Orbit Post Sitemap
BTC hit bottom after three consecutive election cycles; will it happen again this time?
There is an intriguing timing pattern between the US midterm elections and BTC's historical price movements.
Looking back at the previous three cycles: after the 2014 midterms, BTC bottomed around $170 approximately 71 days later; in 2018, about 39 days later, it bottomed near $3,200; in 2022, only about 13 days later, it bottomed near $15,500. Subsequently, BTC experienced long-term gains exceeding 100x, about 20x, and about 8x respectively.
The time to bottom has shortened each cycle, resembling some kind of periodic signal. However, three samples are insufficient to prove a causal relationship between elections and bottoms; halving cycles, macro liquidity, and market risk events are equally important.
More notably, BTC's phase low for 2026 already occurred on July 1, roughly 125 days before the November 3 election. This cycle, the historical pattern has already deviated.
So, is this an early bottom formation, or will there be changes later? More important than betting on the election date is to observe whether macro liquidity, capital flows, and price structure can truly confirm a reversal. $BTC #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ I've gone through the latest capital flow data twice, and the overall picture still looks concerning. ① $BTC : Futures recorded $194M in outflows, while spot saw another $76.36M leave. Both markets are experiencing withdrawals, suggesting investors are reducing exposure rather than simply closing leveraged positions. ② $ETH : The situation looks weaker. Futures outflows reached $95.69M, while spot outflows hit $114M. Real-money selling pressure is adding to the weakness. ③ $SOL : There's one smaToday around 76,700, down about 1.8% in 24h. But in these days, the numbers in the news are even more chaotic than the price.
Take last week's exchange hack case as an example: some say the recovery rate is 90%, others say 95%; the net outflow after withdrawal reopening is said to be 3.64 billion USD, others say 5.14 billion. It looks contradictory, but actually it's different times and different standards.
Now I use AI differently: I don't let it draw conclusions, only let it make a "timestamped timeline." Each piece of information must clearly state: who issued it, when, the number, and what changed compared to the previous entry.
Lining it up like this makes it clear: On 10/29, about 6.3 billion USD was disclosed stolen; the official recovery/restoration rate was later adjusted from about 90% to about 95%; 3.64 billion is the net outflow about 9.5 hours after reopening, 5.14 billion is the 24-hour figure.
The takeaway: AI organizes quickly, but it easily mistakes old numbers for new ones. So for judgment, I do it myself and double-check key numbers against the original text.
When you follow an ongoing event, how do you organize the information? On November 2, Apple announced its fiscal 2026 Q4 results: revenue of $114.48 billion, up 12% year-over-year, earnings per share of $2.10, all exceeding expectations. Full-year revenue reached a record high of $478.8 billion, with iPhone and Mac growing 17.5% and 23.7% respectively.
However, the quality of the gross margin needs to be broken down. About 1 percentage point of this quarter's 47.9% came from a one-time tariff refund; the company expects the gross margin for the December quarter to drop to 45% to 46%, mainly due to "unprecedented" increases in memory prices and the cloud inference costs of Siri AI.
This continues a historical cause-and-effect chain: upstream storage price increases, Apple hedging by raising prices, followed by pressure on both sales volume and profit margins. This quarter, iPad and wearables revenue declined by 10.4% and 7.9%, respectively, and service growth slowed to 9.8%, the lowest in over three years.
After-hours stock price once fell more than 4%, indicating the market is more concerned about profit margins. #苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 Mercado Bitcoin was hit for about $40M and promised to repay every user, yet $BTC barely moved: $76,600 at the news, $76,900 now. Longs worth $90M got wiped in 24 hours, and that is what drives price, not headlines. Which gives way first, $76,400 or $78,800?#توقعات Palantir Earnings Report: Can High Growth Support the High Valuation?
This is a big test for Palantir. High growth looks great, but the valuation is already stretched. Markets want proof it can keep delivering.
Last quarter’s 93% revenue jump and 149% US commercial growth were strong. If Q3 numbers stay hot and guidance holds, the stock should stabilize. Any slowdown and the high expectations will punish it fast.
Strong demand is key right now. Can they keep this pace without missing? $BTC Will it complete its adjustment early this time! The retracements after the first three rounds of elections have gradually narrowed. The drop went from 65% to 52%, then to 27%!
Before this vote, the price has already rebounded from the low.
Can the bulls rewrite the post-election decline script!
This BTC weekly chart compares the post-US midterm election trends of 2014, 2018, and 2022, marking phase retracements of 65%, 52%, and 27%, with each drop smaller than the last.
By 2026, BTC had already undergone a significant adjustment before the vote, then rebounded from the low, with the price around $76,621 in the chart. The market's focus this time is whether the phase low will appear earlier before the election.
I’m more concerned whether the selling pressure after the vote can still push the price down. If BTC holds the previous low during the pullback and then gradually raises the lows, the bulls have a chance to prove that much of the selling pressure has already been released early.
Conversely, if the price breaks below the previous low again, the "early bottom" judgment must be reassessed. Each of the previous three markets had its own background; the most significant signal now is that when bearish news arrives, the price doesn’t fall much, and buying comes in to push it higher.
If post-election selling pressure fails to push to new lows, the bulls gain more confidence to defend the bottom.
Once the price recovers above resistance and buying continues to support, the toughest phase will hopefully be behind us!
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Seeing "AI transformation + profitability," many people would consider it a positive, but I want to hit the brakes. On the contrary, switching tracks does not mean stronger earning ability.
Cipher's Q3 revenue dropped 63%, relying on $127 million in accounting gains to turn operating losses into reported profits, reporting a profit of $31 million. I find this profitability unconvincing: shrinking revenue means business pressure, and accounting gains cannot prove the AI business is working. I will wait for operational results from the transformation and will not cheer for the concept.#苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压
Apple's earnings report is a typical case of "looks good now, but painful later." Q4 revenue and EPS both beat expectations, iPhone and Mac sales were booming, supporting the market, and service revenue also hit a new single-quarter high. At first glance, it's an impressive report card. But the market is not buying it, with after-hours selling off sharply. The core issue lies in the next quarter's gross margin guidance.
This quarter's gross margin was 47.9%, which includes a 1-point bonus from tariff refunds, so the underlying margin isn't as strong as it appears on paper. Management guided December holiday season gross margin to only 45%-46%, a sequential drop of 2-3 points, mainly due to two pressures: rising prices of storage chips, with low-cost inventory nearly depleted, leading to higher procurement costs; plus the rollout of Siri AI driving continuous increases in computing power and R&D investment, steadily eroding profits.
Two other risks cannot be ignored: Greater China revenue rose year-over-year but failed to meet analyst expectations; and the growth of the high-margin services business is slowing, which was originally Apple's profit stabilizer. Even if new products sell well, cost-side erosion will directly eat into the incremental profits expected for the holiday season.
Simply put: demand resilience remains, but the profit ceiling is being pressed down by chip and AI costs. In the short term, stock price battles mean the market no longer gives a "revenue beat" premium, and capital will reprice Apple's profit elasticity. If the US stock market's overall risk appetite declines, volatility in these high-valuation tech stocks will increase, transmitting market risk sentiment to the crypto market as well.ZEC at $1130, are you still waiting for the upgrade to pump?
NU7 hard fork activated two days ago, block time cut from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, but ZEC plunged 10% in 24 hours, and over $13.7 million long positions were just liquidated—Is this the final shakeout before the upgrade, or the beginning of the privacy coin bubble bursting?
Let's look at the surface: good news is right in front of us, but the price fell first.
Around November 5, the NU7 hard fork went live, transaction confirmation speed tripled, the old Sprout pool was disabled, and 60% of fees went into long-term reserves. Sounds like it should pump, right?
So what happened? ZEC dropped from above 1300 all the way down to 1130, falling 9-10% in 24 hours, underperforming the market. Kraken is selling off, $13.7 million leveraged longs liquidated, RSI dropped to the oversold zone of 30-33.
You might think this is a "shakeout before the upgrade," but is there a possibility that the good news was already bought in advance?
First: NU7 is a technical positive, but the market plays “buy the rumor, sell the fact.”
ZEC’s rise from a few hundred to 1300 was driven by the privacy narrative + ETF expectations + NU7 upgrade.
Now that the upgrade is actually happening, what are the early investors doing? They are selling.
Think about it:
Block time of 25 seconds, fast or not? Fast.
60% of fees going into reserves, good or not? Good.
But do these directly mean the coin price will double tomorrow? No.
An upgrade landing doesn’t equal buying pressure landing.
How many L1 upgrades crashed after completion in 2025? Check the charts, none but “good news fully priced in.”
You don’t dare buy before the upgrade, then chase and catch the bag after—it’s always half a step behind the smart money.
Second: The privacy coin narrative is strong, but regulatory pressure is stronger.
ZEC is the leader in privacy coins, with shielded transactions, a 21 million cap, a market cap over $19 billion ranking 11th, and Grayscale even has an ETF product.
Sounds institution-friendly? But don’t forget—
Privacy coins inherently stand against regulation.
Exchange delisting risks, compliance audits, anti-money laundering pressure—any one of these breaking out can crush the price by 10%.
Now market risk appetite is down, BTC is pressured at 76,000, ETH wobbles around 2250, altcoins broadly fall.
When funds tighten, the first to be abandoned are assets with “sexy stories but regulatory headaches.”
Privacy is a necessity, but your position isn’t. Don’t mistake faith for a stop loss.
Third: Technically oversold, but oversold doesn’t mean bottomed.
4-hour chart: price broke below EMA20 (1225) and EMA50 (1239), MACD negative widening, RSI 30-33, indeed oversold.
Key support at 1117-1120, previous low + Fib support. If broken, next stop 1050-1060.
Daily chart: RSI 42, neutral to weak, near lower Bollinger Band, volatility expanding.
But note—the 200-day EMA is at 740-840, meaning ZEC’s long-term structure is still intact, but short-term trend has turned bearish.
It’s like a car speeding suddenly braking hard; it might rebound a bit, but do you expect it to immediately U-turn and speed up? You need to see if volume confirms.
Oversold is a reason to rebound, not to bottom-fish. If 1117 breaks, expect 1050.
Bull vs. bear, you decide:
Bull side:
NU7 upgrade lands November 5, technical narrative is real
RSI oversold, strong support at 1117-1120
Long-term privacy demand exists, ETF has institutional attention
Long-term structure still above 200-day EMA
Bear side:
10% drop in 24 hours, Kraken selling + $13.7 million long liquidations
Pre-upgrade “sell the news” window, profit-taking can hit anytime
BTC pressured, altcoin liquidity tightening
Privacy coin regulatory risk always looming
Break 1117, target 1050 directly
Key levels:
Resistance above: 1180-1200 → 1225-1237 (must hold to turn bullish) → 1280-1300
Support below: 1117-1120 (strong support) → 1100 → 1050-1060 (break target)
Trading strategy:
Short term (1-3 days before upgrade):
If rebound to 1180-1200 stalls with volume, light short positions, target 1110-1080, stop loss above 1220.
If price falls to 1110-1120 with long lower shadows + low volume, light long test, target 1180-1220, stop loss below 1090, exit if broken.
Leverage no more than 5x, liquidation risk still present.
Mid term (1-2 weeks after upgrade):
Wait for NU7 landing data: transaction speed, active addresses, shielded pool usage.
If network data truly improves + capital returns, after support stabilizes, then build mid-term longs, target 1300-1400.
But if volume breaks below 1050, don’t catch the falling knife, wait near 1000 to reassess.
On NU7 upgrade day, the community will shout “privacy coin rise.”
But the upgrade is a project milestone, not your cash-out machine.
Falling from 1300 to 1130 doesn’t mean ZEC is bad.
It means you mistook “technical good news” for a “price guarantee,” forgetting that smart money also needs to sell.
$BTC $ETH $ZEC The Reserve Bank of Australia raised rates by 25 basis points to 4.85%, the highest in 18 years. The numbers aren't shocking; what's shocking is the reason: AI investment and rising energy costs have reignited inflation.
Previously, rate hikes suppressed demand—excessive consumption and loose credit, raising rates could clamp down on wallets. This time, inflation is driven by investment and energy: capital expenditure on computing infrastructure and electricity fuel costs. Neither responds much to interest rates.
The mechanism is a bit awkward. Data center construction has a long cycle and high expected returns; 25 basis points on a decade-long expenditure hardly constitutes a veto reason. The central bank's tool is pressing on a target it can't move much. The result is often inflation doesn't come down, and rates have to rise further.
The transmission to crypto is straightforward. As the risk-free rate rises, discount rates follow, and valuations of long-duration assets are discounted. $BTC is considered digital gold, but when liquidity tightens, it behaves like a high beta risk asset first. $ETH and $SOL rely more on application narratives, have greater elasticity, and fall more directly.
On the other hand: if inflation originates from production-side capacity expansion and computing power investment, this is more like investment cycle inflation, not monetary oversupply. This kind of inflation kills valuations but doesn't necessarily kill narratives.
A question remains: when central banks start paying interest rate premiums for AI capital expenditure, should $BTC be priced as an inflation hedge or a liquidity thermometer? In the same cycle, these two identities give opposite answers.Just came across the latest liquidation data for ZEC $ZEC
Found an interesting detail to share with everyone
Many people want to rush in to catch the bottom as soon as the market stabilizes a bit, but data doesn't lie. Let's look at three fatal signals revealed by this table:
1. 24-hour "massacre" record 🩸
Look at the bottom row: 24-hour long liquidations total $12.15 million, while shorts are only $1.35 million.
Nearly a 9:1 ratio! What does this mean? It means that in the past day, the vast majority of people trying to "catch the falling knife" got buried. This level of selling pressure is not something a casual rebound can resolve.
2. 1-hour level "fake move"
Notice the first row! Within 1 hour, short liquidations started to appear ($11,400), though the amount is small, it indicates a slight short-term rebound.
My judgment is: this is very likely not a reversal, but the main players "luring longs." They use a slight rebound to attract retail investors, then hit them again.
3. 4-hour level still "cleaning out"
In the 4-hour data, longs were still liquidated for $270,000. This shows that at this level, the main players are still decisively unloading or suppressing the price, with no sign of support.
The current ZEC market is a typical "meat grinder" scenario.
For those wanting to catch the bottom: hold your hands! Unless you see a significant increase in short liquidations (indicating shorts are taking profits and the downtrend may pause), do not try to catch the falling knife $ZEC A single institution holds 6.03 million $ETH, directly accounting for 4.9% of the total network supply, with over 5 million already fully staked...
Many get excited seeing institutions buying aggressively, but the more I look, the more uneasy I feel. When chips are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few whales, earning passively through staking and leveraging, is this really decentralization or turning into the institutions' private stash?
Institutions being well-fed doesn’t necessarily mean retail investors can profit alongside.Midterm election day, three position maps simultaneously lean downward.
$BTC: around 77,000. On the upside, 8.0783 billion USD worth of shorts are placed at 80,783 as a reference; on the downside, 780 million USD worth of longs are placed at 73,731 as a reference. The thinner side will be tested first, which is a more honest indicator of direction. ETF single-day outflow is about 614 million USD.
$ETH: around 2,250. The risk line of a certain multi-coin address is at 2,253, less than 0.2% away from the current price; RSI has entered the oversold zone, with the rebound window overlapping the risk.
$SOL: around 92. ETF net outflow last week was 71.47 million USD, the largest single week since launch; a certain address deposited about 1.49 million tokens to exchanges over 10 days, indicating thin absorption.
This week features the midterm election results and Friday's non-farm payrolls. For these three coins, products are withdrawing, whales are selecting, waiting for data to give spot funds a reason to come in on their own.
For record-keeping of market conditions only, not investment advice.
#苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 Will $UNI security concerns drive DEX usage or reduce on-chain turnover? Users may shift from centralized venues to self-custody trading, but panic could also cause funds to exit, so the direction is not singular. If DEX spot depth, fees, and repeat users improve simultaneously, UNI's ecosystem value will be more solid. The opposing view is that aggregators divert traffic and fee policies affect retention; if trading is just short-term panic-driven position switching, it cannot be extrapolated. Natural trading should be distinguished from arbitrage and liquidation flows, and it should be verified whether token holders can share in protocol growth. When further confirming, I will separate news shocks, capital flows, and actual usage for examination; only if at least two indicators remain aligned across multiple periods will I adjust the mid-term judgment. If only short-term price or a single indicator changes, maintain caution and wait for subsequent data. UNI and AAVE rise against the trend, funds are picking "accountable" assets
UNI rose 18% weekly, AAVE lending sector up 7.25%. On the third day of the Binance turmoil, funds shifted from "running first" to "selective buying." Assets with income, buybacks, and real products are clearly more favored. Although meme tokens are lively (TRUMP fell 8.28% today), this shift in fund preference is worth noting. If it continues, the leading list for the next rebound will differ from the previous round. The impact of elections on cryptocurrency prices is actually quite disappointing based on historical data.
Since 1950, there have been 19 midterm elections, and the S&P 500 has risen every year after the election, averaging 15.1%. Bitcoin has also been positive one year after three full cycles, but it always dips for a few weeks right after voting. This year, the US stock market is only 3% below its peak, while Bitcoin is still climbing out of a sell-off. History suggests a high probability of higher prices after one year, but the path in between is tough.
More importantly, the market isn’t trading the election at all today. Some analysis points out directly: the market won’t speculate on midterm election trends primarily because the event risk of a possible renewed hot war with Iran is too great, and almost no traders would bet on the election. The 2022 “red wave” failing was a genuine surprise, yet the market remained calm. So don’t expect the price to move with the election result tomorrow night; the transmission chain isn’t that short. Hong Hao's Daily Review and Outlook 20261102: Lunar Calendar 9.24
November 2, 2026 · Shanghai-Shenzhen 15:00 / Hong Kong Stocks 16:08
Some outlook comments are separately published on the "Hong Hao's Macro Strategy" Orbit for Orbit readers' reference.
Mainline: The catch-up decline caused by the US stock market crash on Friday did not occur. The ChiNext Index rose 1.9%, the Hang Seng Tech Index rose 2.3%, with the rebound led by AI application sectors such as media, gaming, and software; the computing power leaders that led the decline on Friday only slightly corrected, with funds selling banks and precious metals.
At the close of the US East Coast on Friday, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 7.2%, which should have been priced in at the Asian market open on Monday. Instead, A-shares rebounded broadly: the ChiNext Index closed at 2,459 points, up 1.9%, the STAR 50 rose 3.1%, with 4,680 stocks rising compared to 892 on Friday. The Hang Seng Tech Index in Hong Kong rose 2.3%, while the Hang Seng Index only rose 0.4%, dragged down by bank stocks. Funds did not return to the computing power optical module stocks that led the decline on Friday; Zhongji Xuchuang fell 0.5%, New Easun fell 2.3%; instead, they moved into film and television, gaming, publishing, and software sectors, with 125 stocks hitting the daily limit up compared to 47 on Friday. The decliners were banks and gold stocks, with Shanghai Bank down 8.8%, and Shanjin International down 6.4%. #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Binance withdrawals of 4.7 billion didn't crash the market, but a 30% drop in order book depth is the real signal
Customers have cumulatively net withdrawn 4.72 billion USD. Tim Sun from HashKey said there was no large-scale panic nor mass user withdrawals. This is true; the withdrawal volume is large but orderly. However, the real signal lies elsewhere: Talos data shows Binance's BTC order book depth once dropped by about 30%, with market makers pulling back. Withdrawals can return, but restoring depth takes time. Binance is adding incentives for small and medium market makers, but confidence isn't something fixed in a day.
Regarding the stolen assets, the Core network executed a hard fork, recovering 68,146,177 CORE from three attack addresses, accounting for 70.2% of the affected total. No transactions were rolled back, no new issuance, and no change to total supply. Binance said it has compensated 95% of the affected assets, with major tokens fully covered at 100%, and the remaining 5% are low-liquidity small tokens still being slowly repurchased. In terms of transparency, at least this is more practical than many exchanges. $ZEC's decline is unrelated to the overall market; it's its own issue.
BTC dropped 1.68%, ETH dropped 1.44%, and ZEC dropped 8.26%. The gap is huge. On-chain, a giant whale bought 25,002 ZEC over four days at an average price of $1,271, while also holding long leverage positions. As a result, when ZEC fell below 1,200, stop-losses were triggered, causing a combined spot and contract loss of $5.84 million. The community grant pool ZCG holds nearly $125 million, but some feel this money is being spent without restraint, leading to calls for a direct liquidation and exit.
On November 5, there's another event: the NU7 upgrade activation, which will reduce block time from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, tripling confirmation speed. It sounds good, but there's a catch—the old Sprout privacy pool will be frozen, and any ZEC left inside must be migrated before the upgrade or it will become inaccessible. The technical upgrade is real progress, but governance disputes and leveraged liquidations have disrupted short-term sentiment. Many are watching the $1,000 level closely. $BTC voting for the midterm elections is today, how will Bitcoin move???
Conclusion first: Trump is tanking, definitely losing, Bitcoin will most likely crash down into a deep pit, continuing to test 76000, 75500!!
Currently, the election trend is very unfavorable for the Republican Party, the Democrats have a high probability of retaking the House, and the Senate is deadlocked. Once the results come out, regulatory expectations will cool down, risk aversion will rise, and funds will first withdraw from high-risk assets.
ETF liquidity is also weak. In the past few trading days, Bitcoin ETF outflows reached as high as $643 million in a single day, with about $800 million in cumulative outflows from crypto ETFs over the past 7 days, showing institutions are clearly reducing positions in the short term. Although overall outflows nearly stopped yesterday, it looks more like a pause after failing to push prices down, not a bullish counterattack.
The market is now consolidating with low volume, rebounds lack volume, and the bearish structure remains. If it falls below 76000 tomorrow and fails to recover, the next target is 75500.
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ #With the US midterm elections approaching, which results are worth watching?
Voting for the US midterm elections is today. What the crypto community should focus on is not who wins, but whether the CLARITY Act can survive. Polls show the Democrats have a high chance of taking the House and are competitive in the Senate. If the Democrats sweep, the Senate Banking Committee may fall to Warren, a main opponent of CLARITY, making it harder to revive the bill; only if the Republicans hold the Senate is there a chance to push it again. But don’t expect a surge right after the election; the SEC and CFTC can still issue rules within their current authority, and a long-term legislative framework may be more difficult.
The market has already shown caution: BTC is near $76,500, down nearly 2% in 24 hours; ETH is around $2,250. The liquidation cluster is at $78,000, weekly support at $76,500, and ETH support at $2,150. On election day, the market is thin and no one wants to bet on direction; after news settles, "good news may cause a sell-off, bad news may push prices down" is quite likely. Historically, BTC has risen in the 12 months after midterms, but it often dips in the first few weeks post-vote. This cycle is different, so don’t force the pattern.
In short: the election decides the fate of CLARITY for the next two years, not BTC’s direction tomorrow. If support holds, wait for political noise to settle and the market to find its own rhythm; breaking support opens deeper downside.
What do you think if the Democrats sweep? Is the crypto market short-term bearish but long-term bullish, or short-term bearish and long-term bearish? Discuss in the comments. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #Strategy回购规模超购币三倍, Treasury strategy shift? Strait reopening expectations loosen, but coin price movements completely out of sync?
The US and Iran proposed a plan to advance the Strait reopening within two days, but it is only at the draft stage with no finalized agreement. BTC rose 0.64% near 78, ETH recorded a 0.44% increase, while SOL fell 1.72% inversely, showing clear divergence on the market.
This divergence only confirms that the geopolitical risk premium is fading; it does not prove that incremental funds are willing to enter and support crypto assets. BTC holding steady, ETH keeping pace, and SOL maintaining support are the true signals of bullish confirmation.
Open your position list, check the stop-loss levels of your heavy positions, and don’t open new trades impulsively based on single news.
$BTC $ETH $SOL BlackRock alone had outflows exceeding the entire market, a detail more striking than the numbers themselves.
Data from November 2 shows that the US spot Bitcoin ETF had a net outflow of 398.6 million, with BlackRock's IBIT alone withdrawing 405.3 million. One firm’s outflow exceeding the total net outflow of the entire market means other products were trying to fill the gap but couldn’t fully compensate. Fidelity’s FBTC saw a slight inflow of 6.7 million, which is negligible. The selling pressure is concentrated on the largest and most liquid leading products, indicating institutional-level position adjustments rather than retail investors fleeing. October 30 was even more severe, with a single-day outflow of 643 million, the largest since June 25. Consecutive large outflows piling up suppress sentiment in a way that can’t be digested in just one day.
The situation is similar on the ETH side. On November 2, ETH ETFs had a net outflow of 139.7 million, marking the sixth consecutive day of losses. BlackRock’s ETHA alone withdrew 138.3 million. The main institutional allocation channels are narrowing, following the same logic as Bitcoin, but ETH’s resilience is weaker and it falls more sharply when it drops. 🐋 A ZEC whale has started positioning for a reversal to go long!
A holder with about $8.04 million in ZEC short positions has placed nearly $10.78 million in buy orders in the $1055–$1100 range.
If all buy orders are filled, the plan is to first close the short positions, then switch to going long, expecting to establish about 2,889 ZEC long positions.
However, there are also sell orders of about $3.6 million hanging at $1200 above, meaning shorts may continue to add after a rebound.
My view: This is not simply bullish, but preparing for both sides. The $1055–$1100 range is a key observation zone; it’s worth closely watching how the whale moves next.
$ZEC $BTC $ETH
#USMidtermsPolicyOutlook $SNDK SHORT SETUP
SNDK is under pressure near 1,083.80. A rejection below 1,090 could keep sellers in control.
Entry: 1,082–1,086
TP1: 1,072
TP2: 1,060
SL: 1,095
Wait for resistance rejection.#AppleQ4MarginPressure The latest leveraged lending data hides a signal that almost no one wants to face: the overall network long position crowding has reached its limit. $BTC long loans are 1507.55 coins, short loans only 68.89 coins, with a long-short ratio approaching 22 times; $ETH longs are 16,400 coins versus shorts at 766.95 coins, also about 21 times; $SOL is even more extreme, with longs at 129,900 coins against shorts at 3,148 coins, a ratio as high as 41 times. This is not ordinary bullish sentiment but a one-sided leveraged bet. The lending scale represents the real willingness of retail investors to borrow money and leverage to buy. When this number is tens of times that of the short side, it means almost no one in the market is willing to stand on the selling side; everyone is crowded on the same boat. The problem is, the seats on the boat are already full. A hard rule repeatedly verified in fifteen years of trading experience: when the entire network's views are highly consistent and longs are crowded to the extreme, the market often does not smoothly rise but is more likely to experience an emotional purge that sweeps clustered long positions out of the market. The logic is not complicated—buying power has been exhausted, with no new funds to take over, and any slight disturbance will trigger concentrated stop-losses and selling. The timing window is also quite sensitive. The November 6th non-farm payroll report is about to be released, and December rate hike expectations will be repriced. This sensitive node combined with extreme crowding means short-term volatility is destined to be significant. The long structures of $BTC and $ETH are particularly fragile in this environment, and $SOL's 41-fold long-short imbalance amplifies this fragility to the extreme. One sentence worth remembering: the greater the consensus... The AI sector has fallen more sharply than the overall market, but the two that bucked the trend really tell the story.
In the past 24 hours, the AI sector as a whole dropped 4.71%, AKE plunged 33%, VVV fell 4.81%, and Q dropped 9%. However, PIEVERSE rose 5.58%, and SOSO increased 4.90%. Even though the sector mostly declined, there were exceptions, indicating that funds are not withdrawing indiscriminately but are selective. The phase of "buy anything related to AI" is over; now it depends on who actually holds valuable assets. Those who can hold their ground after this round of declines are very likely to lead the next rebound. The U.S. midterm elections start voting today, but Bitcoin is under pressure. BTC has fallen back to around $76,500, with the pressure from tech stock adjustments transmitting to the crypto market, while investors are also waiting for the control of Congress.
Let's look at the money first. From October 26 to 29, the U.S. spot BTC ETF saw a cumulative net inflow of about $441 million; on October 30 alone, there was a net outflow of about $643 million, wiping out all inflows from the previous four days in one day. Institutional buying is unstable, which is the most concrete signal.
History also has something to say. In the past three U.S. midterm elections, BTC has always adjusted first after the election and then rebounded within a year, with an average maximum drawdown of about 38% and an average increase of about 54% after one year. Mechanically applying this to $76,500 corresponds to a stage low of about $47,400 and a one-year target of about $117,700. But this is a scenario simulation; the 2022 round also included the added impact of the FTX collapse.
Mechanistically, it makes sense: with unclear policy direction, some funds are on the sidelines, and the market lacks buying power. Once uncertainty fades, money will return—over the past 13 midterm elections, the S&P 500 has risen an average of 12.4% six months after the election, rising all 13 times.
So what really should be watched is not the price, but whether ETF fund flows can turn positive and whether pullbacks have support. If the key area is reclaimed and funds come in, it can be observed with a light position; if it falls below and continues not to recover, then the plan should be changed.I see this news going against the bulls' expectations, leaning bearish in the short term. BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF IBIT had an outflow of $405.3 million on Monday, the largest since June; the US spot Bitcoin funds had a combined net outflow of nearly $399 million at the start of November.
I have three rules for trading trends: look for persistence, don't decide direction based on a single day — this outflow hurts sentiment but doesn't directly indicate a trend reversal; look at the whole picture, not just the leader — the overall net outflow is less than IBIT's outflow, so not all funds are withdrawing; look for price confirmation, don't follow headlines — if outflows continue and the price structure weakens, then I would consider it evidence of a weakening trend, this is my speculation.
The trend is the best friend; I still wait for confirmation and don't try to guess the bottom. Facing this ETF outflow, are you judging the trend now by fund continuity, price structure, or trading volume?"Whoa! Is the historical curse repeating? BTC brutally halved in the past three midterm elections, how to prevent it this time?"
Looking at this set of data really makes one gasp. In the past three midterm elections, BTC seemed cursed:
📉 In 2014, after losing both chambers, it dropped 48% within 71 days;
📉 In 2018, after losing the House of Representatives, it dropped 50% within 39 days;
📉 In 2022, after losing the House of Representatives, it dropped 16% within 13 days.
Now looking at the current prediction market data: the probability of the Democrats taking the House has soared to 95%, and the Senate 72%. If the prediction is true, losing the House is almost certain. What everyone fears most is losing both chambers, triggering panic selling.
Analysis by Third Sister: Why does BTC crash after elections?
It's not that the election itself is toxic, but the "uncertainty" triggers massive capital withdrawal. Before elections, Wall Street and whales instinctively reduce risk exposure and pull liquidity early to avoid policy risks. Coupled with unclear expectations on crypto regulation before new policies are implemented, this easily causes a chain reaction of sell pressure.
But will the crash really repeat this time?
First, history does not simply repeat. BTC has already experienced a deep correction (78,000), so negative factors may have been priced in early.
Second, note the saying "buy the rumor, sell the fact." If the result is truly a "split Congress" (each party controlling one chamber), the landing of the boot might actually exhaust the bad news and trigger a deep V-shaped reversal.
Response strategy:
Never heavily bet on one side. During elections, sharp spikes are extremely severe, and double-sided liquidation is the norm 1. Overall Bear Market Sentiment Suppression, Binance Theft Incident Impacts Overall Risk Appetite
This is the fundamental macro environment. After the major Binance theft, market confidence collapsed, funds collectively sought safety, and altcoins and Meme launch tracks, being highly elastic assets, were the first to be sold off by capital.
PONS itself relies on speculative hype and Meme wealth effects for support, making it a high-beta token. Once the market shifts toward a bear market expectation, funds prioritize withdrawing from such thematic tokens, and even with a buyback and burn mechanism, it cannot withstand systemic selling pressure.
2. Core Foundation: Rapid Cooling of Meme Token Issuance Hype, Platform Fee Income Decline
PONS’s value anchor is the platform’s token issuance volume and trading fees: the higher the hype, the more new low-quality tokens are launched, the more active the trading, the higher the fees, and the stronger the buyback support.
1. The cycle of low-quality Meme tokens comes quickly and recedes quickly; fewer new tokens are launched, and most new tokens crash immediately upon launch, so players no longer rush into new tokens;
2. Early on-chain subsidies from Robinhood Chain expired, increasing on-chain usage costs, reducing creators’ and players’ willingness to participate;
3. Many low-quality tokens issued on PONS went to zero and ran away; after losses, players exit and watch, causing ecosystem traffic to shrink.
Buybacks are passive buying, not rigid price support. With reduced income, buyback strength naturally shrinks, directly weakening the support logic.
3. Chip Structure: Huge Early Profit Taking, Concentrated High-Level Sell Pressure
PONS has been listed for a short time, rising from a low to nearly 1U peak; early whales, KOLs, and market makers have substantial paper profits.
There is no team lock-up or investor unlocking plan; all tokens were minted once early on with no unlocking schedule constraints, so large holders can sell anytime.
Once the market weakens, if large holders collectively dump and there is insufficient incremental capital to absorb, the price will quickly fall.
4. Track Competition and Capital Diversion, Funds Snatched by Other Launchpads
The Meme launchpad track is highly competitive: shturl.c and other new launchpads continuously compete for traffic.
When the total hot money in the market shrinks, funds concentrate only on a few hotspots; PONS is no longer the sole market focus, new incoming funds dry up, leaving only existing holders competing.
5. Narrative Shortcomings: No Long-Term Fundamental Value, Purely Dependent on Short-Term Speculation
It focuses on Meme low-quality token issuance, with no real-world business, no quantum-resistant underlying cryptography advantage, and no long-term rigid demand.
After the market cools, everyone sees clearly: buyback and burn is just a marketing mechanism, not a stable profit asset. Once the hype story fades, valuation will quickly collapse.
At the same time, it has no governance rights; holders cannot participate in project decisions and can only passively wait for buybacks, lacking long-term holding support.
6. Leverage Chain Liquidations Amplify the Decline
PONS is listed on multiple exchanges with contract leverage. After the market weakens, continuous declines trigger long position liquidations; liquidation orders automatically dump tokens, creating a negative feedback loop of selling as prices fall, accelerating the decline.The bulls are crowding in. Don't get ahead of yourself yet. ⚡ OKEx $BTC contract long-short ratio is currently 2.77, compared to 2.20 24 hours ago, meaning for every 1 short account, there are 2.77 long accounts.
From my perspective, this is a short-term warming of bullish sentiment, not a confirmation of a price rise. The ratio counts accounts, not positions; more bulls doesn't mean capital dominance. The more aligned the direction, the more you need to guard against volatility if expectations fail. But whether 2.77 is extreme, I don't have historical data to reference, so I won't take it directly as a contrarian signal.
My approach is to first see if the price can cooperate with the sentiment. If the ratio keeps rising but the price can't push higher, I'll treat it as a warning of increased risk chasing the rally, waiting for price confirmation before considering entry or exit, and won't stubbornly hold if it fails. When you see this kind of rising ratio, do you wait for a breakout confirmation or prepare for a counter-move first? XCRCL leverages a daily volume of 14.23 million USD to push the price to 72 USD, yet its market capitalization shows as zero—this "volume without value" abnormal data structure exposes a fundamental flaw in the tokenomics design: extremely low circulation or opaque lock-up mechanisms cause the price discovery function to completely fail. A decline of -1.34% within the narrow range of 72-76 USD seems controllable but is actually a unilateral market maker quote under extremely low liquidity; retail investors attempting large trades will face devastating slippage. The triple zero in social sentiment (heat, bullish, bearish all N/A) confirms the project team has not established effective community operations; the narrative vacuum reduces the token to a pure speculative asset. Smart money signals show net short positions and zero net holdings; professional funds vote with their feet: unwilling to bear liquidity risk or participate in possible market maker wash trading. Technically, lacking effective support and resistance references, any directional breakout may evolve into a one-sided accelerated move. Core judgment: XCRCL is a typical "data anomaly, opaque circulation, narrative absence" triple-zero asset, with an extremely unbalanced risk-reward ratio. Non-professional market makers or insiders should avoid attempting to capture swings; retail investors are left only with liquidity traps. $BTC hit a new low again at 2:13 PM Beijing time, with OKEx spot dropping to 76,386, even lower than the 76,545.3 at 11 AM. It is now around 76,644, down 1.12% in 24h.
Coinglass data shows a total liquidation of $298 million across the network in the past 12 hours, with long positions liquidated at $271 million. BTC liquidations reached $67.8 million, and $ETH liquidations were $40.35 million.
ETH is now at 2,246, down 70% in 24h, and the funding rates for both coins remain positive at +0.01%.
BTC contract open interest increased from $7.46 billion to $7.65 billion in 24 hours, with longs adding on the way down.
My view is that this structure of falling prices while adding longs makes it difficult to see a decent rebound. MMTC estimates that there are nearly $30 million long liquidations near 75,900 and 75,100, which will likely be tested first.
This is public information and my personal opinion for reference only, not constituting any investment advice. The market carries risks. Invest cautiously $BTC When "whale bottom fishing" turns into "hacker money laundering," market sentiment is even more fragile than coin prices (｡•́︿•̀｡)
Yesterday's viral news of a "whale buying 27,553 ETH for $2,286 each, splurging $62.97 million" just ignited sentiment, only to be debunked by ZachXBT and Lookonchain: that money came from a €106 million theft from an EU agency, and hackers are converting stablecoins to ETH to launder money. The whale illusion shattered, and the market immediately deflated (｡•́︿•̀｡)
MicroStrategy increased its BTC holdings by 810 last week, but $BTC still fell from 78,597 to 77,407; BitMine added 8,573 ETH but couldn't withstand BlackRock's monthly outflow of 580,100 ETH (about $1.32 billion), with ETH dropping from 2,306 to 2,267. The positive news is like a paper umbrella, unable to stop capital outflow (￣▽￣)
$HYPE is even more frustrated: Paradigm unstaked 2.55 million tokens (about $224 million) using 15 wallets, pushing the price down to 85.57. When institutions turn their backs, retail investors catch the cold first (╥﹏╥)
Today is the US midterm election, and next door they will also release a full reserve proof. With these two events overlapping, volatility may increase. Don't get carried away with your positions; plan your stop-loss first, don't let a single candlestick decide your blood pressure (｡•ᴗ•｡)ᵎᵎ
On-chain data doesn't lie, but stories do. Next time you see a "whale," ask first: is it wearing a mask? (¬‿¬)
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Apple's earnings report is quite interesting: the performance clearly exceeded expectations, but the market still has concerns! 🍎
Q4 revenue was $114.5 billion, up 12% year-over-year; iPhone revenue was $57.6 billion, a huge 17% year-over-year increase, both surpassing expectations, showing the iPhone is still strong.
EPS reached $2.10, with about $0.05 coming from tariff refunds.
On the other hand, rising storage chip prices combined with increased AI costs mean the next quarter's gross margin guidance is only 45%–46%.
On one side, strong iPhone growth; on the other, costs eroding profits. Apple is not short on growth; the real test is whether AI can bring new profit opportunities
#苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 $NEAR NEAR's deflation strategy is really loud.
They directly minted 13 million tokens in a single month, loudly announcing buybacks, but ended up buying back only 1.9 million tokens and just storing them in their own treasury without burning.
The revenue can't even cover a fraction of the new issuance; it's purely printing money with the left hand and stocking it with the right.
The buying pressure on the market has long dried up, and big holders casually dump some chips to push the price down.
Holding this chip structure and expecting a rebound? You're just becoming a bag holder for the project team.
#NEAR
$NEAR
👇$BTC
1 billion USD. This afternoon, the amount of Bitcoin flowing into OKX reached this volume, with user positions accumulating to 156,600 coins; at the same time, Binance's 24-hour fund flow also turned positive, with a net inflow of 1.6 billion.
Money is moving into exchanges.
On the other hand, breaking news says if the Democrats sweep both chambers, the median year-end Bitcoin forecast is 76,450. The current price is 76,615.
The money coming in and the expectation that it won't rise by year-end are on the same table. I can only interpret this as someone having positioned their holdings in advance.
The market also gives no clear direction. At 14:00, the one-hour candle dropped to 76,386, volume 209 coins, the largest of the day; at 15:00 it bounced back to 76,828, volume shrank to 154 coins. The fee rate is still at 0.01%, open interest is 2.618 billion, 3 million more than at noon.
There are buyers when it drops, but after buying, no one pushes it up. In this kind of market, I neither go long nor chase shorts, just wait for it to choose on its own.
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ The latest research from 21Shares mentioned that in the third quarter, the BTC balance held by long-term holders decreased by about 248,000 coins, nearly three times the amount purchased by ETFs during the same period.
This provides a worthwhile direction for studying the question "Why is the price still under pressure despite capital inflows?": buyers do exist, but there may also be a considerable amount of supply being released on the other side.
However, a decrease in the balance of long-term holders does not mean all these coins have entered trading platforms and been sold immediately. On-chain classifications have their own criteria, and balance changes cannot be directly converted into confirmed sell orders. It is more suitable for observing supply structure rather than precisely explaining daily market movements.
What I care about more is, when a batch of long-held coins starts moving, how much new buying pressure is needed to absorb them for the price to gradually stabilize. Simply seeing new allocations from a certain channel and declaring supply shortage is not enough evidence.
This is also the frustrating aspect of BTC currently: positive news can be found, buying interest can be found, yet the price always struggles to move smoothly. The scale and duration on both sides do not match, causing frequent short-term fluctuations.
I still value ETF demand but will consider it within a more complete market context. Only when supply pressure gradually eases and buying interest can sustain will price performance likely become smoother. Capital inflow is one clue, but other evidence is needed to support it.
#BTC持续承压，资金与市场走势出现分歧 Gold broke below 3900, and the short positions placed this morning relying on the 3970 resistance can be gradually reduced. As for how far it can ultimately fall, we will hold our positions and wait and see～$AMD earnings report is coming💥 Whether AI and storage will continue to drop depends on this key point!
The focus is not on how much profit is made this quarter, but on the Q4 earnings guidance: if the guidance falls short of market expectations, or if there is news of AI chip delivery delays, capital will start to doubt the expansion pace of AI servers, and the entire AI sector is likely to collectively plunge📉📉📉
Storage (Micron MU, SanDisk SNDK, SK Hynix SKHY) is the most direct upstream of AI servers. If AI servers don't sell well, the demand expectations for HBM, DRAM, and flash memory will be downgraded accordingly, and storage will naturally come under pressure and decline.
Previously, $INTC Intel was an example: the current quarter's results met expectations, but the next quarter's guidance was weak, and it still got hammered😂😂
The pricing logic of this industry chain now is based on future demand speculation, not on revenue that has already materialized.
Given the current bearish election expectations and weak sentiment in tech stocks, if the guidance is weak, the probability of a sell-off will be even greater.
Xi Jie is bearish, what about you? BTC's decline is only 2%, but the bulls are starting to accelerate their exit! Is ETH the real disaster zone?
What is truly worth warning about in this round of decline is that the price retracement and leverage liquidation are not synchronized. According to this set of order book snapshots, BTC had about 100 forced liquidations in approximately 80 minutes, with long positions losing $1,032,000; ETH had about 100 forced liquidations in approximately 128 minutes, with long positions losing $1,826,000; SOL had the largest decline, but the amounts liquidated on longs and shorts were basically balanced.
More importantly, the long-short ratios for the three coins still reach 2.74, 2.46, and 3.42 respectively, and the funding rates are all positive, indicating that the crowding of longs has not yet fully eased. The short-term supports to watch are $2237 for ETH, $76386 for BTC, and $90.87 for SOL.
My judgment: This may be the first round of leverage liquidation, but it cannot be concluded that the risk has been fully released. If prices continue to fall but open interest does not significantly decrease, we still need to be alert to a second round of long liquidations. $BTC #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Recently, funds have continuously flowed out of exchanges, and market liquidity is gradually tightening. The trends of $BTC, $ETH, $SOL, and $ZEC have shown significant divergence. Fund outflows and new capital inflows are not the same concept, which is also the key reason why Bitcoin ($BTC) remains relatively stable in trend but is actually under pressure in the market. Bitcoin ($BTC) rose slightly by 0.13% intraday, with a 0.07% increase over the past hour, showing a relatively steady trend; Ethereum ($ETH) increased by 0.71%, with a slight 0.01% decline in the hourly chart, overall lacking upward momentum but not weakening. ZEC ($ZEC) rose 4.99% in a single day, then fell back 0.90% in the past hour, a typical short-term spike and pullback; SOL ($SOL) dropped 1.29% for the day but rebounded 0.35% in the last hour, with short-term long positions being tested. Funding rates are a more noteworthy signal: $SOL funding rate is 0.0100%, $ZEC is 0.0097%, $BTC is 0.0089%, and $ETH only 0.0045%. The funding rate differences among different coins are large, and the concentrated direction of leveraged funds does not match the price strength positions. Currently, cash continues to flow out, futures positions cannot keep up with changes, and exchange withdrawals are compressing the spot capital base. The cost of long positions is rising, but the liquidity supporting these positions is decreasing. The high funding rate of $ZEC makes speculative leverage more prone to being squeezed out. A single day's wallet outflow is not a strong reference; continuous outflows are needed to confirm it is not a one-time transfer. The subsequent market direction,Does $AAVE's risk-off deleveraging impact lending demand or highlight risk control advantages? Safety incidents and reduced risk appetite often lead users to lower leverage, but also increase the emphasis on collateralization ratios, liquidations, and oracle risk controls. If Aave maintains repayment, deposit, and borrowing quality amid volatility, the advantages of a mature protocol become evident. The downside is that shrinking lending balances affect fee income; if risk parameters fail or bad debts increase, the outlook weakens. Monitoring utilization, collateral concentration, and liquidation quality is essential; stable income requires evaluating risk costs together. For further confirmation, I separate the impact of news shocks, capital flows, and actual usage; only if at least two indicators align over multiple periods do I adjust the medium-term view. If only short-term price or a single indicator changes, I remain cautious and await subsequent data.ZEC is about to undergo a major upgrade, but the real controversy isn't about the coin price!
Recently, altcoins have generally been under pressure, but ZEC has one matter worth paying special attention to.
According to the current plan, Zcash will activate the NU7 upgrade around November 5, with block time expected to shorten from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, significantly improving confirmation efficiency.
However, as the upgrade approaches, another debate has emerged within the community.
On October 26, Zcash co-founder Sean Bowe proposed adjusting the community funding plan, citing that the related fund reserves have exceeded $125 million, while annual expenditures are about $6 million.
The question arises: Should these funds continue to accumulate, or should the allocation method be readjusted?
I think this is more worth studying than short-term price fluctuations.
ZEC's core competitiveness lies in privacy technology, but long-term development also depends on developers, funding support, and community governance.
Technical upgrades can improve network performance but do not guarantee a price increase; reducing development funds may not necessarily benefit long-term holders.
A truly mature project is marked not only by continuous technical upgrades but also by reasonable allocation of ecosystem resources.
Whether the NU7 upgrade can be successfully implemented and how the community ultimately handles the funding dispute are worth continued attention.
$ZEC #PalantirQ3 revenue grew 96%, but the stock price fell instead of rising. Why can't the positive news trigger market sentiment?
Because the positive news acts as a "sedative" for retail investors. The consensus among big capital is not based on the news but on "risk-off bloodletting."
The true bottom is when "major negative news can't shake the market." Right now, it's "external positive news can't lift the market," which in market terms means only one thing: the bulls above have already been trampled, and the current sell-off is to hunt down deeper leverage liquidation lines (Liquidity Hunt).Dage looks at SanDisk
The market is trading, it's not about "how much money is made now," but "the speed of making money is slowing down"
There is a counterintuitive rule in the storage industry: what matters is not that prices are rising, but how fast prices are rising. The original phrase calls this the "second derivative."
The average selling price of NAND flash memory rose 70% quarter-over-quarter last quarter, but only 25% this quarter. In absolute terms, prices are still rising; a 25% increase in other industries would already be considered a surge. But the market prices based on the "curve only getting steeper," and when the slope of the curve changes from 70 degrees to 25 degrees, even if the direction hasn't changed, capital will retreat first.
Kioxia dealt another blow. Its profit guidance for the next quarter is far below expectations, and management directly said the flash price surge is "stabilizing." Kioxia and SanDisk share a Japanese wafer fab, so Kioxia's statement basically revealed half of SanDisk's bottom cards. As a result, the sell-off spread from SanDisk to Micron and Western Digital, and the entire storage sector took a hit.
There is also a more hidden problem: long-term contracts have locked the "price hike accelerator"
SanDisk signed a bunch of long-term supply agreements called NBM. About half of the capacity for FY27 and about two-thirds for FY28 have already been locked in advance, guaranteeing revenue of $93.9 billion, with contracts extending to 2030.
$SNDK Morgan Stanley's underweight signal matters because it arrives as the major AI spenders' combined free cash flow swung to negative $14B in the first nine months of 2026, from positive $143.5B a year earlier. With buybacks down 83% YoY, investors may demand clearer evidence that expansion can fund itself. That adjustment need not be abrupt, but the margin for disappointment is thinner.
#HedgeFundsUnderweightAI A company’s revenue dropped by 60%, but the profit is still positive. I couldn’t figure out the accounting until I saw it earned 5.9 million from renting out data centers.
Cipher Digital’s mining revenue in Q3 was 20.8 million, down 71% year-over-year, and total revenue was cut from 71.7 million to 26.7 million, looking like it was about to collapse, yet net profit was 31.6 million. The secret is simple: stop mining and rent out the Texas data center.
The cost was an operating loss of 71.9 million, and EBITDA went from a profit of 40.8 million to a loss of 10 million. Betting that $BTC mining is less profitable than renting out racks—if you bet right, you’re a data center stock; if you bet wrong, you’re just stacking mining machines.