Orbit Post Sitemap
ZEC's trading volume in the last hour surged nearly 3.7 times, yet the closing price dropped by $2.45.
On OKX, the spot price closed at $1286.67 between 17:00 and 18:00, down from $1289.12 in the previous hour; trading volume rose from $1.8134 million to $6.7175 million. At 18:00, the nominal contract open interest was about $190.33 million, an increase of approximately $4.433 million compared to 17:00. At 18:19, the current price was around $1304.90.
My judgment is that the increase in both trading volume and open interest is significant, but the closing price for that hour did not keep up. Whether the current upward momentum holds until the hour mark will better indicate if the buying pressure can sustain. The total open interest does not distinguish between new longs or shorts.
I am more focused on whether the price between 18:00 and 19:00 can close above the previous hour's high of $1292.32. If it falls back below $1286.67 while open interest continues to rise, the recent upward move will need to be reassessed.
$ZEC Let's calculate: comparing $500 million to over $1 billion, the former is less than half of the latter, but investment is not the same as revenue. When I saw this news, my first reaction was to break down the scope and not equate a large amount directly with a big problem.
① According to reports, Robert Garcia, who will serve as chairman of the House Oversight Committee, stated that Trump's crypto-related business has generated over $1 billion in revenue and said he will examine the family's crypto transactions and other business dealings. This figure indicates the significance of the subject under review, but it is currently his statement and cannot replace the conclusion of an investigation.
② The Democrats previously focused on a member of the UAE royal family who invested about $500 million in World Liberty Financial last year. My focus is that this company is still applying for a nationwide bank license that requires approval from relevant U.S. Treasury departments. The clarity of the funding relationships and the approval process is more critical than the amount itself.
③ The Democrats plan to start inquiries and subpoenas related to the companies and donors from February next year. This is the timeline for subsequent procedures, not proof of any problems found; if the inquiries affect license approval, then the uncertainty of business progress may increase, which is my speculation.
My judgment: this is somewhat negative for Trump's family-related crypto business but not enough to be bearish for the entire industry. I would pay more attention to investigation evidence and license progress rather than headline volume. Which indicator do you usually value most: funding sources, investigation evidence, or license approval progress? "The boot has landed, but that doesn't mean buying has returned"
With the midterm elections concluded, the crypto market first played out "buy the rumor, sell the fact." The Democrats' sweep of both chambers briefly ignited fears of tighter regulation, causing BTC to drop below $76,000 and ETH to dip near $2,225 (´･ω･`). Then, as the results became clear and uncertainty faded, short sellers covered, pushing BTC back up to around $78,468 and ETH recovering above $2,300 to $2,326, a seemingly lively V-shaped rebound (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧.
However, this feels more like an emotional swing rather than a confirmed trend. The Democratic victory had already been priced in by Polymarket at over 75%, with over $660 million in BTC options traded on election day, about $420 million of which were calls, indicating bets on "bad news being fully priced in" (・∀・). The issue is that spot ETFs have seen net outflows for more than twenty consecutive trading days, with BlackRock's ETHA seeing a single-day outflow of $138 million; BTC's rebound mainly relied on short covering, with no significant new buying entering the market.
Therefore, $78,000 and $2,300 seem more like psychological stop-loss levels for both bulls and bears. Holding these levels does not equal buying returning (￣▽￣). If capital flows do not turn positive going forward, the rebound may still be just a short-term correction.
$BTC $ETH
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权
The voting results are in, marking a critical watershed for the AI theme in the US stock market.
The market’s core question is simple: Can Trump’s all-in AI strategy continue moving forward?
Previously, Trump’s AI strategy centered on loosening regulations, accelerating data center network approvals, and advancing the $500 billion Starlink AI infrastructure, easing restrictions on computing power, chip, and cloud providers. This was the key policy backing for the current AI capital expenditure cycle. But now, with the change in Congress’s composition, the biggest variable has emerged: executive orders can be pushed, but budget, bill approvals, and energy and land review powers lie with Congress.
The conclusion is clear: The broad AI direction won’t be overturned, but the pace of progress will be significantly slowed.
A completely unrestricted acceleration model is hard to replicate, and the difficulty of implementing strong fiscal stimulus has increased; however, the underlying logic of Silicon Valley giants, computing power demand, and the global AI race remains intact. Regulation will shift from "full liberalization" to "conditional approval."
Impact on US tech stocks:
In the short term, expectations will be cut; high-valuation AI computing power and semiconductors are prone to volatile battles, and capital will first realize the premium from policy dividends;
In the medium term, there will be differentiation. Targets with orders already in place, such as computing hardware, energy support, and data centers, will be more resilient; AI application targets relying purely on policy expectations to tell their story will continue to face valuation pressure.
In the long term, the AI capital expenditure cycle is not over; it is just shifting from "policy-driven" to "performance-driven," with increased volatility.SNDK at $1145, do you dare to catch it?
Revenue surged 378%, but the stock price crashed 13% in one day, halving from 2300 to 1145 — is the explosive performance of SNDK a golden opportunity or a flying knife? Just now, 1050 held.
First, look at the surface: explosive earnings report, but the stock crashed.
Q1 FY2027 revenue $11.031 billion, up 378% year-over-year, up 23% quarter-over-quarter; EPS $49.51, significantly beating expectations; gross margin 85.1%; data center revenue $4.8 billion, up 61% quarter-over-quarter; $5 billion buyback; long-term agreements with minimum committed revenue of about $93.9 billion. All positives, right?
But after the earnings report, the stock dropped over 13% in one day, falling from the June high of 2300 down to 1145, a 35% drop in a month and 13% in a week. The market isn’t ignoring the results; it has already priced in the earnings. Think it’s an overreaction? Hold on, read on.
First point: Why did the stock crash despite explosive earnings? The market fears not the earnings but the "growth slowdown."
Year-over-year revenue growth of 378% sounds scary, but quarter-over-quarter growth is retreating from a higher level; consumer segment (PC/mobile) revenue is under pressure, high prices suppress demand; peers like Kioxia warn limited room for consumer price increases. The market is buying not the present but the next quarter.
What’s more painful: stocks rise on expectations, not facts. Before earnings, it rose from 36 to 2300, over 60 times, the good news was already digested. When earnings came out, institutions’ first reaction wasn’t "Wow, amazing," but "Is there anything better?" — no, so they sell first.
This is traditional finance play: all good news priced in becomes bad news. If you trade it with a meme mindset, you’ll get hurt badly.
Second point: The $93.9 billion minimum committed revenue is not just a promise.
Long-term agreements (NBM) signed with multiple customers cover about half of FY2027 and two-thirds of FY2028 bit production, with minimum committed revenue around $93.9 billion. In plain terms: more than half of the next two years’ revenue is already booked.
Moreover, the company is debt-free, cash-rich, with adjusted free cash flow about $5.7 billion, profit margin over 50%, and this quarter repurchased about $5 billion. This is not a company short on money; it’s a money-printing machine.
AI data center storage demand (HBM + enterprise SSD) is expected to continue through 2027-2028, with supply tight and hard to ease quickly. SNDK is a pure NAND/SSD player, data center accounts for over 40%, deeply cooperating with the three major US hyperscalers, holding strong pricing power. The AI storage shovel seller’s business is intact; what’s bad is the stock chips.
Third point: Technicals show oversold rebound but no mid-term reversal.
Fell from 2300 to 1145, a roughly 50% retracement. Daily RSI rebounded from oversold but remains weak; MACD death cross with shrinking histogram shows signs of bottoming but no golden cross; moving averages in bearish alignment, price below MA20/50. Short term is repair, mid-term is a downtrend channel.
Support: 1050-1100 (recent lows + psychological level) → 1000 (structural break)
Resistance: 1180-1200 (first line) → 1250-1300 (dense trading zone) → 1500+
Only a volume-backed hold above 1200 counts as a reversal; failure means just an oversold bounce.
Also note: 8-for-1 stock split, record date around November 9, trading starts around November 20. Volatility will amplify before and after the split, liquidity may be speculated, but leverage will be swept back and forth.
Bull vs. Bear, you decide
On one side:
Revenue up 378% YoY, gross margin 85%, data center +61%
$93.9 billion minimum committed revenue, more than half of two years’ revenue booked
Debt-free + $5 billion buyback + $5.7 billion free cash flow
Halved from 2300 to 1145, RSI oversold recovery
AI storage supercycle not over
On the other side:
Quarter-over-quarter growth slowing, consumer segment weak
Valuation still requires high growth to justify, PE 8-9x not cheap
Bearish moving averages, mid-term downtrend channel
Post-earnings volume sell-off, selling pressure remains
Volatility amplified around stock split, leverage easily swept
Trading strategy
Aggressive short-term (1-3 days):
Light long positions at 1120-1145, stop loss below 1080 (exit if below recent low). First target 1180-1200, sell half; if breaks 1200, look to 1250. Position size 5-10% of capital, leverage ≤5-10x.
Conservative mid-term (1-4 weeks):
Wait for pullback to strong support at 1050-1100 to build positions gradually, or wait for daily volume-backed hold above 1200 to chase. Stop loss below 1000, target 1300-1500. Position size 10-20%, build in batches. Reduce leverage before and after split, reduce positions before macro events (nonfarm payroll, FOMC, semiconductor peer earnings).
Bearish view:
If rebound at 1180-1200 meets resistance with volume and bearish candle, light short positions, stop loss above 1220, target 1100-1050.
SNDK now is like Nvidia in 2023 —
99% think "It’s risen too much, wait for a pullback," but when pullback comes, they don’t buy, then it rallies back and they regret.
$BTC $ETH $SNDK “The boot dropping” does not equal funds returning
After the results of the U.S. midterm elections were announced, the crypto market first went through a stress test, then quickly saw short covering. The Democrats took control of both the House and Senate, and concerns about tighter regulation once crushed risk appetite: Bitcoin fell below $76,000, Ethereum dipped to $2,225. But once the results were no longer uncertain, the market trading logic immediately shifted from "fear of bad news" to "bad news fully priced in," with Bitcoin making a V-shaped recovery to $78,468, approaching the $79,000 mark; Ethereum reclaimed $2,300, closing at $2,326.
The fuel for this rebound was not the election itself. The Democratic victory had long been priced in by Polymarket at over 75%, what was truly bought back was certainty. On election day, Bitcoin options block trades exceeded $660 million, with about $420 million in call buys, some funds clearly betting on a short-term rebound after the results were finalized.
But price reclaiming key levels does not mean incremental funds have returned. Ethereum spot ETFs have seen net outflows for more than twenty consecutive trading days, with BlackRock's ETHA seeing a single-day outflow of $138 million; Bitcoin's rebound also came more from short covering rather than sustained new buying. The $78,000 and $2,300 levels currently look more like psychological stop-loss lines for bulls and bears rather than trend confirmation signals. The market has temporarily stopped falling, but after "buying the expectation, selling the fact," the real answer from funds is still awaited.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 $ETH has been stronger than BTC this afternoon. The lowest point on the hourly candle at 11 AM Beijing time dropped to 2,226, then started to hold above 2,300 in the afternoon, just now reaching a high of 2,330, currently around 2,325, up 4.4% from the low, and +2.4% in 24h.
Binance ETH contract open interest rose from 5.34 billion to 5.50 billion USD in 24 hours, while BTC only increased from 7.73 billion to 7.74 billion. The new leverage is basically all on ETH.
Swolecharts reports that from 0:00 to 10:00 UTC today, ETH liquidations totaled 47.4 million USD, with longs at 27.2 million and shorts at 20.15 million. Shorts have also started to be squeezed in these hours.
$BTC also broke through the large holder's liquidation price of 78,192 at noon, reaching a high of 78,586, now at 78,480, with both sides' fees at +0.01%.
My view is that ETH is currently pushing upward by increasing positions. Undertow statistics show that on Hyperliquid, there are 49.2 million USD worth of short liquidations pressing above the price, while long liquidations below are only 14.4 million. Short-term shorts are more uncomfortable, but since yesterday ETH ETF still had a net outflow of 85.35 million USD and spot hasn't caught up, I don't consider this a reversal yet.🔥What BTC truly lacks is not an election result, but the certainty that can reassure institutions to enter the market! Today, the price hovers around $77,000, the Fear and Greed Index has dropped to 33, and long liquidations totaled $211 million in the past 24 hours. 📊 These data indicate that market sentiment remains fragile; even a slight pause in the rebound could force leveraged longs to exit.
Looking at the CLARITY Act, the Senate procedural vote on September 15 failed to reach the 60-vote threshold, resulting in 49 votes in favor and 50 against. The controversies focus on ethical constraints, stablecoin yield arrangements, and banking competition issues. A change in leadership and agenda priorities in the committee due to turnover does not mean the existing disputes will disappear. 🧩 If negotiations fail to reach a compromise, the legislative certainty the market expects may be further delayed; however, regulators may still advance some matters through rulemaking.
Therefore, do not treat the election directly as a buy signal for BTC. Whether ETF funds have stopped falling and whether macro interest rate expectations ease are the key points to watch next. ⚠️ In the short term, BTC first looks at $76,000; if it breaks down effectively, the focus below is $74,000–$74,900; only by reclaiming $78,000 can the weak structure improve. Do you think the next rally requires a policy breakthrough, or is a capital inflow enough? 🔥No matter how lively the election results are, they can't catch the sell-off for BTC! Today, BTC is still hovering near $77,000, with a slight 24-hour increase of 0.28%, but the Fear and Greed Index has dropped to 33, indicating market sentiment has entered the fear zone. What’s more concerning is that in the past 24 hours, the total liquidations across the network reached $282 million, with long positions accounting for $211 million. 📉 The price not plunging sharply does not mean the leverage risk has disappeared.
Many people pin their hopes on which party controls Congress in the U.S., but the deadlock over the CLARITY Act shows that legislation can’t be completed with a simple majority change. On September 15, the Senate procedural vote failed 49 to 50 to advance the bill; ethical rules, stablecoin yields, and banking concerns remain negotiation obstacles. 🧠 Even if congressional seats change, further negotiation, revision, and voting are needed, so legislative progress is uncertain.
Meanwhile, ETF fund flows and interest rate expectations are more direct short-term variables. If institutions continue to reduce positions, election sentiment alone is unlikely to sustain a continuous rise. ⚠️ I will focus on whether ETF funds can stop outflows after the non-farm payroll data release and whether BTC can regain and hold above 78,000. On the downside, watch 76,000 first; if broken, then pay attention to 74,000–74,900. Today, do you trust political narratives more, or real capital flows? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 🔥Stop treating the U.S. elections as a BTC price pump button! Whether the Democrats or Republicans hold the advantage affects the political arithmetic of the future Congress, but it won't directly create buying pressure in the market. BTC has been tugging around $77,000 today, with the Fear and Greed Index dropping to 33. There were $282 million liquidations across the network in 24 hours, including $211 million losses on long positions.📉 The price seems to fluctuate only slightly, but leveraged funds have already paid the price.
What really deserves attention is the CLARITY Act. The Senate procedural vote on September 15 failed to pass, with 49 votes in favor and 50 against, still short of the 60 votes needed to advance. The controversy is not only about the regulatory framework but also includes ethics provisions for public officials, stablecoin yield structures, and conflicts of interest between banks and the crypto industry.🧩 Changing the majority party does not mean these divisions will automatically disappear.
Continuous ETF outflows and tight macro interest rate expectations are the key reasons for current capital hesitation.⚠️ In the short term, watch for support at $76,000; if broken, focus on $74,000–$74,900; on the rebound, see if funds truly flow back. Elections provide a long-term narrative, but daily ETF subscriptions and redemptions more directly affect buying and selling forces. Do you think BTC will hold $76,000 first or continue downward to find support? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 #Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？
Yes, but profits will be significantly diluted. Expansion in scale (increase in USDC circulation) can indeed bring more reserve income such as U.S. Treasury interest, but this does not mean net profits will surge proportionally.
· The key obstacle is "cost": Circle needs to pay very high "distribution costs" (revenue sharing) to major channels like Coinbase. In addition, the Federal Reserve's future interest rate cut expectations will directly reduce its interest income.🔥If historical patterns continue to hold, is BTC's cycle bottom arriving earlier each year? Looking back at 2014, 2018, and 2022, the U.S. midterm elections all occurred near the end of Bitcoin bear markets, with the actual cycle lows appearing about 71 days, 39 days, and 13 days after the elections, respectively. 📉 From the time intervals, there is indeed a trend of gradual shortening, which is why many cycle analysts keep a close eye on the midterm elections.
However, we cannot conclude that the fourth low will definitely come earlier just because the previous three lows have moved closer to the election date. Each market cycle has its own variables: 2014 had exchange platform crises, 2018 experienced an industry winter, and 2022 saw the FTX incident. The halving cycle provides an observational framework, but liquidity and sudden risks can also alter the trend. ⚠️
What’s more noteworthy is that the BTC phase low in 2026 already appeared in July, about four months before the November election. Whether this time the bottom is early or there will be a second dip later cannot be determined yet. 🧭 I prefer to observe whether the low holds, if trading volume recovers, and whether the long-term moving averages can be reclaimed. Do you think this round of adjustment has already ended early? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 🔥Three U.S. midterm elections, three times BTC continued to test new lows after the elections. This timing pattern deserves serious study! After the 2014 election, it took about 71 days for BTC to hit the cycle low; about 39 days after 2018; about 13 days after 2022.📊 Looking only at these three data sets, the timing of the lows does seem to be gradually advancing, as if each bear market completes its final panic sell-off after the election results are settled.
But here is a key issue: coincidence in timing does not mean the election caused the decline. In 2014, there was the aftermath of the Mt.Gox incident; in 2018, there was an internal crisis in the crypto market; in 2022, the FTX collapse was an additional factor.🧠 What really drives BTC to bottom may be the combined effects of the halving cycle, liquidity, industry risks, and the macro environment, rather than a single political event.
🌍 In 2026, a different situation appeared: the phase low already occurred in July, earlier than the November election. This suggests the market may have completed part of its adjustment early, or it might just be a temporary low that still needs to be verified later. When discussing cycles today, we cannot just look at historical numbers; we must also consider price structure and capital flows. Do you think this time will continue the pattern of the previous three rounds, or will it take a completely different path? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 🔥 Historical data warns that BTC could drop sharply, even to 65k, after the Binance hack - According to shared statistics, the median drop of BTC after 10 major hacks on CEX exchanges is 10.14%, higher than the current drop of 5.61%. - If the pattern repeats, the forecasted scenario is that BTC could retreat to 72,998 USD before November 7. - A worse scenario, similar to the Bybit hack, is the 65,231 USD range. 🫡🫡🫡 Note, this is a forecast scenario based on historical data, not a guaranteed price target. Previous hacks haveAn institution focused on data changing its name often says more about the trend than a research report.
L2BEAT, which has been tracking Ethereum Layer 2 for years, has officially renamed itself ETHBEAT, expanding its scope from Layer 2 to the entire Ethereum ecosystem. The name has changed, and so has the coverage: it will continue monitoring L2s while increasing research on privacy, interoperability, tokens, zero-knowledge proofs, and native Rollups, and will also explore liquid staking in the future.
But the real signal is not in expanding categories, but in the evaluation criteria. Its research focus has shifted to judging whether a project inherits Ethereum's core security properties—censorship resistance, open source, privacy, security—and how many intermediaries users still have to trust. The accompanying move is the launch of the CROPS guide, which includes projects that meet these principles.
In recent years, Layer 2s competed on being cheap and fast, with valuation justified by high TPS. Now the yardstick has changed: for the same project, the question is how much trust you place in whom.
This is a plus for $ETH itself, as the mainnet's security properties have become the anchor for the entire ecosystem; for Layer 2 tokens like $ARB and $OP, it's a retest—scaling dividends have mostly been absorbed, and the remaining premium must be earned through credibility.
One point worth pondering: while everyone is racing to be faster, some are starting to compete on who requires less trust from you. 🔥Three U.S. midterm elections, three times BTC continued to test new lows after the elections. This timing pattern deserves serious study! After the 2014 election, it took about 71 days for BTC to hit the cycle low; about 39 days after 2018; about 13 days after 2022.📊 Looking only at these three data sets, the timing of the lows does seem to be gradually advancing, as if each bear market completes its final panic sell-off after the election results are settled.
But here is a key issue: coincidence in timing does not mean the election caused the decline. In 2014, there was the aftermath of the Mt.Gox incident; in 2018, there was an internal crisis in the crypto market; in 2022, the FTX collapse was an additional factor.🧠 What really drives BTC to bottom may be the combined effects of the halving cycle, liquidity, industry risks, and the macro environment, rather than a single political event.
🌍 In 2026, a different situation appeared: the phase low already occurred in July, earlier than the November election. This suggests the market may have completed part of its adjustment early, or it might just be a temporary low that still needs to be verified later. When discussing cycles today, we cannot just look at historical numbers; we must also consider price structure and capital flows. Do you think this time will continue the pattern of the previous three rounds, or will it take a completely different path? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Solana official released a chart: on Monday, tokenized stock single-day trading volume was about $657 million, more than double any day since September. Backpack Securities alone contributed about $598 million, accounting for about 91%; xStocks about $56 million, following behind.
Strong trading volume does not mean the order book is already decentralized. It is more likely that a single issuer maximized weekend and after-hours flow, while other issuers temporarily lag behind. The impressive numbers indicate demand exists but also show that depth is still tied to one desk. Don't take the peak as the normal depth.
If within seven days Backpack's share remains above 85%, or tokenized stock daily trading falls below $320 million, treat this as a pulse peak, not the market norm. Snapshot around 18:08 Beijing time, Binance spot SOL about $93.19, 24h approximately +0.9%.
$SOL
#SOL #Solana #Tokenized#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Friends, be rational. With the Democrats taking control of both chambers of Congress, it will be difficult to have a smooth one-sided market rally going forward. Previously, the market had been pricing in a main storyline: the White House and Congress both controlled by the Republicans, with tax cuts, loose fiscal policy, and crypto-friendly regulation, supporting the upward imagination for the Nasdaq tech sector and Bitcoin in this round. Now the situation has completely reversed, with Congress gaining balancing power, making it much harder to advance the loose agenda originally planned by Trump. The AI sector is the first to feel the pressure. Committees led by the Democrats will increase hearings and regulatory scrutiny on large tech companies; expectations for computing power subsidies and tax incentives are being discounted. This is also the core reason why Nasdaq futures plunged more than 2% in early trading. Capital is immediately repricing the premium of the "Trump trade," and the volatility of high-valuation tech assets will continue to be amplified. The situation is even more delicate for crypto assets. The originally expected clear legislation on stablecoins and digital assets will be delayed. The Democratic Party's internal regulatory stance on the crypto industry is cautious, and the SEC's strong regulatory approach will receive support at the congressional level, compressing the window for favorable industry legislation. Of course, the president retains veto power and will not directly issue extreme bans; this is not purely all negative but means the positive expectations disappear and more negotiation ensues. Looking at the fiscal side, with the tug-of-war between the two parties, large-scale fiscal expansion is unlikely to be implemented; deficits and bond issuance pace will be constrained, and U.S. Treasury yield volatility will become more frequent. Liquidity expectations will no longer be one-sided, compounded by the FederalThe market isn't lacking liquidity. The bigger question is where that capital is willing to take risk.
BTC is showing healthier positioning, with $136.6M in spot inflows against $79.88M in contract outflows. That suggests genuine buying interest without an aggressive reliance on leverage.
ETH is attracting money from both sides, but the $156M in contract inflows compared with $88M in spot suggests leverage is doing much of the heavy lifting. #DemocratsWinCongress 🔥The Democratic Party has won control of both chambers of Congress. What deserves the most attention next is not just whether Trump's policies will be obstructed, but how the market will reprice political risk! The U.S. midterm elections show a clear shift: the Republican Party has lost control of both chambers, and the Democratic Party has gained more space for hearings, investigations, and oversight. 🌐There are indeed capital donations, industry lobbying, and interest group influences behind U.S. politics, but these complex relationships cannot be simplified as a certain group controlling both parties; such claims lack reliable evidence.
🔎Will Elon Musk become a key focus of a new round of congressional investigations? Democratic lawmakers have already signaled this possibility, and future scrutiny may revolve around DOGE, government contracts, and potential conflicts of interest. However, whether the investigation uncovers any issues depends on evidence and formal conclusions; premature judgments are not appropriate.
📉On the crypto side, I am more concerned about BTC at 74,800–75,000. If this level does not hold, the market may shift from weak consolidation to a more obvious downtrend; if support is effective, there is still a chance to continue consolidating. Those adding positions around 76,500–77,500 should not pin their hopes on a single rebound. Borrowing to add positions is especially risky, as leverage can turn a normal pullback into an unbearable loss. ⚠️Will you continue to observe tonight, or are you already preparing to adjust your positions? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 🔥The Democratic Party has taken control of both chambers of Congress, changing the power dynamics in Washington, and the crypto community will need to reassess risks accordingly! This election is not just a simple win or loss for the two parties; it also involves the redistribution of policy directions, corporate interests, capital support, and congressional oversight authority. 🌍 Reducing complex politics to a certain group controlling both parties lacks reliable evidence and overlooks the real institutional and interest struggles that influence policy.
🧭 What’s worth watching next is whether the Democratic Party will formally push for investigations into Musk, DOGE, and related government contracts and conflicts of interest. Some Democratic lawmakers have already proposed investigation directions, but whether it will be launched, the scope of the investigation, and whether a chain of evidence can be formed still require time to verify.
📉 The real danger signal for the market is whether BTC can hold the 74,800–75,000 range. If this area is effectively broken down, selling pressure may continue to expand; if it holds, the price may still fluctuate repeatedly within this key range. Funds entering or adding positions near 76,500–77,500 should not only think about a rebound to break even but also calculate how much drawdown they can bear. Especially avoid borrowing money to add positions or using high leverage to bet on policy news. Do you think this election will change the risk appetite of the crypto market? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 With the U.S. midterm elections approaching, the market expects a divided Congress. The CLARITY Act has previously stalled in the Senate, and the rising influence of the Democratic Party may slow down and increase controversy around crypto-related legislation. Executive power remains with Trump, so even if the Democrats take the House, the current regulatory enforcement tone will not immediately reverse. This policy landscape makes it difficult for the market to fully price in at once. Bitcoin ($BTC) price has pulled back to around 77,000, with the 4-hour trend weakening. Around 76,500 is an important support level. If this support breaks, the uncertainty brought by the election will amplify selling pressure; before that, funds tend to reduce exposure rather than increase positions. It is worth noting that different cryptocurrencies have varying sensitivities to policy expectations. Ethereum ($ETH), SOL ($SOL), XRP ($XRP), and DOGE ($DOGE) are more susceptible to changes in regulatory timelines compared to Bitcoin ($BTC). The market's game is not about the election results themselves, but the difference between the final seat count and prior expectations. The Democrats taking the House is basically priced in, while the Senate remains the variable for unexpected outcomes. If either side unexpectedly takes both chambers, the pricing of $ETH, $SOL, $XRP, and $DOGE will be re-evaluated. In the short term, the trading focus should prioritize watching whether the 76,500 support line holds. The impact of election news may be less important than the effectiveness of this support level.$UNI UNI's market is a bit top-heavy.
The liquidity pool has shrunk by nearly 30% in a week, yet the long-short ratio has surged to 2.48. Money is flowing out, but leveraged longs are still crowded inside.
This structure really can't withstand a crash. If a little selling pressure comes down, the slippage could trigger stop-losses for longs one by one. The biggest problem now is that there may be more people wanting to exit than those willing to take the positions.
#UNI
$UNI
👇Elon Musk spent 445 million to support the Republican Party, essentially as a business bet and political insurance, not simply an ideological stance. His Tesla and SpaceX are rooted in Texas, requiring relaxed regulations and government aerospace contracts. If the Democrats control Congress, they are likely to tighten regulations on autonomous driving and AI, and also review SpaceX's federal contracts, harming its business interests.
This money was mainly invested in Texas and other red states to help Republicans retain seats, attempting to maintain a policy environment favorable to himself, but the bet failed as the Republicans suffered a heavy defeat this round, and the investment did not yield the expected returns.
This also confirms the capital logic of U.S. elections: many capital tycoons donate money to support candidates with the goal of gaining policy favors and paving the way for their own businesses; however, money cannot guarantee election victories, as public opinion and other factors also influence the results.
Subsequent risks: After the Democrats take control of Congress, Musk's companies may face higher regulatory pressure and scrutiny risks.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 🔥The U.S. midterm elections brought an overnight upheaval, but BTC has not yet seen a definitive rebound because of it! The Democratic Party took control of both the House and Senate, while the Republican Party suffered a clear setback, meaning that Trump's upcoming policy initiatives may face stronger congressional checks and balances.📊 Behind the elections, of course, there is a struggle among capital, interest groups, and political donations, but the results cannot be simply attributed to manipulation by any single group or financial consortium. What truly deserves attention is how the new Congress will exercise its oversight powers.
👀 One focus going forward is whether the Democratic Party will push for a deeper investigation into Musk and his related government projects. Democratic lawmakers have already expressed intentions to investigate, but what they will uncover and whether a formal conclusion will be reached cannot be judged in advance.
Returning to the crypto space, the most important level for BTC right now is the 74,800–75,000 support line.⚠️ If it breaks down effectively, market panic could intensify; if it holds, there is still a chance for short-term oscillations. The high-level replenishment funds around 76,500–77,500 also face pullback and leverage pressure. Don’t borrow money to average down your cost; the market won’t reverse just because you refuse to accept losses. Today, do you think political changes will first affect market sentiment, or will BTC’s technicals give direction first? #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Bitcoin’s $75,000 line is no longer just a chart level. It has become the pressure point where leveraged longs are concentrated, and derivatives data suggests that a break below it could trigger roughly $1.001 billion in long liquidations across major centralized exchanges. That figure does not guarantee a decline, but it maps where the market’s most fragile positioning sits. The mechanics matter more than the headline number. Above $75,000, buy-side leverage has built up heavily. If that floor #تقرير Circle earnings are on the horizon, can stablecoin growth deliver returns? Gold has crossed 4000, while BEAT is still grinding below 0.10
$BTC has risen from a low of 75736.38 to 77929.42, approaching the upper end of the 24-hour range. In the last 3 full hours, it increased by 2.0%, but the trading volume was 21.6% less than the previous 3 hours.
I acknowledge the efficiency of the price rebound, but the momentum has not accelerated accordingly. This is a phase of price re-accumulation, and the strength should not simply replicate the initial speed when leaving the low point.
$BEAT has dropped 3.5% in the past 24 hours, quoted at 0.09925, still below 0.10. The most recent settled funding rate was +0.0062%, meaning longs pay shorts.
When the price is weak, longs still bear this holding cost. I focus more on whether the price can break away; the funding rate level does not equal the probability of a rise, and sideways movement in the short term will also test holders' patience.
$XAU Gold has moved up from around 3960 to cross 4000, quoted at 4025.79, having left the previous back-and-forth area near 3940.
This time, I am somewhat optimistic about price expansion, as there are actual transactions above 4000 as evidence. After pushing up to 4036.2 and pulling back slightly, this is a retracement that is not enough to erase the entire upward move.
RENDER has risen 4.0% in the last 3 hours, with aggressive buy volume accounting for 60.7%, but total volume decreased by 50.2% compared to the previous 3 hours.
What I see is that when trading volume contracts, the transaction method leans more toward aggressive buying. The upward direction is clear, but participation scale has not expanded. Combining these two pieces of evidence, the assessment should be positive but measured.The US has given the green light to perpetual contracts on stocks, and this matter deserves some discussion.
On November 3rd, CFTC Chairman Selig signed off: perpetual futures linked to US individual stocks can now be listed on regulated exchanges in the US. No expiration date, no need for rollovers, funding rates anchored to spot prices—this mechanism, which has been played with in the crypto world for years, is officially entering Wall Street.
Only four firms received licenses in the first batch: Kalshi, Coinbase, Kraken, and Crypto.com. Kalshi plans to list 58 popular stocks, including Apple, Tesla, and Nvidia, with a leverage cap of about 6.5x and a margin floor around 15%.
The on-chain sector is also restless: Lighter will submit DCM/DCO applications in November, and Hyperliquid is directly partnering with ICE to build a compliant market.
But Wall Street reacted faster—Citadel and Cboe immediately filed lawsuits in federal court the same day, demanding the approval be revoked; SIFMA and Nasdaq also sent letters to the SEC opposing it. Simply put, 0DTE options are their lifeblood, and perpetual contracts, which require no rollovers and can be traded almost 24/7, will divert order flow.
The next 60 days are critical: whether regulators can hold firm and whether the court will issue an injunction. If it succeeds, the crypto-native derivatives mechanism will truly have landed.
#Web3 #USStocks #PerpetualContracts #Coinbase The Democratic Party swept Congress, but BTC rebounded against the trend! Did the bears underestimate the market?
The Democrats took control of both the House and Senate, meaning Trump's fiscal and regulatory agenda for the next two years will face stronger checks and balances. However, BTC did not continue to fall; instead, it quickly rebounded from below $76,000 to retake around $78,000.
The reason is that the market is trading not only on policy negatives but also on capital changes after expectations are realized. As the election results become clearer, the dollar weakens and risk appetite warms; on election day, BTC options saw a nominal volume of about $660 million, with call option purchases clearly dominant, and short covering may have amplified the rebound.
Historically, BTC has risen an average of about 53.7% in the 12 months following the last three midterm elections, but the sample size is very small, so this cannot be directly extrapolated to the current cycle.
My view: It is unwise to blindly short in the short term, and short positions around $79,488 must have clear invalidation conditions. Next, focus on ETF capital flows, dollar trends, and whether the price can hold key resistance. You can stick to your directional view, but you cannot stubbornly bear the risk. $BTC #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 With $1.042B in cumulative BTC ETF outflows and total net assets falling to $98.1B, institutional demand is clearly facing pressure. A few corporate Bitcoin purchases can not offset that kind of selling
The bigger issue is the quality of demand. Buying BTC through leveraged financing or raising capital to support treasury holdings is not the same as sustained spot accumulation
#BTCInstitutionalDemand What kept me restless last night wasn’t the market drop, but that a long position worth over 100 million USD was just tens of dollars away from liquidation. Can you believe it? The liquidation buffer for a 30x BTC long position is only 398 USD? Let’s break down this case; it’s actually a very typical capital preference slice. - An address opened a long portfolio worth about 1.01 billion USD yesterday, covering BTC, ETH, HYPE, and ZEC - The current unrealized loss is about 1.725 million USD, with HYPE contributing 618,000 and BTC 709,000 - BTC uses 30x leverage, ETH 15x, HYPE and ZEC each 10x - The buffers to liquidation lines for the four positions are only about 398, 86, 6.58, and 38 USD respectively What’s really worth watching here isn’t the loss figures, but the leverage distribution revealing preferences. The 30x leverage on BTC shows this account treats BTC as the "most stable collateral" to amplify exposure, while taking leverage on high-volatility assets like HYPE. It sounds counterintuitive, but it precisely reflects a capital mindset: the stronger the consensus on an asset, the more leverage is dared; the newer the narrative, the more margin is left. The problem is, in violent fluctuations, the first to collapse is often not the altcoins, but the "most trusted" position. At the market level, the existence of such high-leverage longs will change short-term rhythm. As long as BTC dips a bit more, the liquidation engine may passively consume these positions, creating short-term selling pressure, then amplifying sentiment.On the eve of the $ZEC upgrade, can the NU7 upgrade unlock a singularity in the privacy track?
Key highlights of the NU7 upgrade:
First, block time is compressed from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, significantly improving transaction confirmation speed, officially enabling commercial payment attributes.
Second, Orchard privacy transaction TPS increases from 2.9 to 6.6, solving past issues of privacy transaction lag and inability to handle large funds.
Third, after the upgrade, the old v4 transactions become invalid, and assets in the original Sprout pool that are not migrated will be permanently locked. Position holders need to hedge in advance.
At the same time, NU7 launches the NSM network long-term mechanism, reconstructing the fee economic model:
40% of fees are immediately distributed to miners, 60% are allocated to protocol reserves and temporarily withdrawn from circulation, with gradual release to subsidize miner income after 2031.
Currently, nearly 30% of ZEC's circulating assets are deposited in privacy pools.
From a valuation perspective, the current ZEC price is $1200, with a market cap ratio to BTC of about 1.35%.
There are three reference ranges:
$700–900, accounting for 0.8%-1% of BTC market cap, representing a high cost-performance value floor;
$900–1300, accounting for 1%-1.5% of BTC market cap, a neutral oscillation range;
$1300–1800, accounting for 1.5%-2% of BTC market cap, a growth premium range.
Compared to previous mainstream old coin historical cycles, mainstream old coins' peak values generally reach 3% of BTC market cap, corresponding to a ZEC target price of 2600+. $BNB
CZ said this is "another attack against Binance," with 11,700 hostile posts and 1,083 accounts.
The numbers are intimidating. I reviewed today's market: the low point of 680.37 occurred at 11 AM, that 1-hour candle smashed out 1.27 million volume, the highest real-money volume of the day. Then it climbed back to 705, now at 701.8.
During the hours with the most criticism, the price was rising. The money that lifted 680 has nothing to do with sentiment.
The fee rate is 0.01%, just on the baseline, not a penny more. Positions just over 50 million, barely moved in eight hours. No one is betting on direction.
This year, I was scared off by BNB's public opinion twice, both times at the lows. This time I won't look at posts, only trust the 680 line.
Let them criticize, my position isn't worth them making posts about.$BTC
7,500 BTC, $572 million, transferred at 17:38 to an untagged wallet.
Two years ago when I saw this kind of news flash, the first thing I did was cut long positions. Today I watched the market for ten minutes, the price moved from 78,300 to 78,350, 24-hour high 78,533, not giving an inch.
Open interest is 2.76 billion, a bit thicker than two hours ago. Funding rate 0.0078%, staying below the 0.01% baseline for two consecutive settlement periods. Those wanting to chase should stop, and those wanting to dump haven’t really acted.
The real concern with this kind of transfer is if the recipient wallet is tagged as an exchange deposit. Untagged wallets historically are mostly custody migrations or internal consolidations. Those truly preparing to dump never broadcast in advance.
So I neither added nor reduced. It has been sideways above 78,300 for over seven hours, both sides are waiting.
Waiting for it to give its own direction, I won’t choose for it.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 #Circle財報在即，穩定幣成長能否轉化為收益？
Circle will announce its Q3 earnings at 8 AM Eastern Time on November 4. The focus is whether the growth in USDC scale can translate into retainable earnings; as of 6 PM Taiwan time on November 4, the results have not yet been released. At the end of last quarter, USDC circulation was $73.3 billion, a 19% year-over-year increase; combined revenue and reserve income totaled $701 million, up 7% year-over-year, but reserve income only grew by 5%. The company noted that the average circulation increased by 25%, partially offset by a 66 basis point decline in reserve yield, with distribution, trading, and other costs reaching $412 million. This indicates that scale expansion does not necessarily drive profit growth in tandem; interest rates and distribution costs are equally critical. After the earnings release, it will be possible to verify changes in Q3 average circulation, reserve yield, distribution costs, and net profit, distinguishing quarterly data from real-time market prices.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.Today BTC first probed around $75,700, then was pulled back to around $77,800, rising about 1.7% in 24 hours. ETH is around $2,290, up 1.7%. The above data is for November 4th. It will still fluctuate before the close, so real-time data should be taken as the standard. Why did it first drop then rebound today? I think it's like meeting your partner's parents, then realizing your palms are sweaty on the way home. First, the Democrats took the House, and there is progress in the Senate; uncertainty has settled. BTC bounced back from below $76,000 to $78,000. Simply put, it's a sigh of relief after all the bad news, not a reversal. Second, everyone worries that market structure bills like CLARITY might be delayed. Changing the head of the family in a relationship doesn't mean the marriage is off, just that the bride price needs to be renegotiated. Third, the probability of a Fed rate hike in December is still around 80%. About $1 billion flowed out of spot ETFs in the past two days. Money has become more expensive, so people are less willing to go on dates. This is more long-term than the election. Another small detail: the SEC has issued supplementary explanations on token classification these days. Speaking in the group doesn't mean you are the group owner. This is genuinely friendly to governance tokens. Congress is slow, regulation is moving forward. Emotions and fundamentals should be viewed separately. Outlook for tomorrow: I won't guess the direction. Guessing right is luck; guessing wrong is tuition. Technically, $76,000 to $76,600 is support; $79,500 to $80,500 is resistance. After the election bad news is out, next to watch are rate hikes and ETF funds. The panic index is still above 30, somewhat cautious. Operation advice: peace, no calls. What was said on election night is all no longer relevant Election results have landed. The market first took a hit. BTC dropped from 77049 down to 75734.5. That was the low point. Then it pulled back to 78434.5, current price about +1.80%, with a volatility of 3.67%. ETH followed, at 2323.5, about +2.43%.
My judgment is simple: that low point was sentiment, not pricing.
There is only one reason. When the news came out, those pressing buttons were following the old script—regulation would tighten. After the drop, it was found that no one was stepping in below. The buy side was thin, and the sell side was also thin. So once it pulled, it bounced back. This was not new money entering, but sellers finishing their sales in one go.
A volatility of 3.67% is not small. But the price returned above the open. The real information lies on the low side: the selling pressure came in one wave, with no second wave.
Therefore, I believe the election factor’s effect on the coin price has been fully explained in this drop and pullback. Using it to explain further rises or falls is just making excuses.
If you want to refute me, answer this question directly: Is the 75734.5 low the bottom of this round, or just the first probe? Choose one. #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 $BTC $ETH 78,389.4 USD, a slight 0.94% increase in 24 hours. The market looks calm on the surface, but the underlying structure is tearing apart. On one side, open interest has dropped to 284.1 billion USD, the lowest in 12 months, with most of the leverage accumulated over the past year basically cleared out. On the other side, BTC perpetual funding rates remain stuck at +0.0100%, with longs continuing to pay shorts. The 8-hour average funding rate on some exchanges has already turned negative to -0.0044%, with shorts starting to pay longs, but this is localized, not global. If you put these two sets of data together: leverage is gone, but the funding rate hasn’t returned to zero. This is not the classic bottom pattern—the classic bottom is when the funding rate turns negative first, longs pay enough and are willing to concede, then the market truly clears. The current state is closer to "chips have cleared, but those left are still holding on." Conditional: if the funding rate does not show a global negative shift soon, the sideways consolidation may last longer than most expect. The macro environment is also uncooperative. The US spot Bitcoin ETF has seen net outflows for three consecutive trading days, totaling 1.157 billion USD, with BlackRock’s IBIT accounting for 734 million USD of that. The price has pulled back from below 76,000 to around 78,000, but ETF buying has not returned. Key resistance levels: 78,500, 77,600. Support levels: 76,500, 75,250. --- ETH: high turnover, low open interest, shorts are holding 🔥🖊 2,321.88 USD, 24h +1.01%. ETH’s contract structure is more honest and also more tangled than BTC’s.I've never quite understood: a company hasn't gone public, its stock price doesn't jump daily, so how did it suddenly become worth $115 billion?
The answer is quite simple — a few old shareholders transferred their shares to others, the price was agreed upon, and that price became the default "fair value." The company didn't receive new money, but the label was attached. A year ago it was $75 billion, now it's up 53%, and based on $2.3 billion pre-tax profit, that's nearly 50 times.
My first reaction: does this have anything to do with the $BTC I hold? Not really in the short term; it will still fluctuate. But at least it shows that funds willing to pay a high price for the story are still around. It's just that this price was negotiated behind closed doors, and whether the next buyer accepts it once the door opens is another matter.A UK fintech company that has not yet gone public was recently valued at $115 billion by the market through a secondary transfer of existing shares. No new shares were issued, yet the valuation was established first.
Looking at the numbers: the market valuation in November 2025 is about $75 billion, an increase of approximately 53% in one year; the pre-tax profit in 2025 is about $2.3 billion, corresponding to nearly 50 times earnings. Such a multiple is almost impossible for a traditional bank, but institutions are willing to pay it for a super app that handles payments, accounts, and credit.
Mechanically, this is a secondary market circulation among existing shareholders; no new money enters the company’s books, and the capital structure is not diluted. Two things change: early holders lock in book gains at this price level; the valuation discovery function partially shifts from public issuance and listing review to a closed private secondary market.
Regulators do not see a whole but rather business bricks: payment transfers fall under payment institutions or electronic money institutions, quasi-accounts have a separate set of client fund reserve requirements, and once it involves quasi-deposits, it must answer which license governs it. Adding crypto asset services, the EU requires client asset segregation, separate licensing, and enhanced disclosure.
Therefore, the meaning of the $115 billion is not successful financing but that pricing power has been handed over to a group of leading institutions, while regulatory standards have simultaneously advanced. The price is first set in a closed market before discussing the public market, where ordinary investors receive either a discount or the residual value after others have locked in gains.$BTC Observation: Spot ETF has had outflows for 3 consecutive days totaling $1.16 billion, but single-day outflow has shrunk to $116 million
BTC currently at $78,416, up 1.78% in 24 hours, recovering from $75,734 intraday, ETF still experiencing outflows, price has first stopped falling
Reviewing these three days: October 30 outflow $643 million, November 2 $399 million, November 3 $116 million, single-day scale about 71% less than the previous day (SoSoValue)
On November 3, BlackRock IBIT outflow $94.98 million, while Bitwise BITB, Fidelity FBTC, and Morgan Stanley MSBT had net inflows
Bitwise research head Dragosch believes this is a short-term hedge after the Binance hack, not a structural institutional withdrawal; none of the 15 institutions they surveyed reduced their ETF exposure
Fear & Greed Index rose from 26 to 34, still in the fear zone; before outflows turn to inflows, staying above 78,000 is not yet confirmed.
#BTC现货ETF资金流出，企业财库增持放缓 AMD guidance of 17 billion shatters expectations, after-hours surged to 530 then gave back half, I’m not chasing.
Q3 revenue 13.38 billion USD, market expected 13.06 billion; adjusted EPS 2.09, expected 1.95.
Data center revenue nearly doubled to 8.55 billion, a new high.
Q4 guidance about 17 billion (±3%), market only expected 16.23 billion, midpoint year-over-year +66%.
In October AMD fell 17.5%, Philadelphia Semiconductor Index was down 15.4% in the same period.
From the 10/6 high of 658.52 to the 11/2 low of 466.07, a pullback of about 29%.
On 11/3 closed at 484.47 (+3.8%), after-hours peaked at 530.38, before 8 PM Eastern returned to around 508.
I think the earnings report is solid, the guidance is truly strong.
But the after-hours surge and pullback shows the market is still afraid of an AI capital expenditure bubble; one earnings report can’t turn the whole sector’s sentiment.
I observe and don’t chase; regular session must hold above 520 (10/30 high) to consider the gap fill recovered, MA20 and MA50 still pressuring above 550.
If it breaks below 466, this rebound is invalidated.
Is the 17 billion guidance ironclad proof AI chips haven’t peaked, or is the after-hours surge and pullback your chance to exit?
$AMD $NVDA
#美股财报 #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 ETH surged with volume this hour, while BTC lagged slightly at the high point.
The afternoon recovery didn't immediately retrace: BTC continued to rise over the next few full hourly candles, and ETH held around 2280. Around 18:00 Beijing time, the spot prices for the two coins were approximately 78401 and 2322.8, nearing their respective 24-hour highs. The earlier statement "repair remains to be verified" can now be updated to say the hourly level continuation is still ongoing.
Looking closely at the volume, the situation isn't exactly the same. ETH's last full hourly candle surged to about 2329, with volume clearly above recent averages; BTC reached 78520 in the same hour, but volume did not increase correspondingly. I pay more attention to this divergence: prices rising together does not mean both sides have equally solid follow-through.
Before evening, observe from 15 minutes to 1 hour intervals. BTC's support lies between 78300–78340, a zone where recent 15-minute candles repeatedly stopped falling; resistance is between 78520–78562, overlapping the recent swing high and 24-hour high. Only if volume expands and closes above the upper boundary can we consider the repair continuing; if the hourly candle closes below 78300, the high-level hold is questionable.
For ETH, support is at 2315–2318, where short-term lows and pullback closes concentrate; resistance is at 2329–2330, where the hourly high and 24-hour high coincide. Holding above this level supports continuation of strength; losing the lower boundary suggests a pullback first. Both coins are near highs, volatility may increase, so be cautious of risk. $BTC $ETHOld Leek Observation｜$OSMO: Burning 55.5 million tokens, why am I not rushing to be bullish?
Today, a small-cap target worth paying attention to: Osmosis (OSMO). Osmosis is voting to pass Proposal 1057, planning to permanently burn 55.5 million OSMO from the community fund, pushing the total burned amount over 100 million tokens. This accounts for about 7% of the current supply.
But I believe the real point worth studying in this event is not just the "burning benefit".
First, look at the changes it has already completed:
On October 25, Proposal 1053 passed, stopping new inflation issuance of OSMO, and staking rewards are now provided by protocol revenue. Now Proposal 1057 is ready to permanently burn the 55.5 million OSMO historically accumulated in the community fund.
These two events together form a complete Tokenomics story:
Stop inflation + permanent burn + staking rewards shift to protocol revenue.
But there is a detail that cannot be ignored:
These 55.5 million tokens were already in the community fund and did not belong to the daily circulating sell pressure. This burn is more like turning the original "soft burn" into a permanent burn, rather than the market suddenly losing 7% of tradable chips.The number of companies using artificial intelligence has only slightly increased, but spending on AI has doubled. What's going on?
According to Menlo Ventures, AI deployment spending is expected to reach $176.8 billion annually by September 2026, up from $33 billion the previous year. The proportion of companies adopting AI has only grown from 55% to 65%.
I believe AI agents are changing the game. One employee can run dozens of agents, continuously consuming tokens, without the company needing to hire more staff. But is the efficiency gain worth investing so much money? $BTC $BTC Just saw the price suddenly push above 78,000, which startled me. On the 1-hour chart, the price has consecutively crossed EMA20, EMA50, and EMA100. However, these moving averages are still tangled together on the 1-hour chart, with bullish and bearish MAs twisted into a knot. The short-term surge upward is very fast, but the price is about to hit a bigger barrier overhead.
Switching to the 4-hour chart, EMA20, EMA50, and EMA100 are still neatly aligned downward. All three lines are sloping down, and the current price is just touching the 4-hour EMA50. There are no moving averages supporting the bottom; instead, the overhead MAs are blocking the way. Since the rebound from the low, the price has already pulled about two and a half 4-hour ATRs within a few hours, reaching the moving average resistance zone.
Looking upward, just above 78,000 is the high resistance level from 4 hours ago. The 4-hour moving averages are overall sloping downward, and the downtrend structure has not been broken. For the short-term surge to continue upward here, trading volume must keep expanding.
I still lean bearish. The price is right against the key 4-hour resistance overhead, with several moving averages pressing down. The expectation is for a downward reversal next.
$ETH $SOL #BTC现货ETF资金流出，企业财库增持放缓 I'M WATCHING A BIG LONG ON $ADA .
Price swept the 0.1829 low, then buyers drove it straight back up. ADA trades at 0.1913, just under the 0.1928 high. The 7D and 30D trends are still down, so this is a bounce.
A break above 0.1928 opens more upside. The setup holds above 0.1870. A drop below 0.1829 invalidates it.
Dip buyers showed up. Now I wait for the break.
#DemocratsWinCongress $DOOD DOOD This token is quite interesting.
The 30-day spot net inflow has directly pushed the market cap to 64%, the chips have long been drained by the main force.
Yet the contract shorts are still stubbornly holding on, paying interest daily to stubbornly resist.
There are no sell orders above, the shorts are purely acting as fuel for the main force to pump the price.
#DOOD
$DOOD
👇$ZIL
Sharding has long been discussed as a potential solution to blockchain scalability challenges. Zilliqa built its technological identity around this approach, making it an interesting project to evaluate from an infrastructure perspective. However, technical differentiation is only one part of success. Developer retention, application quality, network demand, and competition will ultimately determine whether its architecture translates into lasting ecosystem strength.