of $1.08 billion in October ETFs, almost wiping out all the inflows from September, while BTC ETFs repeatedly attracted funds during the same period. On the surface, it looks like a "choose one of two" situation for capital, but breaking it down, ETH loses out due to three structural shortcomings.
First, the product design inherently carries a "discount." 🧩 BTC ETFs serve as a clean beta tool for institutions; however, ETH spot ETFs do not include native staking yields long-term. Within a risk-return framework, both expose crypto beta, but holding ETH ETFs yields no on-chain returns, naturally compressing institutional allocation willingness.
Second, the exchange rate is "voting" with the funds. 📉 ETH/BTC has dropped from 0.03294 in September to around 0.029, a decline of about 11%, even touching 0.02883 on October 18. When the rate consistently runs below 0.030, institutions see not "ETH getting cheaper," but rather "relative strength worsening," leading them to marginally cut exposure where conviction is weakest first.
Third, ETH's buying structure is too "narrow." 🎯 BTC has two relatively independent demand lines: ETFs and corporate treasuries; #10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ - HBM shipment volume, HBM's share in DRAM revenue, HBM yield guidance
- Shipment progress of 1c DRAM and 321-layer NAND
- Whether capital expenditure has been raised beyond the plan, management's comments on HBM supply and demand next year
- Free cash flow, subsequent dividend/buyback plans
- Renewal of long-term customer contracts, new order status
One-sentence trading perspective
Q4 earnings are very likely to be impressive in numbers, but "exceeding expectations is difficult, missing expectations easily kills valuation"; it is an AI growth premium within cyclical stocks, not a pure growth stock. HBM's high profit margin is a temporary dividend, not permanent.The selloff that pushed $BTC below $81,000 and $ETH to $2,350 this morning was less a verdict on crypto than a mechanical purge of crowded leverage. In a single hour, roughly $180 million in futures positions were liquidated across the network, and $170 million of that was longs. That asymmetry tells the story: the market did not collapse because sellers arrived in force, it fell because buyers had already arrived in force and left themselves no room to be wrong. Thin morning liquidity amplified#SKhynixQ3HBM4Earnings
#AIMemoryDemand
Markets expect roughly ₩77T in Q3 operating profit, driven by AI memory demand, rising DRAM/NAND prices, and HBM growth.
But the real test is forward guidance: HBM4 ramp-up, memory pricing sustainability, and 2027 demand visibility.
📈 Beat + stronger guidance = potential upside.
⚠️ Strong results but weaker outlook = sell-the-news risk.
My take: The earnings bar is already high. Watch guidance—not just the headline profit.
$SKHY $SKHYNIX $SNDK "After enduring for seven hours, it finally decided to go down — the sideways consolidation was not in vain."
$PEPE dropped from 0.000004667 steadily down to 0.000004294, a 7.99% decline, which magnified 50 times to +399.61%. This position had been consolidating sideways for over seven hours (303→309→283→272, back and forth grinding), at 21:11 it was still at 0.000004413, +272%; now it broke through the previous low of 0.0000043 in one go, adding 127 more points of unrealized profit. This indicates that the 0.0000044 equilibrium point was finally broken by the sellers, and the main downtrend continued. The lows keep moving lower, the rebound volume shrinks, and the bears have regained control.
My view: The sideways consolidation weeded out the impatient, and also thickened my cushion — from 5.76% back to 8.69%. But even at 50x leverage, 8.69% is still just a needle’s distance away. The strategy is simple: push for breakeven, lock in some profits, and treat the base position like a lottery ticket. 0.0000043 has been broken, looking at 0.0000042; resistance above is now 0.0000044, and 0.000004667 is the stop-loss point. No short covering, no chasing the dip — chasing right after a breakout is the worst, it just hands over your head to the pullback. $BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ Recently, I’ve been pondering the points gameplay of the "Divine Calculator" event and found a pretty obvious pricing mismatch. For the same event’s "No" side, predict.fun shows a 46% probability, but hardly anyone is playing points in the event, and you can buy "No" for 0.11. That means you’re taking odds based on a real probability of over 40% to gamble for nearly 9 times the points return. On the leaderboard, this is basically a free gain. The key isn’t really about predicting rise or fall, but about spotting this kind of gap between pricing and popularity. There are quite a few such mispricings in unpopular events; the less people play, the easier it is to find bargains. It’s safer to get a good grasp of the rules before making a move. $USDT$BTC approached the $80,000 mark again last night, marking countless tests of this level in a short period. Last week, it peaked at $84,890 but failed to hold, then dropped consecutively — this pattern of "rising then falling" is bringing a key question to the forefront: Is $80,000 a bottom, or just a pause before the next decline? 🔍 Most people simply see $80,000 as a round number, but its real significance lies in its dual nature: a psychological threshold combined with a cost concentration zone for ETF holders. This means there is short-term support logic at this level, but it is far from an "iron bottom." What is truly concerning is the shift in market narrative — last week's high of $84,890 did not translate into a valid breakout, indicating heavy selling pressure above, and every bullish attempt is draining momentum. Structurally, $83,000 is the prerequisite to judge whether $80,000 can hold. Until the price reclaims $83,000, any judgment that "$80,000 is secure" is premature. Conversely, if $80,000 is decisively broken, rushing to buy the dip is also unwise — the support strength near $78,000 is the next signal point to verify. This is not pessimism but a shift of decision-making basis from emotion to price structure itself. Zooming out, the macro environment before the U.S. midterm elections is likely to continue this back-and-forth oscillation pattern. Capital is reluctant to make large directional bets amid uncertainty, so $BTC is more prone to repeatedly test within a range rather than break out.