Orbit Post Sitemap
The Ethereum Foundation released a Strawmap on X, breaking down the achievement of Lean Ethereum before 2029 into a sequence of forks. At the same time, the market shows the opposite picture: as of 10:13 on November 5, about $983 million worth of liquidations occurred across the network in the past 24 hours, with 130,900 traders liquidated.
In the roadmap, H* is the last fork without Lean features, marking the end of the old paradigm. I* brings leanVM and Lean transactions to the mainnet; the former removes historical complexity unrelated to security, and the latter restructures transactions. J* adds Lean proofs, data availability sampling, and PCS, so nodes no longer have to fully bear the data load but rely on sampling to maintain security and efficiency. Finally, Lean Ethereum is completed at stage L.
The key is not in a single feature but in the rhythm: changes are split into multiple forks rather than one big upgrade. For $ETH, this means acknowledging that the execution layer's complexity can only be offloaded piece by piece.
On the market side, of the $983 million liquidations, $582 million were shorts and $401 million were longs; the largest single liquidation was a roughly $38 million ETH-USDT long on HTX. The two-way liquidations indicate price swings back and forth.
However, current information does not establish a causal link between liquidations and the roadmap; they are just two concurrent lines extending simultaneously. What is truly worth pondering is the time scale: the protocol is priced in years, while positions are priced in hours. The chain sets its goals for 2029, but holders don't survive past a morning. How to choose between CORE, Babylon, and Merlin? Understand the differences of BTCFi public chains in one article
The BTCFi sector is booming, but the underlying positioning of CORE, Babylon, and Merlin is completely different. Many people are easily confused by the unified narrative of "Bitcoin" and choose the wrong track. Below is a comparison of mechanisms, advantages, and disadvantages to help clarify the differences.
📊 Horizontal comparison table
Table
Project Network Positioning Core Mechanism Biggest Highlight Shortcomings Suitable Audience
CORE Independent L1 public chain Satoshi Plus hybrid consensus: Bitcoin miners + BTC stakers + CORE token holders vote to select 21 validator nodes to produce blocks Non-custodial BTC staking, complete EVM public chain ecosystem, tied to Bitcoin miner narrative Only 21 validator nodes, decentralization is relatively weak; BTC only participates in voting and does not provide security backing for the CORE chain Participants who want a complete DeFi ecosystem on an independent public chain and engage in miner narrative games
Babylon BTC staking infrastructure protocol BTC locked in Bitcoin Taproot scripts, assets remain on the BTC mainnet, sharing BTC staking security capabilities with other PoS chains Native BTC self-custodial staking, assets do not need to be cross-chained, relying on BTC itself to provide security to other networks Not a mature general-purpose public chain itself, more like staking middleware, ecosystem construction depends on external networks Users holding a large amount of idle BTC, prioritizing asset security and wanting to stake for yield【Morpho Midnight and Uranium.io: Lending Expansion and the Physical Depth of RWA】
Two on-chain signals, each pointing to a structural direction.
Morpho Midnight's TVL rose 23% on November 5, reaching $163 million. Against the backdrop of a relatively consolidated leading landscape in the lending track, the expansion of the Morpho series, which focuses on institutional-grade risk isolation and customized vaults, represents the continued growth of the "professional lending infrastructure" segment — the pure yield play of the previous cycle is giving way to lending protocols with collateral management capabilities.
Uranium's TVL increased 37.1% to $10.5 million — still small in scale, but the category is worth noting: tokenized uranium. The RWA track is extending from US Treasuries and money market funds to physical commodities. Uranium, as a variety that combines an energy narrative with physical delivery attributes, will be a touchstone for observing the depth capability of "physical assets on-chain" through its tokenization experiment (regulation, custody, delivery chain).What happened? How did it jump to 80,000 overnight?
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权
After the Democrats' big win yesterday, BTC first dropped to around 75,600, then rebounded in a V-shape.
It was stable around 79,000 before sleep, so how did it suddenly surge to 80,000 this morning?
The liquidation map shows:
About 337 million shorts were liquidated breaking above 82,000, and about 919 million longs are waiting to be liquidated if it falls below 79,000.
My judgment:
The area above 81,000 is a resistance test zone, suitable for betting on a pullback after a rebound exhaustion; short positions can be built above 81,000.
Basis:
1. The 81,000–82,000 range is near the 365-day moving average + previous supply wall + a key dense resistance zone repeatedly tested without effective breakthrough; the probability of failure to break through is high.
2. This round of rise mainly relies on short squeeze liquidation + elimination of election uncertainty, lacking sustained spot buying and ETF inflows; it is a corrective rebound, not a trend reversal.
3. After the Democrats control Congress, regulation may become stricter, a medium-term bearish factor.
4. Daily RSI is low, MACD still weak, prone to "false breakouts" followed by pullbacks.
5. The 77,000–80,000 area has dense position costs; surges easily trigger profit-taking and trapped position selling pressure.
6. The current rise is linked to stock market rebound and oil price decline; once macro sentiment cools, crypto is likely to correct first.
Trading advice:
It is recommended to open short positions at the 81,000–82,000 resistance level, targeting around 78,000–79,000; stop loss if it effectively breaks above 82,000, and if it falls below 78,000, look down to 76,000 10x leverage, I'll first calculate the margin without thinking about potential profits: roughly estimated by dividing the notional value by the leverage, the corresponding margin is about $64,700. This monitoring shows that a wallet has newly opened or added a long position on $ZEC, holding 500 coins, with a notional value of approximately $646,900.
I think the key to this trade is not the large amount, but the thin margin for error. If the price moves 1% against the reference price, the position would have an unrealized loss of about $6,469, which is equivalent to 10% of the theoretical margin mentioned above, not including fees. The actual liquidation point depends on the margin mode and additional collateral; 10x leverage alone does not determine it, but the volatility definitely amplifies the principal.
I would choose to be more cautious and not assume the risk is worth it just because a large wallet is going long. Since I can't see their full risk management setup right now, I’d rather observe subsequent position changes first than take someone else’s position size as a source of confidence.$BTC #$ETH $SOL 【Minimalist Chan Theory】
#US Midterm Elections: Democrats Win Control of Both Houses of Congress
I previously wrote that this drop is unlikely to be very deep, with the price hovering around 7.5, because this level is the previous drop's chip concentration area, the lower edge of the pivot, and also the 200-day moving average support. With weekly oversold and multiple supports, a deep drop is unlikely.
I have gradually closed my short positions over the past few days, pocketing 13,000. From both the 30-minute and 4-hour perspectives, this drop is weakening, with the internal structure very full and showing clear divergence. I've been buying the dip at the bottom, riding the roller coaster back and forth, but profits have been giving back and I haven't closed to take profits yet.
Next, I plan to hold this long position for the long term, with an ETH target around 3200 and BTC target around 100,000. The target profit for this long position is 200,000, which will take a few months if all goes well. I will do swing trades and hedging as needed. This rebound is quite strong; now it just needs a pullback that doesn't break the previous low to officially confirm that this drop is completely over. Let the bullet fly a little longer.When I see "continuous profit," the accountant in my head just put on glasses, and the atmosphere team swapped the calculator for glow sticks. The most common misunderstanding in the crypto world: the financial report hasn't been fully reviewed, but the celebration banquet is already booked. 😂
According to the data, Hyperliquid's protocol revenue in the past 30 days reached $66.87 million, ranking first among crypto-native projects after excluding Tether and Circle. I think this is more like a signal of business heat, not yet proof of crossing cycles: its monthly revenue this year ranged from $38.42 million to $74.19 million, with significant fluctuations; if revenue growth mainly relies on market-driven trading stimulation, then how much activity can be retained after the rebound fades will be a real test of the business foundation. This is my speculation and income ranking alone cannot be taken as a seal of approval.
Do you value "peak monthly revenue" more, or "stable revenue during a bear market"? I stand with the latter, after all, a health check shouldn't only measure the fastest heartbeat moments. Meta issues another $15 billion in bonds, the AI boom begins to test real money!
Meta's latest issuance of $15 billion in USD bonds includes some 10-year bonds with yields about 1.6 percentage points higher than U.S. Treasuries. AI infrastructure is still expanding, but financing costs are also rising. Previously, the market worried whether AI could make money; now it also has to calculate: with such large investments, can the returns cover the costs?
Looking at the crypto market, the leader is around $78,453 (+1.28%), the slightly delayed noble is about $2,319 (+1.36%), and SOL is about $92.85 (-0.46%). BTC and ETH have rebounded, but SOL has not kept up; funds are not fully chasing risk.
My view: no matter how big the story, ultimately it comes down to cash flow. The crypto market is the same; don't just chase narratives, watch volume for breakouts, and watch support for pullbacks.
Personal trading record sharing, not investment advice.
$BTC $SOL $ETH
#Meta再发债150亿美元，融资成本上升 When the EUR/USD exchange rate rises, it may be wise to avoid shorting Bitcoin. A weaker dollar often benefits risk assets, and Bitcoin is generally more likely to strengthen. Conversely, when the EUR/USD falls and the dollar strengthens, Bitcoin may be more susceptible to downward pressure. This is not absolute and should not be taken as an entry signal, but it is indeed a macro correlation worth closely monitoring. The key is to trade with the trend, not against it. Bitcoin's Three-Cycle "Bottoming After Election → Rebound" Review
In the history of three midterm elections, $BTC has followed the same path: first a drop, accelerated clearing, then a violent rebound.
Data speaks:
2014 (71 days to bottom)
Election day ~$360 → dropped to $230 (-36%) → next bull peak $20,000+
Rebound: +8,600%
2018 (39 days to bottom)
Election day ~$6,350 → dropped to $3,150 (-50%) → 2019 rebound $13,800
Rebound: +338%
2022 (13 days to bottom)
Election day ~$19,500 → dropped to $15,500 (-21%) → 2024 breaks previous high $73,750
Rebound: +376%
Three patterns:
① Days lagging to bottom decrease: 71→39→13 (market pricing efficiency improves)
② The deeper the drop, the stronger the rebound (2018 dropped 50%, rebounded 338%)
③ Within 12 months after the election, prices are always higher than on election day
Implications for 2026:
Currently, with ETF support + protection fund mechanisms, expected drop is shallower and bottoming faster. If there is a pullback after the election, it is actually a "last dip" layout window.
History does not simply repeat, but it always rhymes After so many years, the nature of the crypto circle has never changed
After a big drop, it's always $BTC that gets rescued first, BTC rises first, and only after it reaches a high and consolidates do altcoins catch up
Today, altcoins generally underperformed BTC in the rebound
Usually at this time, BTC hasn't fully risen yet; once BTC is revived, then it's time to rescue altcoins
If BTC can hold steady at 78000 tonight, altcoins will most likely start catching up afterwards 11.5 SOL Positioning Today
$SOL
Strong overnight rally, reaching a high of 98.16 before entering a high-level consolidation phase. Overall bullish trend remains strong, with operations mainly focusing on buying the dip. #美国10月非农前瞻：就业增长或牵动12月加息预期
Support: 95.0
Resistance: 98.0-98.5
Long positions: Enter near 95.0 on a stable pullback, stop loss at 94.5, first target 97.0, second target 98.0
Short positions: Light short positions can be tried on a rebound in the 98.0-98.5 range if the price stagnates, quick in and out, first target 96.5, second target 95.0 $SNDK dropped from 2300 to 1000, more than halved, and just broke the 1000 whole number mark — does anyone dare to catch the bottom here?
#AMD数据中心收入近翻倍，营收及指引均超预期
Yesterday BTC and gold both surged, and the US stock market overall rebounded, but the storage chip sector fell sharply against the trend, with SanDisk dropping 8 points in one day. Seagate and Western Digital followed suit, the whole sector is being hit hard.
Why? I guess the market is worried that the storage cycle has peaked. It had been rising for over a year, from under 1000 to 2300, and now the funds are starting to exit early. Has the fundamental changed? It doesn't seem so, but stock prices are like this: no top when rising, no bottom when falling.
Personally, I don't dare to catch the falling knife now. Dropping from 2300 to 1000 looks like a big fall, but how do you know how much further down it can go? Storage chips are a strong cyclical industry, and once the cycle turns, the drop is much fiercer than the rise.
If you really want to be optimistic, wait until it stabilizes above 1000 and doesn't hit new lows for several consecutive days. Now? I'll just watch and not get emotionally involved.
What about you? SanDisk has halved from the high point in this wave, do you think it has bottomed out or is it halfway down the mountain?24-hour increase of 18.33%, the last full 1 hour continued to rise by 1.67%, but after the surge, the current price has returned below the hourly close. OKX 02:18 (UTC) snapshot shows $LSK spot at 0.21547 USDT, 24-hour range between 0.18209—0.22296 USDT; the trading volume for the last 24 full hours is approximately 1.8644 million USDT.
The last full 1 hour trading volume was about 120,100 USDT, a slight increase of only 7.04% compared to the previous period; the price touched 0.22296 USDT intraday and closed at 0.21816 USDT, while the current price is even lower. The uptrend remains, but the chasing volume has not expanded in line with the 24-hour increase, so the single-hour continued rise cannot be directly regarded as a confirmed breakout.
OKX does not have LSK perpetual contracts, lacking OI and funding rate cross-verification. If the full hour volume supports a stable hold above 0.22296 USDT, the trend continuation is more credible; if it falls below 0.21121 USDT with increased volume, I would first guard against a pullback after the surge.
* NFA, DYOR$UNI is very strong
1. Because Binance still hasn't opened withdrawals, it means the missing coins haven't been replenished enough. Once withdrawals are opened, the strong opportunity will disappear and it will follow the overall market.
2. UNI and ETH share the same wallet code. ETH withdrawals have already opened, but UNI hasn't, which can help support my judgment.
3. Looking at the UNI spot order book, there really isn't enough buying power.
7.02 million coins were stole#dAfter the Republican Party's crushing defeat, assets related to the Trump family collectively plummeted, evaporating over $200 million in one day!【Brent Crude Falls Below $94, Market Begins Betting on End of US-Iran War】
The core reason for this round of oil price $BZ decline is the rapid dissipation of war risk premium. After the US midterm elections, with the Democrats controlling both houses of Congress, the political cost for Trump to continue military escalation has clearly increased. Vance also publicly linked the Republican defeat to the Iran war. The market is beginning to bet that the US will more actively push for a ceasefire.
Currently, crude oil exports from the Gulf region have recovered to 17.1 million barrels per day, about three-quarters of the pre-war level. If the Strait of Hormuz returns to normal navigation, global crude supply will further improve, and the geopolitical premium previously built into oil prices has room to continue to be unwound.
In the short term, crude oil can be viewed bearish. The Democrats winning the election does not mean the war will end immediately; there is still distance between Iran and the US in reaching an agreement, and US crude inventories unexpectedly decreased by 865,000 barrels last week, indicating that the supply side is not completely loose.
However, before any new military escalation, the dominant logic of oil prices has shifted from supply disruption to ceasefire expectations. Before $100 is firmly reestablished, any rebound looks more like a correction of geopolitical risk premium rather than a new upward trend.
#美国中选改变美伊预期，布伦特跌破95美元 The trading API is currently only open to a small number of whitelisted Alpha users, which is quite interesting, but I'm more concerned about how it will change participation once it moves from a small circle to public access 👀. Variational also disclosed progress on security optimizations, with the public mainnet approaching, the API going live publicly, the TGE planned within the year, and partnership announcements still in the pipeline.
I think this will have a stronger catalytic effect on sentiment in the trading tools sector and we shouldn't just focus on token issuance expectations. My guess is that if the API attracts more automated strategies after going public, there might be more quotes and trading opportunities for highly volatile assets; however, when strategies cluster, it could also amplify short-term volatility, and more activity doesn't necessarily mean better execution for ordinary users.
I will be watching the post-launch trading depth and the spreads during intense volatility, rather than judging by the number of integrations. Regarding this kind of API opening, is the recent focus more on on-chain derivatives or automated trading tools? Which change do you value more? That "fake fall" judgment was immediately voted on by the market with its feet.
As soon as the news that the Democratic Party took control of the House of Representatives came out, $BTC spiked to 75,734, piercing through the daily EMA200. But the panic didn't even last through lunch — at 12 o'clock it stood back at 76,550, now at 78,400, even higher than the 77,880 at the start of the vote this morning. The bearish news is real, the sell-off is real, but the shorts didn't hold.
The real tough battle is overhead: 78,430 to 78,460. The 1-hour EMA200 and 4-hour EMA50 are tightly stacked on this line, and the remaining 56.8 short positions of that 40x short seller have a liquidation price of 78,427.7, just below the line. At 15:25 he was liquidated again, his position shrinking, but he hasn't left yet.
If this line breaks, he is the last fuel; if it doesn't, this V shape is just a short covering encore. Keep your eyes on 78,430, don't blink. #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 #CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% #AMD数据中心收入近翻倍，营收及指引均超预期 $66.87 million, this is Hyperliquid's protocol revenue over the past 30 days mentioned in the material, and it's the number I care about most. The report also mentioned that after the election results were finalized, the crypto market rebounded. But rather than a “bullish comeback,” I want to understand: how many barriers remain before this revenue reaches the pockets of token holders?
I run a small company, and of course, I’m happy to see a good turnover, but turnover is not net profit, let alone cash that can be freely distributed. My judgment is: protocol revenue has reference value, but using it directly as evidence that the token is undervalued lacks business logic. Input and output must account for costs, and also consider what sustains the revenue.
The same goes for buybacks; you can’t just look at whether they exist, but also at the source of funds and sustainability. My guess is, if the market cools down and trading demand drops, then protocol cash flow and buyback capacity may both be under pressure. The worst in business is to estimate annual income based on peak season revenue and then spend all risk reserves; when evaluating projects, I also don’t want to mistake hype for stable operations.
So I will treat this revenue as a starting point for further research, not as an answer to “should I get in.” For friends in business, if a company’s revenue is highly correlated with market cycles, how much risk reserve would you require to accept that it can sustainably buy back tokens?When I saw this message, the first thing that came to mind was: security in accounting is usually treated like a cost, but when something goes wrong, it feels like insurance. For me, judging odds can't just be about what is saved in the short term; it also requires considering who bears the tail risk.
According to Bloomberg, the T3 Financial Crime Fighting Alliance, jointly established in September 2024 by the organization behind the Tron blockchain, Tether, and TRM Labs, has quietly disbanded, with no specific reasons disclosed. This alliance had previously frozen $250 million in illicit assets. My judgment is that this deducts points from the stability of industry collaboration but is not enough to directly infer a negative price impact.
There are two reasons. The record of frozen assets shows that such cooperation had actual output; the alliance's exit at least increases the difficulty for outsiders to assess the continuity of collaboration. But without reasons, we cannot tell if this is a change in cooperation format or if parties are unwilling to continue bearing the costs. Betting on one explanation now is risky; the information support is too thin, the odds look tempting, but the probability of success is hard to judge.
In my speculation, if future disclosures clarify how responsibilities are divided, this change would be worth reevaluating; if only the disbandment news comes without explanation in the long term, then interpreting it as a reduced risk is not justified. For ordinary users, losing one alliance does not mean one less layer of financial risk. I will first leave a discount for uncertainty and not rush to count the unknown as a positive.This is the view I wrote yesterday about the future of BTC, which still applies.
There are two core points:
1. After the mid-term elections ended and the results came out, BTC rebounded from 76,000 to around 78,000 at the time of writing the article. How to confirm that this is a rebound?
2. If a main upward reversal trend appears, how to confirm it and how to handle it in practice?
BTC rebounded to a high of 81,000 in the early morning, so now I can clearly answer the above two questions:
First: The price quickly rose and stabilized at 79,600, and has steadily moved upward in the last 10 hours, so the rebound view is invalid. Therefore, I will not do ultra-short-term trading. You have also seen my position; I have just been holding it.
Second: The US stock market opened with volume and directly stood above 79,600. The 1H chart shows a pullback without breaking below, and now the price is running around 80,800, so I am operating according to the main upward trend strategy.
The practical operation is divided into two parts:
Select targets that can be rolled over and targets that cannot be added to (can only be held).
The targets that can be rolled over are still UNI and ETH. Other targets will only have positions established temporarily without moving!First, did I follow the original trading plan?
Second, did I enter the market based on clear criteria, or was it out of fear of missing out?
Third, during the trade, did I temporarily change my rules due to fear or greed?
Fourth, does the risk I took this time match my financial situation?
Fifth, what did this trade truly teach me?
Reviewing trades is not about making excuses for losses, nor about finding more reasons to justify profits.
Its real value is to help you distinguish which decisions are worth keeping and which mistakes need improvement.
4. Summarize weekly to identify recurring issues
Looking at a single trade alone can easily be influenced by chance factors.
But once you accumulate a certain number of records, you can try to identify recurring behavioral patterns.
For example:
Which type of trades perform relatively better?
What were the main causes of the biggest losses?
Did frequent trading lead to excessive fees? After using leverage, was it easier to incur losses beyond expectations?
After consecutive wins or losses, are you more likely to break trading discipline?
Don’t rush to change your entire strategy based on the results of just two or three trades. When the sample size is too small, randomness can be strong, and different market conditions also affect outcomes.
A better approach is to continuously accumulate records and, once you have enough evidence, determine whether the issues stem from the trading method, execution discipline, or changes in market conditions.
5. After each review, implement a specific improvement action The votes for the U.S. midterm elections have all been cast. Asking if the results are out yet requires splitting it into two sentences: the outcome is no surprise, but the official stamp hasn't been fully applied yet.
The last polling station closed in the early hours of November 4th, and states began to focus on counting votes. The conclusions calculated by various U.S. media outlets are roughly consistent—the Democratic Party won big this time, taking back control of both the House and Senate in one sweep.
The House majority requires just 218 seats, and they are expected to secure 245 or more; the Senate has about 54 seats, losing old Republican strongholds like Texas, Ohio, and Kansas that haven't flipped blue in decades, along with a string of governor seats. U.S. media calls this a "blue wave."
Trump's side has also acknowledged this, publicly congratulating and expressing willingness to cooperate with the Democrats, but leaving room in his words: "I'm not on the ballot, so this doesn't count as my loss," and he has already hinted that he will use the presidential veto if necessary.
However, strictly speaking, the numbers you see now are media estimates, not official certifications. States generally wait until mid to late November or even December to officially confirm, and some tightly contested districts may recount or engage in legal battles. The new Congress won't take office until January next year.
In short: the game is decided, the Democrats have swept everything, and now it's just a matter of waiting for the states to finish signing off. #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Circle’s Q3 highlights a key distinction: growing stablecoin activity does not automatically mean higher reserve income.
Results released Nov 4 included:
• Total revenue and reserve income: $865M, up 17% YoY
• Net income from continuing operations: $226M, up 5%
• Adjusted EBITDA: $317M, up 85%
• USDC onchain transaction volume: $13.9T, up 49%
• Average USDC in circulation: $73.3B, up 8%
Reserve income fell 8% to $658M, mainly due to a 61 bps decline in the reserve return rate, partly offset by higher average USDC circulation.
Transaction volume measures activity, while balances and reserve yields help determine reserve income. More transfers do not automatically mean higher issuer earnings.
Other revenue reached $207M, including $182M from the ARC token presale. Circle attributed adjusted EBITDA growth to presale revenue and lower distribution costs, partly offset by increased investment in new products.
The presale contribution should be assessed separately from reserve income when evaluating earnings sustainability. This quarter’s revenue mix may not be repeated in future quarters.
Arc public mainnet launched Sept 16 with native USDC integration and 100+ institutional and ecosystem participants. Launch participation is a starting point; sustained activity will offer further evidence of adoption.
Payments expansion adds another perspective:
• Circle Payments Network: $41.3B in annualized payment volume
• Tazapay: over $25B in annualized payment volume, with local payout coverage across 100+ markets
These are payment-volume metrics, not revenue, and should not be added together as an already combined business. Circle’s proposed Tazapay acquisition is expected to close in 2027, subject to regulatory approvals.
The next test is whether payment adoption can support durable earnings as reserve yields and costs evolve.
Which matters most for Circle’s outlook: USDC circulation, reserve yields or payment adoption?
#CircleQ3USDCVolumeUp49% The Democratic Party swept both the House and Senate. I previously said that the day the midterm election results came out was a phase low point. I even placed an order at 75,000, but it didn't execute because the rebound was too fast. Today, let's talk about who's really driving this rally.
$BTC rebounded sharply from the low of 75,618 to above 80,700. It looks fierce, but it's all due to short covering. In the past 24 hours, there was a total liquidation of 822 million across the network, with shorts accounting for 511 million, or 62%. In just one hour, 378 million shorts were liquidated; however, open interest actually dropped 4.36% to 347.7 billion, indicating that the rise is due to clearing old positions, not new money entering. Spot BTC ETFs have seen a net outflow of 1.16 billion over the last three trading days, with institutions selling and retail investors buying. Recovering 80,000 is just a psychological barrier; 82,000 is the real test, and further breakthroughs require new buying pressure.
$ETH is the strongest rebound among the three, standing above 2,400, but the fundamentals are still insufficient. On the same day, spot ETFs still saw an outflow of 85.35 million, and the old story of strong on-chain institutions but weak off-chain remains unchanged; 2,370–2,390 is the support zone to watch. This sharp bounce is due to concentrated short covering, not because institutions have returned.
$SOL is the weakest rebound, with active addresses still around 1.88 million. Adoption after Alpenglow hasn't stopped, RSI is near oversold, but no funds are coming in. It has strong fundamentals but was mistakenly punished by macro factors. When risk appetite returns, it will likely lead the rally. For now, neither flee nor chase.
So overall, this rally is mainly driven by short squeezes. The bull run will only be called when new buying enters the market. #Sony Earnings Preview: How Are the Gaming and Music Businesses Performing?
Key Metric Thresholds
1. PS5 Shipments
- ≥1.7 million units: ✅ Exceeds expectations
- 1.4–1.69 million units: ➖ Meets expectations
- <1.4 million units: ❌ Below expectations
2. PS Plus Paid Subscribers
- Month-over-month increase of 500,000 or more: ✅ Exceeds expectations
- Month-over-month change between -200,000 and +490,000: ➖ Meets expectations
- Month-over-month decline greater than 200,000: ❌ Below expectations
3. Gaming Segment Operating Profit (excluding one-time Bungie restructuring costs)
- ≥215 billion JPY: ✅ Exceeds expectations
- 190–214 billion JPY: ➖ Meets expectations
- <190 billion JPY: ❌ Below expectations
4. Software Revenue (First-party + Third-party + DLC/In-app purchases)
- Month-over-month growth: ✅ Exceeds expectations
- Slight decline (≤5%): ➖ Meets expectations
- Decline >5%: ❌ Below expectations
Music Sony Music Segment Scoring
1. Recorded Music Streaming Revenue Growth (USD)
- ≥12%: ✅ Exceeds expectations
- 7%–11%: ➖ Meets expectations
- <7%: ❌ Below expectations
2. Publishing Streaming Growth (USD)
- ≥10%: ✅ Exceeds expectations
- 6%–9%: ➖ Meets expectations
- <6%: ❌ Below expectations There is an on-chain address with a 98% win rate that reduced its $BTC long position by $6.66 million from November 4 to 5. Many people's first reaction was "the big player ran away." But he still holds $18.1 million in long positions, which doesn't look like running.
The path of the position reduction is even more interesting. He didn't dump it all at once; instead, he first closed about $2.2 million, then reopened about $1.8 million, and then closed about $6.2 million again. Close, open, then close again, with a net reduction of $6.66 million. This is not panic; someone is repositioning according to plan.
The prices also match. In these two days, the weighted average closing price of his long positions was about $80,253, and the weighted average opening price was about $80,104, two numbers almost identical.
Looking over a longer period makes it clearer: this address made 42 rounds of trades from September 18 to October 30, with a win rate of about 98%. Over more than a month and 42 rounds, his money is not made by betting on one big move but by taking a very narrow slice each round and repeating it.
My judgment: he is reducing exposure, not changing direction. The $18.1 million long position is still open; the direction hasn't changed. The $6.66 million reduction means he doesn't want to be fully invested at this level. He is taking some profits off the table and leaving room for the next dip.
What’s worth thinking about is that a person with a 98% win rate acts so boringly with just a close and open. Those who survive are often not the ones with the most accurate judgment but the ones who make a little profit each round and then pull back.$RENDER
The coin that rose 9.3% has only a little over two million USD in the contract pool.
The DePIN sector rebounded 5.79% across the board this morning, RENDER pulled from 1.477 to 1.64, now at 1.614, up 9.3% in 24 hours, leading this batch.
I checked the leverage. Perpetual positions are 1.53 million tokens, equivalent to 2.47 million USD, spot 24-hour volume is 2.83 million USD. The pool is so small that a single order of tens of thousands of dollars can draw a decent bullish candle, which has little to do with the narrative.
The volume is real though. 110k at 22:00, 175k at 23:00, shrank to just over 30k at midnight, then 130k at 5:00, 140k at 6:00, and 110k again at 9:00, with continuous buying, not just a single spike and retreat.
But the fee rate is only 0.005%, half of the 0.01% benchmark. Despite nearly a 10% rise, bulls are unwilling to pay more. Either spot is buying, or no one dares to add leverage here.
I usually watch this kind of structure without acting. It looks good rising, but the relay is insufficient. Wait until the fee rate returns above the benchmark and someone is willing to pay for long positions, then we can talk about whether it’s really starting.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 #AMD data center revenue nearly doubled, revenue and guidance both exceed expectations
$BTC $XAU AMD's Q3 earnings far exceeded expectations, with data center segment revenue nearly doubling year-on-year. EPYC CPUs paired with AI accelerator cards continue to scale up, with AI computing power becoming the core growth engine. Q4 revenue guidance is also higher than expected, driving strength in the computing chip sector after hours.
Positive for AI semiconductors, boosting market risk appetite, but note that the prior gains were significant, so there is a possibility of a pullback after the positive news is priced in.
For gold, this is only a secondary disturbance factor. The resilience of tech company profits indirectly reinforces the Fed's high interest rate support logic, bearish for gold prices but with limited impact. The main market focus remains tonight's ADP report and Friday's nonfarm payroll data, combined with safe-haven expectations from the congressional deadlock.
Considering the current market context
This earnings report is a strong boost for the tech sector but insufficient to change gold's current employment data-driven dynamics. Gold still depends on tonight's ADP and Friday's nonfarm data; if employment data is strong, combined with tech profit resilience and rising rate hike expectations, gold's rebound pressure will increase.
Don't be one-sidedly bearish on gold just because of AMD's positive news; it is only a secondary variable, and the safe-haven premium from the congressional deadlock still exists.
Brothers, share your gold price views in the comments…$BTC
This morning, I saw the 30th breaking news, the least noticeable one being that the Moscow Exchange will launch BTC, ETH, and USDT spot trading on December 1st.
Russia's largest securities exchange uses the stock market infrastructure for matching orders, with clearing handled by the National Settlement Depository. The details are interesting: retail investors must first pass a test, and each brokerage can buy up to 300,000 rubles per year, about 3,700 USD.
So the scale is symbolic, not about volume. A sanctioned exchange, providing a settlement channel for banks cut off from SWIFT, can only handle so much traffic.
The market situation further illustrates the issue. South Korea's KOSPI dropped over 5% intraday, Nasdaq futures down 1.3%, gold rose 4.3% in one day breaking 4100. Stocks are falling, safe havens are rising, BTC pulled from 76,932 to 81,200, now 80,814, about a 5% increase.
Three assets that shouldn't all rise together are rising simultaneously; I interpret this as pricing in fiat currency depreciation. But volume doesn't support this theory: at 11 PM last night, one 1H candle had 3 million contracts, the previous one 1.48 million, and the following 11 candles combined less than 2.6 million, only 80% of that single candle.
The fee rate is 0.0078%, still below the 0.01% benchmark. BTC rose 5%, yet bulls didn't even pay a premium. This doesn't look like new money entering the market, more like short positions above being cleared, with the price moved to a level where no one is floating a loss.
I tend to see this as a new consolidation zone, not a step up. To really move higher, we need to see a second 3 million volume candle.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 SanDisk fell nearly 10%, Micron and Seagate dropped over 7%, Western Digital fell over 6%, and SK Hynix ADR dropped over 5%. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index expanded its intraday decline to 5%.
SK Hynix's Q3 operating profit was 83.33 trillion KRW, with an operating margin of 80%, a record high. CEO Kwon Oh-hyun said something during the conference call that silenced all the shorts — "For the next three years until 2029, DRAM and HBM capacity is practically sold out," and customer demand is more than twice the company's supply capacity.
Samsung's HBM capacity is fully sold out through 2027. Kioxia's NAND capacity is fully sold out through 2027.
Profits hit record highs. Capacity is sold out four years in advance. Supply shortage will continue until 2030.
Yet the stock price dropped 10%.
This is not a fundamental problem. This is the result of a governor election in Texas, temporarily overshadowing a four-year order book.
On November 4, Democratic candidate Gina Hinojosa won the Texas governor race. One of her core campaign promises: immediately suspend data center project approvals upon taking office and re-examine the impact of these projects on electricity, water resources, and local infrastructure.
Goldman Sachs released a report that day with a figure: local-level approval freezes could affect about 45% of planned new data center capacity in the U.S., with Texas alone accounting for about 25%.
The market logic instantly connected: if data centers are not built → who will chips be sold to? → sell first, then talk.
JPMorgan's storage industry report released the day before the crash clearly stated: DRAM prices rose 23% quarter-over-quarter in Q3, exceeding expectations; HBM4 has already started shipping; manufacturers unanimously indicate demand will still exceed supply after 2027, with over 75% of capacity locked in for fiscal year 2027. JPMorgan maintains an "overweight" rating on SK Hynix, Samsung, and Kioxia.
Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley did the same thing at the same time: they changed the valuation framework for storage stocks from price-to-book ratio to price-to-earnings ratio because the "cyclical stock" label no longer fits this order book.
In other words: Wall Street is not bearish on storage. Wall Street is selling a stock that no longer behaves like a cyclical stock using cyclical stock selling methods.
When a stock falls 7% because "a few fewer data centers might be built," while its HBM capacity is already sold out through 2029 and customers are lining up for products, is the market pricing reality or pricing a policy scenario that has not yet occurred?
Regulatory risk is real. Approval delays will cause short-term noise. But what is delayed is the pace, not the demand. Texas suspending approvals cannot change the long-term computing contracts already signed by Microsoft, Amazon, and Google, nor can it change the industry fact of HBM supply shortage until 2030.
Storage stocks have retraced about 45% from their 2026 highs, with valuations compressed to less than 3.5 times the expected 2027 price-to-earnings ratio. The assumption implicit in this price is that AI capital expenditure will encounter major problems.
But the financial reports say the exact opposite.
On the day of the crash, someone in the stock forum typed: "The tech bubble has started to burst."
When the bubble bursts, capacity cannot be sold out through 2029.
Do you trust an emotional pricing caused by a governor's campaign promise, or do you trust a signed order book locked through 2029?
$SNDK $SKHY $AMD 🔥 The US October non-farm payrolls are here! Is there still a chance for a rate cut?
I believe the current Federal Reserve is probably more conflicted than investors!
Employment is too strong, so there's no reason to cut rates; employment is too weak, and worries about an economic recession will resurface. The most awkward situation is that employment cools down, but inflation refuses to settle.
I've always held the view that what the market truly needs is not the Fed desperately cutting rates, but an economy that can withstand rate cuts.
Why do I say this?
If non-farm payrolls weaken moderately and the unemployment rate remains stable, it indicates the labor market is cooling without losing control. This is the scenario the US stock and crypto markets prefer to see.
But if employment suddenly deteriorates sharply, even if rate cut expectations heat up quickly, don't rush to call a bull market! Because what the market will worry about next could be corporate profits and an economic recession.
Conversely, if employment remains strong and wage growth is still hot, why would the Fed rush to ease?
For $BTC, I pay more attention to three signals: the US dollar index, US Treasury yields, and the market's pricing of the next rate cut.
Rising rate cut expectations do not necessarily mean Bitcoin will rise; real liquidity improvement is more likely to support a sustained rally.
My judgment is clear: the window for rate cuts has not completely closed, but expecting a single non-farm payroll report to directly ignite a bull market is probably too simplistic.
Going forward, more important than guessing rate cuts is determining whether the market is trading a soft landing or recession risk.
Do you think the next rate cut will come earlier or continue to be delayed? "Under Resonance, Don't Treat History as a Script"
The BTC halving rhythm once again overlaps with the U.S. midterm election cycle, so the market naturally compares the post-midterm election trends of 2014, 2018, and 2022: after the election results, the bear market did not end immediately but took approximately 71 days, 39 days, and 13 days respectively to find the bottom. The bottom appears faster and faster, driven by deeper institutional participation and accelerated information dissemination, compressing panic and risk pricing into a shorter window.
This set of statistics is valuable for reference but cannot be directly applied. Each downturn is driven by different factors, and this round also includes the binding of election results with expectations for crypto policy: if control of either chamber changes, regulatory direction, legislative progress, and market pricing could all be rewritten.
Therefore, the midterm election is more like a time anchor rather than a button for a definitive bottom. History suggests that the "final drop" may occur, but the rhythm, depth, and triggering conditions still depend on policy variables and capital reactions. Cycle resonance is worth attention, but simple replication is not advisable.With the midterm elections settled, the Democrats have taken both chambers, and Trump basically can only talk tough for the next two years. There will be much less of those "troubles" like tariffs and geopolitical issues.
The sharp drop in oil prices reflects the market betting on a US-Iran détente. Iran may be tough in words, but negotiating with someone else is always better than clashing head-on with Trump. The Russia-Ukraine situation will also ease somewhat; the Democrats want to solve the oil price issue, so Russian oil won't be a deadlock. This is also good for the Federal Reserve, as its independence will face less interference and frictions with the ruling party will be reduced.
$BTC and the US stock market have already started pricing in a positive direction, but the real handover won't happen until early 2027; for now, Trump is still in power. Data shows there is liquidation pressure both above and below BTC. Breaking above 82,000, about $337 million in short positions could be forcibly liquidated. Falling below 79,000, about $919 million in long positions could be liquidated, with significantly greater pressure below.
The liquidation chart is essentially a forced liquidation map; the taller the bars, the more likely that price level will trigger a chain reaction of liquidations, amplifying short-term volatility.I got stuck reconciling this morning: the cost basis for SOL and ZEC positions is stuck at 0.0067%, while ETH only costs 0.0026%. On the same chart, the expensive side is two and a half times pricier than the cheap side.
First, let me show the cheap position I hold: ETH has the lightest cost basis, the 24-hour position decreased by 7.22%, and the price also followed to around 2426. This position isn’t hot to hold, so I’m willing to let it stay a bit longer. 😌
Now look at the expensive position: SOL and ZEC have high cost bases; ZEC’s 24-hour position surged 14.90%, SOL dropped 4.25%, but ZEC has already pulled back 0.87% in the short 1-hour term. The more aggressively the expensive position surges, the less willing I am to renew its funding.
BTC is stuck in the middle, with a cost basis of 0.0044%, the 24-hour position only moved 2.06%, and the price is holding above 80000, grinding around 80655. This position neither rushes to run nor falls behind, so I let it stay put.
Here’s how I calculate it: a high cost basis means bulls are lining up to pay and hold hard; a fast-rising position doesn’t mean the direction is stable. Once the short-term grip loosens, the expensive position gets washed out first. The cheap side, on the other hand, is where no one is crowding; the price keeps up, and the position isn’t overheated.
With the Bank of England decision coming tonight, I won’t bet early. If the expensive position’s cost basis pushes higher, I’ll halve it first; if the cheap position weakens, I’ll follow out.
So expensive doesn’t necessarily mean wrong, cheap doesn’t necessarily mean right. I only adjust positions based on the cost basis column, won’t renew funding for the expensive position, and won’t chase this segment. 💡#US Midterm Elections: Democrats Gain Control of Both Houses of Congress
With the Democrats winning, will BTC face short-term pressure or long-term benefits?
The crypto industry had previously been closely linked with the Trump camp, so with the Democrats fully controlling Congress, the market naturally worries about changes in the regulatory environment.
But investors need to distinguish between two issues: one is short-term policy expectations, and the other is Bitcoin's long-term value.
In the short term, the progress of regulatory bills, trading platform rules, and institutional fund sentiment may all affect BTC prices. In the long term, Bitcoin's trajectory also depends on global liquidity, institutional allocation, ETF fund flows, and market demand.
I don't believe a single midterm election can determine Bitcoin's long-term fate.
If future regulations become more transparent, it could actually help traditional financial institutions establish a more stable participation framework. Of course, tighter regulation may also bring temporary pressure.
Investing in BTC means you can't just focus on Washington press conferences. What really matters is whether funds are entering the market and whether there is demand for $BTC ⛏️ A Bitcoin mining company, the most valuable asset in its financial report is no longer the coins.
Riot sold over 20,000 coins this year, leaving just over 2,000 on the books, in exchange for a 15-year AI lease agreement.
910 megawatts, about $28 billion, the entire campus leased to an unnamed cutting-edge AI lab.
While peers were downgraded by Bernstein, it rose nearly 10%.
I think from now on, when looking at Riot, first check if the lease can be delivered on time, no need to look at the coin price first.
$RIOT #Meta再发债150亿美元，融资成本上升
On November 3rd, Meta completed a $15 billion issuance of five tranches of US dollar bonds, with a 30-year maturity in 2056, a coupon rate of 7.5%, and a yield of 7.53%, which is 220 basis points above US Treasuries. Subscription orders reached $58 billion, nearly 4 times oversubscribed.
But this is not an improvement in credit; it is "demand exchanged for a higher yield." The same batch of 30-year bonds has a spread nearly 0.9 percentage points higher than similar bonds Meta issued in April this year. S&P downgraded Meta's outlook to negative before the bond issuance, citing high capital expenditures and negative free cash flow—Q3 FCF was -$2.12 billion.
This is not just Meta's issue. Oracle issued bonds this week with coupons above 7%-8.5%, compared to 5%-7% in February; Alphabet's 19-year euro bonds yield over 5.2%, while the same maturity in May was only 4.5%. The yield premium on large tech company bonds has risen to the highest level since 2003, with Meta's CDS quotes reaching 1.2%, comparable to junk sovereign debt.
The financing logic for AI capital expenditures is shifting: from an "equity narrative" to "debt cost constraints." The $15 billion subscription enthusiasm shows the market is still willing to provide funds, but the 7.5% 30-year coupon indicates that the market's patience in providing funds is becoming more expensive. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 US stocks rise instead of falling, with the Dow closing up 3% and the S&P up 1.58% to 7688 points — the market logic is "uncertainty resolved + oil prices to fall = easing inflation." Brent crude oil plunged 10% intraday, falling below $100, as everyone bets that under Democratic checks, the Iran conflict will end sooner; gold broke through $4000, rising 3.34% to 4072.
Cryptocurrencies were sold off along with "Trump-associated assets" — the expectation of relaxed regulation is gone, which is a short-term negative; but with US Treasury yields falling and bets on rate cuts heating up, there is long-term support for coin prices, with these two forces pulling against each other.
In short, it’s a normalization of "veto politics": the Democrats control Congress but lack a two-thirds majority, so legislation cannot be pushed through; Trump holds veto power and cannot push his own agenda either. On issues like budget, tariffs, the war on Iran, and immigration, the next two years will be a repeated tug-of-war. For the market, a stalemate is not necessarily bad — fiscal expansion is limited, oil prices fall, and rate cut expectations rise, which in the short term is actually a relief.
The three things to watch next are: whether there will be disputes over state certifications, whether oil prices can stabilize, and how the first round of budget battles will be fought after the new Congress convenes in January next year. The official has not disclosed the exact total amount of stolen STRK, nor a precise fixed number of "how many STRK remain with the hacker," so a definitive figure cannot be provided. There are two reasons for this:
1. In the stolen asset list this time, BTC, ETH, and stablecoins are the key disclosed targets. STRK is one of dozens of small and medium coins. Binance and on-chain tracking agencies (Lookonchain, ZachXBT) have never publicly revealed the original total amount of stolen STRK;
2. The hacker's method involves splitting in batches, cross-address coin mixing, cross-chain jumps, and small dispersed exchanges. Some are transferred to multi-layer intermediate wallets for temporary storage. On-chain analysts can only monitor the portion that has already entered DEX and CEX sell pools. A large amount of STRK transferred into silent relay addresses has already left clear tracking paths, creating blind spots in statistics.
Currently confirmed public clues:
1. Shortly after the incident broke out, monitoring platforms like Onchain Lens captured that the hacker addresses started batch selling STRK, synchronizing with coins like WLD, PEPE, UNI, gradually exchanging them into ETH as laundering transit chips;
2. Market consensus: STRK has not been frozen. Stablecoins USDT/USDC can be blacklisted and frozen by issuers, but STRK is a native on-chain token without issuer freeze authority, all falling under hacker-controlled addresses;
3. The hacker's strategy is not a one-time dump: Lazarus (TraderTraitor) tends to extend the cycle, selling in batches during market recovery phases, i.e., during rebounds, continuously releasing selling pressure. This was the risk point you previously focused on.
Why it is difficult to count the "remaining amount":
- Multi-address splitting: a large amount of STRK is split into dozens or hundreds of independent anonymous wallets;
- Coin mixing protocols and cross-bridge jumps: after entering privacy mixing layers, on-chain tagging becomes invalid;
- Interval operations: sometimes sales pause for weeks, waiting for market recovery before small sales, making continuous statistics difficult;
- Some STRK may be temporarily retained, not rushed to exchange, serving as backup chips.
Market-level significance (aligned with your main line):
Even without knowing the exact remaining quantity, the core risk logic remains unchanged:
1. The STRK in the hacker's hands are cost-free chips. As long as the market rebounds, there is motivation for continuous dumping; combined with STRK's own fixed large monthly unlock selling pressure, forming a double selling pressure resonance;
2. Clarify: this is selling pressure caused by exchange custody theft, not a problem with Starknet's underlying cryptography, and unrelated to its independent L1 or post-quantum technology itself;
3. On-chain tracking can only see the "already sold portion." The silently hidden chips represent invisible looming risks, and this uncertainty cannot be completely eliminated.I think the truly striking part of this tax news is not the 0.2% figure itself, but that it changes the basis of taxation from "how much profit is made" to "how much the asset is worth."
According to The Defiant, the crypto community is seeking to overturn a 0.2% tax in Illinois. This tax is levied based on asset value rather than profits, and covered brokers must charge Illinois clients accordingly. At present, it is a matter of seeking to overturn, not having been repealed yet; I do not conflate these two stages.
My judgment is that this represents a real cost issue for affected users and should not be dismissed as mere industry lobbying for policy space. Taxing based on asset value means the tax base does not directly depend on profitability; if users have not made money but are still within the tax scope, this burden will not naturally disappear due to lack of profits. This is what concerns me more— a small tax rate does not necessarily mean a light burden.
Another key point is that the tax is collected at the broker level; the rules will reach customers through service providers, not just remain in the legal text. However, the source does not specify the frequency of taxation or exact boundaries, and I do not want to fill in those gaps. For me, what to watch next are the detailed tax rules and the progress of challenges, rather than prematurely interpreting "seeking to overturn" as a policy benefit. 当前加密市场进入多空挤压的僵持阶段，行情更多是仓位博弈的体现，而非趋势走出明确方向。衍生品巨鲸正在大举做空，一边押注下行，一边从多头头寸中收取费用，而现货价格却在关键支撑附近稳住，多空双方迎来今年最紧张的博弈时刻。 比特币（$BTC）在77600附近震荡，76000一带堆积了大量杠杆多头清算盘，一旦失守，很容易触发连锁清算。以太坊（$ETH）已经跌破 2300，均线呈现看跌结构，每一轮反弹都显得后劲不足。HYPE（$HYPE）作为近期热度较高的品种，短期上涨之后，获利盘开始离场，大户的交易动作持续压制它的价格走势。 市场现在很特殊，空头资金占据主导，上涨对于空头来说成本很高，但前期一轮下跌之后盘面已经进入超卖区间，本身存在技术反弹的需求。拥挤空头和超卖行情相撞，很容易催生剧烈波动，不过要留意，就算出现反弹，也有可能只是给空头提供离场流动性，并不代表行情反转，反弹之后容易再度迎来抛压。 随着外部因素带来预期变化，交易者也在观望后续的监管与风险偏好走向，不少持有空单的交易者会等待合适窗口重新评估仓位。接下来重点要看，在空头资金撤退前，76000 附近的清算区域会不会被触碰，这也会决76000 is not the bottom, it is the ten-day exit
$BTC dropped to around 76300 yesterday, pierced with a spike, then stopped.
It hovered above 76000, but volume never came out.
How is this number calculated:
For ten consecutive trading days, daily outflows exceeded 1 billion USD.
Over ten days, this adds up to tens of billions of dollars in selling pressure.
Who is placing orders here:
Institutions are selling, but no one is taking the orders.
The reason no one dares to take them is not the price, but the midterm elections not being settled.
The next step down:
If 76000 doesn't hold, there is no ready buy order below.
Even if it holds, it will only be sideways, not a reversal.
Ten days of outflows totaling 10 billion, the buyers have not yet entered.
If this level breaks down, it will be faster than yesterday's spike.
#BTC现货ETF资金流出，企业财库增持放缓
#$BTC In June this year, seeing the monthly RSI of $SNDK enter an unprecedented extreme range, I wrote: Boiling water can only eventually cool down.
Having worked for more than a decade in jobs related to underlying hardware, this has become part of my market intuition. Looking back at this year's trend analysis of SNDK, I even feel like I held a stroke of genius.
Friends who follow the storage sector must be quite concerned about "when it will bottom out" and "when to buy." My answer is: wait until the storage topic is scarcely followed, like a faded star, and the long-term decline is about to end.
At that time, I will write again: When the sun rises again, the clumped ice will surely melt.To pour some cold water first, I don't directly consider the "pro-support faction winning" as a market-wide positive.
The most easily overestimated is converting the politically friendly label in advance into policy dividends for all tokens.
According to the Stand With Crypto page, out of 435 House seats, 397 have been confirmed, with 226 pro-crypto members elected; out of 35 Senate seats up for election, 33 have been confirmed, with 19 pro-support members elected. I am cautious for two reasons: supporting crypto does not equal endorsing every token and business, so policy benefits cannot be generalized; the number of elected members does not equal the number of votes for passing bills, as specific terms still require negotiation, and seat advantage cannot be directly converted into regulatory relaxation.
Of course, bulls might see further ahead. If subsequent specific bills can gain bipartisan support and clearly improve industry operating conditions, I will change my stance. Based on this news, are you bullish or bearish? Which type of business do you think will benefit first, and why? #索尼财报前瞻：游戏与音乐业务表现如何？
Combining Sony's recent performance with market expectations, the core focus of this earnings report is the "profit structure divergence." Although hardware sales in the gaming business have declined, the high profit margins from subscriptions and digital content are sufficient to support profit growth; the music business continues to be a more stable growth engine, driven by strong streaming and copyright revenue. The market generally expects revenue pressure, but profit performance is likely to exceed expectations. The key is to verify whether the gaming business can maintain profitability resilience despite hardware contraction.Brothers, go for it. The midday spike was really dramatic. The bears who were waiting to keep dumping suddenly became the ones getting carried away 😂
$BTC: This rally looks more like short covering pushing the price up. Some short-term bearish fuel has been consumed, but the possibility of continued short squeezing can't be ruled out. However, don't rush to call a reversal yet. The key is whether the rebound can hold the pullback level; if it can't hold, it's still a shakeout.
$ETH: Also repairing in the short term, $2300 is the short-term dividing line. If it can hold above and test around $2388, the rebound space might open up; if it spikes up then falls back, it's likely to remain volatile and oscillate.
Today is just bulls and bears setting traps for each other, with shorts waiting to dump getting harvested instead. Don't rush to chase the rally; spike moves are the easiest to whip back and forth, so be sure to set your stop losses properly.
#AMD数据中心收入近翻倍，营收及指引均超预期 Let's calculate: incorporating cross-chain contract calls into a single transaction, the real weight lies in consolidating the dispersed execution results together, rather than just connecting to another chain. The Ethereum Economic Zone (EEZ) has launched the Rollup X development testnet, demonstrating synchronous composability; I think this is more like a tool for developers to verify application logic, not yet a finished product delivered to users.
① A single transaction calling a contract on another chain is the key point of this demonstration. If an application can achieve atomic cross-chain execution, developers have the opportunity to reduce the remedial logic for "executed here but not there," which I consider the most practical value.
② Initiated jointly by Gnosis and Zisk, with additional funding from the Ethereum Foundation. The initiators and supporters explain why it has attracted attention, but I wouldn't directly equate organizational endorsement with application deployment capability.
③ The number of new tokens added is zero, and the default gas token is $ETH. This indicates the solution does not introduce an additional token, but this does not imply lower user costs, as no fee data was provided.
My judgment is that this news is more significant for cross-chain application development than for explaining short-term market trends. What I want to see next is whether developers can use it to create business processes that were difficult to achieve before, rather than just rerunning the call demonstration.Term Structure Radar
The scale of the first positive spread for $ETH is very small. The near-buy far-sell quote spread is +0.58%, with the first pair scale about 2 dollars; at a scale of 10,000, this tier only covers about 0.02%. Under small volume, the impact will quickly erode the spread.