Orbit Post Sitemap
ETH is currently around $2,341, with a 24-hour range of $2,298–$2,358, up about 1.4%, but down 3.7% in the past 7 days and 13.1% in the past 30 days, remaining weak in the medium term.
Derivatives are neutral to slightly bearish: funding rate +0.0072%, open interest about $5.51 billion; 24-hour liquidations about $19.71 million, with shorts at $17.3 million, indicating this rebound is more due to shorts being forced to cover rather than bulls actively pushing.
Funding is the main drag: US spot ETH ETF saw a net outflow of about $1.08 billion in October, the worst month this year; a hedging factor is the on-chain staking volume hitting a record of about 43.8 million tokens.
Macro: The Federal Reserve's interest rate decision will be announced at 2 AM Beijing time on October 29. The market prices in a hold this time, but the expectation for a rate hike in December is high. The 10-year US Treasury yield is about 5%, and hawkish rhetoric will suppress rebounds.
Outlook (not advice): On the upside, first watch $2,350–$2,380; only with volume recovery can we talk about $2,400–$2,440. On the downside, first watch $2,290–$2,300; if it breaks the monthly low of $2,276, beware of a drop to $2,240–$2,260. Use low leverage and set stop losses. $ZEC #OctoberFOMCRateDecisionToBeAnnouncedThisWeek
#ZECRises6%AgainstTheTrend: Short Squeeze + Upgrade Expectations, Beware of Profit-Taking After Positive News
While mainstream coins fluctuate, ZEC strengthens against the trend, surging over 6% in a single day to become the market dark horse, driven by a combination of crowded short positions and upgrade expectations.
Intensive Positive Catalysts Released: Coinciding with the project's tenth anniversary, the Tachyon upgrade is advancing, which will compress on-chain data for shielded payments; the Ironwood upgrade introduces quantum-secure addresses, continuously strengthening the technical narrative. On the funding side, Grayscale's ZEC ETF saw a weekly net inflow of $41.1 million, a new ETF application has been submitted, and the on-chain ZEC supply on Solana reached a historic high, with attention and liquidity rising simultaneously. Meanwhile, discussions have been triggered by treasury mechanism reforms proposing to redirect 8% of block subsidies toward network sustainability, while total supply remains unchanged.
Extremely Crowded Shorts on the Market: Open interest surged 18% in one day, with short positions near the current price accounting for 75%. Price increases triggered passive short stop-loss covering, creating a short squeeze rally. Technical boundaries are clear: resistance at $1329-$1336, with a breakout target of $1350; core support at $1239-$1245, with $1300 as the short-term strength/weakness dividing line.
Risks Should Not Be Ignored: The EU will ban privacy coins on exchanges starting in 2027, creating long-term regulatory pressure; the rally is mainly driven by anticipated upgrade trading, lacking strong fundamental support, making it easy to give back gains after positive news materializes. Suitable for short-term trading rather than long-term holding. The US Consumer Confidence Index for October is 91.7, reaching a new high since June and far exceeding expectations, but the market gave no directional response before the FOMC decision. The real signal is hidden in the ETF ledger: money is flowing in, but only through a single channel.
$BTC is around 80,800, up 1.2% in 24 hours, with an intraday high of 81,300. Last week, spot ETFs saw a net inflow of about $301 million, but excluding BlackRock's IBIT, the remaining products had a combined net outflow of about $265 million. For the entire month of October, ETFs still had a net outflow of about $203 million. The price has recovered above 80,000, but the "unipolar inflow" structure of ETFs has not changed; the 82,000–84,000 range is the upper area that needs testing.
$ETH is around 2,346, up 1.6%, just stuck near the on-chain average cost of 2,310 and the 200-day EMA. Spot ETH ETFs had a net outflow of $1.26 billion in October, approaching the largest single-month outflow on record, with ETHA accounting for over 90% of redemptions. The 2,300–2,315 range is the most critical short-term level; holding it is the basis for stabilization.
$SOL is around 101, up about 1%. SOL ETFs have had net outflows for three consecutive weeks, with a single-week outflow of $17.3 million; buying pressure above 100 remains thin.
In short: The rebound in consumer confidence gave the market a reason to rally, but before the FOMC announcement, ETF money still flows only through the narrowest channel.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 Bitcoin has met a new rival in the competition for capital: artificial intelligence.
Anthropic has just filed for an IPO. AI and semiconductor stocks are rising, while Bitcoin remains under pressure, and ETFs are experiencing significant outflows.
Notably, CoinDesk previously predicted that the IPO wave of $SPCX, $OPENAI, and Anthropic could raise over $240 billion.
The issue is not just about scale.
For years, cryptocurrency has been one of the preferred choices for capital seeking breakthrough growth.
Now, AI offers another option: companies with revenue, tangible products, and access to the stock market.
But this does not mean that funds flowing out of crypto will automatically flow into AI.
However, this introduces a crucial change:
Bitcoin does not necessarily have to lose investor confidence to lose capital. Sometimes, it just needs a more attractive investment opportunity to appear. $BTC 70% of the entire $SUI network's SUI is locked dead in staking pools, so the chips available to dump outside are inherently limited.
That fee-free stablecoin mechanism is the real dark horse. On the surface, it lets funds freeload on the network, but in reality, it takes all the interest from stablecoins parked on-chain and mindlessly uses it to buy SUI at market price, distributing it to nodes.
The larger the pool of settled funds coming in, the stronger this passive buying pressure becomes.
The circulating supply is already bottomed out, and every day the system forces strong buys. Opening short positions at this point means really fighting a knife battle against an emotionless automatic buying mechanism.Nightclub hostess's crypto trading diary
Surprisingly calm despite the entire portfolio being underwater? This top-tier whale's triple short positions are surviving solely on funding fees.
On-chain monitoring shows this whale has simultaneously shorted BTC, ETH, and SOL perpetual contracts. All three coins are currently at a loss on the books, relying on continuous funding fees to offset some of the loss pressure.
Breaking down the positions:
✅ BTC 5x full position short, 2,613.29 coins, market value 210 million U, entry 76,343.5 U, unrealized loss 10.5955 million U, funding fees collected 3.1767 million U, liquidation price 137,300.27
✅ ETH 5x full position short, 106,400 coins, market value 250 million U, entry 2,322.74 U, unrealized loss 1.5599 million U, funding fees 4.302 million U, liquidation price 3,723.54
✅ SOL 7x full position short, 719,900 coins, market value 72.6776 million U, entry 94.3199 U, unrealized loss 4.7799 million U, funding fees 3.8379 million U
Total unrealized loss is about 16.9353 million U, funding fees collected total 11.3166 million U, net unrealized loss after fees is 5.6187 million U.
Margin sum exceeds 102 million U, liquidation prices are far from current prices, so no immediate risk of forced liquidation.
But the hidden risk remains. Whether this strategy can hold depends on two key points: whether the market continues to rally, and whether short funding fees can keep flowing in steadily. When I look at staking-related news, I usually first place it under capital allocation: whether funds are willing to stay long-term on-chain depends not only on returns but also on whether those returns are sustainable and whether the underlying services are reliable. Regarding the recent Solflare incident, I tend to view it as a localized trust discount rather than directly interpreting it as a liquidity crisis for the entire market.
According to Solflare's disclosure, a security incident involving the staking service provider affected its validator keys, and this validator is currently no longer generating staking rewards. Solflare stated that user funds were not affected; the delegated $SOL remains in users' own staking accounts, controlled by their keys. Subsequent updates will guide migration through the app, and once activated, rewards will resume, with plans to compensate migrating users.
My speculation is: if macro liquidity tightens and capital values certainty more, then the interruption of rewards will amplify users' sensitivity to service provider risks, and funds may prefer validators with stable operations. However, control over principal has not been lost, which is different from asset theft and should not be priced the same.
Therefore, I tend to see this as negative news at the staking service layer. Going forward, the focus should be on whether the migration proceeds smoothly and how compensation is implemented, rather than just moving on after seeing the words "fund security." For large funds, the interruption of rewards and migration costs also need to be accounted for. When encountering such incidents, which macro factor do people care about most now: the holding cost brought by interest rates, or risk appetite changes due to liquidity shifts? As of October 28, 2026, a monitoring benchmark has been established: Filecoin officially states that the genesis allocation plan of Protocol Labs and the Filecoin Foundation ended on October 15, and cites a model estimating a roughly 75% decrease in the daily circulating supply increment; this figure is model-based and should not be considered a verified on-chain net circulating supply change. The rules allocate new block rewards to consensus, service, and burn portions; the initial service share is 5%, the consensus share is 95%, and subsequent growth of the service share depends on payment volume thresholds. The reward split itself does not change the total minted amount, as the directly burned portion offsets the corresponding increase in circulating supply; collateral release may also increase circulation, so the end of the allocation does not mean FIL has already entered the reward distribution results; these still require subsequent on-chain data verification.DOGE trades 400 million in one day, less than 3.3% of its market cap; while PEPE's market cap is only one-seventh of that, it can trade 267 million, with a turnover more than four times higher. The money is actually still there, it's just that the market no longer wants to "play" with the "dog"!
$DOGE 0.0773, down 2.7% in 7 days, down 20% in 30 days, 89.4% below ATH. A 400 million turnover is not small, turnover rate 3.3%, still below the median 3.5% of the top 100 coins. With 5 billion new coins mined annually, plus the biggest backer busy building rockets, who still wants to pay attention to it...
$PEPE 0.00000429, +4% in 7 days, +0.8% in 30 days, RSI 52. Trading volume 267 million, turnover 15%, the most active tier. 85% below ATH. Some are gambling, but no movement for a month; anyone with eyes can see it's just moving from left hand to right hand, not very meaningful.
$PUMP 0.0042, 30-day revenue 62.75 million, half repurchased, 32.47% already burned. Only 46% released, FDV 4.15 billion is 2.2 times the market cap of 1.9 billion, top 10 addresses hold 60%, unlocking 1.5% more in November, if you get in, they will dump on you, do you dare?
No one wants to touch the old ones, the small ones are just playing left hand to right hand themselves, the profitable ones hold through unlocks. For these three coins, I have no more moves! BTC is still above 80,000, ETH has a slight rebound, and Dogecoin also has new news! The most frustrating thing is that the decision has not been announced yet, but the market in our minds has already risen.
First, mark the time: this FOMC decision is scheduled to be announced at 2 AM Beijing time on October 29. Without the result, the rise cannot be directly explained as an early digestion of good news.
First, look at $BTC, reference price 80638, up 0.21% in 24 hours. The quote is still below 81000. Price recovery does not mean the buying momentum will continue.
Next, look at $ETH, reference price 2348, up 0.80% in 24 hours. Stronger than BTC in this window, but this small increase alone cannot confirm a full market warming.
Finally, look at $DOGE. On October 21, Dogecoin Labs announced the integration of MyDoge, DogeOS, and Such App. But the official DogeOS documentation still shows the testnet is online, and the mainnet is still in preparation.
Integrating teams, launching applications, and generating real demand are different stages. Announcements can come first, but whether users continue to use it still needs follow-up verification.
I am more concerned about the market performance after the decision, rather than finding a definite reason for the current rise.
The ecosystem has a timetable, but the coin price has no takeoff guarantee.
This is only a personal market record and does not constitute investment advice.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 I’ve looked at that on-chain chip chart several times.
The Bitfinex on-chain data group is quite interesting: around $82,224, there’s a new concentrated cost zone of about 145,000 BTC added, while at $80,353, the amount actually decreased by about 62,000 BTC. To put it simply: during this pullback, some chips were moved from just above $80,000 to above $82,000—not a scare-off, but a turnover at a higher cost.
The short-term holder SOPR is about 1.003, and the profit supply ratio is about 70%. These two numbers indicate that the vast majority of holders in the market are in profit, but not by much; a slight drop brings them back to their cost line. Coupled with futures open interest rising 4.2% from the October 12 low to about 645,000 BTC, and funding rates returning to normal ranges, leverage has been moderately added back—not frenzied.
One more detail: the Coinbase premium index has been negative for 33 consecutive days, currently at -0.15%, showing that buying pressure in the US remains soft. My takeaway is—the base isn’t broken, but the engine is lukewarm. This perfectly aligns with my "dollar-cost averaging without chasing highs" approach. The CLARITY Act failed, and this matter is more serious than the market itself
On September 15, the U.S. Senate voted on the CLARITY Act, with 49 votes in favor and 50 against, falling short of the 60-vote threshold, effectively blocking it. Comprehensive market structure legislation now looks pushed back to 2027.
At the same time, another development is happening: CFTC Chairman Selig announced that if Congress doesn't act, they will first create a voluntary federal registration path for crypto exchanges, allowing exchanges to operate under the protection standards of the U.S. derivatives market; the OCC is issuing national trust licenses to stablecoin and crypto companies, the SEC is granting a five-year exemption for tokenized stocks, and the FASB is discussing classifying some stablecoins as cash equivalents. JPMorgan's assessment is accurate: these measures can attract institutions but may be overturned by the next administration and cannot replace legislation.
What does this mean for prices? In the short term, without the "legalization dividend" as a valuation anchor, the trapped positions above 87,000 are harder to digest. In the long term, rules are gradually being released from regulators' mouths, slower than one-time legislation but also less likely to be overturned. I assign high importance to this matter; it is a slow variable, silent but decisive for the ceiling.The so-called "digital gold," why is it moving in sync with the Nasdaq?
Honestly, this is quite a slap in the face. Glassnode's observation is that in mid-October, the correlation between BTC and U.S. stocks rose to the highest level since the end of May. When AI trading jitters, Bitcoin jitters along — on Monday, South Korea's Kospi and Japan's Nikkei chip stocks fell, and BTC dropped below 80,000 on the same day.
The logic is not hard to understand: for quant funds and algorithmic traders, BTC is a risk asset, not a safe haven. Gold stood back at $4,060 today, up 1.09%; BTC climbed from 79,300 to 80,900, but with more stumbles than gold. This is the current reality: inflation plus geopolitical tensions (U.S.-Iran, oil prices hitting 116) hit hard, money goes to gold first, BTC has to wait for risk appetite to recover.
I hold BTC, but I don't fool myself into thinking it's gold. My approach is to treat it as a "high beta tech stock" for portfolio allocation, not as a safe haven. If you use it to hedge inflation, the data from the past two weeks will disappoint you. Someone bet 68 million USD below 80,000 that it would rise to 90,000
This position is quite wild. On Derive, a certain wallet bought 800 BTC call options expiring on November 6 with a strike price of 90,000 USD all at once on October 20, with a notional value of about 68 million USD, making it the largest single open position on the platform currently.
Note the expiration date: the US midterm elections are on November 3, and November 6 is the first expiration date after the election. This guy is betting not on technicals, but on the election window plus policy expectations.
What’s even more worth watching is the change in implied probabilities: the option market’s probability of "breaking 100,000 before Christmas" climbed from 9.7% a week ago to 12%; the demand for insurance against "falling below 70,000" actually dropped from 15.6% to 11%. On Polymarket, the chance of hitting 100,000 this year is only 17%, and hitting 110,000 is down to 9%.
With such a big price gap between these two groups, who do I trust? Neither fully. But I noticed one thing: more people are willing to pay for upside, and fewer are buying insurance against crashes. This kind of "tail optimism rising" usually appears at the end of a low-level consolidation, not at the top. I’m not moving my spot, but I’m keeping this as a piece on the chessboard. Why is liquidity often more worth paying attention to than the price drop during market panic?
When the crypto market experiences sharp volatility, many people first focus on how much Bitcoin has dropped, how much altcoins have fallen, and whether the market will continue to decline. But besides price changes, there is another easily overlooked factor: liquidity. It determines whether traders can complete buy and sell orders close to their expected prices and also affects the extent to which market volatility is amplified.
First, a price drop and deteriorating liquidity are not the same thing. If the market still has ample buy and sell orders, trading can remain relatively smooth even if prices continue to fall. But when buy orders quickly diminish and the order book thins, a large sell order can cause a significant price impact, leading to more severe market fluctuations in a short time.
Second, insufficient liquidity increases trading costs. Widened bid-ask spreads, actual transaction prices deviating from expectations, and difficulty executing large orders can all cause investors to pay extra costs. In extreme conditions, even if the direction is correctly judged, it does not guarantee that trades can be completed at ideal prices.
Third, liquidity can create a feedback effect. When prices fall rapidly, some traders may withdraw their orders, and leveraged positions may trigger forced liquidations, further increasing selling pressure. It is important to note that this does not happen with every price drop, but it is worth paying attention to when the market is under pressure.
When the market drops quickly, do you first focus on the price decline or whether the order book remains sufficient? Why? Why does an increase in token market capitalization not necessarily mean a large inflow of funds?
In the crypto market, market capitalization is often used to measure the size of a token. When the market cap rises rapidly, many people assume that a large amount of capital is entering the market. But there is an easily overlooked distinction here: market cap is a valuation calculated based on market price and does not equal the total amount of actual funds flowing in.
First, market cap is usually calculated by multiplying the token price by the corresponding supply. If a token has a circulating supply of 100 million tokens and the market price rises from $1 to $2, its circulating market cap will increase from $100 million to $200 million. But this does not mean that $100 million of new funds have actually been used to buy this token.
Second, market price is often determined by marginal trades. In markets with low liquidity, a portion of buy orders can push the transaction price up, and the new price will be used to estimate the value of all circulating tokens. Therefore, there can be a significant difference between market cap growth and real capital inflow.
Third, attention should also be paid to trading depth, bid-ask spread, actual transaction volume, and concentration of holdings. If price increases mainly occur in markets with insufficient liquidity or trading is concentrated among a few addresses, then changes in market cap may not fully reflect broad market demand.
If a token’s market cap doubles within a week but the trading depth is very shallow, would you prioritize focusing on market cap changes or actual fund flows? Why?#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ I think SK Hynix is very likely to exceed expectations this time.
HBM4 will truly start contributing to Vera Rubin's revenue from Q3, DRAM prices have risen about 22%, NAND about 15%, just the price increase alone is enough to boost profits. The market consensus expects operating profit around 77 trillion KRW, gross margin close to 78%, which is already very high, but some brokerages see it exceeding 80 trillion.
The only thing to be cautious about is not the numbers themselves this quarter, but whether HBM4 shipments are below expectations due to Rubin's delay, and how much Samsung catches up. Even if the numbers exceed expectations, if the guidance is weak, the stock might not rise.
Do you think HBM4 can push profitability to the next level this time? Strategy has paused, and this matter is underestimated
I've been pondering this all day. Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) disclosed that during the week of October 19–25, it neither bought nor sold a single Bitcoin, which is a rare pause in its long-term "financing-to-buy-coin" rhythm. During the same period, it spent $204.9 million to repurchase its own STRC preferred shares.
The holding numbers remain unchanged: 848,517 coins, with a cumulative cost of about $64.02 billion, averaging about $75,446 per coin. Calculated at today's price of $80,900, the book profit is still standing.
Why do I care? Because in the past two years, "Saylor buying again" has almost equaled a buy signal for BTC. Now he has stopped and is focusing on repairing his own balance sheet. This is not bearish, but it indicates one thing: even the most loyal buyer thinks now is not the most cost-effective position. Adding the overall holdings of listed companies—globally (excluding mining companies) holding a total of 1,161,643 coins, about $95.4 billion, accounting for 5.8% of the circulating market value—these chips are locked and heavy. They don't sell when prices rise, and they don't necessarily buy when prices fall.
My own response: I don't see it as bearish, but as a reminder "not to expect institutions to provide a bottom." #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ $BTC ETF money is coming in more "calmly" than I expected
According to SoSoValue: On October 26 Eastern Time, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net inflow of $110 million, and all the money came from just one fund, BlackRock's IBIT, with zero net inflow from others combined. IBIT's historical cumulative net inflow has reached $66.244 billion, with total US BTC ETF net assets at $102.84 billion, accounting for 6.41% of BTC's total market cap, and a historical cumulative net inflow of $57.293 billion.
This only makes sense when viewed in the context of last week: from Monday to Wednesday, about $1.08 billion flowed in, but on Thursday and Friday, $772.4 million flowed out, resulting in a net inflow of roughly $300-400 million for the whole week. In other words, institutions are not "buying"; they are repositioning before the interest rate decision: only buying IBIT, the deepest liquidity pool, and avoiding other fringe options.
I personally have a position bought around 83,000, and seeing this structure actually reassures me—it's not retail investors blindly rushing in, but big money carefully selecting vehicles. Conversely, a reminder: the ETF cumulative net flow for the entire October was still a net outflow of about $170 million, which is incomparable to the net inflows of $3.5 billion in August and $2.6 billion in September. The money hasn't fled, but it definitely hasn't returned either. #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ $BTC The real market open this week is at 2 AM tonight
The Federal Reserve will meet on October 27–28, and the interest rate decision will be announced at 2 AM Beijing time on October 29 (Thursday). This time, there will be no new economic forecasts or dot plots.
Conclusion first: a "hold" this time is almost certain. CME FedWatch prices the probability of 3.75%–4.00% at 88%–93%, and among 100 economists surveyed by Reuters, 94 expect no change. The September hike was the first 25 basis point increase in 2023, and adding another one a month later would be too rushed politically and in communication—especially with the midterm elections on November 3.
What really matters is the wording. The market has already priced in a 70%–78% chance of a rate hike in December. So a "hawkish pause" is the baseline scenario: verbally cautious but honestly keeping the option to tighten in December.
How do I interpret this as a holder? If the statement removes "data dependence" and emphasizes inflation risks, US Treasury yields will rise, the Nasdaq will take a hit first, and BTC will follow down; if Powell’s tone is softer, the 87,000 resistance wall might get another shot. Don’t bet on direction, just deleverage and sleep. #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ $BTC $DOGE #OctoberFOMCRateDecisionToBeAnnouncedThisWeek
#MainstreamBleedingDOGEGainsAgainstTrend: Capital Downgrade Game, Don't Mistake Emotion for Trend
While mainstream coins remain weak, DOGE's strength against the trend has become an unexpected highlight on the market. This is not due to a broad sector rally but a capital migration game amid risk preference downgrade.
Catalyst support: Since October 12, large addresses have increased holdings by about 600 million DOGE, with over 36 billion tokens changing hands around $0.081, significantly increasing token concentration; meanwhile, the AI wallet is about to launch, social profile features are going live, and new ecosystem narratives continue to ignite sentiment, with 64% of the community bullish.
Clear capital logic: ETH is stuck in a "boiling frog" style gradual decline, with marginal buying drying up; SOL's 100-dollar level is barely supported, and blue-chip appeal continues to wane. Speculative funds have not fully exited but shifted to high-elasticity, low-price meme assets, with DOGE absorbing this short-term liquidity due to its high beta characteristics.
However, risks cannot be ignored: House of Doge has lost exclusive brand usage rights from the foundation, fracturing the ecosystem cooperation framework; and the meme market is entirely sentiment-driven, lacking fundamental support, so once sentiment fades, the decline will be rapid.
Essentially, this is a capital downgrade game, not a sector trend reversal. DOGE shows strong short-term resilience but remains a sentiment-driven asset. Trading should focus on quick entries and exits, with caution against the risk of a broader market pullback triggered by mainstream coins breaking down.Over 1,000 large whale transactions of BTC in 24 hours have generated a turnover of 17.9 billion USD, with Binance withdrawing 8,200 BTC in a single transaction. This is not something retail investors can do; chips are moving to cold wallets. USDT whales have a turnover of 25.9 billion, with off-exchange funds ready but not rushing into the market. The security booth just changed shifts, I placed my thermos on the table, staring at AIN's market.
AIN current price is 0.15896, RSI is overbought, MACD shows bearish divergence, and bullish volume can't keep up. The liquidation chart shows a cluster of long liquidations around 0.1595; pushing up will just fuel the shorts. There is strong short support around 0.145 below. The afternoon sun shines in, I pressed my hat down a bit.
The operation is bearish biased. Enter short positions in batches between 0.158 and 0.1595, take profit at the first target of 0.150, second target at 0.145. Set the stop loss above 0.162; if broken, accept the loss. Keep position size light, as this divergence area is prone to stop-loss hunting spikes.
$AIN
#美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落
@OKX星球 $xNVDA announced a $3 billion investment in Meta.
Meta also plans to increase its financing scale to $97.5 billion.
The AI industry is becoming more and more interesting now.
Chip suppliers not only sell chips but also start investing in their own customers.
AI demand is indeed strong, but the capital cycle and final investment returns deserve serious study.Everyone says SK Hynix's earnings report is good news for storage coins, but I want to take the opposite view: it's draining the crypto circle's blood. With an expected operating profit surge of 614%, the stock price has halved from its June peak, meaning the market has already priced it in. AI capital expenditure and crypto are competing for the same pool of risk funds, and the 20-week correlation between BTC and Korean chip stocks has turned negative to -0.41—chips rise, but BTC may not follow.
On the flip side, this negative factor is almost fully played out. BTC current price is 80865, holding above 80,000, with no short-term structural damage. Resistance above is at 81000, with a triple confluence at previous high 81278, round number, and moving average 80277; support below is at 80178, overlapping previous low 79477 and round number 80000.
Bold prediction: with earnings and decisions settled, negative factors exhausted and funds flowing back, BTC will first surge to previous high 81278, holding above 81000 to directly target 82000; if it pulls back to 80178 without breaking, that's a good dip-buy level. Trading plan: hold above 81000, small position 5000U long, stop loss at 80600, target 82000; exit if it breaks below 79477. Currently recovering from a 200,000U loss, no holding through losses, must use stop loss. $BTC $BTC #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ 本期嘉宾：BTC、ETH、ZEC 三个币都在涨，涨得最猛的那个身边全是空单：ZEC 一天 +6.2%，持仓量跟着多了 18%，现价上下 3% 这段里七成五是空单。另两个正好反过来，多头占优（52%、56%）。三个币头顶的燃料区全在 1.5% 内，脚下全在 2% 以外，ZEC 要 5% 外才有。 $BTC ｜阻力 81,275.5–82,051.1｜支撑 77,968.8–78,989.4
现价 80,903.3，头顶 0.46%，脚下 2.37%。今早那根冲到 81,278.8 就掉回来，15 分钟图连着两根长上影，现在还在 1 小时布林中轨上方 0.5%。 头顶 0.46% 起是 81,275.5–82,051.1 一片，81,566.64 这个空头痛点（3,349.80 万）就在这片里。今早那个高点贴着这片下沿，差 3 块钱没进去。 脚下 1.17% 处孤零零一座 79,959.06 多头痛点（3,349.80 万），跟脚下那片隔着 1.2% 空档；昨天傍晚那个低点 79,477.9 穿到它下面 0.6%，现在才站回来。脚下那片比头顶那片厚。 离现价最近这一段多空基本对半，多头 Good morning, brothers. 📈 Macro trump card: October holds steady, December is the real term. The latest CME FedWatch pricing shows a high probability of 89.5%–91% that the FOMC will keep rates unchanged in October, but this "no rate hike" placebo has almost no trading value. What the market is really pricing in is December: the probability of a 25 basis point hike has risen to 68%–73.9%, with some estimates even higher. This is not the end of tightening, it is a postponement of tightening. Inflation has not given the doves any face. September CPI year-on-year was 3.7%, core CPI year-on-year was 2.6%, with housing, medical, and airline service prices rising simultaneously, indicating the rebound is not simply due to energy disturbances. Core PCE year-on-year remains around 3.0%, a full percentage point away from the 2% target. The time interest rates stay high is likely longer than the market expected at the beginning of the year. Employment is cooling down, but not enough for the Fed to pivot. September nonfarm payrolls increased by only 29,000, far below expectations, and previous values were revised downward. However, in an environment of unstable inflation expectations, weak employment does not automatically mean easing. The Fed lacks urgent reasons to pivot; the data combination points to a "hawkish pause," not a policy turning point. Liquidity signals: ETFs are swinging, not flooding. Bitcoin spot ETFs had a net inflow of about $301 million last week, ending two consecutive weeks of outflows, but October still shows a net outflow of $314 million. Funds are coming back, but not continuously. This determines that the current market is more likely a structural repair,$ETH #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议
#Is the ETH rebound a short squeeze trap? 1.3 billion lost in 30 days, upgrade delay hides risks
ETH short-term rebound to around 2340, seemingly MACD golden cross initiating recovery, but actually driven entirely by short stop-loss covering, not new capital inflow. Over $500,000 worth of short positions liquidated within 263 minutes, price rebounded above the average short cost triggering passive buy orders, but positions shrank simultaneously, long-short ratio declined, rise accompanied by position reduction, rebound quality seriously insufficient.
Fundamental selling pressure continues to intensify: Spot ETF net outflow of $1.31 billion in 30 days, five times the scale of BTC, with BlackRock alone outflowing $1.13 billion; Ethereum Foundation sold 2,785 coins, ICO-era whales transferred another 3,000 coins to exchanges, spot selling pressure is continuous.
Ecosystem expectations keep falling short: Glamsterdam upgrade delayed again, possibly until 2027, only key vulnerabilities fixed; EIP-8025 testing progressing, stablecoin ecosystem accounts for 37%, all long-term logic, short-term valuation support is weak. OpenAI's “ETH hypothesis falsification” misunderstanding went viral, precisely exposing the truth of quiet market trading and collective capital wait-and-see before the FOMC.
Technical boundaries clear: Strong resistance at 2380 above, failure to hold means bearish pattern remains; core support at 2227 below, breaking it will open downside space. Avoid chasing high on low-volume rebound, prioritize light positions and defense before the decision.I think SK Hynix is very likely to exceed expectations this time.
HBM4 will truly start contributing to Vera Rubin's revenue from Q3, DRAM prices have risen about 22%, NAND about 15%, and just the price increases alone are enough to boost profits. The market consensus expects operating profit around 77 trillion KRW, with a gross margin close to 78%, which is already very high, but some brokerages see it exceeding 80 trillion.
The only thing to be cautious about is not the numbers for this quarter themselves, but whether HBM4 shipments are below expectations due to Rubin's delay, and how much Samsung catches up. Even if the numbers exceed expectations but the guidance is weak, the stock might still not rise.
Do you think HBM4 can push profitability up another notch this time? 80,000 has returned, but the real critical point is at 87,000
This morning, Bitcoin rose over 1% to reclaim 81,000, reaching a high of 81,300; Ethereum followed with a 1.7% increase, trading at 2,351. After falling below 80,000 for two days, the bulls have taken back their position.
But don’t rush to celebrate yet, on-chain data pours cold water on this.
[87,000, the place that buried rebounds twice this year] Glassnode data shows that buyers of Bitcoin over the past two years have costs concentrated above 87,000, forming a massive wall of trapped positions. This year’s pattern has played out twice already: whenever the price touches 87,000, both the positions breaking even and profit-taking sell off together, followed by a drop starting at 25%. The path from 80,000 to 87,000 is treaded step by step by those wanting to escape.
[The market itself doesn’t believe it] On the prediction market Polymarket, the probability of Bitcoin reaching 100,000 within the year is only 17%, and reaching 110,000 is just 9%. Money is more honest than words.
[The only variable is early tomorrow morning] Since mid-October, the correlation between Bitcoin and the US stock market has risen to the highest since the end of May — it no longer moves on its own but depends entirely on macro conditions. The Federal Reserve decision early Thursday morning is the decisive factor for this rebound: if the tone is dovish, 87,000 can be tested; if it remains hawkish, 80,000 will have to be surrendered again.
How many times do you think this 87,000 wall needs to be hit before it breaks?
$BTC $ETH $BTC The entire network is waiting for positive news from the Ethereum testnet. On one side, researchers are frantically tweeting celebrations, while on the other, nearly $90 million is fleeing. The foundation is even secretly swapping U.
They verbally shout about the stars and the sea, but are frantically offloading in hand. The main players are skillfully playing this facade. With the October FOMC decision just around the corner, the macro expectation of "higher rates for longer" is making BTC grind at the 80,000 level, while ETH is trapped by liquidity tightening and whale portfolio adjustments. This pattern of good news turning into bad news is common.
The 2321 price is like stagnant water, tightly suppressed by the EMA above. As long as the rebound doesn't surpass 2380, it's a bear market; breaking below 2281 points directly to 2200. Although the 100x short position shown in the chart has over 10x unrealized profit, extreme spikes make high leverage like walking a tightrope. In the market, buyers listen to stories, while those who see the cards eat the meat.
Currently, long and short leverage is crowded, and before the FOMC boot drops, repeated shakeouts are likely. It is recommended to hold light spot positions defensively, strictly control leverage on contracts, avoid becoming liquidation fodder, and prioritize capital preservation. $BTC $ETH $ZEC btc
The Federal Reserve's interest rate decision will be announced at 2 PM on Thursday. Cryptocurrency is currently not an independent narrative; Bitcoin follows Nasdaq fluctuations. When tech stocks weaken due to concerns over AI capital expenditures, the crypto market simultaneously comes under pressure. A deeper constraint lies in the high US Treasury yields (10-year nearing 5%), which increase the cost of leveraged funds, while the crypto market itself lacks endogenous liquidity sources, passively amplifying sensitivity to the macro interest rate environment. CoinShares points out that the next phase of the crypto market direction is more likely to be determined by the interest rate path rather than industry-specific catalysts, so continue to pay attention to the interest rate path.
btc:
Bitcoin has recently been tugging around $80,000, repeatedly falling below and barely recovering. This fragile balance directly reflects the suppression of interest rate expectations: the market prices in about a 68% or higher probability of a rate hike in December. If the statement is hawkish and strengthens expectations for December action, rising US Treasury yields will suppress risk assets, and Bitcoin may test support below $80,000 again, reaching levels like $78,000; conversely, if the wording leaves room for December, Bitcoin is expected to get a breather and attempt to recover above $82,000 $BTC surges then falls back: ETF “net inflow” fails to mask same-day demand reversal 📉
$BTC weakened again after attempting to rebound near $85,000, dipping once to $79,332. The report on October 26 shows its 24-hour trading volume at about $17.55 billion; related data is rolling and changes over time, so it should not be confused with subsequent exchange quotes or closing prices.
ETF capital flow also fluctuated: Farside Investors' table shows inflows of $526.7 million, $23.2 million, and $524.8 million on October 19, 20, and 21 respectively; outflows of $635.6 million and $137.9 million on the 22nd and 23rd, totaling $773.5 million outflow over two days. Summing the five entries, net inflow is about $301.2 million. However, there is one issuer entry missing on October 23, so the total is still subject to adjustment.
Therefore, two consecutive days of outflows do not necessarily mean a net outflow for the week; capital remains positive during the week, but same-day demand has reversed, and BTC failed to hold the high level. The price retreat near $85,000 after three days of inflows also indicates that relying solely on new ETF funds may not be enough to support Bitcoin. ⚠️#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ $ETH 2348 tailing off, but still trapped in a "consolidation cage"
Market summary:
4H: MACD golden cross below zero line with expanding red bars, RSI recovering from 42 to 48; however, price remains suppressed by EMA25(2318)/EMA99(2347), 2360 is the intraday hard resistance
2300 successfully reclaimed twice, 200-day EMA(2317) temporarily acts as the lifeline; below 2,282 break = target 2,220
Capital betrayal: On 10.27, spot ETF net outflow of $88.58 million, foundation sold 2785 ETH, BitMine approaching 5% cap and no longer aggressively buying — rebound lacks institutional support
Three critical lines:
2,317–2,300 = bull's bottom support, daily close above maintains base formation
2,360–2,400 = rebound wall, only breaking above cancels the "weak" label
2,461 = true strength threshold, requires ETF inflow + volume expansion
This ETH wave:
Like a "sidekick lifted by BTC" —
BTC passes 81.2K, ETH touches 2360; BTC drops to 79.8K, ETH instantly breaks 2300.
No independent trend, all rebounds before FOMC (29th 02:00) are leveraged moves.
Trading strategy: Light positions between 2320–2340 if not broken, reduce if 2360 not surpassed; exit if 2282 breaks, only go long on volume breakout above 2461.
(Not investment advice · For reference only) $ETH Recently, there has been internal conflict within the Federal Reserve. Since Waller took office, he has adopted a "silent strategy," not speaking much, leaving the market uncertain about his intentions. As a result, the vice chairs came out to correct this, saying there is no rush to raise interest rates, and the market immediately rebounded.
But Waller disagrees, saying that this approach of narrowing forward guidance is like "throwing out the baby with the bathwater." I think this shows there is a significant division within the Fed—some advocate continuing to raise rates to suppress inflation, while others suggest waiting and watching.
In September, rates were already raised by 25 basis points to 3.75%-4%, and now the PCE inflation forecast is 3.7%, with oil prices still above 110. I believe the probability of Waller taking a hawkish stance at this press conference is high, and it’s not ruled out that he might hint at another rate hike in December.
Brothers, don’t think the trend has reversed just because it rose today; the real direction will be revealed tomorrow night.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 $BTC $ETH $ZEC Smart money also took a hit? BTC longs and shorts both suffer 😵💫
$BTC current price 79822, funding rate 0.0090%. Among 2529 smart money traders, the nominal long-short ratio is 27.02%, superficially shorts dominate, but both sides are actually struggling 😣.
Longs: 1014 people, position size $784 million, average price 86544.49, unrealized loss about $66.04 million, profit rate only 30.96%. Cost is stacked above 86544, so any rebound first faces pressure to break even 🧱.
Shorts: 1515 people, position size $2.9 billion, average price 76750.39, unrealized loss about $112 million, profit ratio 58.21%. Larger volume, close to cost, but widespread unrealized losses indicate shorting didn’t get a bargain either 📉.
Core point: Under volatile tug-of-war, longs and shorts are both under pressure; 86544 is strong resistance above, while the short cost zone below provides support. Short-term looks more like a range tug-of-war, not a one-sided easy win 🎯. Smart money can lose too, due to mismatched position sizes, costs, and volatility rhythm. For reference only, not trading advice ⚠️#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 But the Strategy has not exited. As of October 25, it holds about 848,500 bitcoins at an average cost of $75,446, still floating a profit of about 6% at the $80,000 price. Pausing accumulation and liquidation are two different things.
Fidelity Digital Assets analyst Zack Wainwright provided a more macro perspective in a report on October 20: all companies buying bitcoin through issuing preferred shares have cumulatively purchased about 136,000 bitcoins, accounting for 0.5% of the total bitcoin supply. From March to May 2026, these companies raised $7 billion to sweep up 95,000 bitcoins. Fidelity believes this type of product builds a bridge connecting crypto assets with the global $150 trillion fixed income market. But the bridge has weight limits. Fidelity also warns: this model only works if the coin price’s long-term gains outpace the dividend costs. Once sideways or downward trends persist too long, incremental buying may instead become a source of liquidity risk. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC $BTC $ETH Old whales are unloading, new narratives are taking off, which to follow?
Today's two on-chain news combined are particularly interesting.
On one side, old money is exiting: two whales dormant for 3 years deposited 2,571 BTC worth $207 million into Coinbase Prime; an ancient Ethereum whale from the 2015 ICO at $0.31 cost transferred another 3,000 ETH to exchanges within 24 hours, with 47,000 ETH remaining. These are chips held for many years, starting to move around the 800,000 level.
On the other side, new money is betting: Sony's L2 Soneium announced a token issuance after TVL dropped 95%, betting on IP going on-chain; Upbit announced listing NIL/KRW trading pair, NIL surged 29% in 15 minutes; Quack AI rose 271% in one day; anti-Pump.fun narrative token LAUNCH had $6.8 million in daily volume.
Also a security alert: Indian exchange CoinDCX lost $16 million due to an automatic transfer system failure.
My view: Old whales depositing into Coinbase Prime doesn't necessarily mean selling, Prime is a custody and OTC channel, more for institutional portfolio adjustment; but the continuous moves indicate large holders are reallocating around the 800,000 level.
Regarding new narratives, opportunities like Upbit listings and token launches after TVL crashes are pure speculation, fast in and out, don't use main positions.
The altcoin season index has dropped to 53, heat is cooling down, so be more cautious chasing new coins now. $BTC, 100x long position. Entered at 80,046.4, now at 80,821.7, floating profit 96.85%.
Sounds impressive, right? But breaking it down, it's just so-so — actual increase 0.97%, safety margin 0.96%. I bet on less than 1% movement with 100x leverage, then hyped it as "almost doubled."
The most frustrating part is 81,000. Just an hour or two ago it was 80,921.8, 109%, inside the gate; now 80,821.7, retreated 178 points, 0.22%.
My mood swung several times in between: felt bored at 44%, started feeling high at 109%, now 96%, a bit regretful for not taking profit earlier. Overnight, this string of numbers led me back and forth several times.
But one thing I did well — did nothing. No adding positions, no chasing highs, no averaging down.
So now I’m doing this: take out most of the money first, push the rest to break even, and let the remaining bit do whatever it wants. The gate will open by itself, or not. I’m going to sleep. $ETH $SOL
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 In this 24-hour liquidation pain point statistics set, BTC, ETH, and SOL share a common contrast: the largest short pain points are closer to the price at the time of statistics, while the largest long pain points correspond to greater liquidation volumes. Distance and scale point to different things. BTC: Price at statistics 80747.1; upper short largest pain point 81558.27, distance +1%, liquidation volume 26.5443 million U; lower long largest pain point 78853.93, distance -2.34%, liquidation volume 40.7142 million U. ETH: Price at statistics 2343.4; upper 2374.86, distance +1.34%, short liquidation volume 17.4384 million U; lower 2288.65, distance -2.34%, long liquidation volume 19.0945 million U. SOL: Price at statistics 101; upper 101.89, distance +0.88%, short liquidation volume 3.3067 million U; lower 99.15, distance -1.83%, long liquidation volume 3.431 million U. 💡 My view. Being closer above means a smaller price increase is needed to hit the short pain point, but that does not equal a higher probability of price rising; a larger scale below also does not directly imply the price will move downward. By coin, BTC shows a more pronounced difference in long and short liquidation scales; ETH and SOL have more balanced amounts on both sides, with SOL having the closest upper pain point distance among the three. You cannot treat the three coins as having the same trading structure just because the upper side is closer. Regarding the spike and two-way liquidation risks mentioned in the text, I am more concerned about80,017 美元这个数字，比涨跌幅更值得盯。 你有没有发现，价格几乎没动，但市场的"紧张感"变了？ BTC 报 80,017，日内只抬了 0.16%；ETH 2,320，几乎贴着零轴；SOL 101，反而滑了 0.70%。表面像一潭静水，可衍生品这边不太一样——当价格被压得这么窄，杠杆往往在悄悄堆积，多空都觉得自己有机会，谁都不肯先撤。这种结构最脆弱的地方，不是方向，而是"谁先被挤"。 我自己的感受是，现在交易的不是涨幅，是耐心。现货没给出明确信号，合约却在替市场定价情绪：一点点上推就能触发空头回补，一点点下探又容易踩到多头止损。薄薄的区间里，波动被压缩，挤压风险反而在上升。资金费率如果持续偏正，说明多头愿意付费持仓，乐观是有的，但也意味着下行时的连锁反应会更急。 偏多的路径很清楚：只要 BTC 守住 80,000 附近、ETH 不丢 2,300，杠杆多头就有机会借一次小突破把情绪点燃，山寨跟着修复。风险则藏在另一边——SOL 已经先走弱，如果它继续拖后腿，说明风险偏好没有真正回来，BTC 的横盘可能只是"等一个触发点"，而不是"蓄势向上"。 消息面上，Strategy 暂停加仓、S$ATOM Value Tracking: The underlying logic behind ATOM being undervalued is hidden in the "burn address."
IBC has connected 115+ chains and processed over $50 billion in transactions, yet it still hovers near historical lows. The change is: the inflation cap has been reduced from 20% to 10%, and Osmosis protocol revenue will be used for open market buybacks and burning of ATOM.
In the past, stakers earned from dilution caused by issuance; in the future, they will earn from real network fees. Solana integration is in its final stage, Base and other EVM L2 connections are under audit, and the Hub is expected to become a cross-chain routing layer.
The suspense is not in the price, but in when the first deposit will appear in the burn address after the buyback mechanism is implemented. When institutions start seriously "using" Cosmos, ATOM's narrative will no longer be just about cross-chain, but the settlement layer for the RWA era. Tracking data is closer to value than chasing sentiment.
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ $HOOD
Robinhood's crypto revenue for Q3 was $120 million, down 55% year-over-year. This was the most striking line in its after-hours earnings report last night.
But on the same day, its total revenue was $1.424 billion, a record high, up 12% year-over-year. Revenue from the prediction market was $173 million, more than six times higher; options and stocks are all rising, only the crypto segment is shrinking. Crypto's share of total revenue was 21% a year ago, now it's only 8.4%.
The HOOD token on OKX is now 87.8, down from 93.2 in 24 hours, a drop of nearly 6%. After the retail investor retreat, even the most crypto-friendly US stock brokerage is like this, which I think says more than any candlestick chart. By the way, this $120 million is actually a bit higher than analysts' expected $114 million—the expectations had already been cut to the floor.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 $ETH
Seeing the phrase "ETH is fake," my first reaction was to check my holdings—nothing unusual on the market, fluctuating between 2296 and 2364 in the last 24 hours, current price 2348.
Ethereum is definitely not fake. Yesterday, OpenAI released three achievements at once, one of which disproved the "Exponential Time Hypothesis" from computational complexity theory, abbreviated as ETH. Outsiders freaked out at the headline, insiders found the abbreviation ironically amusing.
I think this mix-up quite well reflects the current market sentiment: an academic abbreviation completely unrelated to crypto can go viral like this, showing that people really have time on their hands. Funding rate is 0.0085%, almost flat, open interest at 14.98 billion USD basically unchanged—before the Fed decision, no one dares to make a move first. Despite the confusion, the calm market is the real truth right now.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK Hynix Q3 earnings report is coming, can HBM4 boost profitability? The annualized interest rate of $USDC on OKX suddenly jumped from 3% to 9%, a figure more worth pondering than Bitcoin's sideways movement around the $80,000 mark. Stablecoin lending rates don't triple without reason; it indicates that someone is using stablecoins as collateral to leverage, and the demand is urgent and intense. Interest rates are the price of capital, and a sudden price change signals behavior: the market's leverage appetite is heating up, not cooling down. Interestingly, at the same time, $BTC is stuck near 80,000, unable to go up or down. On the surface, it looks like boring consolidation, but putting the two together changes the picture: on one side, leverage demand suddenly expands; on the other, the price refuses to choose a direction. This divergence often means that incremental funds are quietly building positions rather than exiting. The crowd sees "no upward movement," but the capital side sees "someone is borrowing bullets." Market sentiment is clearly divided at this moment. One side says this is a normal pullback in a bull market; the other side eyes 75,000, expecting another drop. The disagreement itself is information—when neither bulls nor bears can present overwhelming reasons, the price gets stuck in the middle, repeatedly grinding. Real turning points usually don't happen in consensus but at moments when consensus is weakest. My judgment is cautious: the current macro environment and sentiment do not support an immediate bull market restart; $BTC is more likely to test downward in the short term rather than break upward. But this is not a prediction; trading is inherently a probability game. The cost of being wrong is missing out, and the other cost of being wrong is losing money; these two are asymmetric—missing an opportunity doesn't lose principal, waitingIn the DePIN storage sector, it is common to boast about "total network storage capacity exceeding 100PB" and "node count surpassing 10,000" to showcase prosperity. However, if all the data stored on these hard drives is junk, this is merely an inflation-driven empty operation.
Comparing these three projects:
$FIL: The former storage leader. The total network computing power is huge, but the actual external customer paid revenue is very low. Most nodes (SPs) still rely on block inflation rewards for income, and with early token unlocks, selling pressure persists. Its token value capture heavily depends on the future realization of the "AI data storage" narrative.
$AR: Focuses on "one-time payment, permanent storage." The mechanism is very innovative, but most of its protocol income goes into an endowment fund for future long-term payments, rather than being directly distributed to token holders or burned. The token's current empowerment mainly relies on expectations of ecosystem expansion.
$STX: Although also infrastructure, through the PoX mechanism, miners must pay real BTC to obtain STX block production rights, and this BTC is directly rewarded to stakers. This creates a hard link between STX's value capture and Bitcoin's underlying real income.
Summary:
The three models in the storage sector are clearly ranked: $FIL "relies on inflation subsidies and new narratives to save the day"; $AR "has income but it all goes into a long-term endowment fund"; while $STX "anchors its returns with real BTC." $ETH this one, 100x long position, floating profit 124.23%.
Let me walk you through the path it took tonight, quite funny: at 8:58 it was 2336.18, 67.48%; at 4:31, 2343.8, 100.32%; at 6:05, 2352.13, 136.21%; now 2349.35, 124.23%.
See it? It just climbed above 2350, barely settled, then slid down. Now it's off by 0.65 points, 0.03%—this gate has changed owners for the Nth time tonight.
I calculated the safety margin: 1.23%. Under 100x leverage, this thing is dangerously thin; a normal shake can wipe me out. Converted, every 1 point move in ETH makes my floating profit jump 4.31%—if it shakes 5 points around 2349, I bounce between 103% and 145%.
My biggest fear is my own impulsiveness now. Seeing "just 0.65 points away," I really want to add a position to push it through. That thought is the dumbest. What I add is not a position, but moving closer to the cliff edge.
So I won't. I take most of the money, push the breakeven up, and let the rest go. $BTC $ETH
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 $ETH Review: After the 2807 warning was triggered, what to watch next?📉
Around 2807 it was noted: if 2810-2820 is not broken suddenly, the upward momentum is risky. Subsequently, ETH made multiple failed attempts to rally and turned bearish, currently down 18.76%.🔍
Structurally, 2807-2282 is first seen as a correction to the weekly uptrend from 1505-2807. If 2282 marks the full correction, ETH needs to quickly reclaim and hold 2370-2390, and must not lose the green Gann 2/1 line again; otherwise, the move since 2282 is just a rebound, which will be followed by further correction. The secondary bottom to watch is 2145-2156 (where MA200 and Fibonacci 0.5 intersect). The correction starting from 2807 may end as early as mid-November.⏳
Currently, price is consolidating near 2300. ETH/BTC is weakening, with funds favoring $BTC; staking lockups and continuous withdrawals benefit the long term, but spot ETF net outflows and weak spot support persist.⚖️
On liquidations, long positions are stacked below 2279, short positions above 2346, and high-leverage longs remain active. Wednesday's FOMC is the key variable: a hawkish tone breaking below 2300 could trigger a long squeeze; if 2280 holds, a short squeeze rebound to 2346 is possible.🎯#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 Google earnings report coming tonight: Cloud business surges, but free cash flow is the biggest weakness
Google will release its Q3 earnings report at midnight Beijing time on October 29. The market expects revenue of $127.8 billion, a 25% year-over-year increase.
The real contradiction in the fundamentals is not in revenue, but whether "burning money to drive growth" can close the loop. The cloud business is the biggest highlight, with the market expecting growth of over 90%, and JPMorgan even raising it to 100%, corresponding to revenue of about $30.3 billion. However, free cash flow turned negative for the first time in history in Q2, and the full-year capital expenditure guidance is as high as $195 billion to $205 billion, nearly doubling year-over-year.
0x50c2be4b3958c358e2654c6dabb4feb9e1cc7777
0xe797e34845f5c23b1f578c7c49a101fca4137777
If cloud growth holds at 90%, it indicates AI investments are generating returns; if it falls short of expectations or capital expenditure guidance continues to be revised upward, the "resilience narrative" of the fundamentals will be questioned. Meanwhile, the FOMC decision is also scheduled in the same window, making tonight destined to be turbulent with the dual volatility of macro and earnings.
Disclaimer: This is only a summary of public information and does not constitute investment advice.
$GOOGL CORE Coin Price Prediction: 4 Scenario Analyses Based on Market Cap Backward Calculation
Baseline Parameters: Circulating supply ≈ 1.5 billion CORE, current price ≈ $0.017, current circulating market cap about $25 million
Scenario ①: Pessimistic Scenario (Ecosystem Continues to Shrink)
Circulating market cap falls back to $10 million
Target price ≈ $0.0067
Logic: Validator nodes continue to flee, BTCFi sector heat remains low, ghost chips keep dumping, no new BTC staking capital inflow into the ecosystem, coin price continues to hit new lows.
Scenario ②: Neutral to Slightly Weak (Sector Slightly Warms Up)
Circulating market cap reaches $75 million
Target price ≈ $0.05
Logic: BTCFi sector experiences slight rotation, node loss rate slows down, ghost chips do not concentrate dumping, no major product breakthroughs needed, just relying on sector capital inflow to achieve this, making it the relatively most realistic target range.
Scenario ③: Optimistic Scenario (Ecosystem Reverses)
Circulating market cap surges to $500 million
Target price ≈ $0.33
Logic: Number of validators stops declining and rises, SatPay launches, Middle East Nawa ecosystem continuously brings BTC staking increments, on-chain fees and buyback flywheel start operating, CORE becomes one of the core assets in the BTCFi sector.
Scenario ④: Extreme Bull Market Scenario (Replicating Historical High-Level Market, Circulating Market Cap Hits $9 Billion)
Target price ≈ around $6
Logic: BTCFi enters a super bull market, massive Bitcoin assets flood into Core ecosystem staking, 69 million ghost chips are absorbed by the market