Orbit Post Sitemap
BTC's strong breakout above 81,000 should not be constrained by the linear thinking of "Democrats winning is bearish." Considering the latest election situation and market conditions, this rally is actually the result of a triple logic resonance:
First, all bearish factors have been exhausted, and the political uncertainty has completely settled.
The Democrats took control of both chambers, severely limiting the Trump administration's fiscal and regulatory actions. The market had been pricing After an exchange runs into trouble, instead of choosing to "fix it before reopening," it breaks the reopening into several phases: On November 9, it first only opened the website, allowing users to view balances, statements, assets, and investment status. Transfers, withdrawals, and trading will be gradually enabled after each module passes security verification. The sequence is very deliberate—first let the eyes see, then let the hands operate.
The compensation plan uses own funds. The weight of this statement lies in its acknowledgment of the gap, while shifting the gap onto the company's balance sheet rather than the customer asset pool. The numbers in customer accounts remain unchanged; the shortfall is covered by shareholders.
What makes the promise credible is not the wording of the announcement, but the on-chain actions: Tether, Circle, Paxos, BRL1, together with Chainalysis and community experts, froze over 15 million USD of related assets. Stablecoins like $USDT, $USDC, $USDP all have issuer-level freezing authority, which is usually criticized for centralization but proves useful in crises.
The first phase only allows queries, not withdrawals. This is not a technical issue but a liquidity issue. Withdrawals are the real run point—opening them means all happening simultaneously; queries, on the contrary, allow panic to settle first.
What’s worth considering: own funds compensation can absorb one incident but not a second. No matter how well staged the phased reopening is, it only extends the trust repair period rather than restoring it. The pricing of $BTC and $ETH never looks at announcements, only at how many people are still willing to keep their money inside.🇺🇸 US Stock Market Close · Wed 11-04
S&P 500 7,688.62 ▲1.58%
Nasdaq 100 28,437.17 ▲0.91%
Dow Jones 53,356.12 ▲3.03%｜VIX 16.61
NDX100 Up/Down Ratio 69 up / 35 down
Extremes MRNA ▲13.11%｜DDOG ▼14.42%
MSFT 555.80 ▲6.68%
AMZN 266.03 ▲6.12%
AAPL 349.51 ▲5.31%
NFLX 66.39 ▲4.68%
TSLA 385.19 ▼3.34%
GOOGL 288.93 ▲3.18%
NVDA 200.13 ▼3.17%
AVGO 325.48 ▼2.00%
META 630.00 ▲1.44%
AMD 488.78 ▲1.01%
💡 Today the Dow led the gains, followed by the S&P, while the Nasdaq was weaker with clear divergence among tech heavyweights. MSFT, AMZN, and AAPL supported the market, while NVDA, TSLA, AVGO, and DDOG dragged it down; 69 up, 35 down, with more advancing stocks but not a unanimous rise. VIX at 16.61 indicates stable sentiment, with style resembling capital rotation rather than a broad tech rally. Watching the market at 6 AM, it's getting lively again! BTC is challenging 80,000 again, ETH's rebound is stronger, and UNI is also active. But with this rise, have institutional funds really returned?
First, look at $BTC: estimated at $80,500
After the US midterm elections, the market is reassessing the crypto regulatory outlook. A weaker dollar and renewed risk appetite are driving the rebound, but with ETF funds continuously flowing out before, it's still uncertain if the buying momentum can continue. Short-term focus on the 80,000 support; holding above it targets 82,000, breaking below warns of a retest of 78,000.
Next, look at $ETH: estimated at $2,450
ETH's recent rebound is stronger than BTC's, but institutional fund flows remain divided. Fed policy expectations and US employment data continue to influence market sentiment. Short-term holding above 2,400 offers a chance to challenge 2,500; only after breaking through is there more room to grow.
Finally, look at $UNI: reference price around $7.7
The SEC's recent explanation on governance token voting rights has drawn attention, easing some regulatory uncertainty around UNI. However, good news doesn't mean an immediate rise. Short-term focus on 7.5 support; breaking 8 dollars is needed for further strength.
A few final words:
Price rebound is just the first step; sustained ETF fund inflows are more convincing. The biggest fear now is chasing the rise only to fall back again!
Do you think BTC can hold above 80,000 this time?
#索尼财报前瞻：游戏与音乐业务表现如何？ Heat is fading, don't rush to catch the falling knife
Heat, after all, has to subside eventually. If you're holding meme coins or looking to bottom-fish, you might want to take a close look at these few.
$PEPE After the neighboring theft incident caused sell-offs, a legendary trader bought 45.08 billion tokens, driving the price up. But once the heat died down, trading volume couldn't keep up, and now it can only hover around 0.000005. Without continued buying pressure, staying low just means staying low.
$TRUMP Around 1.58, on election voting day, not a single cent of political concept funds came in. Political tokens are like this: once the event passes, they expire on their own.
$UNI Previously, when Robinhood chain launched, everyone bet on RWA trading volume surging and fees burning UNI, pushing the price up. But the 7u level has been flat for too long; the protocol is clearly profitable, but the governance hype isn't enough to support buying. The burn event was expected to lift it, but so far it only serves as bottom support logic, not a short-term rally trigger.
Conclusion: PEPE and TRUMP are not suitable to catch right now; if you want to catch, wait for either volume surge or new narrative—without either, don't act. UNI is unlikely to rise unless the distribution mechanism truly changes. Strategy is still buying BTC; corporate treasuries have not completely stopped
Strategy disclosed on November 2 that between October 26 and November 1, it increased its holdings by 811 BTC, investing about $65.5 million, with an average purchase price of approximately $80,846. As of November 1, the position reached 849,327 BTC.
This data does not align with the market narrative that "corporate treasury buying has disappeared." Although this purchase scale is lower than the 1,665 BTC bought in a week at the end of September, it is higher than the 267 and 250 BTC disclosed in the previous two weeks.
What I pay more attention to is the source of purchase funds, financing costs, and company cash reserves, rather than simply counting the number of BTC bought. Corporate treasury purchases are a long-term allocation behavior and may not immediately drive spot prices.
For $BTC, the next focus is whether ETFs and corporate treasuries form a combined demand. Different buyers operate on different rhythms, so one company's actions cannot represent the entire market.
#BTC现货ETF资金流出，企业财库增持放缓 #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% In the latest 24-hour liquidation data, the long and short concentration zones for BTC, ETH, and SOL appear simultaneously around the current price, but their crowding directions are not consistent. For BTC below, the largest long liquidation point is at 79925.12, with a scale of 70.5124 million U, which is -0.22% away from the current price; above, the largest short liquidation point is at 81487.94, with a scale of 42.5313 million U, +1.73% away, and the current price is 80099.9. From this data set, the area below BTC is closer and has a larger liquidation scale. ETH shows the opposite structure. The largest long liquidation point is at 2391.83, with a scale of 26.292 million U, -1.15% away; the largest short liquidation point is at 2463.35, with a scale of 57.0493 million U, +1.80% away, and the current price is 2419.72. The short liquidation scale above is significantly higher but farther away, so the price touching it cannot be judged solely by scale. SOL's current price is 94.83. The largest long liquidation point below is at 91.5, with a scale of 4.1429 million U, -3.51% away; the largest short liquidation point above is at 95.63, with a scale of 2.6514 million U, +0.84% away. Its characteristic is that the upper position is the closest but corresponds to a smaller liquidation scale. 💡 My view. This data is more suitable for identifying the concentrated direction of leverage rather than directly serving as a price target. BTC needs attention to the close area below for support, while ETH should observe whether the upper short zone will becomeThe gold price on the monitor has plummeted about 30% from the January peak, like a heart suddenly compressed: central banks net bought 321 tons in Q3, a 42% year-on-year increase, the strongest myocardial perfusion since Q4 2024; gold funds increased holdings by 211 tons, pushing total holdings to a record high of 4,256 tons. However, demand for gold bars and coins dropped by 19%, indicating peripheral perfusion has cooled. The issue is not whether there is long-term buying, but whether the proximal circulation can hold up.
First, looking at vital signs: spot gold is around $3,900, with the dollar, US Treasury yields, and deleveraging simultaneously drawing blood, causing increased afterload, insufficient capacity, and a sympathetic storm. Central bank and fund buying act like collateral circulation, supplying blood but unable to immediately correct shock. The decline in gold bar and coin demand is capillary bed contraction, showing retail investors lack autonomous rebound ability on price. At this point, mistaking long-term demand for a strong heart stimulant is a misjudgment—the cardiac surgeon fears only looking at good angiography without considering pumping output.
Next, looking at the linked asset $xIBM: tokenized US stock risk appetite resembles an immune response post-transplant; once tech assets are rejected by yields, funds first cut high-volatility positions, then turn to gold for extracorporeal circulation. For gold to stabilize, the aortic clamp of the dollar and yields must loosen, and venous return from deleveraging must recover; otherwise, central bank buying is just maintenance fluid continuously pumped in, delaying ischemia but not replacing the heart's autonomous contraction. The real pathology is proximal selling pressure and liquidity withdrawal, not a lack of long-term demand.
My on-stage judgment is very cold: $3,900 is not an aesthetic price but a hemodynamic boundary. Central bank 321 tons and fund 211 tons constitute record-level blood supply, but gold bar and coin demand dropping 19% shows peripheral circulation is lagging; if the dollar, yields, or deleveraging continue to pressure, gold price may slide from "stable" to "low output." Long-term buying can repair vessels but cannot replace the heart's beat. #centralbanksbuy321tgoldPushing the $2 trillion valuation card back to the center of the board, buyers are only willing to take over at $1.5 trillion to $1.6 trillion — this is not a price inquiry, but a forced exchange of the opponent's attacking pieces in the midgame.
Let's first look at the opening. Anthropic's revenue surged 1,127% year-over-year, reaching $16.956 billion, like a coordinated attack with the king's wing and three pawns, very aggressive. But the real killer in the midgame is the pace: the month-over-month growth rate dropped from 144% to about 47%, and the time advantage is leaking. More critically, the rear wing: $895.4 billion in long-term computing power and lease commitments are weighing down, with $69.8 billion maturing within twelve months. This is not a light piece; it's a pinned piece on the pawn chain. If cash flow cannot be converted into sustainable profit, the opponent will repeatedly check with containment tactics. An operating loss of $567 million indicates the offensive has not yet translated into a piece advantage.
Institutions pushing the valuation down from $2 trillion to $1.5 trillion to $1.6 trillion is equivalent to a pre-opening probe: acknowledging your growth potential but unwilling to pay full price for an unfulfilled endgame. The tokenized US stock market will first reflect this valuation anchor drift: liquidity flows like an open line, and once news drops, volatility pours in along the line; if revenue growth cannot cover promised interest and lease obligations, token prices will only tactically retreat following the valuation anchor.
A true grandmaster is not dazzled by the 1,127% year-over-year fireworks. I only focus on three board elements: whether the month-over-month slowdown stops the bleeding, whether the twelve-month maturing commitments are covered by operating cash flow, and whether losses narrow to a calculable path. If these three cannot hold, the valuation debate is no longer an opening probe but the king's wing being torn open in the endgame. The winning or losing move in this game is not the thousandfold growth fireworks, but whether that string of maturing commitments within twelve months will pin the king's wing into a deadlock. #anthropicipopricedebate An update on a giant whale's perpetual contract positions shows that BTC, ETH, and SOL are all 5X cross-margin short positions, with a total position value reaching 510 million U. The data describes this as a long-term bearish bet portfolio. Notably, all three positions are currently at unrealized losses, but the funding fee income varies. The BTC short position is -1938.96 BTC, with a position value of $160 million, an entry price of 78096.0, unrealized P&L of -3.8138 million U; funding fee income of +3.1497 million U, margin of 31.0479 million U, and liquidation price at 139526.81. The ETH short position is -36,800 ETH, with a position value of $89.0986 million, an entry price of 2375.07, unrealized P&L of -1.6142 million U, funding fee income of +3.424 million U; margin of 17.8197 million U, and liquidation price at 5527.66. The SOL short position is -249,100 SOL, with a position value of $23.5457 million, an entry price of 91.4214, unrealized P&L of -772,400 U, funding fee income of +553,300 U; margin of 4.7091 million U, and liquidation price at 550.8. 💡 My view. The most interesting aspect of this data set lies in the relationship between funding fee income and unrealized losses: ETH's funding fee income exceeds its current unrealized loss, while BTC and SOBefore the first opening in November, Sony is about to lay out the cross-sectional diagrams of its two thickest load-bearing pillars on the table—game software, digital content and subscription services, plus music streaming and copyright licensing. This isn’t a report card; it’s two structural audit reports.
I’ve been doing planning for twenty years, and what I fear most is when the client talks structure based on renderings. Anyone can design a facade; no matter how shiny the glass curtain wall is, if the rebar spacing is off by one centimeter, twenty years later it will be a continuous crack. The same goes for these financial reports: first look at the hidden works, then the skyline.
PlayStation’s subscription revenue is a dead load—modelable, predictable, and accumulative year by year. That’s the core tube, bearing the overturning moment of the entire building; software sales are live loads, fluctuating with blockbuster cycles like instantaneous lobby crowds, and the ratio determines the damping ratio—during blockbuster gaps, when the live load withdraws, the building starts to sway. The music segment speaks another structural language: copyright licensing is a long-term tenant, with cash flow like shear walls—stable, but the growth was already built into the blueprint; streaming growth is a later added floor—whether it can be added depends on whether the foundation piles were reserved initially.
And the $xQQQ layer is a prefabricated external curtain wall. Components are prefabricated in the factory and hoisted on site, with short construction time and quick facing, appearing to fit tightly with the main structure. But the sealant at the joints is the key—that’s fluidity. When the underlying asset gaps, the force transmission path won’t instantly connect; there is slip, delay, and gaps in between. When the wind blows, the curtain wall rattles first, while the main structure hasn’t moved yet. Don’t use the stiffness of the curtain wall to verify the core tube—that’s two different codes.
What really needs monitoring is the guideline schedule: the rhythm of content investment, the convergence speed of subscription retention, and the lock-in period length of license renewals. These three are the reinforcement drawings; changing one bar alters the load-bearing capacity of the entire floor.
I don’t look at renderings. I only ask one question: can the core tube of this building withstand the horizontal shear force of the next blockbuster gap? #sonyq2gamingandmusicAMD's data center revenue in Q3 was about $8.5 billion, a 97% year-over-year increase; total revenue was about $13.377 billion, up 45% year-over-year. Previously, everyone was asking when AI orders would materialize, and this time there is at least a solid operational result.
I am more concerned about profit changes. GAAP operating profit grew 123% year-over-year, and the operating margin rose from 14% to 21%, indicating that after revenue expansion, profit growth accelerated. The effects of scale are already visible in the financial statements.
Of course, other businesses did not run wildly together. Gaming business revenue dropped 40%, and the combined client and gaming segment revenue fell 8%. AMD's current growth is still largely driven by the data center.
So going forward, we need to watch both Helios and EPYC continue to deliver, and whether this business mix can maintain profit improvement. We cannot ignore changes in other segments just because the AI business is strong.
The Q4 revenue guidance of about $17 billion, with a 3% margin of error, has pushed the next quarter's target even higher. The difficulty of fulfillment has also increased.
Seeing the stock price still under pressure after a good earnings report, holders inevitably feel frustrated. But I will judge operational results and purchase price separately. This quarter is worth affirming, but future valuation support still needs continuous delivery and profit to verify.
#AMD数据中心收入近翻倍，营收及指引均超预期 Circle's on-chain USDC transaction volume in Q3 was approximately $13.9 trillion, a year-over-year increase of 49%; the average quarterly circulation was about $73.3 billion, up 8% year-over-year.
Putting these two growth rates together, I find it more interesting than just looking at transaction volume alone: the same unit of USDC is being used more frequently. This is a good sign for network activity.
However, one of Circle's main sources of revenue remains reserve income. Faster turnover of coins does not mean the company can proportionally earn more money with each transaction. How usage growth ultimately translates into shareholder returns depends on the specific fee model.
This time, total revenue and reserve income were about $865 million, a 17% year-over-year increase. The financial report also disclosed that approximately $181.8 million of ARC token presale-related income was recognized during the quarter. It has its own fulfillment and revenue recognition schedule and cannot be directly considered as ongoing income generated by USDC transaction activity.
I acknowledge the growth in network usage, but I would ask more about the quality of revenue: which revenues can be repeatedly generated with business usage, and which are affected by the progress of specific projects?
What truly excites about stablecoins is that more and more people are willing to use them. Investing in company stock requires taking a step further to see if this usage can bring stable, repeatable income. The excitement over transaction volume is worth celebrating, but how profits are retained also needs to be clearly explained.
#CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% The Democratic Party has gained control of both chambers of Congress, and over the next two years, the legislative environment for the Trump administration will change significantly.
For the crypto industry, I think the first thing that needs adjustment is the expectation of how policies will be advanced. Previously, support signals were released through the executive branch; now, bipartisan cooperation in Congress is more necessary. Regulatory division of labor, conflicts of interest, and investor protection will all re-enter detailed discussions.
This does not mean that the progress the industry has fought for in the past will be wiped out overnight. Established businesses and implemented arrangements will not automatically disappear because of the election results. But who drives the new agenda and how the provisions are amended could indeed affect the pace of corporate investment.
What I least want to see is the market compressing complex results into "one party won, so the crypto world is finished," or "policy is constrained, so funds must flow to BTC." Such explanations are easy to spread but not very helpful for judging what comes next.
This result actually reminds the industry that long-term business cannot be tied to just one president. Rules that gain broader support give companies the confidence to invest in business years down the line.
Short-term prices can first express sentiment, but what’s more worth watching next is which issues the new Congress is prepared to prioritize and whether the industry can present proposals acceptable to legislators of different stances. It’s easy to rise on political hype, but it’s hard to develop on stable rules.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 #AAOI High-speed optical modules volume increase, can Q3 earnings exceed expectations? $BTC
Yesterday I said: no sweep = no fast hostile bill, no fast friendly bill.
I was wrong on the sweep.
Democrats took House AND Senate. Full blue wave
BTC reacted exactly like Bitcoin does: dumped to $75.7k on the news, then reclaimed $80k on short liquidations + uncertainty fading
Short term: Bitcoin doesn't care who wins
Long term: policy still matters. CLARITY is now likely dead, and oversight starts in Jan
Price is noise. Policy is signal. Bitcoin survives both
#DemocratsWinCongress The current price has basically returned to around the IPO price of 135, which is a very strong psychological barrier—this was the largest IPO in history, raising $75 billion. A deep break below the IPO price would trigger more selling pressure. Historically, after breaking below in July, the price indeed dropped to a low near 111. So: 135 holds as support, with limited downside space, making it suitable for range-bound buying on dips rather than chasing highs; if it effectively breaks below 135, then look toward 120 or even around 111. The first resistance above is 150 (which is also HSBC's target price), and above that is the previous high at 165.This sharp V-shape rebound in the US pre-market—does anyone really think the “bull return” means going all in? Stay calm first; the contract side isn’t as smooth as it looks.
$BTC is currently around 77500, quickly rebounding from 76260, with the hourly long-short ratio rising to about 2.8. Once the rebound hits, retail bulls get crowded. The 78000 resistance is right ahead; if the main players push hard with heavy leverage, their cost isn’t low. A pullback to shake out positions first is a more typical scenario.
$ETH is around 2288, with a long-short ratio of about 2.46. The funding rate fluctuates near zero, so bullish confidence isn’t stable. When trend followers go long, if the market weakens slightly, ETH tends to fall faster.
The biggest risk is $SOL, currently near 93.1. The rebound strength is weak, but the 4-hour long-short ratio is as high as 3.5. Bottom-fishing bulls are crowded, leverage is heavy, and the price lagging behind makes this structure the easiest breakthrough point for the main players to kill leverage.
In short, liquidity in the US pre-market is thin, and the sharp rally looks more like a bull trap. Don’t rush to chase the highs to avoid a cold splash when the market opens. After the US market opens, will it continue to squeeze shorts or reverse and crash? Do you have any positions now?Tonight everyone is celebrating the big rally, but I'll pour some cold water first. Tomorrow night at 9:30, there's still a tough battle ahead: the Nonfarm Payrolls.
Let's start with the data: expected new jobs 60,000, previous value 29,000, unemployment rate 4.2%. Don't underestimate these numbers; they directly determine whether there will be another rate hike in December.
I'll give you three scenarios, match them accordingly when the time comes.
First, far exceeding expectations, employment looks great. That would be troublesome; the calls for a December rate hike will rise again. Some of tonight's gains might have to be given back.
Second, roughly as expected, then the music and dance continue; tonight's rebound foundation remains intact.
Third, far weaker than expected. Don't rush to celebrate. Inflation is still at 3.1%. Weak data doesn't necessarily mean good news; it could signal a recession, which would cause an even more irrational drop.
So my approach is not to heavily bet on direction before the data comes out, and don't trust the first reaction. In the first few minutes after the data release, it's all machine orders fighting. Wait for half an hour; the real direction will then emerge.
Tomorrow night at 9:30, let's check the answers together.
#美国10月非农前瞻：就业增长或牵动12月加息预期 $BTC $ETH $SNDK BTC breaks above $80,000 again, ETH rises 5.5% in a single day, and the total market capitalization of the crypto market rebounds to $2.78 trillion. After consecutive declines, the market has finally seen a relatively obvious rebound. But this time, what truly deserves attention is not how much the price has risen, but the capital structure behind the rebound. The US BTC and ETH spot ETFs have seen continuous net outflows; although redemption pressure is easing, the latest full trading day has still not turned positive. The total supply of stablecoins continues to decline, while Solana's on-chain perpetual contract trading volume has surged significantly. This indicates that risk appetite is recovering, but new funds have not yet fully returned. Meanwhile, the US midterm elections have changed the congressional landscape, traditional asset management giant Schroders has introduced emerging market bond strategies to Solana through Centrifuge, and Binance has also announced it has replenished about 98% of the affected assets. Price, policy, institutional applications, and exchange security are all changing simultaneously. The most important question today is: BTC breaking above $80,000 again—does it mean a new upward trend is beginning, or is the market still in a post-decline recovery phase? 📈 Market: BTC breaks above $80,000, ETH leads gains, SOL clearly lags Behind As of the CoinGecko snapshot at 05:10–05:12 HKT on November 5: BTC is at $80,105.23, up 3.00% in 24 hours. ETH is at $2,417.33, up 5.50%. SOL is atTonight, two semiconductor companies released their earnings reports again, showing clear divergence.
Qualcomm fell more than 5% after hours, still verbally reaffirming that its data center revenue will reach $5 billion by 2027, and casually raised product prices citing increased costs; Arm was even more lively, with partners shipping over 10 billion chips in a single quarter and AGI orders lined up through 2027.
The numbers aren't bad, but the market votes with its feet: the more fully the story is told, the sharper the drop. Everyone can draw the data center pie now; the difference is that some are already collecting money, while others are still stuck on the PPT.
The dumbest play on earnings night is to rush in and bet on direction just because of one good number. My logic hasn't changed: I don't short profits; I short this ever-expanding valuation pie.There is a suspicious signal hidden in the early morning contract data: the long position borrowing volume of $BTC is as high as 1524.93 coins, while the short position borrowing is only 69.67 coins, with a long-short borrowing ratio exceeding 20 times. This is not a healthy long market, but a crowd of crowded leverage lined up in the same direction. 🕵️ What is truly worth pondering is that this extreme skew appears in three mainstream coins, not just a single asset. $ETH long borrowing is 15,900 coins, shorts only 870.88 coins; $SOL long borrowing is 129,700 coins, shorts 7,688.71 coins. The three markets simultaneously show a structure of highly concentrated buyer funds and continuously rising long-short leverage ratios, meaning that once the price is pushed downward, liquidations will trigger chain reactions along the same crowded channel. This is not dispersed optimism, but concentrated fragility. My judgment is: the biggest misjudgment in the current market is reading "strong long consensus" as "sufficient upward momentum." The volume of borrowed coins for longs far exceeds that for shorts, indicating that leveraged funds have already taken their positions in advance, and the marginal buying power to push prices higher is actually decreasing. When everyone is already on the same side, who will take the next baton? Under this structure, the price does not need to crash heavily; just a normal pullback is enough to trigger concentrated liquidations. 📉 From operational traces, some traders have already voted with their feet: clearing long positions in $ETH and $SOL, only holding $BTC, even retaining 100x leverage waiting for a rebound. This choice itself reveals the problem—the weaker the asset, the more crowded the longs, the sooner they get cut. $SOL's$INJ
There is a term in the approval document that is easy to overlook: staking type. Nasdaq approved Canary's staking type INJ ETF, ticker INJC, at 4:57 AM.
This means the fund must use the money to stake INJ to earn yield. The coins must be locked in, not just held in a custody account doing nothing. Theoretically, the supply will tighten.
The market reaction is very honest. When the news came out, INJ touched 7.978, a 24-hour high, then slid back to 7.912 in about twenty minutes. Essentially a free rise.
The volume didn't catch up. Contract volume this hour was 740,000 contracts, the previous hour was 1.31 million contracts, roughly the same per minute. No one is rushing in.
How thin the coin's pool is: 24-hour perpetual contract volume is 22.3 million USD, spot only 1.87 million, a twelvefold difference. Open interest is 545,000 coins, worth 4.31 million USD.
The fee rate is negative, -0.0038%, shorts are slightly paying. It rose from 7.005 to 7.978 in 24 hours, a 14% increase, and the ETF news was just the last push.
There is a whole road between the approval and subscription. I don't hold INJ, so I won't chase at this level. I'll wait to see if the upper shadow at 7.97 finishes and if there is volume before deciding.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 A reminder for those only focused on chip stock earnings reports: the real turning signals often come from the buyers.
The Information leaked that Microsoft has lowered its data center spending due to cloud service provider IREN delaying deliveries. This statement carries more weight than ten sell-side research reports.
Over the past year, the chain has been full of sell-side voices shouting about shortages, price hikes, and orders booked through the year after next; now, for the first time, one of the biggest buyers is pulling back. Capex is not a perpetual motion machine; it’s controlled by the few at the top who sign the checks. When they frown, all the storage, chips, and foundry players lined up below have to shake.
Don’t rush to bottom-fish semiconductor stocks; first, see if the spenders are still willing to keep signing off.$BTC
900 dollars. Last night at 11 PM, that one-hour candle surged to 81200, then pulled back to 80299, with an upper wick of 900.
That candle traded 1749 units, the largest one-hour volume in the past 24 hours, the previous one was 785. The money really came in during the surge, but the price didn't hold.
The following six candles traded 685, 371, 270, 317, 212, and 74 units respectively. Dropping all the way. Now this candle only has over 70 units left, the quietest hour today.
On the other side, there was also a wick. Yesterday morning at 11 AM, it dropped to 75734.5, with a lower wick of 434, trading 934 units.
Both ends were pierced: bottom at 75734, top at 81200. There's a gap of over 5400 dollars between these two numbers, completely empty.
Miners are still selling. Hut 8 made two sales totaling 3102 units, locking in 250 million; Riot said almost all newly mined coins are sold. They all sell around 80,000, the price didn't collapse, indicating someone is buying. I can't see who is buying, only the market.
My judgment: the upper wick of 900 is neither a top nor a buy signal. In a market where both ends have been pierced, I won't trade the 800-dollar range in the middle, no volume, no direction, entering means just paying fees.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Election fog clears, crypto market sees V-shaped rebound
As the results of the U.S. midterm elections become clear, the cryptocurrency market experienced a strong rebound on Wednesday. $BTC briefly fell below $76,000, then rapidly surged about $3,000 to reclaim the $80,000 level; $ETH simultaneously broke through $2,400, rising more than 6% within 24 hours.
The core driver of this rebound is not the election results themselves, but the elimination of uncertainty. The Democratic Party's sweep of both houses once triggered market concerns about obstacles to crypto-friendly policies, causing Bitcoin to drop. But as the results settled, the "bad news fully priced in" logic quickly prevailed: with the executive and legislative branches controlled by different parties, the probability of extreme policy shifts decreased. Coupled with a strong rebound in the three major U.S. stock indexes, risk appetite quickly warmed, and funds flowed back into crypto assets.
However, the foundation of the rebound is not yet solid. Analysts point out that the current recovery relies more on derivative buying and passive acceptance, while active spot demand remains insufficient. Bitcoin faces key resistance tests near $82,000, and Ethereum around the $2,400 level. Returning to $80,000 and holding above $2,400 is the first step in sentiment repair; whether the "uncertainty discount" can be converted into sustained spot buying is the key to determining how far this rebound can go.In the 24-hour liquidation statistics, a clear divergence appears in the liquidation structure of BTC, ETH, and SOL: BTC and ETH short positions have higher liquidation amounts, while SOL is slightly dominated by long position liquidations. Total BTC liquidations amount to 410 million U, accounting for 40.7%; long position liquidations are 99.4042 million U, short position liquidations are 310 million U. Total ETH liquidations are 240 million U, accounting for 24.47%; long position liquidations are 110 million U, short position liquidations are 130 million U. Total SOL liquidations are 30.6477 million U, accounting for 3.06%; long position liquidations are 16.2447 million U, short position liquidations are 14.4031 million U. 💡 My view. This data set looks more like a concentrated liquidation during a directional shift. The larger losses on BTC and ETH short positions indicate that during this upward probing phase, the short positions accumulated above bore the initial pressure; the slightly higher long position liquidations on SOL suggest that its short-term participant structure has not fully followed the broader market. However, the dominance of short position liquidations only reflects the position outcomes over the past 24 hours and does not directly imply a continued upward trend. The original text mentions that there are also concentrated long areas below; if prices continue to fluctuate, the market may still be in a volatile phase of back-and-forth pressure between bulls and bears. What is more worth watching next is the absorption after liquidation and whether the short liquidation advantage of BTC and ETH can continue. Are you more focused on the continuation after the liquidation of the broader market shorts, or on the divergence signal brought by the relatively high SOL long position liquidations? $BTC $ETH $SOLDaily fund data shows that BTC, ETH, and SOL all had net capital inflows throughout the day, but the market performance varied significantly in strength; funds came in, but the pace of the rally was completely different.
Capital situation:
$BTC: Single-day net inflow of 537.91 BTC, with large orders as the main buying force. Funds favor the more stable BTC, showing stronger rebound resilience.
$ETH: Single-day net inflow of 4076.36 ETH, with a slight capital return, but the market response was muted and the upward momentum was weak.
$SOL: Single-day net inflow of 161,100 SOL, the largest net inflow scale, but the price weakened instead. After funds were absorbed, selling pressure continued, a typical case of capital inflow with a grinding market.
An interesting point: funds are flowing in, but market feedback is vastly different; having money doesn’t mean an immediate price rise.
This structure easily causes frequent shakeouts of floating positions. Do not chase highs; patiently wait for signals of capital strength.
This is only a personal data record review and does not constitute any investment advice
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 The thing to watch most closely in this AI cycle isn't which chip stock rises or falls, but the financing chain. Tonight's news: Goldman Sachs and Apollo are looking for Wall Street people to sell off about $40 billion worth of SpaceX chip financing shares. Note, this is the toughest target in this round, even the underwriters themselves have started passing the ticket outward.
I've always said, what's crashing this time isn't profits, but valuations and the financing chain; it's a gray rhino, not a black swan. Everything looks good while the money is still circulating; the story only truly loosens when the lead players start to reduce their holdings.
$BTC is being sold off together as a risk asset, sharing the same underlying tone. I haven't moved a single one of these short positions in my hands.After the U.S. midterm elections, the power division in Congress has basically taken shape. BTC rebounded intraday from $75,800 to $78,400, with Nasdaq futures rising simultaneously. It is believed that Democratic control of Congress will cause regulatory easing bills such as the Clarity Act to stall; BTC's current pricing is more influenced by U.S. dollar macro liquidity. The implied volatility of major term options rose by about 1 percentage point, and the options market remains somewhat pessimistic about significant price fluctuations before the end of the year. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC $BTC Don't treat ETFs as a universal key. Capital inflow does not equal sustained buying; it includes both allocation funds and short-term arbitrage funds, which withdraw at the slightest spread or fluctuation, so inflows are naturally intermittent. On the market, institutional dip-buying and whale rebound selling coexist, and selling pressure appears as soon as the upper trapped zone is reached; although there is support below, bulls lack continuous incremental volume. The result is repeated range tugging, chasing gains easily leads to pullbacks, and bottom-fishing risks triggering stop-losses.
The essence remains a battle among existing funds, with no clear intention of off-market capital entering. Whenever the Nasdaq or US Treasury yields fluctuate, risk appetite changes, and ETF funds follow suit with sudden ins and outs. Therefore, the biggest fear now is mistaking volatility for a trend and prematurely betting on a one-sided breakout. What’s truly worth waiting for are two confirmations: continuous net inflows of ETFs with volume expansion stabilizing above resistance, or a decisive breakdown of support followed by trend-following. Before confirmation, light positions and observation offer better cost-effectiveness than reckless trading. $ETH $SOL #CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% Watching the big player's “short rent collection” ledger 📉(￣▽￣)ノ
This big player’s latest perpetual positions are very clear: the portfolio is entirely short, disclosing a nominal total position of about 170 million U, holding positions while collecting funding fees, with an overall unrealized profit of about 2.7 million U, and total funding fees exceeding 430,000 U, a solid “short rent collection” style (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧.
Breaking it down is even more interesting: BTC short 25X full position, position value about 110 million U, entry at 79,888 U, unrealized profit about 2.7559 million U, funding fees +418,300 U, liquidation price 92,547.65 U; ETH short 25X, position about 8.1476 million U, entry at 2,258.74 U, currently unrealized loss about 136,000 U, funding fees only +5,411.74 U, liquidation price 8,052.55 U; SOL short 20X, position about 3.5831 million U, entry at 95.9647 U, unrealized profit about 83,600 U, funding fees +10,200 U, liquidation price 625.44 U.
The highlight is profit differentiation: BTC and SOL contribute unrealized profits, ETH is temporarily lagging; but funding fees continue to trickle in 💰. However, under full-position high leverage, with margin sharing and position linkage, looking only at liquidation prices can create a “very safe” illusion ⚠️. Collecting rent is attractive, but a change in market direction also tests margin depth. Watching is fine, but copying trades requires caution (｡•́︿•̀｡)
$BTC $ETH $SOL #Circle Earnings Report is on the way, can stablecoin growth generate returns? According to the disclosed post, a whale simultaneously holds short positions in BTC, ETH, and SOL, all using full-margin leverage. The position sizes are very large, with unrealized losses and funding fee income coexisting, creating a clear contrast. The BTC short is 5X, holding -2327.43 BTC, with a position value of 190 million U, an opening price of $76398.7, unrealized P&L of -8.9519 million U, and funding fee income of +3.6261 million U. The margin for this position is 37.353 million U, with a liquidation price of $137514.07. The ETH short is also 5X, holding -87,500 ETH, with a position value of 210 million U, an opening price of $2322.71, unrealized P&L of -8.8535 million U, and funding fee income of +4.627 million U. The margin is 42.4178 million U, with a liquidation price of $3934.94. The SOL uses 7X full-margin short, holding -684,800 SOL, with a position value of 64.9868 million U, an opening price of $94.3346, unrealized P&L of -386,400 U, and funding fee income of +3.9816 million U. The margin is 9.2838 million U, with a liquidation price of $285.08. 💡 My view. The structure of this data is more worth noting than simply the "whale is bearish." The funding fee income for BTC and ETH has not yet covered their respective listed unrealized lossesBinance's funds are coming back, but the seven-day account is still negative
Short-term inflow is to stop the bleeding, but the long-term hole hasn't been filled yet. The CEO said, "Deposits exceed withdrawals every hour," just take that with a grain of salt; looking at the weekly chart is more reliable. The biggest fear in a hacker incident is a bank run. So far, although withdrawal volume is large, order is still maintained, but confidence takes longer to recover than data.On-chain fixed income is no longer limited to "government bonds + money market funds." On November 4, Schroders, a UK asset manager managing about $1.1 trillion in assets, brought its emerging market bond strategy onto Solana through the tokenization platform Centrifuge. This is Schroders' first product deployment on Solana. The product structure needs to be clearly understood: investors do not receive Schroders' fund itself, but token shares of a BVI-registered professional investor feeder fund, called SISF, whose net asset value follows the underlying Luxembourg UCITS fund "Schroder ISF Emerging Market Bond." The underlying investments are government, institutional, and corporate bonds in emerging markets, including both USD-denominated and local currency bonds. Subscription and redemption are done using stablecoins and are only open to non-U.S. professional investors; retail investors cannot buy in. Why this is noteworthy: previously, institutional tokenized products were basically cash and short-term U.S. Treasuries, with very "flat" risk and return profiles. Emerging market bonds derive returns from credit, exchange rates, and various national economies, with greater volatility and risk, which also means more types of collateral, vaults, and structured products can be done on-chain. Centrifuge states that the platform's tokenized assets exceed $750 million; Schroders was approved in Ireland in August this year for a tokenized USD money market fund share. What to watch next: whether SISF will be accepted as collateral by DeFi protocols, whether there is liquidity in the secondary market, and whether other large asset managers will follow suit to putThe weakest link has never been BTC itself, but the group of people in the leverage structure who are driven by emotions. With this wave of consecutive bad news hitting, who is really being liquidated? Last night, watching BTC repeatedly suppressed around 76000, my first reaction was not panic, but to check the derivatives data. Binance just went through a big storm, the US midterm elections are stirring things up again, spot ETFs continue to see net outflows, tech stocks are sliding along, and bad news seems to be lining up as if on cue. On the surface, it looks like news is pushing prices down, but what the market is really trading is the repricing of leveraged positions. The perpetual contract funding rate has turned negative, and the open interest is rising instead of falling amid the price drop, indicating some are bottom-fishing with leverage, while others are stubbornly holding long positions. The worst thing for this structure is not another drop, but sideways grinding that slowly kills high-leverage longs through time decay. From another perspective, after all the bad news is out, what reason do the shorts have to keep pushing prices down? 70,000 is not a hard bottom, and I am very clear about that. But the interesting thing about BTC is that every few years someone declares it worthless, yet it outlives them all. I personally hold 1.7307 BTC, still some way from my target of 3, and I keep dollar-cost averaging at 3 AM every day. When it rises, I’m happy with my account; when it falls, I earn more off-exchange to keep buying. Those who accumulate coins lack nothing but patience. However, it’s important to distinguish: the patience of spot coin holders and the patience of leveraged contract holders are completely different. The real danger in this downturn lies with the latter. A negative funding rate often means shorts are paying to hold positions, and once the price stabilizesBorrowing data is the most honest sentiment indicator: $BTC long borrowing is nearly 20 times that of shorts, $ETH nearly 10 times, and $SOL is also very crowded. When everyone is overwhelmingly long, liquidation risk is the biggest headwind — wait for leverage to clear first, then talk about $82,600.I've been waiting for the US to give a clear statement on crypto, but what came instead was this: Scaramucci said the only reason the CLARITY Act failed was because Trump himself issued a Meme coin.
It's not that the clauses couldn't be agreed on, nor that there weren't enough votes, but that the president held the coins.
Put it in a neighborhood context and you'll understand. The homeowners' committee director first occupies three parking spots, then lets everyone vote on the parking rules. No matter how fair it's written, you wouldn't believe it.
So the real cost of $TRUMP isn't on the K-line. It turned the phrase "crypto-friendly" from a plus into a liability.
$BTC will continue to fluctuate as usual, but when it comes to policy, hold off on that statement for now. U.S. Treasuries strengthen, fiscal tightening expectations are being repriced
Democratic control of Congress means that the legislative space for Trump to expand the deficit is compressed, reducing federal borrowing pressure. U.S. Treasuries rose across the board, and yields fell. For the $40 trillion U.S. Treasury market, this is a clear positive signal. However, some warn that the logic of a stalemate being beneficial may not hold at current yield levels; when financing costs are too high, the budget stalemate itself is a risk.$TRUMP Bearish: Democrats take control of both houses of Congress, TRUMP drops 18% in one day, falling out of the top 100 by market cap
The biggest risk lies in a political expectation reversal. With Democrats winning both the Senate and the House, it will be more difficult for Trump to advance crypto agendas in the next two years, and the family’s crypto business may face increased scrutiny.
TRUMP is currently priced at $1.289, down 18.4% in 24 hours, hitting a low of $1.218, with a trading volume of about $32 million, having already fallen out of the top 100 by market cap.
On the same day, BTC rose 3%, ETH rose 5.8%, while TRUMP declined inversely, WLFI dropped about 5%, and Trump Media & Technology Group’s stock price fell 17% to a record low.
The buying demand for this type of coin mainly relies on political sentiment support. Once sentiment shifts, lacking other demand support, subsequent news of increased scrutiny on the Trump family’s crypto projects may continue to depress prices.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 The death of a crypto bill was said to be caused by a Meme coin.
Anthony Scaramucci's original words were very direct: The only reason the CLARITY bill failed was that US President TRUMP launched his own Meme coin. It wasn't due to disagreements over wording or lack of seats, but because of a coin.
The CLARITY bill aimed to resolve who governs crypto assets and their nature, something the industry has waited many years for. It got stuck not because of technical disagreements, but because those pushing the bill held positions themselves. When rule makers are also coin holders, the bill is not just a rule but a profit distribution plan. Other legislators don't fail to understand the clauses; they just dare not vote for a referee who has a vested interest.
This also explains why political coins like $TRUMP have a far greater impact than price fluctuations. They turned crypto-friendliness from a plus into a liability. Since then, any politician wanting to push legislation must first prove: Have you issued a coin? The legislative window was thus shut by insiders themselves.
For $BTC and $ETH, the short-term impact is not on price but on expectations. Paths like ETF channels and institutional allocations that have been established remain unaffected, but the assumption that the US will provide a clear framework for crypto will be postponed. Betting on regulatory implementation is actually betting on political credibility.
One question remains: If the industry's long-fought legislative recognition comes at the cost of legislators issuing coins themselves, is that recognition still valuable? BitMine is less than 50,000 ETH away from 5% of the ETH supply
Total holdings are 6.06 million ETH, accounting for 4.9% of the circulating supply, and the company itself says it has "completed 99%". Last week, it bought another 8,573 ETH. At this pace, it will reach the 5% mark in less than six weeks. It has staked 5.22 million ETH, with annual rewards of about 358 million. This kind of concentrated holding strategy is a double-edged sword in the long run.#Oklo核能供电布局距离商业化还有多远？ - First Aurora (Idaho INL): Target grid connection and power sales by the end of 2027 to 2028, achieving the first commercial power revenue, marking its iconic commercialization starting point; it follows the DOE pilot pathway, not the standard NRC full license route, so the approval process is faster but still carries delay risks (investment banks generally consider a delay to 2029 a more realistic scenario)
- Isotope business (earlier revenue): Pilot in 2026, expected to start stable isotope sales revenue in 2027, a small-scale commercialization, not the main power business
- Meta Ohio large cluster (1.2GW): First units earliest in 2030, full scale to 1.2GW by 2034, representing large-scale commercialization
- Oak Ridge fuel recycling plant: Production target 2030
Risk points (critical for OKLO stock price):
1. It has not yet obtained the standard NRC combined operating license; INL is a special pilot and cannot be directly replicated for other sites
2. Large-scale supply of HALEU high-assay low-enriched uranium fuel will wait until 2029; the first unit will rely on existing fuel for transition
3. The first reactor is a "first-of-a-kind"; historically, almost all advanced fast reactors have been delayed; many nuclear analysts consider 2028 an optimistic target$AKE
One coin dropped 33% in 24 hours, yet the perpetual fee rate is negative 0.06%.
AKE was at 0.004 24 hours ago, now at 0.00267. The low hit 0.00243, then bounced back about 10% from there.
Normally, after a crash, shorts should stop. Here it's reversed: the fee rate is -0.06%, six basis points, shorts pay longs every eight hours. More people are queuing to short than to long, and they're even willing to pay to do so.
Open interest is only $2.87 million, 24-hour volume converted to USD is over $70 million, a 25x turnover. This pool can't hold people; they come in, shoot once, and leave.
In this thin market, there's a group of shorts paying to hold positions, making it easiest for a 30% spike to happen. I won't catch it, nor can I guess when that spike will come.
I watch the fee rate. The day the negative fee rate returns to positive, the paying shorts will run, and the story will be over. I said this three days too early last time.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Whale's full short position: unrealized losses covered by funding fees
Monitoring shows that a certain whale has established a fully covered short portfolio of BTC, ETH, and SOL in the perpetual contract market, with a total nominal position of about $660 million. The profit and loss of the three short positions are clearly differentiated: BTC short position has an unrealized loss of $3.62 million, but funding fee income of $3.59 million, almost breaking even; ETH short position has an unrealized profit of $2.35 million, with funding fee income of $4.56 million; SOL short position has an unrealized profit of $346,000, with funding fee income of $3.96 million. The total funding fees amount to about $12.12 million, not only covering the overall unrealized loss but also generating a positive contribution.
This portfolio uses a full margin mode, with 5x leverage for BTC and ETH, and 7x leverage for SOL. BTC entry average price is $76,383, liquidation price $137,256; ETH entry average price is $2,322.71, liquidation price $3,793.19; SOL entry average price is $94.33, liquidation price $292.81. Overall, the whale does not rely on short-term declines to win but earns funding fees through long-term shorts, exchanging time for space. The core risk lies in the full margin linkage and the triggering of liquidation prices under extreme market conditions.
$BTC $ETH $SOL On-chain: BlackRock-related addresses transferred about 7,244 BTC and about 63,600 ETH to Coinbase Prime, totaling approximately $702 million.
Such large-scale migrations are often described as "dump rehearsals," but Coinbase Prime itself is the custody/execution channel for products like IBIT — creation, redemption, rebalancing, and daily custody scheduling all go through the same line. Transfer in ≠ sell out.
Stacking public capital flows: On 11/3, spot BTC ETFs still had a net outflow of about $116 million, but it narrowed significantly compared to the previous two days; ETH ETFs continue to have outflows. Don't conflate large holder relocations with fund redemptions.
(On-chain monitoring + media paraphrase, medium confidence)
Are you focusing first on the next on-chain transaction, or waiting for the daily ETF report?
$BTC $ETH "Fireworks" in the liquidity vacuum: Who is paying for the one-hour frenzy? 🔥📉 📈 Data snapshot: The surge is the result, the volume contraction is the answer BTC briefly touched 80,141.7 intraday, with a 24h increase exceeding 3.6%; ETH simultaneously broke through 2,400, reaching a high of 2,450.79, with an intraday increase approaching 6%; SOL bounced to 98.16 then quickly lost momentum. The 15-minute candlestick reveals another layer of information: the volume spike lasted only a very short window, then volume quickly collapsed, and the price began to grind down at a very gentle slope. Current prices: BTC 80,067, ETH 2,415, SOL 94.61—the wick left by the surge remains, but the buying pressure that pushed prices up is gone. 📉 Macro conditional sentence: If ADP is the appetizer, Friday's nonfarm payroll is the main course The US October ADP employment figure released on November 4 was 86,000, higher than the market expectation of 69,000. If employment data continues to be strong, the cost for the Federal Reserve to maintain a hawkish stance in December will further decrease; the market's priced-in probability of a rate hike in December is already close to 80%. For zero-yield/high-duration assets, this is not a friendly interest rate path. Core PCE remains stuck at 3.1%, with no sign of inflation turning. If Friday's nonfarm payroll again exceeds expectations, the current "surge then sideways" structure is more likely to break downwards than upwards. 💰 ETF funds: The buying pillar is receding, and notAfter BTC fell below 76,000 and then surged back to 80,000, why did the bears get caught off guard overnight?
Last night, the most uncomfortable might not have been those bottom-fishing, but those who just opened short positions around 76,000 USD.
When BTC quickly broke through the key support, market sentiment was almost one-sided. Election results, regulatory concerns, and ETF outflows all weighed heavily on the market. Many people saw the breakdown and followed the trend to short, but the price did not continue to drop; instead, it quickly recovered back to 80,000 USD.
The reason is actually simple: the previous decline had already released a large amount of panic selling, and there was support around 76,000 USD. When the price stood back above this key level, the newly opened short positions had to stop losses, and the short covering further pushed the price up, resulting in a cycle of rising and flattening, then rising again.
But I think this night was more like a short squeeze, not a sudden market bull turn. Macro pressures, ETF fund withdrawals, and regulatory uncertainties have not disappeared. The rebound to 80,000 USD only indicates that short positions were too crowded in the short term and does not prove that the overhead resistance has been resolved.
This round of market action reminds me again: after continuous declines, the most dangerous move is not necessarily bottom-fishing, but starting to short only after seeing a breakdown. The direction may be right, but entering at the wrong position will still get carried away by the market.#苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 That fall on election night was brutal. Bitcoin once dropped to 75,600, a 7-week low, and everyone thought it was over. But what happened? It didn’t stay down there; it directly reversed and broke through 80,000, reaching a high of 81,100, now hovering around 80,500; Ethereum was even stronger, rising more than 6% to over 2,430 USD.
Why the quick rebound? Shorts were squeezed too tightly. When the price pulled up, shorts had to buy back to cover, pushing the price higher: in just 1 hour, shorts liquidated $378 million, and in 24 hours total liquidations were about $950 million.
But don’t get ahead of yourself: Bitcoin ETFs have seen $1.16 billion outflows in three days, institutional money hasn’t returned; this rally looks more like a short squeeze than a big influx of new money.
In short: Bitcoin can only be considered truly recovering if it holds above 80,000; if it can’t hold, it will be pushed back down quickly. This is not investment advice.