Orbit Post Sitemap
I usually start by distinguishing whether on-chain news is about changing the total amount of funds or about changing the direction of funds. Macro liquidity determines whether funds are willing to enter the market, while security costs affect where funds dare to stay after entering. This news leans more towards the latter.
According to PANews citing Scam Sniffer monitoring, within less than 4 hours, about $1.2 million USDT, USDC, and ETH from over 100 wallets on Ethereum and BNB Chain were transferred to the same address, then all exchanged for ETH. This is currently suspected to be theft.
My judgment is that this is bearish for on-chain trust but cannot be directly elevated to a liquidity crisis for the entire market. It involves multiple wallets, which indeed can amplify user unease; however, the funds being exchanged into $ETH only indicates a change in asset form, not that new funds are bullish on Ethereum. I separate security incidents from market buying to avoid being misled by the exchange actions.
Pushing the funding perspective one step further, here is my speculation: if similar incidents continue to occur, large funds may raise their requirements for custody, authorization, and operational processes, and ordinary users may reduce the time their funds stay on-chain. However, at present, this is not enough to conclude a full withdrawal of funds. What macro factor do you care about most right now: US dollar liquidity, interest rate trajectory, or overall risk appetite? How will it affect your reaction to this kind of security news?如果BTC重新冲向8.4万美元，空头可能被迫买回；但在此之前，多头也可能先经历一轮考验。 这轮行情最值得盯的，不是某个神奇目标价，而是杠杆资金会把价格推向哪里。 8万美元附近反复拉锯后，BTC下一步需要证明的，是买盘能否持续跟进。若价格放量突破8.1万—8.15万美元，才有机会继续挑战更高阻力；如果反弹缺乏成交量配合，也可能再次回落。 市场流传的数据显示，8.4万美元附近存在规模可观的空头清算预期。逻辑很简单：空单被强平时，需要买入BTC平仓，这些被动买盘可能进一步放大上涨，形成空头挤压。 但要注意，清算热力图不等于真实挂单，更不代表所有潜在仓位都会在同一价格爆仓。 截至10月28日，另一份公开模型估算的数据，将近期较明显的BTC空头清算聚集区放在8.3万美元附近，规模约数千万美元，而不是直接确认8.4万美元有27亿美元必然清算。 所以，真正值得观察的是三个信号： BTC能否有效站稳8.1万—8.15万美元； 上涨时成交量和现货买盘是否同步增强； 未平仓合约是否异常堆积，避免价格稍有回落就触发反向清算。 空头清算可以成为上涨燃料，却不是上涨的发动机。 没有持续买盘，市场未必能走到清算区SK Hynix's Q3 earnings report is explosive! Can the AI market continue? SK Hynix's Q3 earnings are out, with revenue of 104.62 trillion KRW, a year-on-year increase of 328%; operating profit of 83.33 trillion KRW, a year-on-year increase of about 632%, and an operating margin as high as 80%! This report at least shows that AI storage demand remains strong, and HBM and server memory are still key growth drivers in the industry chain. For the US tech sector, this is a positive signal. Next, we need to watch the earnings reports of tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon to see if they can continue to prove that AI investment is not just burning money. As for BTC and ETH, I am more focused on indirect transmission: whether AI's better-than-expected performance can drive the Nasdaq and semiconductor sectors to strengthen, and whether risk appetite can further recover, is the key. But don't rush to call a reversal. Good tech stock earnings do not necessarily mean the crypto market will rise. Macroeconomic liquidity, the US dollar, and leverage liquidation factors cannot be ignored. The key points to watch next: whether the US stock market can continue the momentum, whether BTC can follow the rise, and whether ETH can catch up. Is this rally a new opportunity brought by fundamentals, or just a short-term emotional rebound? The market will provide the answer. $BTC $ETH # Latest Updates
- Broadcom's $63 billion AI chip financing finalized; Meta increases capital by $25 billion with 5x oversubscription, NVDA and AMD participate. CRWV up 7.9%, NBIS up 11%.
- HOOD Q3 revenue $1.424 billion misses expectations, crypto revenue down 55% YoY, after-hours down 7%; forecast market revenue $173 million, up over 6x YoY, BTC at eighty thousand.
- Israeli election exit polls deadlocked, a rerun will increase uncertainty in US-Israel joint actions; Houthis attack Saudi Arabia's largest oil terminal, Brent crude at $114.2.
- SK Hynix Q3 revenue 104.62 trillion KRW, operating profit 83.33 trillion KRW both exceed expectations; adds 20 trillion KRW buyback, annual dividend at least 30 trillion KRW.
# Trading Analysis
- Maintain conclusion unchanged: AI capital expenditure ROI validation replaces hardware supply as the core contradiction.
- 10-year US Treasury yield oscillates near 5%, SME capital expenditure flat. Israeli election deadlock increases uncertainty, Houthis attack Saudi Arabia's largest oil terminal, Brent crude fluctuates around $114, inflation persists. Focus on Q3 GDP and PCE.
- Broadcom/Meta massive financing boosts semiconductors. HOOD confirms weak crypto macro, Q3 crypto revenue down 55% YoY. ETFs remain resilient.$ZEC is now holding steady around 1312. Why do I say it’s actually safer now than yesterday?
Yesterday, I predicted a resistance zone between 1280-1300. Although there was a liquidation of over 7 million short positions, the bulls broke through strongly and are currently holding at 1312!
Grayscale ETF has ended outflows and turned to a net inflow of over 40 million, with institutions accumulating at low levels.
ZEC has already broken through a key resistance level, and the increase in open interest indicates active buying driving the momentum, with strong upward energy.
My view is that a pullback is an opportunity. The first target is around 1360. If volume expands and it breaks the previous high of 1368, the upside space opens up, directly targeting 1380. As long as it doesn’t break the 1280 support, the bullish trend remains unchanged, so hold steady.
#SK海力士Q3营收首破100万亿韩元 $UNITREE is currently cautious about shorting. Too many people are shorting, and the funding rate reaching 1% indicates strong shorting sentiment. But you have to understand one thing: the move from 60 to 105 is indeed driven by sentiment. The funding rate difference between futures and spot is significant, but you need to understand the sentiment in the big A market. As long as that market doesn't come down, these futures are unlikely to drop either. In this situation, there will definitely be a short squeeze first before it goes down; the shorts will definitely be liquidated first.AI is transforming the Web3 security industry, but the changes may not be what many expect.
Jump Crypto has adjusted the bug reporting rules for the Firedancer client in the Solana ecosystem: researchers must burn 1 SOL, worth about $100, for each report submitted. Even if the report is invalid or duplicate, it will not be refunded.
The reason is practical: a previous audit competition received 809 reports but ultimately identified only 127 unique security issues, with nearly half of the valid reports being duplicates.
AI makes generating code, analyzing vulnerabilities, and writing reports cheaper, but verifying whether a vulnerability is real and exploitable still requires engineers to invest time.
This creates a new contradiction: information production is becoming cheaper, but professional judgment has not decreased in cost accordingly.
This is not just a blockchain problem. In the future, all open security platforms may face a large volume of low-quality information generated by AI.
However, charging fees also has a cost: it can filter out some spam reports but may block researchers who have limited funds but real capability.
A truly effective security mechanism is not about minimizing the number of reports but about enabling truly important vulnerabilities to be discovered, verified, and fixed more quickly. #Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？
Circle's financial report is about to be revealed. The market consensus focus is not on USDC circulation volume, but on how many cents Circle can actually keep from every 1 dollar of revenue.
The problem lies in the structure. Circle's revenue heavily depends on reserve interest (about 95%). Of the $701 million total revenue in Q2, $412.5 million was directly paid as distribution costs to channels—Coinbase alone took $324.6 million. After deducting operating expenses, the revenue for the first half of the year was $1.4 billion, with net profit only about $98 million, retaining about 7 cents per dollar of revenue. The 19% year-on-year growth in USDC scale is real, but the scale growth has not translated proportionally into profit.
The real test lies in both interest rates and competition. For every 100 basis points drop in reserve yield, Circle's reserve income in the next 12 months decreases by about $737 million, distribution costs simultaneously drop by about $360 million, and the net impact remains considerable. Meanwhile, zero-fee stablecoins are emerging; Coinbase is both the largest distribution partner and a competitor's supporter, a contradiction that cannot be avoided.
USDC is a hard asset in the stablecoin track, but Circle's business model means it earns money from "interest spread minus channel tolls." Scale is the face, retention rate is the substance. In the earnings call, management's statements on the proportion of distribution costs and non-interest income such as Arc are more worth watching than the USDC numbers. $BTC $ETH Regarding gold, here are the reasons to buy now:
1. 4000 is a major support level
2. Quality assets won't give you a textbook golden pit, unlike BTC and others, which don't offer technically standard prices
3. The sharp drop in gold last Friday was largely due to the stock market decline; gold was sold off as liquidity, with money flowing into stocks, bonds, etc.
Reasons for a rebound:
1. The Fed is very unlikely to raise rates next week, and the US stock market is generally weak now
The Fed might take a dovish stance and intervene to rescue the market (if the US stock market recovers early and liquidity eases, money will naturally flow back into gold, making its price reasonable and cheap)
2. Early next month, the central bank is expected to issue another notice to increase gold reserves, which will boost market confidence
3. Gold, as a major commodity, will naturally attract bottom-fishers after a significant price drop; consensus is strong, and everyone worldwide knows gold is valuable.
4. With a weakening dollar, gold naturally becomes a better alternative product, and if the US goes to war, for example with Iran, and US foreign exchange assets are frozen, it further strengthens the gold narrative.
I don't think I bought at the absolute bottom, but it's close enough. I've bought this much and won't continue buying. I think this level is reasonable and won't see further sharp declines $XAUT For this FOMC meeting (October 28), the market is highly unanimous in expecting the interest rate to remain unchanged, with the target range continuing to hold at 3.75%–4.00%. The probability of no change is about 90%–96%, as this is the first meeting after the September rate hike, and the decision itself has been fully priced in. 
The real variable is not the rate itself, but the wording of Chairman Kevin Warsh's press conference—especially hints about a December rate hike, and statements on inflation and the labor market. There is no new dot plot this time; the tone will dominate market expectations on whether the "rate hike cycle continues."
Impact on BTC and ETH:
• Neutral/slightly dovish tone: short-term risk appetite rises. BTC has a chance to test resistance above 82,000–83,000, ETH will look to challenge resistance near 2,370.
• Hawkish tone (reinforcing December hike): USD and US Treasury yields strengthen, risk assets come under pressure. BTC may retest support at 78,000–79,000, ETH needs to watch if the key support at 2,280 breaks.
Currently, BTC is oscillating near 80,000, ETH is consolidating in the 2,300–2,350 range. The macro environment (high yields, sticky inflation) remains dominant; after the meeting, combined with tech earnings and PCE data, volatility may increase. The impact of the hold itself is limited; the direction depends on Warsh's wording and subsequent capital flow changes#10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 $ETH $BTC PEPE spot and perpetual contract trading volumes at 09:00 both expanded by about 7 times, but at 10:00 the spot price fell back below the 09:00 closing price. At 09:00, spot trading volume was $3,981,200, closing at 0.0000049187; during the same period, perpetual contract volume was $34,084,100. At 10:00, spot trading volume was still $3,376,800, closing at 0.0000048552.
My judgment is that the rise at 09:00 involved participation from both sides, but the sustained volume increase has not yet resulted in a stable price. Focusing only on the 09:00 price increase tends to overestimate its continuation; the trading volume alone cannot distinguish between active buying and selling, nor can it be used to assert that a squeeze occurred.
I am more concerned whether the next full hour can reclaim 0.0000049187. If it continues to close below that level and spot volume significantly shrinks, I will further downgrade my assessment of this rise. If it climbs back above and maintains trading volume higher than the recent average, then I will consider its continuation.
$PEPE Have you ever experienced this awkward situation: your stuff is locked in a bank safe deposit box, you suddenly need money, but you can't take out the gold bars as collateral? Institutions face the same issue—the assets are very safe with qualified custodians, but if they want to borrow stablecoins from on-chain lending pools, they often have to move the coins out of custody first, and risk control usually vetoes it. What Chainlink (LINK) does is somewhat like appointing an "external referee" for the on-chain world: smart contracts can't see gold prices, inventory, or cross-chain status by themselves, so they rely on oracles to securely feed off-chain data on-chain. Price feeds, proof of reserves, and cross-chain messages (CCIP) are all parts of this business. The plot has been quite intense these past two days. The official blog (October 26) launched CustodySync, with Anchorage Digital as the first partner: institutional assets remain with qualified custodians, proof of reserves synchronizes balances on-chain, and then "receipt tokens" are used as collateral in lending markets—the vault door doesn't open, but the collateralization is done; both sides use the same Chainlink price to calculate LTV (loan-to-value ratio), reducing the "custody says healthy, but on-chain liquidation" miscommunication. The next day, the Hong Kong Gold and Silver Exchange's gold token XGZ (about 1 gram of gold per token) announced integration with CCIP, aiming to enable tokenized gold to move cross-chain. In short, LINK here is more like fixing the "access card for institutional capital entering DeFi": don't move the assets first, align the data first. I think CustodySync is more practical than just shouting TVL; however, first launch doesn't meanYesterday I thought that Canada's ban on stablecoin yields was a blanket ban: no matter the name, any return was not allowed. Today, after carefully reading Article 14 of the draft disclosed on October 27, I realized I misunderstood—it’s not that Canada forbids rewards, but rather it splits the rewards into two halves: those linked to an actual consumption transaction are allowed, while those linked purely to holding without spending are not. This distinction is actually easy to understand. The draft’s original logic is: cashback given only after a payment is made and the merchant transaction is completed is not considered interest; but returns calculated based on the balance and holding time in a wallet count as holding yields, even if they are called points, rights, or membership benefits. In other words, regulators focus not on what the activity is called, but on what behavior the money is actually paid for. I set three rules for myself to quickly evaluate cashback activities: First, look at the trigger point. Does the cashback only arrive after a successful payment? If you get cashback without spending, or the less you spend the more you get back, be cautious. Second, look at the calculation method. Is cashback calculated per transaction, or based on average balance, minimum balance, or holding days in the wallet? The latter is basically the holding yield formula, and changing the name doesn’t change its nature. Third, look at additional conditions. The easiest pitfall is mixed types: for example, 1% cashback per transaction, but only if you maintain a minimum balance for 30 consecutive days. The draft does not provide an automatic safe harbor for such mixed activities, meaning that “consumption cashback” with holding thresholds cannot be assumed to be compliant consumption rewards. There is also one detail worth noting 作为 Meme 币的鼻祖，狗狗币（DOGE）的行情预测已经脱离了传统加密资产的价值评估逻辑，演变为一场关于“全球散户情绪、马斯克言论以及地缘宏观流动性”的博弈。 近期，DOGE 在价格走势上经历了从剧烈波动到高位承压的过渡。以下为您奉上客观、多维度的 DOGE 最新行情预测分析与独家见解。 一、 核心影响因素与催化剂 1. 机构合规化进程：ETF 的长效催化剂 21Shares 已经在纳斯达克推出了 DOGE ETF (TDOG)，这为 DOGE 带来了前所未有的合规资金通道。 • 见解： ETF 的上市不仅是价格的强心剂，更改变了 DOGE 的玩家结构。过去 DOGE 完全由高风险偏好的散户驱动，而现在它正逐步被纳入一部分投机性机构的资产配置组合中。 2. “马斯克效应”的边际递减与质变 埃隆·马斯克依然是 DOGE 最核心的“喊单者”。随着他在政府效率部（D.O.G.E）等政治与商业活动中的深度参与，DOGE 频繁成为焦点。 • 见解： 市场对马斯克“随口一句推特”的兴奋感正在边际递减，单纯的口头喊单很难再引发过去动辄几倍的暴涨。未来的质变点在于 X（原推特）支付系统的实质性落地。#Meta financing increased to $97.5 billion, NVIDIA subscribed for $3 billion
The boss has something to say
Meta raised the first phase of financing from $35 billion to $37.5 billion, with a subsequent maximum addition of $60 billion, bringing the total pot to $97.5 billion. NVIDIA directly subscribed for $3 billion, while AMD and Broadcom are also watching. All the money is poured into AI data centers and computing power.
I think this is the most blatant manifestation of the AI capital closed loop. Chip suppliers invest in Meta on one hand and sell computing power equipment to it on the other. NVIDIA pays to buy customers, and customers use the money to buy cards. Isn't this stepping on your own feet? Some ask in the comments whether this can bring enough returns; I think it's very difficult. Meta's annual capital expenditure has already soared to $145 billion, free cash flow has turned negative, and now it has to rely on debt issuance and additional shares to fill the gap. This kind of hard-bound model will have severe backlash once computing power demand slows down.
The market reaction is subtle. NVDA rose slightly by 0.12%, META up 0.27%, AMD up 0.84%. Funds are watching, and no one dares to chase high deeply.
It's indirectly bearish for crypto. With giants absorbing so much capital, market liquidity is severely drained, and BTC lacks external increments.
BTC took a waterfall drop last night; now let's see if the 80,000 level can hold. If it doesn't hold, expect a deeper correction, with resistance above at 84,000 to 85,000. Don't chase the rise or kill the fall; just set your stop losses well.
The above analysis is time-sensitive; orders must have stop losses set. Good luck. $BTC $ETH $ZEC When I guide newcomers through market trends, I often remind them: first convert price fluctuations into whether your account can withstand them. According to Bloomberg, after Bitcoin's summer rebound, the upward momentum has faded, now retreating to around $80,000, facing continuous sell-offs during the push toward $100,000.
Buyers' costs over the past two years have concentrated at $87,000 and above; the nearby break-even selling pressure has suppressed rebounds twice this year, each followed by at least a 25% pullback. My judgment is that this information is more useful for risk management of leveraged positions than for predicting the next directional move.
📌 Here's a simple example for newcomers: if you enter at $87,000 and it drops to $80,000, the asset's decline is about 8%. But with leverage, the loss proportion borne by your account equity is amplified; whether you can hold on until a rebound depends on margin, position size, and maintenance margin requirements—you can't just rely on whether you "got the big direction right."
There are two reasons here: cost concentration zones meeting break-even exits tend to form rebound resistance; and leveraged positions might hit liquidation thresholds while waiting for a breakout, never getting to see the judgment play out. The most common mistake newcomers make is treating "a previous 25% drop" as the ceiling for this pullback, or even as a basis for adding margin.
I treat these price levels as clues to observe selling pressure, not as scripts that must repeat; direction can be slowly verified, but don't lose room in your position first.💻 According to code review practices, I first look at the input: The investigation of Zilliqa with external security companies is still ongoing, and CEO Alexander Zahnd has resigned. The X-Bridge and ZRC2 proxy contracts used by some pools are affected, but native $ZIL and the Zilliqa EVM network are not affected.
My judgment: This time, the focus should be on how to verify the rectification rather than personnel changes. The boundary of impact determines the scope of investigation; the entire network cannot be treated as a single fault domain. Rotating operational keys is a remediation action but cannot alone prove that the vulnerability has been fixed. The investigation is not finished, so the root cause judgment cannot be directly "merged and deployed."
If I were to revise the response process, I would disclose the impact list, repair verification, and recovery conditions separately to avoid users misreading "not affected" as "usable everywhere." Currently, the official still requires not using X-Bridge and the affected pools. Please help me review: before recovery, which verification result should be disclosed most? What is missing in my acceptance logic?On the eve of Microsoft's earnings report, the real question isn't how much profit was made, but when the money from AI will be recouped.
On October 28, Microsoft is set to release its new quarterly results. The market expects revenue of about $90.6 billion and earnings per share of about $4.71. But I think what’s more worth watching than these two numbers is Azure’s growth and AI capital expenditure.
Recently, the US stock AI sector has become active again, with funds willing to pay for future growth. The question is, as computing power investment grows, can profit realization keep pace?
My judgment is that Microsoft relying solely on earnings beating expectations may not be enough to sustain a strong stock price.
If Azure’s growth accelerates, AI business revenue improves, and management provides convincing profit guidance, the market will have reason to raise valuations again.
Conversely, if capital expenditure continues to expand but cloud business growth shows no clear improvement, even with strong revenue, beware of a post-earnings spike followed by a decline.
This time, I’m not rushing to guess the rise or fall; I want to see how much premium the market is willing to pay for AI’s future.
Optimism before the earnings report does not equal certainty after it. To summarize yesterday's thoughts, I said SanDisk rising to 1380 and Hynix to 1080 both have a profit margin of about 10%.
Crude oil shorted at 103, seeing 98-99, with a low drop to 99.5.
Bitcoin is preparing to consider shorting at 82200-83000 but hasn't reached the range yet.
From the moment Anthropic's profits burst the AI bubble, I knew SanDisk and Hynix would rise.
The core reason is that AI capital investment peaked earlier + contract liquidations fell too sharply, and the panic selling was too fierce, causing excessive downside, so any positive news will trigger a rebound to repair.
The rebound is a window before the midterm elections, not a signal to chase highs.
1. On the AI storage side:
After a short-term surge, don't chase the rise. SanDisk faces strong resistance in the 1420-1450 range, and Hynix's resistance is at 1150-1180, both previous high-volume zones, easy to pull back upon touching. Capital is very likely to reduce positions before the elections, and risk-off sentiment will come quickly.
2. On the Bitcoin side:
The Nasdaq recovery and AI sector takeoff have just driven Bitcoin to surge near 81000 last night. The higher the rebound, the better the short entry. The main entry timing is still 82200-83000. Crude oil's macro pressure hasn't eased, and midterm election uncertainty remains. Risk-off decline is still in play.
Take profits on this 10% rebound in AI storage; just don't mistake the repair rebound for a reversal signal.BTC surged to $80,800 then pulled back, with 874,000 coins locked above forming a strong resistance — rotation hasn't started yet, funds are just hesitating at the door.
$BTC: $80,878. After peaking at $80,819, it faced pressure and retreated to the Bollinger middle band. The $81,000 to $82,500 range concentrates about 874,000 BTC cost basis here; after breaking below $81,300, this level has turned from support into resistance. Above $87,000, locked positions have twice suppressed rallies this year. Although ETF funds saw a single-day inflow of $110 million, mainly concentrated in IBIT, other products remained mostly flat. Full recovery of spot demand is yet to be confirmed.
$ETH: $2,354.85. BTC dominance is 60.49%, still 2.5 percentage points above the 58% threshold that would trigger altcoin rotation. ETH is more passively following BTC rather than acting as an independent rotation driver.
$SOL: $101.54. The SOL/BTC rate did not hit new highs during BTC's surge. Earlier inflation reduction proposals have been priced in advance; currently, SOL is in a consolidation phase after clearing positive news.
Summary: As long as BTC dominance doesn't fall below 58%, rotation is a false premise. Funds haven't exited but haven't dispersed either — waiting for macro signals to provide the next direction.
#BTC冲高回落，市场轮动开始了吗？ Solana (SOL) real-time price: approximately $101
As of today, SOL is trading near $101, with a slight 24-hour increase of about 0.4%, following the overall market trend but lacking independent momentum.
· Ecosystem fundamentals show highlights but struggle to translate into price: Solana's on-chain RWA market cap has grown from $700 million to $4.3 billion within a year, and third-quarter application revenue increased about 48% quarter-over-quarter to $299 million. However, revenue heavily depends on trading activity, and ecosystem growth has yet to convert into a clear price breakout.
· ETF funds continue to bleed: SOL spot ETFs have seen net outflows for three consecutive weeks, with about $8.23 million withdrawn on October 26 alone, mainly contributed by Bitwise's BSOL. Without a shift in capital flow, technical positives are unlikely to independently support the market.
· Key technical levels: SOL is currently caught between the 50-day moving average (around $106) and the 200-day moving average (around $98). The $95–$100 range below is the last demand zone; breaking below it could open up a larger downside.
· Macro pressure: The Federal Reserve announced its interest rate decision today, with the market expecting no change, but the liquidity-scarce environment for altcoins is unlikely to improve in the short term.
In summary: Ecosystem data is not bad, but with continuous ETF fund outflows and macro uncertainty, SOL is precarious around the $100 mark. Holding above $95 is the bottom line. An $ETH OG associated with #EthereumFoundation sold 7,594 $ETH (worth $17.79 million) after being inactive for a year.
This OG bought 200,000 $ETH during the ICO at $0.31 each (costing $61,000) and received 42,654 $ETH from #EthereumFoundation when the $ETH trading price was $13.82. Lookonchain Weekly Report for October 19-25, 2026: Funds Are Flowing Out of the Market.
Stablecoin prices have dropped, decentralized exchange trading volumes have decreased, but only publicly listed companies continue steadily accumulating Bitcoin.
• Stablecoin market capitalization decreased by $2.19 billion.
• Compared to the previous week, spot trading volume on DEXs fell by 12.21%, and per-share trading volume dropped by 8.59%.
• Protocol revenue declined by 10.57%, while Central City’s revenue astonishingly increased by 14,393%.
• Two publicly listed companies collectively purchased an additional 6,202 Bitcoins ($494.23 million).
• This strategy neither bought nor sold Bitcoin this week, while Bitmine additionally acquired 10,452 Ethereum ($24.13 million).
I believe the nearly $2.2 billion outflow from the stablecoin market is a bad sign; funds are leaving the market and have not yet returned. However, since enterprises are still steadily accumulating, I think the market bottom should not be far off. It’s just that retail investors feel discouraged, leading to a drop in trading volume. I’m not ready to go all in yet; I will wait for a reversal in stablecoin fund flows before making a decision.
People are speculating whether funds have truly been withdrawn or are just waiting to see the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee’s moves. $BTC Ripple has obtained the U.S. national trust bank license, and XRP only rose a little over 2 points this morning.
On October 26, the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency gave Ripple the final approval for the national trust bank.
It can manage RLUSD reserves and do digital asset custody, but it cannot accept deposits or make loans.
RLUSD currently has a market value of about $2.5 billion.
XRP was around 1.33 this morning, up about 2.7% in 24 hours.
I think this license directly benefits RLUSD, not XRP.
Transferring RLUSD on Ethereum doesn't require XRP, and on the XRP ledger it only consumes a small amount of fees.
So a 2-point rise is reasonable; the market doesn't see this as a big positive for XRP.
The Fed's interest rate decision is tonight, and PCE inflation data comes tomorrow night; chasing news now isn't worthwhile.
I choose to observe, not chase.
If it breaks and holds above 1.40, which is last week's high, it means funds are truly repricing the bank license, and my judgment would be wrong.
If it falls back below 1.27, it means this news has already been fully priced in.
Do you think this license will ultimately benefit XRP, or only RLUSD?
A. Yes, it will eventually affect XRP
B. No, these are two separate matters
$XRP
#XRP #Ripple #FedRateDecision Attendance sheet: Only one person clocks in daily. On the 27th, 305.81 BTC spot coins were bought, with the entire family inactive; two days ago, only one family moved 1376.78 coins, volume shrank by nearly 80%. Detailed breakdown: which family bought how many coins, no total number tricks. Every day one family moves, switching families, sporadic probing, not collective. The foundation hasn't collapsed: 721,800 coins, daily 300 is just a drizzle, no sign of a run. Market: BTC hovers above 80,000, ETH hovers, SOL holds 100, ZEC leads with nearly 6%. The whole network is evenly split, liquidations at 149 million, no heavy bets. FOMC decision comes early Thursday, everyone waits calmly with over 700,000 coins; short-term no chasing, no second family following as a probe. Conditions: I will acknowledge only if multiple families buy for two consecutive days and volume returns to thousands; if single-day turns negative with multiple families selling together, first reduce positions.Brothers, just by looking at the liquidation data, you can immediately understand how exhausting the current market is.
BTC's total network liquidations in the past 24 hours are less than 80 million, which is not even close to the scale of previous liquidation events that often reached billions. Considering the recent ETF fund fluctuations (BlackRock standing alone, FBTC/ARKB outflows), October still shows a net outflow overall. The macro expectation of "higher interest rates lasting longer" is suppressing the market, and with the FOMC decision just around the corner, both bulls and bears are waiting and watching. ETH is no different; the 80,000 level is crowded with leverage but no big moves are happening.
What does this mean? Whether long or short, neither side can make a significant move. No one can completely crush the opponent, so there’s no big surge or plunge. Simply put, it’s just existing funds tugging back and forth inside, with no new money coming in from outside. BTC is oscillating between 80,450 and 81,300, sweeping stop losses back and forth, specifically targeting those playing with high leverage.
This kind of market is the most frustrating—looks like it’s about to break out but then turns back down. Don’t open positions frequently during this phase, and keep leverage light. Grinding sideways is the easiest way to break your mindset and lose money repeatedly without realizing it. Be patient and wait; only when liquidation scale expands (like when the FOMC shoe drops) can we expect a decent market move. $SOL is also dragged down by the overall environment, and altcoins have an even harder time holding up. $BTC $ETH $ZEC Meme coins were once Solana's "stress test" to prove its high throughput and low-cost capabilities. Now that their share has significantly declined, it indicates that on-chain activity is "deflating," which is beneficial for the long-term narrative. However, the issue is whether stable, high-quality trading volume can pick up after speculative trading decreases. Currently, we see a clear drop in the share of perpetual contracts, while specialized derivative chains like Hyperliquid continue to dominate the on-chain perps space.
On-chain perps are a high-value, high-friction market that demands extremely low latency, deep market making, and robust risk engines. Solana has long led in spot DEXs but has lagged relatively behind in perps. Its share dropped from 17% to 6%, reflecting both the decline in leveraged trading after the Meme craze and the fact that Solana's perp platforms have not significantly expanded their advantage against Hyperliquid. Some historically high trading volumes may also include points/airdrop farming components, so the real organic trading volume needs to be viewed more soberly.
Institutional progress is indeed underway: stablecoins, tokenized assets, and payment settlements have all made tangible advances. Solana's speed and cost advantages are attractive for institutional high-frequency settlements and tokenized stocks/assets. However, current price pressure and ETF outflows indicate the market is waiting for more solid "non-speculative" revenue and user stickiness. The overall crypto market downturn also amplifies the growing pains during this transition period.When I look at prediction markets in the crypto space, if I encounter messages like "it's already decided internally," I first check what conditions they use for settlement. Does a project announcement count, or only when the feature actually goes live? This is really different from just watching the coin price rise and fall. Even if the news is true, it doesn't necessarily correspond to the outcome in the question. When the odds move, I can't tell if it's insider money coming in or if everyone is just convinced by that screenshot. And of course, the screenshot often has the source cropped out, which is just annoying. 89.65 亿美元，环比增长 51%，非 GAAP 每股收益 39.25 美元，高于市场预期的 34.96 美元。全年营收 202.48 亿美元，同比增长 175%，已经不是普通的业绩增长，而是存储行业景气度明显回升的体现。 第四季度数据中心营收达到 29.77 亿美元，环比增长 103%，AI 基础设施建设对高性能存储的需求正在转化为实际收入。同时，公司预计下一季度营收将达到 103 亿至 108 亿美元，业绩增长暂时还没有看到明显放缓的信号。 不过也要注意，闪迪的增长不仅来自出货量，还受到存储产品涨价推动。如果后续价格上涨放缓，或者 AI 资本开支不及预期，利润率也可能承压。 闪迪的基本面确实强，但股价能否继续上涨，还要看下一份财报能不能再次超预期。公司计划于 10 月 29 日公布 2027 财年第一季度业绩，这才是接下来值得重点关注的催化剂。 对于这类已经大幅上涨的 AI 存储股，我更倾向于关注业绩兑现和回调后的机会，而不是单纯追逐财报利好。 #闪迪MSCI调仓生效，NAND估值受关注 A 30 million retracement is no cause for panic; first, look at the whale's moat
This bullish whale has a 30 million floating profit retracement in 24 hours, with three long positions shrinking: BTC retraced 12.8 million, ETH retraced 9.2 million, SOL retraced 8 million. On the surface, it looks pressured, but don't rush to call it dangerous — this whale has accumulated profits exceeding 220 million USD at the bottom of this round, so the retracement is just profit-taking, not a capital emergency.
Looking at the base: BTC long 1,850 coins, nominal 150 million, 4x leverage, average price 64,200; ETH long 78,000 coins, nominal 180 million, 4x leverage, average price 3,180; SOL long 550,000 coins, nominal 56 million, 5x leverage, average price 132. Total nominal nearly 400 million, low leverage, able to withstand volatility.
Looking at stop-loss: BTC about 48,000, ETH about 2,100, SOL about 85, regular shakeouts unlikely to hit the bottom line. It bets on trend continuation with low leverage, not high leverage risking everything.
Conclusion: There are whale long positions supporting the bottom, but the real test is not the retracement, but whether macro liquidity turns. Whether to follow or not, don't just focus on price fluctuations; first look at risk control boundaries.
BTC ETH SOL #ThisWeekFocus November Nonfarm Data #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #MiddleEastSituationEasing #CanCrudeOilCrashBenefitRiskAssets?From 25 million to 1.5 billion USD: What are the "necessary conditions" for CORE coin to hit the $1 mark?
Currently, the circulating supply of CORE is about 1.5 billion tokens, priced at $0.017, with a market cap of approximately 25 million USD; to reach $1, the market cap needs to expand to 1.5 billion USD, requiring multiple conditions to be met simultaneously, none of which can be missing. Necessary condition ①: Network security stabilizes
Independent validators stop withdrawing, their numbers rebound, and the market re-recognizes the security of the Satoshi Plus consensus. Only when the risk of network decentralization is eliminated will large Bitcoin holders dare to stake BTC on a large scale into the Core ecosystem, which is the foundation of the BTCFi narrative.
Necessary condition ②: Ghost chip sell pressure is absorbed
69 million ghost chips cannot be dumped in a concentrated manner during the price rise; the chips must be gradually absorbed by the market to eliminate the largest unpredictable sell pressure bomb on the way up. Necessary condition ③: Core products launch, revenue flywheel runs, SatPay officially goes live, on-chain fees and buyback mechanisms are implemented, no longer relying solely on narrative; ecosystems like Middle East's Nawa Finance continue to bring new BTC staking funds, and TVL achieves significant growth. Necessary condition ④: BTCFi sector bull market + winning competition in the sector
BTCFi becomes the main theme of this bull market, CORE competes with rivals like Babylon and Stacks to capture a large market share and attract institutional capital entry. Conclusion first: $INTC is up 4.5% today, but the trouble with tokenized stocks isn't the market—26 US-listed companies have formally opposed others tokenizing their stocks, up from 9 two weeks ago, meaning about 41% of 62 companies have withdrawn.
Announcement on 10-27: ICE and OKX's US holding company joint venture OKXICE added Intel, Oracle, IBM, and IonQ to the list of opponents.
The key sentence to note: Tokens represent a claim right against the real stocks held by a third-party tokenizer through a registered broker; whether your self-custodied tokens count as client property and are protected by SIPC if the broker goes bankrupt is uncertain.
Your X-tokenized stocks on OKX are a different matter: OKX's announcement states they are provided by xStocks, running on Solana and X Layer, and do not represent equity ownership.
Wallet accounting: $INTC perpetual 24h trading volume is 230,000 contracts ≈ $20.9 million, while XINTC spot turnover is only $1.02 million, a 20x difference.
My judgment: The bottleneck is no longer whether stocks can be put on-chain, but who is qualified to package your stocks. Ask three questions first: who truly custodies the real stocks, whether broker bankruptcy counts as client property, and whether LPs can withdraw anytime.
Would you hold a token with an unclear claim right just for 24-hour trading? $INTC Chip stocks are being sold, essentials are being bought. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index dropped about 12% in a month, with a maximum drawdown close to 15%. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 itself fell less than 1%. Is that surprising? Not really—the index is being carried by big tech like Nvidia, while most stocks are actually rising. The equal-weighted S&P rose 2.5%, while the regular S&P fell 0.9%. September was still a win for the giants, but in October, ordinary stocks led by four points. Such a monthly reversal is rare even when looking back to 1990. $SPY Where did the money go? Energy rose 13%, consumer staples rose 9%. Pools, RVs, yachts—things no one mentioned before, all performed well last week. $QQQ Now stuck in a midterm election year. Historically, this year is the weakest for the stock market, but late October often marks a phase low; in the year after the election, the S&P has risen 19 times. However, in 2018, it kept falling until just before Christmas, so these patterns are only references, not signals. $NVDA To put it simply: it’s not necessarily that AI is over, it’s more like a style shift—from a few giants to a broader market. Going forward, watch two things: whether it can hold by month-end, and whether chips will continue to drag. #ThisWeekOctoberFOMCRateDecisionWillBeAnnounced Galaxy announces the end of the bear market in June! Are Bitcoin bears really going to be proven wrong this time? $BTC
The market is still debating whether Bitcoin has entered a bear market, but Galaxy Research has made a rather bold judgment: the Bitcoin bear market may have already ended in June.
Galaxy's reasons include: $BTC reclaiming the 50-week moving average, a slowdown in selling by long-term holders, and macro background changes brought by the continuous rise of U.S. debt.
These signals together are indeed worth serious study.
First, the reduction in selling by long-term holders means the potential selling pressure in the market may be easing. Second, if Bitcoin can sustain above the 50-week moving average, the medium to long-term trend has a chance to gradually improve.
As for the U.S. debt issue, it reinforces some investors' demand for allocation to scarce assets, but this does not necessarily mean that a weaker dollar or increased debt will inevitably drive $BTC higher.
What I dislike most is the market declaring the bull market over whenever prices fall, and immediately announcing a new super bull market whenever prices rise. The market is not that simple; truly valuable judgments must tell you both the reasons to be bullish and the reasons why that view might be wrong #10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 #SK海力士Q3营收首破100万亿韩元 #RobinhoodQ3营收增长，净利润下降 Core Trader 100 (0x82f6bb…512ec) closed all $SOXL short positions with 10x leverage, realizing a loss of $35,742.42. This position has already exited, but what I’m more interested in studying is: can the loss exit be written into a rule in advance? 🤖
If I were to write it as a strategy, I would first try this: "If the price moves 2% against the entry price, close all positions, no temporary relaxation." This is a hypothetical condition I’m researching for myself; it doesn’t mean this address follows it, nor that 2% is the optimal parameter.
The average entry price was $100.1526, the exit price was $102.6687, the price moved approximately 2.51% against the position upwards. Roughly calculating with 10x leverage, the margin-level loss is about 25.1%, excluding fees and other impacts. My judgment is that leveraged positions should first set a loss budget before discussing directional confidence; otherwise, small price deviations can turn into big wounds.
The advantage of this rule is that the exit condition is clear, reducing the "wait a bit longer" bargaining. The drawbacks are obvious: a fixed 2% is not suitable for all volatility environments and may cause frequent stop losses; if slippage occurs, the actual loss may exceed the budget.
I’m still struggling with how to set the threshold. If you were to write this short position exit condition, would you choose a 2% price reversal or a 20% margin loss? Would you add a volatility condition as well? After ETH surged to $2700, it quickly retreated, with staking volume hitting a new high of 43.16 million tokens, but spot ETFs saw a net outflow of nearly $90 million in a single day. On-chain tokens are increasingly locked up, yet on-exchange funds are withdrawing, exposing a severe divergence in capital flow during this rally.
$ETH is quoted at 2,356.14. Staking accounts for nearly 36%, but the yield has dropped to around 2.46%, unable to retain hot money in a high-interest environment. ETF outflows indicate institutions are cashing out short-term, and the historical selling pressure above 2700 requires stronger incremental volume to absorb.
$BTC is quoted at 80,899.9. The largest marginal buyer on the enterprise side (Strategy) has paused additional purchases and shifted to repurchasing preferred shares. The high interest rate environment raises the opportunity cost of non-interest-bearing assets, and the repeated tug-of-war around the 80,000 mark reflects macroeconomic pressure.
$SOL is quoted at 101.56. Recently, about 480,000 SOL were transferred by whales to exchanges, indicating real selling pressure. As a high-beta asset, before macro uncertainties settle, the $100 level is easily dragged down by the broader market.
Summary
Staking lock-up is a slow variable, ETF outflow is a fast signal. When staking yields fail to outperform risk-free rates, locked tokens cannot prevent capital from exiting for risk aversion before macro conditions stabilize. Under this divergence, defense is paramount.
#ETH冲高2700美元，质押与资金面现分化 🚨 Robinhood's performance hits a record high, but its crypto business has been slashed significantly! Where has the trading heat in the crypto world gone?
Robinhood's latest earnings report is out! Q3 total net revenue reached $1.42 billion, up 12% year-over-year, setting a new single-quarter record; net profit, however, fell 14% year-over-year. The most notable point is that crypto trading revenue was only $120 million, a sharp 55% year-over-year drop, with trading volume down 38%.
🧠 Simply put: not all business is cooling down; rather, users' money and attention are shifting elsewhere. As crypto trading cools, event contracts, stocks, and options are heating up, indicating the platform's revenue is no longer solely supported by crypto trading. Meanwhile, Robinhood's self-built chain's first full quarter of DEX trading volume exceeded $80 billion, with on-chain fees surpassing $50 million. Traditional trading platforms are also accelerating their on-chain deployments.
🔥 My take: The most interesting aspect of this earnings report is the simultaneous "decline in crypto trading revenue" and "expansion of on-chain business." In the short term, weakening retail trading enthusiasm may pressure market sentiment; in the long term, the platform is still competing for the gateway to on-chain trading and asset tokenization.
So don't just be bearish because of revenue decline, nor be bullish just because on-chain data looks good. What really needs watching is when funds return to crypto trading and whether on-chain growth can translate into sustained real demand. 👀$DOGE $ETH $XAU 两笔钱正在讲同一个故事，但大多数人只盯着价格看。链上数据显示，自10月12日以来大额地址累计增持约6亿枚$DOGE，而0.081美元附近聚集了约360亿枚的成交筹码；几乎同一时间，资管机构SIGFIG披露其客户在三季度增持了约7300万美元的比特币ETF，资金来自富国银行、Citizens、桑坦德和瑞银等银行的零售账户。一个是巨鲸在链上悄悄加仓，一个是传统银行渠道的客户资金持续渗入，两条路径指向的其实是同一件事：增量资金正在从不同入口进入这个市场。 真正值得琢磨的不是谁买得更多，而是资金性质的差异。$DOGE这一端是典型的大户行为，筹码在特定价格带高度集中，意味着0.081美元已经从普通成交区变成了多空双方的成本分界线；$BTC那一端则是资管渠道的配置需求，散户资金通过银行平台间接持有ETF，这种买盘节奏慢、黏性高，不会因为一根阴线就撤退。两种资金一快一慢，恰好构成市场结构的两个支点。 但这里有个容易被忽略的时间差。SIGFIG的数据属于三季度，反映的是几个月前的配置动作，不能直接等同于当下的新增买盘；而$DOGE的增持是10月12日之后的链上变化，时效性更强。把两者混为一谈，很容易得 ETH，已于3小时前全部转入交易所，价值1159 万美元。该巨鲸 11年前花费 3.1万美元通过 ICO 认购10万枚 ETH，此前曾以每枚5.47美元卖出5万枚，目前还持有4.5 万枚 ETH，价值约1.05亿美元；此次以每权 2320美元卖出 5000 枚 ETH。#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC $ETH $CORE decentralized block production is one thing. Having the same group controlling partnerships, the Maple lawsuit (settled under confidentiality, with no public benefit to holders), chaotic reward issuance, and a large amount of remaining distribution exit on one side while handing over a depleted token to the community is another.
You have ignored fundamental issues about liquidity, token distribution, and accountability for months. Contributors quietly remove Core from their profiles, and the price hovers near historic lows. This does not look like a planned handover but more like an exit. Independent validators running blocks do not transfer control over the remaining contributors, reserves, and treasury tokens, which can still influence the market.
If this is truly community-led now, then disclose wallet-level transparency of the remaining distribution and stop treating silence + slogans as progress. Otherwise, this is just the latest repackaging of damage caused by an escape.Today, October 28, the market will face two important policy decisions: the Bank of Canada will announce its interest rate decision and monetary policy report, and the Federal Reserve will announce its interest rate decision and hold a press conference. Ajian will directly guide everyone through a quick judgment framework and position suggestions:
First, you need to know that the market is not only concerned about whether the interest rate changes this time; in fact, most of it has already been anticipated and priced in. The main focus is still on the assessment of inflation, economic growth, and the future policy path. Because even if the central bank keeps the interest rate unchanged, if the statement or press conference releases stronger inflation concerns, the market may still reprice the future rate cut space, and crypto assets will directly come under pressure; conversely, even if there is no immediate rate cut, as long as the policy guidance is more moderate than market expectations, it may ease the pressure on risk assets.
So today, key points to observe are:
1. How the Federal Reserve describes inflation risks
2. Whether there is any change in the description of the future policy path
3. The actual reaction of the US dollar and US Treasury yields after the decision
4. Whether BTC follows risk assets or shows an independent trend
It is especially important to note that although the overall market is showing a rebound trend driven by $BTC, before the decision is announced, all of this can only be regarded as market expectations and does not represent trend confirmation. Remember, truly valuable trading opportunities often lie not in guessing a number correctly but in judging the gap between the final result and market expectations.
That is all, DYOR# The October FOMC interest rate decision will be announced this week After the $HOOD Q3 earnings report, I went long.
Revenue hit a record $1.424 billion, adjusted EPS of 0.60 beat expectations. Net profit declined mainly due to a $67 million unrealized loss, not an issue with the core business.
Bullish points lie in the structure: prediction market revenue $173 million, surpassing crypto for the first time; options up 31%, Gold subscriptions hit a new high of 5.2 million, net inflows $16 billion. Robinhood Chain earned $26 million in its first quarter.
Shares fell 5.5% after hours to $89; I think the market only focused on profit, not the structure. Prediction market + Gold + Chain are the real growth engines for HOOD's next phase.
Small position long, stop loss if it falls below 85. #RobinhoodQ3营收增长，净利润下降 $SKHY Report Time: 2026-10-28 10:40 (Beijing Time) | Earnings Release: 2026-10-28 Pre-market (Seoul) | Data as of the release date
1. Key Conclusions
Partially exceeded expectations: both revenue and operating profit surpassed estimates, while net profit was significantly below. Revenue surpassed 100 trillion KRW for the first time, operating profit exceeded the most aggressive institutional forecasts; however, net profit (including Kioxia investment book fluctuations) was about 33% below consensus. Market reaction was positive (KOSPI +2.2% at open, SK Hynix up nearly 3%), but the stock price has retraced nearly 60% from the June high. The key focus is on the sustainability of HBM price increases in 2027 rather than the current quarter's figures.
2. Actual vs Market Expectations (Q3 2026, K-IFRS, unaudited)
Metric Actual Market Consensus Result
Operating Revenue 104.62 trillion KRW 98.2~98.96 trillion ✅ Exceeded expectations (first time over 100 trillion, +32% QoQ, +328% YoY)
Operating Profit 83.33 trillion KRW 77.5 trillion (aggressive forecast 80.1 trillion) ✅ Exceeded expectations (+38% QoQ, +632% YoY, operating margin 80%)
Net Profit 39.78 trillion KRW 59.66 trillion ❌ About 33% below (YoY +216%, QoQ -58%)
Note: The net profit shortfall is mainly due to non-operating factors such as the Kioxia investment.From a macro perspective, I am more concerned about whether new funds are entering the market rather than which story is running fast. PANews, citing SoSoValue data, reported that the crypto sector generally rose, with the Meme sector up 3.78% in 24 hours, the NFT sector up 3.32%; the news headline also mentioned that the AI sector fell more than 6%.
My judgment is that this is not enough to be considered a signal of a comprehensive liquidity warming. Sector gains are not net capital inflows and cannot be equated directly; the strength of Meme and weakness of AI also indicate that risk appetite is not expanding synchronously. My speculation is that if it is just existing funds switching hotspots, then local excitement can last for a while but may not support the valuation of the entire market.
I tend to view this as a structural market rather than hastily labeling the macro environment as "loosening." Going forward, I will watch whether capital inflows can continue, so as not to mistake fund relocation for new money entering the market. But it's still too early to judge a reversal. BTC spot and futures are both seeing short-term synchronized inflows, ETH leverage funds are replenishing more noticeably, while SOL is supported by spot but futures are still retreating. BTC spot net inflow over 4 hours is $111 million, futures net inflow is $36.18 million. Over 24 hours, spot net inflow is $179 million, but futures net outflow is $92.74 million. The 30-day futures net outflow has expanded to $7.83 billion, indicating short-term buying has returned, but mid-term deleveraging is not over yet. ETH spot net inflow over 4 hours is $51.64 million, futures net inflow is $221 million. Over 24 hours, spot net inflow is $87.02 million, futures net inflow is $185 million. However, the 30-day spot net outflow is $3.77 billion, and futures net outflow is $8.29 billion. Short-term replenishment strength is stronger than BTC, but mid-term capital structure remains weak. SOL spot net inflow over 4 hours is $8.66 million, futures net inflow is $4.53 million. Over 24 hours, spot net inflow is $23.7 million, but futures net outflow is $58.94 million. The 30-day futures cumulative net outflow is $2.17 billion, indicating spot is being supported, but leverage funds remain cautious about the rebound. BTC short-term funds are flowing back, ETH futures funds are rushing in, and SOL spot support is most obvious. It currently looks more like a replenishment of funds after continuous retreat, not a trend reversal yet. Continue to watch if the rebound can bring sustained increments; otherwise, there is still a risk of pullback after a rally. Don't get scared to the point of peeing yourself by this news.
Dropping such explosive news about an imminent war right before the election is a typical politician's tactic, deliberately creating panic to pull votes.
Look, the news even says Trump himself hasn't signed anything yet; this is just all talk and no action.
If a real war breaks out, oil prices will skyrocket, and inflation in the US will explode—how could the election even happen then?
So most likely, this is just a lot of noise with little action, extreme pressure to force Iran to back down.
If you're scared and start cutting losses or chasing high prices in gold and oil, chances are the big players are using the news to scalp retail investors. Don't scare yourself unnecessarily.🔍 After losing, the position was completely closed at once. Is it admitting a mistake, or withdrawing from the battlefield first? The wallet I’m monitoring, 0x82f6bb…512ec, has closed all $SOXL short positions with 10x leverage, with a closing amount of about $1,458,500, realizing a loss of $35,742.42.
An interesting detail here: the opening average price was $100.1526, the closing price was $102.6687, the price moved about 2.51% in the opposite direction; roughly calculated with 10x leverage, the impact on the margin is about 25.1%. And this is a full exit, not just reducing the position, so at least this position no longer carries directional risk.
This is my speculation: this time it looks more like actively cutting risk rather than waiting for the short logic to play out. But don’t rush to conclusions yet; just from the closing, it’s unclear if a preset stop loss was triggered. I will continue to monitor whether this address opens shorts again to distinguish if this is a temporary retreat or abandoning this round of judgment.$COIN
Coinbase has been exposed for a data leak again. This time, I was waiting to catch a dip, but there wasn’t even a splash.
SlowMist confirmed that contact information of over 70,000 users was obtained by hackers, and the company itself admitted it. This amount of data would have been a big deal a few years ago. Yet COIN’s individual token price on OKX is currently 159.7, fluctuating between 158.1 and 162.9 in 24 hours, dropping less than half a percent. Just looking at the price, you’d think the leaked list was something trivial.
Later, it made sense. This time, what was obtained was contact info, not private keys or access to funds, which is a different scale from coin theft. But if phone numbers and emails fall into the hands of cybercriminals, targeted phishing follows, and these aftereffects aren’t something the stock price should reflect on the same day.
There’s also background: South Korea’s Bithumb was hit the same day, leaking info of 38,000 customers. Exchange hacks are as frequent as meals now; the market has already priced this in, and those who needed to be affected have been affected.
I originally thought there would at least be a small dip, placed an order and waited for a position, but after waiting a long time, nothing happened. If the market thinks it’s nothing, then it’s nothing.
#10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 Betting on a trend reversal with one day's capital flow, I think the risk-reward of this judgment is not worthwhile. SoSoValue data shows that on October 27 Eastern Time, the US $SOL spot ETF had a net outflow of $19.155 million, all from GSOL, with no net outflow from other products that day.
My judgment is slightly negative in the short term, but the claim of a "complete capital withdrawal" is overestimated. The outflow is concentrated in a single product, which has limited proof of overall demand weakening; the historical cumulative net inflow is still $1.513 billion, which cannot be erased by one day's data. However, cumulative inflow is a thing of the past and cannot guarantee subsequent support.
According to my speculation, if outflows continue and spread to more products, then the probability of demand weakening will significantly increase, making an adjustment in judgment more worthwhile; if it is just an isolated redemption, chasing emotions to draw conclusions is not worthwhile. I will first observe the persistence and coverage of the outflows and will not use a single negative number to pretend it is a winning probability. ETF net inflow exceeded 100 million on Monday, interrupting last week's net outflow. Can this prove that the net outflow on Thursday and Friday last week was just a short-term turnover? Can the market continue to verify this?
Monday's ETF data release showed a single-day net inflow of 110.3 million, with the net inflow relying solely on IBIT; other institutions did not show any return flow.
Crypto market data showed little change compared to Sunday, especially in core funds where no significant differences appeared, and total funds did not show obvious net outflow.
On the market side, $BTC tested around 80,000 continuously on the hourly level and then rebounded. Currently, the rebound is relatively strong, and short-term support remains effective. Next, watch whether the short-term 1-hour resistance at 80,600 and 81,400 can be effectively broken through and held. If broken and held, continue to watch 82,000 and 82,900.
Overall, the market is currently good. ETF funds returned on Monday, crypto funds did not net outflow, and the short-term trend looks more optimistic. Next, it depends on whether macro pressure can continue to ease. Once macro pressure is relieved, focus will shift to the situation of breaking through resistance!
#10月FOMC利率决议即将公布
#BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？