Orbit Post Sitemap
I never understood it—how could people still be buying when prices have dropped so much?
Then I realized clearly: the people spending money here don’t even look at K-line charts. Tether holds a Bitcoin reserve of 150,000 coins, valued at $11.5 billion, bought up in October. BitMNR is even more aggressive, accumulating 6.06 million $ETH over a year and a half, locked in at an average price of 3329, and just added 5,000 more on Kraken a few days ago.
One relies on US Treasury interest behind stablecoins, the other on mining farm cash flow—money is coming in every day, so not buying feels worse.
So when they drop, it’s called a discount; when I drop, it’s called being trapped. Same price level, two different lives.There is something quite counterintuitive: the market is falling, but the wealthiest group is increasing their positions, and doing so very calmly.
Tether's Bitcoin reserve has risen to 150,000 coins, with a market value of $11.5 billion, making large purchases in October. BitMNR bought another 5,000 $ETH on Kraken, accumulating 6.06 million coins over a year and a half, worth over $20 billion, at an average price of $3,329.
These two have one thing in common: the money used to buy coins does not come from the crypto circle. One relies on the interest spread behind stablecoins and U.S. Treasury bonds, the other on mining machines and electricity costs. Both have cash flow from their main business daily, unrelated to market ups and downs.
This explains a question many find puzzling—why, after such a long decline, the bottom is still being supported. The support is not from bottom-fishing traders, but from allocation investors.
My own feeling is that this type of buying has almost no reference value for short-term trading. They can endure a 50% drop or wait three years; their pace is completely different. But it is indeed changing one thing: the circulating supply of $BTC and $ETH is thinning, with more and more coins lying dormant in cold wallets.
With fewer coins circulating, the market will be more volatile—stronger on the way up, and more fragile on the way down. This is neither bullish nor bearish; it is a structural change.
What is worth pondering is: when the most stable buyers do not need to sell, who is deciding the price? Today the index didn't fall sharply, but the structure was severely torn apart.
The A-share Shanghai Composite Index only dropped 0.82%, but the ChiNext Index directly plunged 2.73%, and the STAR 50 was even worse, down 3.81%. Trading volume shrank to 1.7 trillion, 80.3 billion less than yesterday. The electronics sector saw a net outflow of 21 billion in one day, communications withdrew another 9.3 billion, and computing hardware was crushed to the ground. On the other hand, the new energy sector attracted 2.5 billion against the trend, the battery sector rebounded in the afternoon, Huangtai Liquor had a 4-day limit-up, AI comic producers Dasheng Culture and Longban Media had 3-day limit-ups, and physical AI company Suochen Technology also touched 20cm. Money squeezed out from the most crowded tech hardware moved to low-position themes and defensive directions.
U.S. stocks also went their separate ways last night. The Nasdaq rose 0.83%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rebounded 2.64%, SanDisk rose over 4%, Broadcom and AMD rose over 3%, and Nvidia rose 2.26%. But Apple fell 1.97%, Tesla fell 1.32%, and the Dow was dragged into the red. Those buying chips and those buying Apple did not have the same trading day.
$BTC hovered around 77,000, with 338 million liquidated across the network in 24 hours, longs accounting for 265 million, and $ETH liquidated 48 million. The fear and greed index stayed at 33, ETFs ran over 800 million USD in six days, with BlackRock alone redeeming over 200 million. But on-chain whales reversed and added 303,000 coins, the fastest increase since February. Those in suits are redeeming, those holding cold wallets are picking up coins.
Money hasn't gone far, it's just changing seats, and changing seats is when it's easiest to get hit from both sides. When I look at this kind of order, I usually divide the position size by the leverage first, then calculate how much tuition fee you have to pay if the price moves against you a bit. A large number doesn't equal strong confidence; how much room to retreat you have is the real account.
This time, two wallets used 10x leverage to go long on $ZEC within a short period, with a combined nominal position of about $434,400. Roughly calculating by leverage, the initial margin is about $43,400. If the price moves 3% against them, the unrealized loss is about $13,000, which is about 30% of this initial margin, excluding fees and not representing the overall account loss ratio.
My judgment is: the direction has some agreement, but it's not yet stable. Two wallets moving in the same direction doesn't mean there are two independent bases; leverage amplifies the cost of trial and error; the data also doesn't show stop-loss or other account positions, so it's unclear how much they can withstand. I would choose to be cautious and not chase in based on this tip. Observing whether both sides reduce positions quickly next is more useful than just watching the opening position amount.#Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？ Circle's profit core relies on USDC reserve interest income. Growth in stablecoin circulation does not equal simultaneous profit realization. Incremental earnings are largely shared with channel partners, and combined with interest rate cuts lowering reserve yields, this erodes the interest margin. The key points of this earnings report are the USDC circulation scale, on-chain payments, and AI intelligent agent scenario implementation. In the short term, if circulation steadily rises and channel risk control improves, performance will be resilient; however, the interest rate cut cycle, tightening regulation, and USDT competition are all suppressive factors. A mere surge in trading volume is difficult to convert into profit; it is necessary to look at retained funds and fee optimization. Overall expectations are cautious, and growth realization is challenging.The CFTC clearance gives single-stock perps a regulated route, but the same-day lawsuit shows that classification remains the central constraint. Cash settlement and no expiry may appeal to traders seeking continuous exposure; scaling will depend on whether exchanges can fit that demand into an already crowded equity-derivatives market.
#CFTCSingleStockPerps ETH perpetual current price 2246.16, total smart money traders 2,639, total open interest 2.02B, nominal long-short ratio 24.05%.
There are 879 long traders holding 393.20M, average entry price 2824.27, unrealized loss about 101 million USD, profit ratio only 24.23%, deeply trapped at high levels, difficult to actively push upward in the short term.
There are 1,760 short traders holding 1.63B, average entry price 2236.75, current price slightly rising, shorts also experiencing unrealized loss, unrealized loss 6.84 million USD, profit ratio 67.67%.
Short positions are significantly larger than long positions, but with the current slight price increase, shorts are under considerable pressure; long costs are much higher than the current price, making it very difficult to break even. Both smart money longs and shorts are simultaneously in loss, with no side having a crushing advantage. Consistent with BTC market rhythm, short-term market fluctuates repeatedly, with spike washouts continuously consuming leveraged funds, and blind chasing orders are easily stopped out. It is necessary to wait for the price to effectively break through key liquidity zones before a clear trend can emerge. The most heartbreaking thing about Apple's earnings report isn't poor performance, but that it performed well and still got hammered.
Revenue was 114.5 billion, up 12% year-over-year, iPhone up 17%, all exceeding expectations. However, the next quarter's gross margin guidance is 45%–46%, down from the recently reported 47.9%. New CEO Ternus directly said that memory price increases are "unprecedented." After-hours, the stock dropped more than 4%, and on Tuesday, the main stock closed down 1.9%.
My view: demand is not the problem; the problem is cost, and no one can solve that in the short term. The perpetual is now around 331, with 322 below as yesterday's low, and 345 above as the pre-earnings report level. Until it returns to 345, I consider it still digesting.
Do you think "a good company being wrongly punished" is an opportunity, or is the memory price increase just beginning?
$AAPL $MU
#USStocks #Earnings #Apple
Personal observation, not investment adviceThis morning's drop and rebound have only one cause: oil prices.
BTC fell from 78,063 last night to 75,736 this morning, a 3.0% drop.
The lowest hour saw $135 million in trading volume, the largest in two days.
Then it pulled back to 77,420 within an hour.
It’s not just BTC that fell.
Nasdaq futures at 27,700, down 2.14%.
S&P futures −1.24%, Dow futures −0.81%.
(U.S. stock market spot hasn’t opened yet.)
Why the drop? Look at oil.
The U.S.-Iran conflict escalates, Brent at $102.97, WTI at $95.31.
Goldman Sachs raised its December Brent forecast from 90 to 105.
At this level, inflation won’t come down.
If inflation doesn’t come down, don’t expect rate cuts; hikes might even be necessary.
So what’s being hit isn’t the economy, but valuations.
Why the rebound? Still look at oil.
On November 3, Trump told the Financial Times there’s no plan for an immediate strike on Iran.
After this statement, oil prices reversed from rising to falling.
The source of panic was oil; once oil turned, the panic disappeared.
At first glance, I thought this was uncertainty about the election, but after reviewing the timeline, I realized the main cause was the war premium.
This rebound doesn’t look like "bottom-fishing capital entering," but more like "bad news disproved by a single statement."
There’s a big difference: the former requires new buying, the latter just needs no one selling anymore.
Do you think we should focus on oil prices next, or on the election vote count?
$BTC ETH plays a role in transaction fees, staking and network security.
But there's a catch here too. More activity on Ethereum doesn't necessarily translate into proportional value accruing to ETH, especially as Layer 2 networks make transactions cheaper.
For the next decade, I'm more interested in two questions:
$BTC: How much global wealth will eventually find its way into Bitcoin?
$ETH: How much economic value generated across the Ethereum ecosystem will actually accrue to ETH?Today's market, the most striking thing isn't the drop, but the two sides slapping each other.
The A-share Shanghai Composite Index only lost 0.82%, the STAR Market Composite Index plunged 4.78%, and the electronics sector saw a net outflow of over 8 billion yuan in one day. But the power equipment sector absorbed over 6 billion yuan, food and beverage took in over 4 billion yuan, Huangtai Liquor had a 4-day winning streak, Maotai rose against the market trend, with a net inflow of over 6 billion yuan in five days. AI animation companies Dasheng Culture and Zhejiang Film Industry had a 3-day winning streak, with the highest order book at over 2 million lots; short drama users grew from 10 million to 400 million in less than three years. Semiconductor equipment is rising, but computing hardware is falling; Zhongji Xuchuang and Tianfu Communications turned green, money moved from the most crowded end to places no one is fighting for.
The US stock market was also split last night: the Nasdaq rose 0.83%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rebounded 2.64%, SanDisk rose over 4%, Broadcom and AMD rose over 3%. But Apple fell 1.97%, Tesla fell 1.32%, and the Dow Jones closed down. Those buying chips and those buying Apple did not have the same trading day.
$BTC touched 76,500 and was pulled back again; the fear index dropped eleven points in one day, directly down to 26. ETFs ran over 800 million USD in six days, with BlackRock alone redeeming 400 million, but on-chain whales reversed and increased holdings to 3.03 million coins, the strongest accumulation since February. On the $ETH side, an address also spent 37 million USD in five hours to buy, at an average price of 2,279, and hasn't stopped.
Those in suits are cutting, those with cold wallets are picking up; the money hasn't run away, it's just musical chairs.As analyzed earlier, after the rebound to 78830, it turned down to test 74909. This move has already played out, with 75690 completing the first test. What’s next? The second test at 74909! As for whether it will break through, it's a 50-50 chance. The midterm election outcome is settled, whether the US and Iran will still fight, the non-farm payroll data on the 6th, and whether there will be a rate hike in December are all variables. So, it’s not time to get overly bullish yet; contracts around BTC 76000 can be entered with a small position.The midterm elections are expected to cause another dip in the market, but it won't fall too much. After this event passes, the market will start to form a bottom.
In the past three Bitcoin cycles, the bottom appeared after the US midterm elections: 71 days after in 2014, 39 days after in 2018, and 13 days after in 2022.
If this pattern repeats, the time window for Bitcoin's next cycle bottom could be from the end of 2026 to early 2027.
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $BTC 🔥BTC has rebounded as expected, reaching around 78000 as I mentioned yesterday. What’s next, up or down?
Yesterday I posted a warning that there were too many short positions below 78000, which is the easiest situation for a rebound.
🔺 If the rebound is weak and ends around 78000, it’s because many short positions are there, forcing a short squeeze to stop losses, then it can’t go higher.
🔺 If the rebound is stronger, it will try to reach the liquidity above 79000, but the rebound was too weak and couldn’t go beyond 78000.
So what happens next?
First, the bulls are still relatively weak and haven’t reached the liquidity near 79000. It can’t go higher from the short positions at 78000. The current price is around 77000, where there are no trading conditions. The price is stuck in a no-man’s land, so I suggest staying flat and waiting.
🔺 For going long, I consider it only after breaking below the parallel bottom at 76000 or the bottom at 75000, then showing a strong recovery, bullish divergence, or a large number of short positions.
🔺 For going short, I consider shorting near 78800, the parallel top, because there is liquidity above 78800 and a gap above 79000, making it a good shorting condition.
So I will be watching when the price reaches 78800 to take out the parallel top liquidity and fill the gap around 79200-79600.$BTC has now moved below $75,819, hitting the yellow support level.
Meanwhile, the long liquidation cluster around $75,000 has been significantly reduced.
Liquidity is getting cleared. How many more downside targets will price hit before we see a reaction?$ZEC has gone completely crazy, blinking and already hitting 1232 again!
Brothers, good afternoon, I am Siqing
Did you see the breaking news above? The whale openly bought spot and contracts to go long. The market maker is riding this wave, plus someone is stubbornly holding the bottom at 77300 on BTC, forcing the shorts to get squeezed hard.
No more nonsense, here’s what to do next:
For those wanting to short:
Don’t try to top pick now. Wait for it to surge up to 1240 - 1245 (near previous highs). If it can’t break through and closes with a long upper shadow, and BTC at 77500 also weakens, then flip to short directly. Set stop loss above 1250, take a small pullback and exit.
For those wanting to go long:
Don’t chase at 1232 now, the deviation is too large, entering now means catching the falling knife. Wait patiently for a pullback. If it can hold steady around 1205 - 1210, showing a stabilization signal on the right side, then get on board to go long. If it breaks down below 1200 with heavy volume, don’t go long, follow the shorts.
This market is too wild, hold your USDT tight, don’t get greedy, don’t shoot the eagle without seeing the rabbit. Wait for it to reveal its flaws before acting!
⚠️ Personal operation, don’t blindly follow.
👇 Brothers, did you follow this whale’s open buy to pump the market? 🍵$SUI
On-chain funds increase: how to distinguish between genuine adoption and short-term parking?
Cross-platform migration can change on-chain balances, but an increase in balance does not mean users are willing to use the application long-term. The key is whether the funds enter continuous settlement, lending, and consumption scenarios.
If the scale of funds increases but usage frequency does not improve, it should first be regarded as liquidity migration; if new address retention and application revenue both rise simultaneously, then the judgment of ecological expansion is strengthened. The usage situation after subsidy withdrawal is especially important.Something's wrong, this world is really crazy as hell. Someone borrowed $140 million just to squeeze out 110,000 from a small vault 😂
This morning, something exploded on-chain. On BNB Chain, there's a small project called CoreVault, with an InsurancePool next to it, originally meant as an insurance pool to cover depositors.
The attacker first used a flash loan to borrow about $143.6 million worth of WBNB, then used this money to make large swaps in the pool, forcibly crashing the price. The contract redemption was based on this spot price, so the amount that should have been compensated was amplified about 33 times. The insurance pool spat out 260.21 BNB at once, worth about $180,000 at the time.
Then he swapped those tokens back the same way, repaid the flash loan with interest, all done in one transaction. After costs, he netted about 160.26 BNB, roughly $110,000, gas fees not included.
The insurance pool lost even more, with a net outflow close to $180,000. It's called insurance, but in the end, it became someone else's ATM, quite ironic.
The $140 million principal was in his hands for only a few seconds: borrowed, crashed the price, withdrew money, repaid the loan, barely spending any of his own money. Using a price that can be easily manipulated as a quote—this kind of trap happens to projects every now and then. Watching this really makes you feel sorry for the people who deposited their money.
For beginners, it's recommended to watch more and trade less; when buying coins, only buy $BTC The rally looks strong, but the data tells a different story.
$BTC saw $33.74M in short liquidations vs just $6.7M in longs, suggesting a short squeeze rather than genuine buying pressure.
$ETH showed the same pattern, with $34.87M in shorts wiped out. Forced buying pushed prices higher, but fresh spot demand remains unproven.
$CORE also showed how quickly a squeeze can reverse, wiping out both shorts and longs.
#USMidtermsCongressWatch "Ranking Match in a Low-Volume Market" (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
The midterm election vote counting is still ongoing, with data leaning towards the Democrats, but at this point in the market, direction is not the hardest part; the challenge is how to position your holdings. In a low-volume environment, strength and weakness matter more than price moves (￣▽￣)
$BTC has been grinding between 76387 and 78064 over 24 hours, with only 10,516 coins traded, a fear-greed index of 34, sentiment recovering, but funds reluctant to chase. It acts like a ballast stone—stable but temporarily lacking elasticity. Allocate 60% in the portfolio, keep the rest waiting for election-related negative news to unfold before moving (｡•́︿•̀｡)
$ETH ranks second. ETH/BTC has risen to 0.0294, outperforming by nearly half a percent in a day; staking queues are congested, exit queues bearish, chips are locked up, making it more suitable for an elastic position (๑•́ ₃ •̀๑)
$ZEC is the most independent. It bounced off around 1250 and still holds 1200; governance turmoil caused nearly 100,000 coins to exit free circulation, tightening supply. 1200 is the lifeline—no break, no move (ง •̀_•́)ง
The rule in a low-volume market is straightforward: the strong don’t necessarily rise immediately, the weak often fall behind first. Arrange your seating well, then leave the rest to patience～ (´▽｀)ノ♪
#美国中期选举进入计票阶段，国会控制权将如何变化？ Reviewing $ETH, I just got off yesterday
Today I bought back nearly $40 cheaper at a cost of 2257
The intraday low was 2225
Previous low was 2237
Once broken, it breaks
I thought breaking the level would take a long time before there was a chance to buy the dip
But the market returned the position in half a day
It’s really scary that it broke below the previous low, even lower than where I sold yesterday
A 15-minute candle released the largest volume of the session
Before the price even landed, I started buying
After buying, it kept dropping
Dropped to 2225 before stopping, now the 15-minute candle has already bounced back
The unrealized profit isn’t much but the direction is right
If the bulls don’t leave at this position, I won’t mess around
Hold when you should hold
Stop loss when you should stop loss
Set the stop loss just below the 2225 spike
Preserve the position first, then talk
The most satisfying moment in trading
Is not catching the absolute bottom
But when you personally sold yesterday’s position
And today the market gives it back to you at a discount Zcash ($ZEC)
🛡️ Privacy is becoming an important conversation in digital finance.
Zcash uses zero-knowledge cryptography to support privacy-preserving transactions. Its technology gives users the option to make transactions with enhanced privacy while maintaining the benefits of blockchain-based value transfer. As digital finance evolves, privacy and transparency will remain important topics for developers and communities.
Should financial privacy be a standard feature of cryptocurrency? 🔐To pour some cold water first, I don't take large long positions as a signal of an upcoming rise. Core Trader 19 (0x0c1f69…9672b) newly opened or added to a long position on SNDK, with 10x leverage, nominal value about $53,700, reference price $1061.5699. My judgment is: this order shows someone is willing to take risks, but it doesn't mean going long now is a bargain yet.
I'm stuck on two points. First, this is just a directional position without complete holdings and hedging information, so the nominal amount can't be directly translated into the trader's bullish confidence. Second, leverage makes timing entry more demanding: estimating from this position, if the price moves 1% against it, the paper loss is about $537, excluding fees. This is not a prediction of a drop, but a reminder that even if the direction is ultimately correct, volatility may force position adjustments first. When the market reverses, the hardest hit are leveraged longs who have no room and refuse to admit mistakes.
Of course, he might have bought correctly. I won't force bearish reasons just to be bearish. If the price can sustain above the reference price, recover after a pullback, and not just spike briefly, I will raise my evaluation of this long position. These are my observation conditions, not a market that has already happened. What I will watch next is whether the price can validate this entry, not how famous the wallet name is. The rally looks like conviction. The tape says it is plumbing. Over the past 24 hours, $BTC short liquidations reached $33.74 million against just $6.7 million in longs, a ratio that describes a squeeze far more than a bid. The cascade unfolded in layers: $25.99 million of shorts cleared within 12 hours, $17.3 million within four, and another $1.52 million in a single hour. Each forced buy triggered the next stop-loss, a chain reaction rather than fresh spot capital choosing higher prices. $ETH Today's market, the index is the face, the account is the inside, and the inside and outside are not the same.
The "sheep" stocks in the A-share market were still playing on homophones yesterday, but today they directly hit the daily limit down in batches, coming fast and going even faster. The chip concept absorbed 5.7 billion yuan in half a day, robots absorbed 4.4 billion yuan, but more than 3,700 stocks in the whole market are falling. No matter how fiercely semiconductors rise, they can't withstand the pull from consumption and real estate below. The broad-based ETFs bought nearly 80 billion yuan in one day to support the market, yet the STAR 50 still fell nearly 4 points. Money is stuck at the door, and people inside are still trying to get out.
The US Nasdaq rose 0.83%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rebounded 2.64%, with SanDisk, Broadcom, and AMD all up over 3%, but the Dow was dragged down by Apple falling nearly 2 points and Tesla in the red. The seven giants have long gone their separate ways; those buying chips and those buying Apple are not having the same day today.
$BTC stabilized near 77,000, $ETH stood back at 2276, and the fear and greed index climbed from 26 back to 34, looking like a recovery. But ETF money is still flowing out; prices have returned, but funds have not. This divergence is more wearing than a one-way decline. The index is holding, sentiment is repairing, but the money hasn't truly turned around yet. I've always had something I couldn't figure out: ETFs keep reporting this outflow and that inflow every day, but what does it really have to do with me?
Yesterday, the US spot BTC ETF had a net outflow of $116 million. Sounds scary, but when you break it down, IBIT saw an outflow of $95 million, and the one with the code BTC had an outflow of $52.6 million. Together, these two exceed the total net outflow — which means other products were secretly buying.
So the so-called capital withdrawal is actually some people leaving and some people entering; subtract one from the other, and the remainder is $116 million. My current understanding: this number is not a prediction, it's bookkeeping.US spot BTC ETFs saw a net outflow of $116 million yesterday. The number isn't huge, but the structure is worth a look.
IBIT alone accounted for $95 million, making up 80%; the BTC ticker ETF saw another $52.6 million outflow. Together, these two total over $147 million, which already exceeds the total net outflow—indicating that other products had slight net inflows, partially offsetting the outflows.
This is interesting. Previously, ETF outflows tended to move in unison, but now it's different: some are selling while others are still buying, though the buyers are quieter. The $116 million is the net result of two opposing forces, not a one-sided panic.
Looking deeper: ETF subscriptions and redemptions correlate positively with $BTC price, but outflows transmit more slowly than inflows. Redemptions require settlement and market makers hedging, so price reactions often lag by a day or two.
Therefore, my judgment is that this looks more like position rebalancing rather than a systemic retreat. IBIT is large, and its absolute adjustment numbers always look ugly, so you can't take its outflows alone as the market's overall sentiment. The real signal lies in persistence: net outflows lasting more than three consecutive days and spreading from IBIT to other products—that's when capital is truly leaving this asset class.
$ETH and $SOL haven't followed the decline these past two days, which also indirectly shows that selling pressure remains locked within the $BTC ETF channel.Triple-line hedging, Big Bro Maji's "hard-holding ledger"
Monitoring shows that Big Bro Maji is hard-holding the market with a massive long-short combination: $BTC short, $ETH long, $HYPE short advancing on three fronts, with a total margin of about 5,698,000 U and a total position value of about 62,980,000 U, maximizing the intensity of the game.
BTC short: 40X full position, holding -249.9 BTC, average opening price 78,104.1 U, unrealized profit +325,700 U, funding fee +166,300 U, liquidation price 103,059.49 U, temporarily the "profit cushion" in the portfolio.
ETH long: 25X full position, holding 9,823.81 ETH, average opening price 2,427.28 U, unrealized loss -1,722,900 U, funding fee -82,200 U, liquidation price 1,561.77 U, the long side is clearly under pressure.
HYPE short: 5X full position, holding -259,600 HYPE, average opening price 72.8005 U, unrealized loss -2,765,900 U, funding fee +1,203,000 U, liquidation price 106.72 U, becoming the main source of loss.
Roughly summed up, unrealized P&L is about -4,163,100 U, funding fee about +1,287,100 U, still in an unrealized loss state after hedging. The money earned from the BTC short is being eaten up by the ETH long and HYPE short. The triple-line liquidation prices still have some distance, but under a high-leverage full-position combination, any sharp unilateral surge or drop may trigger chain pressure. Hard-holding does not mean risk-free.There are obvious differences in the liquidation structures of BTC, ETH, and CORE: BTC and ETH mainly experience short liquidations within the 1-hour timeframe, but when extended to 4-hour and 24-hour periods, long liquidations are actually larger; CORE's 1-hour liquidations come entirely from longs. For BTC, the 1-hour liquidation volume is 35.0894 million U, with longs at 200,000 U and shorts at 34.8894 million U. The 4-hour liquidation expands to 110 million U, with longs at 70.661 million U and shorts at 37.7314 million U; the 24-hour liquidation reaches 160 million U, with longs at 97.6173 million U and shorts at 58.4455 million U. ETH follows a similar pattern. The 1-hour liquidation is 6.5824 million U, with longs at 591,800 U and shorts at 5.9907 million U; the 4-hour liquidation is 31.1973 million U, with longs at 24.0625 million U and shorts at 7.1348 million U; the 24-hour liquidation reaches 64.6826 million U, with longs at 37.1472 million U and shorts at 27.5354 million U. CORE's 1-hour liquidation is 4.8375 million U, all from longs, with no short liquidations. 💡 My view. The most notable aspect of this data set is the switch in liquidation direction between short and longer timeframes. The 1-hour data for BTC and ETH indicates that short-term fluctuations first force many shorts to exit, but the larger long liquidations at 4-hour and 24-hour intervals suggest that long leverage pressure becomes more pronounced in the subsequent market trend. The liquidation amounts only describe the forced liquidation structure that has occurred and cannot alone be used to infer the direction of the next market phase Strategy delivered a somewhat conflicted financial report last week
From October 26 to November 1, the company used proceeds from common stock financing to buy 811 $BTC, about $65.5 million, at an average price of around 80,846, bringing total holdings up to 849,327 coins
However, in the same week, it spent about $208.2 million in cash to repurchase STRC preferred shares, more than three times the amount spent on buying coins, with cash reserves dropping from about $242.4 million to about $132.7 million
Institutions haven't been supportive either
The US spot BTC ETF saw a net outflow of about $27.4 million on November 3, marking three consecutive days of withdrawals, though this outflow is much smaller than the roughly $398.6 million on November 2, indicating a slowing outflow pace
My view is that Strategy seems more focused on restructuring preferred stock liabilities this week rather than aggressively increasing positions
In the short term, don't interpret this as a bullish trend signal
On the market, $BTC in the Asian morning session fell from around 78,000 to about 77,000, with a 24-hour high/low of approximately 78,049/76,360, and a funding rate of about 0.01%
Short term support is first seen at 76,800, which was tested several times this morning; breaking below this level suggests reducing positions
Resistance above is at 77,500; holding above this level could target 78,000 next The most vulnerable link has never been the election results themselves, but the portion of our positions where we have prematurely bet on "good news." With the midterm elections approaching, is your position truly ready to face the "immediate volatility upon results"? Reviewing my watchlist these days, the more I look, the more interesting it becomes. All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for re-election, about one-third of the 100 Senate seats are rotating, and legislation requires approval from both chambers to count. In other words, what really determines the context of crypto regulation is not who wins, but whether a majority in both chambers forms a system of checks and balances. The industry hasn't been idle either; three super PACs have poured about $170 million into the race. This money isn't buying a particular candidate, but an entry ticket to the future digital asset legislative environment. What is the market trading on? I believe it’s not the crude narrative of "who wins and whether BTC rises or falls," but the moment when policy expectations are repriced. The bullish path is clear: if the congressional makeup facilitates smoother fiscal, tax, and digital asset legislation, risk appetite will first emerge in altcoins and ETH, while BTC will act more like a ballast. But risk signals are also flashing: this $170 million industry bet itself is an expectation priced in advance. If the results become ambiguous or stuck in a stalemate, the first to loosen are often the most leveraged positions, not the price itself. I have noted three points in my risk diary. - Sentiment tends to spike before the election; don’t mistake the spike for confirmation. - If results are delayed or a "divided" scenario emerges, altcoins will retrace faster than BTC, so allow for pacing buffers. - What’s truly worth monitoring is the change in wording around legislative progress.Today, the A-shares market closed with the Shanghai Composite Index dropping only 0.82%, the ChiNext Index plunging 2.73%, and the STAR 50 Index sharply falling 3.81%. Trading volume shrank to 1.7 trillion yuan, with over 3,300 stocks closing in the red. The chip industry chain saw a net outflow of 24.2 billion yuan in one day, with optical communication and computing hardware collectively drained; however, batteries and new energy sectors bucked the trend by attracting funds, and defensive sectors like insurance and rare earths also pushed upward. Huangtai Liquor hit a 4-day limit up, Gaozheng Civil Explosion and Dasheng Culture both hit 3-day limit ups. Low-level consumer and thematic stocks are still emerging, but the money flow path from high-level tech to low-level defensive stocks is very clear, so those who chased the morning rally likely ended up holding positions at the close.
US chip stocks retraced some losses, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index up 2.64%, SanDisk rising over 4%, Broadcom and AMD up more than 3%, and the Nasdaq closing up 0.83%. However, Apple dropped nearly 2 points, warning that memory costs will continue to squeeze margins, causing the Dow to close in the red and Tesla to also end lower. Buyers of chips and buyers of Apple had very different trading days today.
$BTC touched a new low again this afternoon, with Binance spot hitting around 76,388. The 24-hour total liquidation across the network was 338 million, with long positions accounting for 265 million. $ETH saw liquidations of 48 million. But looking closely at the liquidation structure, short positions on ETH already account for 70%, and those chasing shorts are starting to get bitten back. ETFs have lost over 800 million USD in six days, the fear and greed index is stuck at 26, and the money hasn't gone far—it's just switching sides. When switching sides, it's easiest for both sides to get hit.The "uncertainty" of the midterm elections is more costly than any negative factor
On November 4th, the U.S. midterm election vote count was tight, and the control of Congress remained unclear.
Do you understand the weight of this signal?
The market is not afraid of "which party wins." The market fears "not knowing who wins." Political uncertainty leads to a global contraction of risk assets overall, with short-term funds tending to lock in profits or stay on the sidelines, causing the market to exhibit "low volume oscillations and high-frequency shakeouts" as a risk-averse characteristic.
The deeper issue is hidden in the CLARITY Act. This bill, which determines the long-term regulatory framework for U.S. digital assets, failed to reach the 60-vote threshold in a procedural Senate vote in September and has yet to break through. The midterm elections change the composition of the next Congress, thereby altering the political calculations for this bill when it restarts in 2027.
Bitcoin was not brought down by "a certain candidate." It was indirectly pushed down by the fact of "not knowing who is in charge." $BTC $ETH $SOL #美国中期选举进入计票阶段，国会控制权将如何变化？ #Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？ #AMD数据中心收入近翻倍，营收及指引均超预期 $SPCX
The Texas flip to blue will definitely put pressure on assets related to Elon Musk, there's no doubt about that.
This pressure might not be short-lived.
I don't want to say things like "The Texas data center might face delays, so it's beneficial for Orbit Data Center."
Because such words sound more like forced consolation at times like this.
Accept the Republican Party's crushing defeat, the future policy environment might be unfavorable, but just firmly believe in the big trend of technological development.Congressional seats determine regulatory expectations, but will BTC really surge to 87,000 or drop back to 60,000 because of this?
The impact of the U.S. midterm elections is shifting from political news to policy pricing in the crypto market. Three possible outcomes may correspond to different market expectations:
First, if the Republican Party continues to control both chambers, the existing crypto policy agenda may have smoother conditions for advancement, but bills still need to pass through Congress, so positive news does not necessarily mean BTC will break through $87,000.
Second, if the Democratic Party controls both chambers, regulatory review and legislative priorities may change, but the president still holds veto power, so it cannot be simply inferred that BTC will inevitably fall to $60,000.
Third, if the two parties split control of the chambers, the importance of bipartisan negotiations increases, and advancing the CLARITY Act may face more coordination costs. The bill previously failed to pass the Senate's 60-vote procedural threshold, indicating that legislative difficulties are not solely about party seats.
My view is that the election affects midterm expectations, but in the short term, we still need to watch capital flows, the dollar, and price structure. Don't bet on the outcome prematurely, and don't treat scenario price levels as certain targets. Wait for the vote count to become clear, then let the market provide direction. $BTC Performance exceeded expectations and a stock split was announced, yet SanDisk still fell 13%. 1. There's nothing wrong with SanDisk's report: performance exceeded expectations, and a stock split was announced, but the stock price still dropped over 13%. Good news all around but the price fell, indicating the market is using good news as a selling point now; the storage price hike expectation has already been priced in.
2. The same feeling applies to $SOL as well. BTC touched above 78,000 during the day, SOL only slightly declined, the rhythm still hasn't caught up; funding rates are close to zero, open interest hasn't risen, and few leveraged positions have chased in.
3. A few days ago, spot ETF outflows exceeded 2 billion USD, yet the price barely moved, basically just existing funds circulating. In this environment, good news turning into bad news and the lower bound of sideways trading not holding up are normal. For $SOL to have an independent rally, incremental funds need to come in first.
#闪迪业绩超预期并宣布拆股，股价跌逾13% $SOL[Texas Political Shift, AI Computing Power Stocks Take the First Hit]
The Democratic Party has taken the majority in the Senate and also won the Texas governor and senator elections. Texas Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gina Hinojosa has explicitly proposed suspending new data center construction, limiting water and electricity resource consumption, and canceling related tax incentives. For the AI industry, this directly cuts into the main artery, restricting the infrastructure for computing power expansion.
About one-quarter of the expected data center capacity by 2030 in the U.S. is concentrated in Texas, with related planned projects totaling 13.3GW. Once the new government pushes for stricter approvals and energy regulations, the impact will affect not only data center operators but also GPU cloud service providers that rely on continuous expansion. High-debt, high-capital expenditure companies like $CRWV are especially sensitive.
The market reaction is clear: Nasdaq futures once dropped more than 2%, and CoreWeave's after-hours decline reached about 7%. The AI sector was already facing huge capital expenditures, financing costs, and investment return pressures; this election adds policy uncertainty. Some took advantage of the vote counting period to continuously short CoreWeave via TWAP, indicating that funds are trading around this direction.
It is worth focusing on the fact that AI computing power expansion is encountering local political and energy resource constraints for the first time. AI demand will not disappear because of the election, but whether data centers can be built and whether they can get sufficiently cheap electricity may be more worthy of revaluation than GPU orders.The index looks bad today, but the structure is shifting, and the change is quite obvious.
The Shanghai Composite Index in A-shares fell 0.82%, the ChiNext Index plunged 2.73%, and trading volume shrank by 80.2 billion compared to yesterday. Semiconductors and communication equipment took a hit, but defensive sectors like medical aesthetics, insurance, rare earths, and aviation airports pushed up against the trend. Solid-state battery company Shangshui Intelligent also hit the limit up. In media, Dasheng Culture hit a 3-day limit up, and Wintour Holdings had 5 limit ups in 6 days. The money hasn't left the market; it just moved from tech hardware to safer places.
The US Nasdaq rose 0.83%, Nvidia gained 2.29% to reclaim the top spot in global market cap, and Microsoft and Meta both rose over 2%. But Apple dropped 1.9%, warning that memory costs will squeeze gross margins, dragging the Dow into the red. Buyers of chips and buyers of Apple are not in the same world today.
$BTC saw liquidations of 106 million in 24 hours, $ETH liquidations reached 48 million, with long positions still accounting for nearly 80% of the entire network, but short liquidations on ETH have already reached 70%. The fear and greed index is stuck at 34. Leverage clearing has shifted from a one-sided long squeeze to a long-short double kill. The worst part may be almost over, but the money is not rushing back yet. Three major tokens are flashing the same warning at once, and the synchrony matters more than any single chart. $BTC, $ETH and $ZEC are all printing overbought readings while their funding rates sit in positive territory — a combination that historically describes a crowded long side rather than fresh conviction. Start with $BTC at 77,737. Price is hugging the upper Bollinger Band with RSI near 70, but the tell is what happened at 77,884: two attempts, both rejected, on volume too thin to confirOn the news front, market risk appetite remains weak, with the results of the U.S. midterm elections becoming a key short-term variable affecting risk assets. As some U.S. states gradually announce election results, the market is beginning to assess the impact of changes in congressional control on subsequent cryptocurrency regulatory policies and the legislative progress of the CLARITY Act. Policy uncertainty continues to limit institutional capital inflows. Meanwhile, Asian stock markets are generally under pressure today, with major indices in South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan showing significant declines. The tech stock sell-off sentiment continues to transmit to global risk assets. U.S. employment data is also another important variable this week; Friday's nonfarm payroll report may influence market judgments on the Federal Reserve's future interest rate path. The user fund withdrawals triggered by the previous Binance security incident are still ongoing, but market focus has gradually shifted from the incident itself to whether funds can flow back in.
On the capital side, institutional funds have not shown obvious recovery. The U.S. spot BTC ETF saw a net outflow of about $398.6 million on November 2, and preliminary statistics for November 3 still show a net outflow of about $20.6 million, though some fund data is incomplete, so the final figures may be adjusted. According to current statistics, the cumulative net outflow of BTC ETFs over the past five trading days is about $907.9 million, indicating that institutional funds remain overall in a defensive stance. In the derivatives market, approximately $181.7 million was liquidated across the entire market in the past 24 hours, with long positions liquidated at about $121.7 million, accounting for roughly 67%. BTC single liquidations were about $45.05 million, showing that bulls are still under considerable pressure.$APR | SHORT SETUP 💵
APR is facing selling pressure near 0.03912. A weak retest of resistance could support a potential short trade.
Entry: 0.03916–0.03924
TP1: 0.03881
TP2: 0.03857
TP3: 0.03834
SL: 0.03943
Confirm bearish momentum before execution.#AMDQ3DataCenterUp97% $LIT Positive news: Chainlink Asia-Pacific stock market data integrated into Lighter, LIT up 6%, CFTC application to be submitted within the month
Is there solid news supporting LIT's rise today? OKX current price is $3.2812, up 6.17% in 24 hours, with about $24.5 million in trading volume
Yes, Chainlink expanded Asia-Pacific stock data streams on November 3, covering over $40 trillion in stock markets across China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, including TSMC, Tencent, and Samsung. Lighter is among the first platforms to go live with this data
On the same day, the number of stock tokens that can be used as collateral on Lighter's Robinhood Chain increased from 11 to 23, adding Apple, Amazon, and Coinbase. This means more tradable assets and margin options, directly corresponding to increased trading volume and fee demand
Looking ahead to regulation, founder Novakovski stated that applications for DCM and DCO licenses will be submitted to the US CFTC within November, but have not been filed yet
The price rise is capped by the team and investors starting to unlock tokens on December 27. Currently, about 250 million tokens are circulating, only one quarter of the total supply.Revenue surged 96%, but the stock price fell more than 5% in pre-market
Palantir's Q3 revenue was $2.313 billion, up 96% year-over-year, exceeding the expected $2.18 billion.
Adjusted earnings per share were $0.44, also beating expectations.
U.S. commercial revenue was $984 million, up 148% year-over-year, surpassing U.S. government business for the first time ever.
The full-year guidance was also raised to $8.53 billion, with a growth rate of about 91%.
The problem lies in orders: Q3 total contract value was $2.918 billion, up only 6% year-over-year.
The growth rate of U.S. commercial contract value dropped sharply from over 153% last quarter to 11%.
Coupled with a price-to-earnings ratio of 153, the market has lost patience waiting for the next deal.
I think this is not a deterioration in performance, but the valuation rose ahead of the results; I am observing, not chasing.
The invalidation point is the contract value growth returning to triple digits, or the stock price closing above $180 with volume.
Will you take advantage of this pullback to buy cheap, or wait for the order data to warm up first?
$PLTR $AAPL
#PalantirQ3营收增长96%，股价不涨反跌 To start with a cold splash of water, although I tend to be bearish first, I don't get excited just because someone is heavily shorting. These kinds of trades most easily lead people to misinterpret "daring to bet" as "being confident in the prediction." The first thing I focus on is not how much can be earned, but whether this position has room to breathe if the market moves against it. The direction can be slowly verified, but leverage might not give you the time.
This time, Core Trader 19 (0x0c1f69…9672b) opened a short on BTC with 40x leverage, with a nominal value of about $422,900. My judgment is: it looks more like a directional bet with very narrow fault tolerance, not yet a solid bearish basis. There are two reasons: roughly calculated by leverage, a reverse fluctuation of about 2.5% equals the initial margin size, but actual liquidation is also affected by margin mode, maintenance margin, etc.; additionally, nominal position size does not equal judgment quality. Looking only at this monitoring data, we don't know if it is hedged. Taking someone else's risk exposure directly as a market conclusion misses a logical step.
Of course, this trader might also be right. If BTC continues to decline and the rebound fails to recover the losses, I will increase my recognition of the bearish continuation; this is my observation condition, not a market that has already happened. If the price instead rises, I speculate the first to suffer will be the high-leverage shorts, not those who are only bearish in words. I will next watch whether the price can verify the bearish judgment, not substituting evidence with position size.$HYPE
Does greater market volatility mean better revenue quality for HYPE?
Perpetual contract platforms may earn more fees, but intense liquidations, market maker order cancellations, and user losses can also harm subsequent retention.
If fee growth is accompanied by stable depth, diversified users, and healthy collateral, value capture is more credible; if trading is concentrated in a few accounts or relies on subsidies and high leverage, revenue sustainability should be discounted. I will reassess retention after the hype fades.I've been consistently shorting Bitcoin $BTC throughout this week, and today the strategy finally delivered a significant result! I personally achieved a 700% return, while several fellow traders who followed my analysis also made thousands of dollars. So, what makes me so confident about maintaining a bearish position on Bitcoin? Let me explain my reasoning. 📊 Comparing the Market Structure Ethereum $ETH started its move around 1,900 on August 19, climbed to a high of 2,860, and has recentlyThe easiest thing to get carried away with when watching the market is staring at large orders.
When you see millions of dollars traded on the screen, your fingers immediately itch, thinking the money is coming in and the price must go up, right? But often the order is filled and the price doesn't move at all.
Gold has played out like this twice in the past two days. A $1.149 million long order came in at 3905, and the price really stopped falling and even broke 3940. But when a $7.89 million long order came in at 3943.63, the price still dropped; having more money doesn't help.
So I only trust large orders halfway, and the other half depends on whether the price respects the order after it's filled. Right now, there's buying support between 3940 and 3945; let's see if $PAXG can hold that level first.Gold has been moving very textbook-like these past two days, worth breaking down.
The 3905–3900 support zone mentioned yesterday afternoon took effect, XAU pulled back and then rebounded, breaking resistance and reaching a high of 3979. What’s worth watching is not the price increase, but the price reaction after three large orders were executed.
First, look at 3905: a $1.149 million long order was executed, the price stopped falling, then broke through 3940. After the money entered, the price moved accordingly, the support is real.
Next, look at 3950: a $2.3526 million sell-to-close long order was executed, which normally would push the price down, but instead it didn’t fall and rose all the way to 3979. The sell order didn’t create pressure, indicating there was more aggressive buying support below.
But there are counterexamples at the same level. The $2.4 million sell-to-close short order at 3950 and the $7.89 million long order at 3943.63 didn’t stop the pullback. The buy orders were executed but didn’t hold the price.
Putting these four orders together, the conclusion is simple: large orders themselves are not signals; the feedback after execution is what matters. If the price doesn’t fall after a sell order executes, it’s bullish; if it doesn’t rise, selling pressure is effective. If the price doesn’t rise after a buy order executes, it’s bearish; if it stops falling, the support is effective.
Currently, large buy orders are being executed around 3940–3945, playing a supporting role. $PAXG and $XAUT are most closely linked to gold prices and can be watched simultaneously; $BTC follows the same interpretation. One question remains: if the buying at this level is eaten up but the price doesn’t fall, do you see it as support or as someone slowly unloading their position?The Crypto Chessboard After the Midterm Elections: BTC Holds Steady, ETH Experiences Underlying Currents
Before the dust settles on the midterm elections, Trump has temporarily paused strikes against Iran, but geopolitical risks remain. What truly moves the crypto market is the new map of Capitol Hill.
The mainstream expectation points to a "minority majority" rather than a decisive majority—whether losing one or both chambers, a regulatory deadlock is highly likely to continue. The already effective GENIUS Act will not be repealed by the new Congress, while the CLARITY Act fell short in a Senate procedural vote at 49:50 before the election, making its passage in 2026 nearly impossible. If the Democrats take the House, they gain hearing, subpoena, and investigative powers, but not the votes to rewrite laws; the presidential veto remains a firewall, with a very low probability of being overridden by two-thirds. Legislation remains frozen, and regulatory friction shifts from "Congressional legislation" to "committee investigations plus administrative enforcement."
For BTC, the pricing anchors are macro liquidity, dollar credit, and institutional allocation; the distribution of congressional seats does not directly alter these variables. Even if the Democrats sweep, BTC remains the most resilient crypto asset. But ETH is different—it is deeply tied to DeFi, market structure legislation, securities classification, and compliance pathways. The death of the CLARITY Act combined with increased Democratic scrutiny will suppress ETH's valuation elasticity. Under regulatory deadlock, BTC is resilient, ETH is sensitive, and divergence is the main theme.
$BTC $ETH
#美国中期选举进入计票阶段，国会控制权将如何变化？ 🚨 BITCOIN IS NOT NECESSARILY ENTERING A BEAR MARKET!
Selling pressure on $BTC is showing signs of weakening as the current decline is significantly less than previous corrections.
Comparison of 4-week declines:
- November 2025: -30%
- January 2026: -35%
- May 2026: -28%
- Current: -12%
This indicates that selling intensity has decreased, opening the possibility for accumulation and recovery. However, BTC still needs to hold support and confirm a reversal before concluding the downtrend has ended.