Orbit Post Sitemap
$BTC's dip to 79,506 in the evening didn't go lower; at 8 PM Beijing time, it directly surged over 650 dollars, reaching a high of 80,497, and now around 80,250, it has stood back above 80,000.
$ETH followed even stronger, bouncing from a low of 2,297 to 2,341.9, now at 2,329, turning from red to green with a 0.5% increase in 24h.
However, this rally isn't shorts running away; on OKX, BTC contract open interest increased from 3.43 billion USD to 3.57 billion in 24h, ETH from 1.8 billion to 1.9 billion, funding rate remains at 0.01%, with long-short account ratios BTC 2.2, ETH 2.39.
CoinDesk reports 133 million USD liquidated across the network in the past 24 hours. The Federal Reserve starts its two-day rate meeting today, with FedWatch showing about a 90% chance of no change. On Monday, BTC spot ETF also saw an inflow of 110 million USD.
My view is that the pullback to 80,000 before the rate decision looks more like bulls rushing in, positions getting increasingly full; shorts above 81k and longs below 79.5k, one side will be swept before tomorrow night.Anthropic's official IPO filing is indeed exciting. An AI company that has been discussed for so long is finally starting to undergo more detailed scrutiny from the public market.
However, there is one sentence in the official announcement that is particularly worth noting: the number of shares issued and the price range have not yet been determined.
In other words, the "potential record valuation" is still just an expectation at this point. The company is strong, and buying in at any price is a different matter. Popular IPOs tend to mix these two ideas, creating the illusion that if you miss the first day, you will never have another chance.
I actually think the research only begins after the prospectus is made public.
How revenue is recognized, why customers continue to pay, how inference costs change—these issues will all affect valuation later. Leading model capabilities are certainly exciting, but the public market will ultimately ask: how much profit can the increased usage retain?
I am willing to seriously consider this company and admit that I am attracted by the scale of this listing. But the more I like the product, the more I have to remind myself to separate the investment price for evaluation.
Users of Claude and holders of Anthropic stock do not have exactly the same expectations. The former hope for stronger capabilities and lower prices, while the latter also care about how these changes affect returns. Waiting for the issuance terms to come out before deciding whether it is worth participating is, in my opinion, not late at all.
#Anthropic正式申请IPO，或创上市估值纪录 Waiting for Robinhood's earnings report tonight, I want to focus on the structure of trading revenue.
The company's Q2 options revenue was $342 million, and cryptocurrency revenue was $100 million. This gap is very straightforward: when we talk about Robinhood, we often follow the crypto price, but its trading business is far more than just cryptocurrency.
The issue is that different trading categories have different monetization methods and revenue levels. Stock trading volume, options contracts, and cryptocurrency trading volume cannot be lumped together to conclude that "the busier, the more profitable."
If trading volume increases but revenue doesn't keep up, we need to see whether the business structure has changed or if the revenue per unit of trading has changed. Conversely, even if total trading volume isn't particularly impressive, growth in high-revenue-contributing businesses can still lead to results exceeding expectations.
I am optimistic about the platform enriching its products, but just looking at a screenshot of trading volume and shouting about explosive performance really skips the process.
Users open the app, complete trades, and the company ultimately retains profit, with clearing, service, and operating costs in between. The faster the expansion, the more these details cannot be ignored.
Robinhood has already shown the market many growth stories. Next, what I want to see is whether these new businesses actually make each unit of revenue more solid or just add more items to the financial report.
#Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ The US and Iran discuss a plan to open the Strait of Hormuz, and oil prices fall; this reaction is easy to understand. As long as the possibility of easing the conflict increases, the market will first remove some risk premiums.
But when I see this kind of news, I increasingly care about whether the plan includes an arrangement of "who acts first."
Iran hopes to lift the blockade, while the US demands free passage through the channel. Both sides are willing to talk, but there is a big difference between both sides accepting the same execution order. Especially when each step requires the other side to act first, negotiations can easily stall, while prices have already moved ahead.
For oil prices, a very frustrating trend may follow: prices drop a bit when there is progress, then rise back when execution gets stuck. You think you are judging supply and demand, but in reality, you are guessing the next diplomatic news every day.
I don’t want to directly write "discussion of the plan" as the end of the supply crisis, nor do I think oil prices must rebound just because they fall. What’s more worth tracking is whether both sides have a clear timetable and which actions can be independently verified.
The most annoying part of this market phase is that the viewpoint may be correct, but the timing of entry is completely off. Peace expectations are welcome, but the market can trade in advance, while reality needs to be fulfilled step by step. The time gap between the two is enough to torment those chasing rallies and selling off multiple times.
#美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 Tomorrow we will look at SK Hynix's earnings report, and the conclusion I most want to avoid is a lazy one: profit growth is all thanks to HBM4.
The company has already disclosed that HBM4 began mass shipments in Q2 and will continue to ramp up in the second half of the year. But within the same results, rising prices of traditional DRAM and NAND, as well as increased sales of high-value products, are also driving profitability. Several forces combined ultimately present a nice figure, which should not be casually attributed to the hottest concept.
This time I will pay special attention to whether management clearly explains the contributions of product mix and pricing.
If profit improvement mainly comes from a higher proportion of more competitive products, I will be more confident; if it mainly relies on industry-wide price increases, then we need to continue to assess how long this price level can hold. Both types of growth can be profitable, but their sustainability requires different evidence.
There is also an easily overlooked issue: after suppliers increase shipments, are customers accelerating usage or stocking up in advance? This will affect the rhythm of subsequent orders and cannot be directly extrapolated just because this quarter's deliveries are lively.
I have expectations for HBM4 and am also willing to acknowledge the contribution of traditional memory. When spending money to buy stocks, there is no need to be a fan of a certain technical term. The better the earnings report looks, the more we should break down the reasons for making money clearly, so as not to end up betting on the right industry direction but misjudging the source of profits.
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ For this rate decision, I plan to pay less attention to the debate over whether "holding steady is good news" and focus more on U.S. Treasuries.
The reason is simple: the Federal Reserve's announced policy rate remaining unchanged does not mean that market financing conditions haven't changed. If the press conference makes investors feel that high interest rates will be maintained longer, bond yields could still rise, and valuation pressure on risk assets would increase accordingly.
So, rushing to buy BTC just because the "rate is unchanged" seems a bit hasty to me. What you're really trading is whether money will become more expensive in the coming months. Focusing only on whether there was an adjustment this time easily misses the latter part.
After the decision is announced in the early hours of October 29 Beijing time, I will observe BTC alongside the two-year U.S. Treasury yield. If BTC rallies first but yields continue to rise afterward, whether this rally can hold is questionable. Of course, the two won't move in a fixed relationship every minute.
I understand everyone is hoping for a breather. After such a long period of volatility, everyone wants a clear direction.
But there is a gap between "results meeting expectations" and "worth rising afterward." Rather than rushing to label the meeting as dovish or hawkish, I care more about which direction the market re-prices future interest rates after hearing the news. This calculation will ultimately be reflected in the price.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #ClearRegulatoryBoundariesForStablecoinYields in the US and Canada
The leader has something to say
The US and Canada have simultaneously clarified the regulatory boundaries for stablecoin yields. Canada released a draft on October 24 proposing to prohibit issuers from directly or indirectly paying yields to holders, but allowing transaction rewards, requiring 1:1 reserves, redemption within three business days, and a 1% fee cap. The US OCC announced the final implementation rules of the GENIUS Act on October 21, similarly banning issuers from directly paying interest but leaving room for third-party rewards that meet regulatory requirements.
I believe this essentially puts a tight leash on the "interest-bearing" function of stablecoins. Previously, a lot of funds sat in stablecoins waiting to earn interest; now that path is blocked or restricted. A comment in the discussion section hit the nail on the head: the US and Canada are tightening the leash on stablecoin interest, making Bitcoin's store-of-value status more solid.
When stablecoins can no longer provide risk-free yields, funds will either buy US Treasuries or seek truly scarce store-of-value assets. This is a substantial support for Bitcoin's long-term narrative.
However, the short-term market reaction is very muted, with USDT down slightly by 0.03% and USDC down slightly by 0.01%. This is a slow-moving institutional factor, not a short-term catalyst. $BTC $ETH $DOOD
Bitcoin took a waterfall drop last night; now we watch if the 80,000 level can hold. If it doesn't hold, expect a deeper pullback, with resistance above at 84,000 to 85,000. Do not chase the rally or panic sell; set your stop-loss orders properly.
The above analysis is time-sensitive; make sure to set your stop-loss orders. Good luck.Bull and bear data completely diverge: The more retail investors go long on BTC and ETH, the stronger the short-term selling pressure becomes. The current market shows a clear "retail long vs. large holders/active trades biased bearish" divergence, especially for BTC and ETH. ZEC is relatively independent, with signs of large capital absorption.
The latest 5-minute active trades show BTC, ETH, and ZEC are all dominated by bears, but capital attitudes have clearly diverged.
$BTC long-short ratio is only 0.769 (long 43.47% / short 56.53%). Large holders are bearish, while retail accounts have a long-short ratio exceeding 2.3. Short-term selling continues to dominate, yet retail investors keep buying long. Without volume support during a rebound, it can easily become a bull trap again.
$ETH long-short ratio is only 0.6658 (long 39.97% / short 60.03%), showing the strongest bearish advantage among the three coins. Retail accounts have the highest long-short ratio at 3.40, with large holders and retail investors continuing to bet against each other. If BTC weakens, ETH may lead a sharp decline.
$ZEC long-short ratio is 0.846 (long 45.83% / short 54.17%). Short-term active selling still dominates, but large holders are clearly bullish, forming a stark contrast with BTC and ETH.
BTC and ETH are typical cases of "retail buying long, large holders/active selling dominating," making rebounds prone to bull traps when lacking volume. ZEC shows a pattern of large capital bullishness and retail accounts bearishness. Gold and ETH: Bearish Pressure Is Shifting Gears
Gold bears currently hold considerable unrealized profits, so some partial covering is not surprising. But taking profits only brings short-term fluctuations and does not equal a trend reversal, so I still do not view gold's rebound as a bullish signal.
In contrast, ETH deserves closer attention. Earlier, short positions were heavy, and as the price rises, the shorts' profits have been significantly compressed. At this point, as long as ETH continues to rise moderately, shorts may shift from "comfortable" to "passive," and covering or stop-loss actions will quickly amplify upward pressure. In other words, ETH's current short structure is more fragile than gold's and more prone to triggering a squeeze.
However, this does not mean I will immediately go long. A trading opportunity is not an entry signal; the key is whether the price can force a short reaction with a moderate rise. If such a sign appears, ETH's odds will be better than gold's. Gold is currently just a stage for shorts to take profits, while ETH may be where short pressure is repriced. Going forward, I prefer to wait for ETH's short squeeze window rather than rush to take sides.
$ETH $XAU
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 The most worth watching in $MSFT's earnings report tomorrow is whether AI investment can turn into cloud revenue. The market is already discussing data center spending by large tech companies, and investors will compare Azure's growth rate, capital expenditures, and depreciation returns. The FOMC decision on the same day may amplify valuation reactions. If cloud revenue accelerates and investment returns are clear, the AI narrative is realized; if capital expenditures continue to accelerate but revenue does not keep up, I will lower my valuation tolerance.$BEAT
Have any of you actually played this Audition IP? 🤔
It peaked at 11 yuan
Official data says Audition has 600 million registered users worldwide
Telegram mini program, mobile rhythm game, AI music studio
Also two AI virtual idols, Kira and Ray
The coin is used for playing games to earn coins, creative incentives, community voting
CertiK score just over 4
But there are a few things that must be said
First, the team is not public
The 1inch entry directly states the issuer is undisclosed
No named founders, no corporate entity
The official website contact page only has one X account and one email
The linked GitHub organization has no public repositories
Second, governance is not launched
The whitepaper says there will be community governance in the future
Right now, the foundation and team call the shots
Third, audit does not equal security
The most critical point, after 5 days
Team holds 8%
Advisors and early investors 13.07%
Totaling 21.07%
Do you have BEAT? At what price did you enter? A structure worth pondering: HYPE contracts have a 24-hour trading volume of $1.99 billion, while spot trading is only $800 million, with the former being 2.5 times the latter. In other words, this price is mainly driven by the derivatives market, while the spot market mostly confirms the orders.
There are pros and cons to derivatives dominating pricing: the advantage is deep liquidity and fast price discovery; the downside is that prices include leverage distortions, and a strong liquidation can push prices beyond the range supported by actual supply and demand, making it look lively but not necessarily solid. Under this structure, a simple way to judge a strengthening market is to see if spot buying returns. An increase in contract volume might just be more long-short betting and does not mean someone truly wants to hold the asset; only when spot volume continuously rises and buyers pay to withdraw coins does the price rise have a solid foundation.
Therefore, when monitoring the market, don’t just look at total volume; break it down: a decline in $HYPE contract share and a rise in spot share means the structure is repairing; if the 2.5x gap continues to widen, be cautious of any rebound, as the leverage-built platform can collapse quickly.ETF funds fluctuate between "large outflows followed by small inflows," and whether buying stabilizes depends on if inflows continue for several days, not just a single-day rebound.
Hard data: The US spot $BTC ETF saw a net inflow of about $110.3 million on Monday (almost all from IBIT), but the previous two trading days combined had outflows of about $770 million; since October, there has been a net outflow of about $202 million (SoSoValue). The current price of $BTC is around $80,200, almost flat over 24 hours. A single-day inflow can only be called a stopgap; the monthly figure is still negative, and after large outflows, it remains to be seen if institutions truly replenish.
Do you believe more in "continued inflows pushing the price back above $82,000," or "repeated outflows indicate that buying demand is still fragile"? #BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ $BTC Diplomatic rhetoric can suppress oil prices to some extent, but that doesn't mean the Hormuz risk premium has been unloaded.
Hard data: On Tuesday, Brent was roughly between $114.6–116.3 per barrel, WTI about $100.7–102.2, having dropped about 1% in early trading due to expectations of a US-Iran deal and Tehran quadrilateral talks, then rebounded due to continued Houthi disruptions in Saudi Arabia. Hormuz flow remains at about 60% of normal; the Iranian "about 7 days to reopen the strait" plan is still stuck on US conditions regarding port unblocking, sanctions, and war, and has not yet materialized. Supply figures are being revised, the premium hasn't been cleared, so oil prices "can rebound a bit" but are unlikely to return to 80. High oil prices continue to suppress risk appetite, also posing macro headwinds for $BTC.
Do you believe more in "the deal will push oil prices below 100" or "the premium will stick above 110"? #美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 $CL $BZ $BTC #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
Short-term trading growth is expected to continue. In August 2026, stock trading volume increased by 68% year-over-year, options by 50%, and market trading volume is expected to grow about 15 times, but cryptocurrency trading volume declined by 38% year-over-year. Diversified business is reducing dependence on the crypto market, and sustainability still depends on market activity, user growth, and profitability.$CAP is advised not to short, this person has been buying continuously#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议
"Fed Decision Imminent, Bitcoin Consolidates with Low Volume"
This Thursday early morning, the Federal Reserve will announce the October interest rate decision. Many expected the market to be bustling on the eve of this major event, but Bitcoin has been quieter than anyone else these past two days.
After dropping from $84,539 all the way below $80,000 to a low of $79,803, bulls have pulled it back above $80,000, but the total network trading volume has shrunk sharply from $553 million to $201 million, with major players collectively stepping back to observe.
Currently, spot price is hovering around $80,379, and everyone is waiting for the interest rate decision at 2 AM Thursday to set the direction. $BTC Calculating, 18 months is one and a half years. This "early bull market" judgment focuses on old coins that have been dormant for at least one and a half years. Bitcoin analysis reported by Cointelegraph suggests that the share of realized market cap held by this batch of coins is declining, indicating an early bull market and expecting a strong rise accordingly. I think it can be interpreted as somewhat bullish, but there is still a lack of evidence to confirm the market trend.
① The threshold is coins unmoved for 18 months or more; the observation target is not all $BTC. It describes changes in a specific coin-age group and cannot be directly equated with the buying and selling intentions of the entire market.
② What is declining is the share of realized market cap, not the exact quantity of old coins sold as explicitly given by the source. To calculate the proportion, both numerator and denominator must be considered. Based solely on the share decline, I would not directly conclude that long-term holders are concentrating on selling.
③ The source provides an 18-month screening line but does not give the extent of the decline or the comparison period. The term "decline" could vary in weight; if it is just a short-term fluctuation, then using it to judge the bull market phase seems premature to me.
I prefer to treat this information as a bullish clue pending verification, rather than a countdown to a market trend. Next, I will monitor whether this share change can continue and whether there is more complete data on the extent and period, to first fill in the gaps and then improve the confidence of the judgment.I just came across "£22 billion currency fund on XRPL" and initially thought the entire fund had been moved on-chain.
After checking Aviva Investors' original text from yesterday, what was put on-chain is a newly created tokenized share of this fund. Aviva itself first invested £50 million. Comparing £50 million to the £22 billion fund size, that's just over 0.2%. Including the previous USD fund, the total on-chain shares of the two funds amount to just over £86 million.
The on-chain layer is just an access point; the fund itself remains off-chain, with assets still custodied at BNY Mellon in New York. Coincidentally, Ripple obtained the final approval from the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for a national trust bank on the same day, and the main custodian for RLUSD's $2.5 billion reserve is also this BNY.
So don't hype this as "institutions massively going on-chain". The headline is flashy, but the money is still watched by the old banks, with only a small opening on-chain.
If by the end of the year Aviva's two on-chain shares exceed £200 million in total, then consider me conservative. #Ripple获美国国家信托银行最终批准 18,600 coins, this is the net inflow of Bitcoin by short-term holders into exchanges in the past 24 hours, mostly at a loss.
The market is cooperating as well, OKX is now hovering around 79,800, with a 24-hour low of 79,400, just grinding below the 80,000 mark. Those who chased above 80,000 and got in are now selling at a loss, no surprise there.
Last time I bet it would break through at a similar threshold, but it just got ground down for three days with no reaction. This time I’ve learned my lesson; at this kind of level, I won’t make a move—neither cutting losses nor adding.
Also, the original Bitcoin DEX, the old version V1 of DotSwap, was hacked; within four hours, 8.5 BTC were drained from the pool, about 685,000 USD, due to the outdated server-side signature mechanism. The amount isn’t large, but the old protocol managing the custody pool is like this—when something goes wrong, it’s a total mess.
The sell-off orders are piling up at the doorstep, either triggering a wave of accelerated decline or grinding into a bottom. I’m betting on the latter. The 80,000 integer level has always been formed by grinding, not by breaking through.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 📉 Downward unchanged: Short covering can't support the second leg, 80,850 can't be reached, first return to 79,800.
Reconciliation: At 18:17 bet on down, low point 79,505 missed by 49, no break, pulled back to 80,313, coordinate not reached.
This hour exploded 9.81 million, shorts account for 91.1%; 12 hours longs are 57.1%, switched sides.
Fee rate all three periods 0.01000%, premium −0.037% discount. Discount still pays full rent, money is supported by interest rate, not grabbed by longs.
Turnover 162.1 billion +22.51%, open interest 143 billion +1.97%, liquidations 145 million −6.96%. Volume increase with position adding, fewer deaths, both sides adding waiting for open.
Mr. Nameless's wallet increased from 266 to 1,703.98 coins, 137 million USD, previous two times piled to 2,000 coins were pushed back at 23:00.
Contrary evidence: ETF daily NAV +110 million turned positive, 30 days still −279 million, can't change direction.
Coordinates: first watch 79,800, if broken watch 79,505.
Invalidation line: 1H close above 81,300 means I'm wrong, this week's box top, until 10-28 08:00.
Personal review, not advice.
In the first hour of the open, do you bet on touching 80,850 first, or returning to 79,800 first?
$BTC #OctoberFOMCRateDecisionToBeAnnouncedThisWeekZEC rose about 2.9% today to 1266, while BTC is still hovering around 80,000. I won't chase this relatively strong wave for now.
Noticed: Crypto Economy wrote this afternoon that ZEC held above 1200 even when BTC fell below 80,000, mentioning that high derivative positions and short squeezes could amplify volatility.
TokenPost also noted on the same day that ZEC rose over 3%, approaching 1250.
At this moment (10/27 ~21:03), OKX spot is about 1266, 24-hour high 1278, low 1211.5; perpetual nominal positions about $157 million, funding rate slightly negative.
The top hot topic on Orbit remains this week's October FOMC, with the decision on Wednesday.
My view: This is relative strength before the FOMC, not confirmation of a privacy coin trend; with leverage piling up, it looks more like an observation window.
First, watch if it can hold above 1250 and reclaim today's high of 1278; if it breaks today's low of 1211 and falls back below 1200, this observation fails.
Do you think it can hold 1250 before the FOMC, or will it first retest 1200?
$ZEC $BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ On October 26, the US BTC spot ETF saw a net inflow of about $110.3 million, ending the previous trading day's net outflow of $137.9 million. The ETH spot ETF had a net outflow of about $88.58 million, and the SOL spot ETF also had a net outflow of about $8.2 million.
BTC received $110 million in buying, so why am I still not in a hurry to be bullish? The latest ETF funds show a clear divergence.
On the surface, institutional buying for BTC has returned, but this is not a comprehensive strengthening; rather, funds continue to concentrate on BTC.
BTC: The ETF inflow again indicates that there is still capital support around the $80,000 level. However, a single-day scale of $110 million is not strong, and the funds that flowed out the previous trading day have not been fully recovered. If the price does not keep up with the capital inflow, it actually indicates that selling pressure above remains.
ETH: ETF outflows are close to $90 million, clearly weaker than BTC. BTC can maintain consolidation with capital support, but ETH lacks incremental buying. Once BTC falls again, ETH is more likely to break key support.
SOL: ETF continues small outflows, indicating that high-volatility funds remain cautious. The market may have some resilience during rebounds, but sustainability cannot be overestimated for now.
The real signal from this data set is not that institutions are bottom-fishing comprehensively, but that funds are only willing to take on BTC and are unwilling to expand risk exposure.
Therefore, I remain short-term bearish. Unless BTC firmly reclaims key resistance levels, ETH and SOL rebounds should be viewed as weak recoveries, and there is no rush to chase longs. SkyAI was formerly known as Sharps Technology. In August 2025, it raised over $400 million to convert into a SOL treasury, and in the following month, it purchased more than 2 million SOL tokens, becoming at one point the fifth largest publicly listed SOL holding company.
By October 16, all these tokens had been sold off. According to company disclosures, about 1 million tokens had been sold by the time the buyback was announced on October 11. Later SEC filings showed around 600,000 tokens remaining, which were then completely cleared out. The company had $223.8 million in cash on hand, of which $201.3 million was allocated for the buyback at $3 per share, with the offer ending on October 29.
An interesting detail: initially, the buyback came with a condition that SOL had to stay above $100, but this condition was later removed. By the end of 2025, the company's holding cost was about $194 per token, while $SOL has been hovering around $100 this month, roughly half the cost. Bastion Trading, holding nearly 10%, felt $3 was too low and requested $3.5 and an independent review, choosing not to participate.
Such companies had a combined unrealized loss of $1.5 billion as of February this year. Those able to convert tokens into cash and return it to shareholders might be emulated, or it could be an isolated case. How other SOL treasury companies choose to proceed will be the next point of focus.482,228 tokens, 49 million USD, three days. There is a SOL whale selling off in batches, this is the most solid data today.
SOL is now at 100.1, it broke 100 intraday, dropped to a low of 99.17 and then pulled back, down 1.4% in 24 hours. The bulls are struggling to hold the 100 level.
Selling over three days instead of dumping all at once indicates they are looking for liquidity and don't intend to kill the order book. But conversely, it does mean there are serious sellers above 100, so don't confuse a rebound with a reversal.
By the way, Marinade said the Agave validator margin deduction exemption after the slot jump is confirmed, so the ecosystem side has no substantial damage; this is not negative news.
I thought the rebound could hold at 102, but I was proven wrong. Now I've learned to be cautious, leaving the longs above 100 to others and waiting until the selling is done.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 白银这条5到7年路线图，现在更像博弈期而不是追涨期吧？ 我第一眼看到37到39美元那个回踩区，心里是有点痒的，因为36.57到38.82正好卡着一堆斐波那契和波浪结构，像提前画好的接球点✨ 但再往下看，2029年269美元、2032到2033年410到569美元，前提是黄金奔到18000、金银比压到30到40，这就不是单纯技术图了，是把宏观剧本一起押上去。 我更在意的是节奏：这类超长期目标一旦被市场拿来当叙事，短线持仓容易先变拥挤，杠杆先热，现货反而被动。白银和BTC在这一点上很像，价格还没走完，合约端的资金费率、未平仓量和清算带已经先开始讲故事了💫 如果37到39真的被测试，关键不是"到没到"，而是回踩时持仓是减还是加、费率是降温还是继续顶，这决定它是洗筹还是挤压前的脆弱平衡。 偏多路径也清楚：只要29.86不破，波浪计数仍有效，回踩不破前低、持仓温和回落，反而容易把浮筹洗掉，给后面留空间。风险则藏在另一端，高目标本身会吸引追价盘，一旦宏观假设松动，先崩的往往不是现货情绪，而是高杠杆那一层。山寨和风险偏好也会跟着受影响，白银这种"慢资产"若波动放大，资金对高beta的耐心会更短。 Tired of looking at the $BTC 4-hour chart, switched to 1-hour and found that the dog whale is just torturing me on a different scale.
Falling down from 84,900, each rebound is lower than the last. Now it's grinding around 80,000. I don't think it's gearing up for a big move; it feels more like both buyers and sellers are waiting for news, and no one wants to make the first move.
The short moving averages are stuck near 80,100, and the price hasn't reclaimed that level yet. Although the MACD isn't as ugly as before, it only means the drop isn't as severe; it doesn't prove the bulls are ready to enter.
My thinking is simple:
First, the 80,600–80,900 range needs to be reclaimed and held on a pullback before I consider entering a small position, initially targeting around 81,300. If I chase in and it falls back into the original range, I'll admit I was wrong and exit.
Next, watch 79,220. If it really breaks below that and the rebound can't recover, don't comfort yourself with washouts; be prepared in advance for 77K and 75K.
This week is packed with news: the Fed decision early Thursday morning, followed by GDP and PCE in the evening.
I'd rather buy a bit later than risk another stop loss just to chase a few hundred dollars of rebound.Progress toward an agreement could unwind part of the geopolitical risk premium in oil, while a breakdown in negotiations could quickly revive supply fears and push energy prices higher.
My take: The market is trading the possibility of peace, not yet the reality of secure shipping. Until commercial traffic through Hormuz normalizes, any oil price relief remains vulnerable to the next geopolitical headline.
#USIranHormuzTalks The Federal Reserve will announce its interest rate decision this Wednesday (October 28), with the market widely expecting it to remain unchanged at 3.75% to 4.00%. In a Reuters survey, 94 out of 100 economists expect a pause this month, but all 100 expect a rate hike in December. The biggest focus this week is the possibility of holding steady this month and potentially acting next month.
This round of rate hikes began in September, when rates were raised by 25 basis points for the first time in three years. The driver was inflation: the September CPI rose 3.7% year-on-year, with oil prices soaring due to the Iran conflict.
Why pause despite still-high inflation? First, the economy is resilient and the labor market stable, allowing room for a pause; second, the September hike has already pushed up Treasury yields and tightened financial conditions, so the effects are being observed. Chris Hodge of Natixis said the pause helps determine whether high inflation is a trend.
Political factors cannot be ignored. The Fed will meet before the November 3 election, and Heather Long of Navy Federal believes there will be no rate hike close to the election.
Market pricing also confirms this: CME FedWatch shows an 88% probability of no change in October and a 71% probability of a hike in December. CNBC reports that futures markets show less than a 10% chance of a rate hike this month, with nearly 75% expecting at least one more hike this year. $NVDA AI demand is strong, so why is the market still focused on financing costs and capital expenditures? AI chip sales benefit from data center expansions, but the lengthened customer investment recovery cycle may affect order continuity and valuation. Asian stock markets rose today driven by AI, with semiconductor sectors showing clear resilience; the downside is that computing power spending may be overly concentrated. If orders, gross margins, and customer cash flows remain robust simultaneously, I will maintain a positive outlook; if spending outpaces returns, expectations need to be lowered.Many people blindly believe in funding rates
They say if the funding rate soars, there will definitely be a big drop or a sharp dip
I think that's not necessarily true,
Actually, when the overall funding rate is flat, not suddenly spiking a lot (compare the two charts below),
this kind of funding rate is not deterministic, it's just a reference indicator
The essence of trend influence still depends on liquidity.
From the market perspective, support has been broken multiple times, seller liquidity has been repeatedly seized, whether the 791 low will be broken again is not certain (it only means there is a probability, nothing more; even if the 791 support breaks, the downside is likely limited because support has been broken multiple times before, seller liquidity has been liquidated many times, and the remaining liquidity is very limited),
On the contrary, the probability of a big rebound after consolidation is very high, because every short during rebounds has been profitable, and a large amount of short liquidity has accumulated during the downtrend.
Moreover, the current funding rate around 0.01% is influenced by many factors
1. Retail investors have not panicked to chase shorts below 80,000 (no negative premium in contracts)
2. It is within the exchange's "clamping balance range" formula
This indicates that the current $BTC market is in a rebalancing period after a liquidity vacuum:
Shorts are unwilling to aggressively leverage to chase shorts above the 79,000~80,000 support zone,
And longs are cautious after experiencing liquidations, both sides are watching,
Contract and spot prices are highly aligned.
Of course, the specific trend still depends on how news unfolds; what we can do is strictly stop loss and aim for reasonable targets and risk-reward ratios.Diplomacy is offering the oil market some relief, but the Strait of Hormuz remains the real test.
Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan held talks with Iranian officials in Tehran on October 26 to prevent further military escalation. Oman is also reporting progress toward a temporary arrangement to restore freedom of navigation.
Yet Brent crude remains around $115 per barrel, showing how little confidence the market has in a quick return to normal supply conditions.
#USIranHormuzTalks #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议
BTC is now around 80K, pushed back from 81K to test 79,321, bounced to 80,700 but lost momentum. No one dares to move before the FOMC.
Bears can't push it down, bulls can't lift it up, it's stuck. ETFs are flowing out, whales' transfers down 36%, retail investors want to run on the rebound, but big players are adding longs. There's buying support below 79,300, strong resistance between 81K-82K, only breaking above 83K will be promising.
My view: Before the FOMC, bulls might rally on the "no rate hike" expectation, but will likely face resistance near 82.5K, then retest 79K, or even 78K-76.5K. Don't chase longs or shorts before it settles.#StockEarningsSeason #USStockEarnings
Google will release its earnings report tomorrow night (around 4 AM Beijing time on Thursday). What I’m most interested in isn’t how much profit they made, but the capex.
Last quarter, cloud business grew 82%, EPS was 9.11 vs. 2.88, clearly a big beat, yet the stock price still dropped 7.1% the next day. Conversely, in April this year, it rose 10%, while options only priced in about 5.5%. Both times exceeded options expectations.
This time, options are pricing in ±6.4%, with the market expecting revenue around 127.9 billion and EPS about 3.02. This year’s capex guidance has already been raised to 195–205 billion; if it goes higher, even a beat might not help.
$GOOGL perpetual is now around 319, with 317 as this week’s low. Breaking below that could lead to further downside; on the upside, watch if it can reclaim 325 first.
Before the earnings, I don’t want to guess the direction. Are you betting it will go up or down?
Just my personal observation, not investment advice.$ETH This order, I wrote the rules as "If... then...", leaving no room for improvisation.
Open position at 2320.52, 100x leverage, current price 2336.18, floating profit 67.48%, buffer 0.67%.
If it breaks below 2300 → close the position. Do not wait for the cost line at 2320.52. 2300 is the foundation; if the foundation collapses, everything above is invalid. Although 2300 is further from the cost line (36.18 vs 15.66 points), once it breaks, it means this bullish structure has ended.
If it holds above 2350 → then talk about 2400. 2350 is 13.82 points (0.59%) above the current price, the first hurdle tonight. If it can't break through, 67.48% is the ceiling; take profits while you can.
If it moves sideways around 2336 → set a time limit. At 100x nominal position, funding fees apply; even if the direction is right, you have to pay. One day sideways, the fees will eat up most of this 67.48%. If the first two conditions are not triggered by the deadline, I will handle it myself.
If the floating profit continues to rise → absolutely no adding to the position. This is the easiest rule to break. Adding positions under 100x leverage is like moving closer to the edge of a cliff. Adding positions turns one gamble into two. $BTC $ZEC
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 A return flow of 1.08 billion USD in three days—is it a "real reversal" or a "false move"?
Looking at the ETF data, the Bitcoin spot funds have had net inflows for three consecutive trading days, directly pushing the net inflow for October back to 461 million.
BlackRock and Fidelity absorbed the majority, and the buying was indeed widespread. But one detail is worth pondering: in the past three rounds where Bitcoin rose over 50%, the daily average ETF net inflow was over 200 million USD, while since July this year, the daily average has only been 86 million.
In other words, this return flow is real, but the speed has not yet reached the "ignition" level.
For Ethereum, the ETF single-day net inflow was 29.4 million, with Grayscale contributing the bulk, but on a 30-day scale it is still a net outflow hole. SOL had a single-day net inflow of 10.67 million, the smallest volume, and its confirmation effect on the trend is also the weakest.
Zijin's replenishment is the first step; sustainability is the second. If no action is taken (currently the market pricing maintains a probability of over 90% that interest rates remain unchanged), the real test is just beginning.
This is only a market record and does not constitute investment advice.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？
#美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 Until then, BTC’s reaction may be more about positioning and sentiment than a genuine shift in macro conditions.
I’d rather see BTC reclaim $80K and hold it after the initial news-driven move than chase a relief rally that could fade as quickly as it started.
#USIranHormuzTalks 1. Current Position
OKX BTC-USDT around 79,840.5 (13:22, -0.45%); 24H range 79,455.8 ~ 80,849.9; other levels 79,821.7 (12:08), 80,040.2 (09:53)
Last night US stocks surged, but BTC did not follow: S&P +0.70% at 7,676.77, Nasdaq +0.82%, Dow +0.28%, Philly Semiconductor +2.82% (Anthropic filed S-1 igniting AI rally), while BTC remains below 80,000. This is the most important divergence tonight: the risk appetite recovery in stocks has not transmitted to the crypto space.
Three pieces of evidence supporting this divergence: Coinbase premium index has been negative for 33 consecutive days (-0.126%~-0.15%, weak US spot buying); BTC market dominance rose to 57.8%~60.1% (funds are only contracting internally within crypto towards BTC, no new money inflow); Strategy last week (10/19~25) had zero purchases and used $204.9 million to repurchase preferred shares (holding 848,517 units, average price $75,446) — major real buyers have stopped.
#美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落 每卖出100韩元的产品，就能留下约76韩元的营业利润。 这是 SK 海力士上一季度交出的利润率。2026年二季度，公司营收约79.32万亿韩元，营业利润约60.54万亿韩元。看这种公司，我会先把“AI需求很强”放在一边，算一算需求到底给利润表带来了多大变化。至少从这组数字看，存储涨价和高价值产品的销售，已经变成了实实在在的盈利。 接下来要看的是，这么高的盈利水平还能维持多久。 SK 海力士将在10月28日公布三季度业绩。我更关注 HBM4 的放量情况：公司此前披露，HBM4 已在二季度开始批量出货，下半年计划继续爬坡。三季度能否把这部分增长体现在收入和利润里，会直接影响市场对后续几个季度的判断。 这里有一笔很容易被忽略的账。订单增加，要扩产；新产能落地，又要先花钱。卖得更多当然是好事，但如果为了增长不断增加投入，最后能留下多少现金，也得一起算。 公司8月批准了约54万亿韩元的新厂投资，涉及龙仁Y2和清州M17，属于分多年推进的建设计划，并不是这一季度就全部花掉。这个投入规模，也让我更想听管理层怎么解释后面的需求和产能安排：哪些需求已经有客户承接，哪些还需要随着市场变化逐步投入。 所以我Starting from the afternoon of October 21, BTC and ETH both moved downward, stopping at noon on the 24th. BTC dropped by 5677 USD, 6.7%, over 68 hours. ETH fell by 244 USD, 9.7%, over 44 hours.
At the stopping points, each left a low point on both sides. BTC was at 79220, ETH at 2282. Both positions still hold now.
The rebound was not urgent. BTC touched 80844 and then retreated, ETH reached 2344 and lost momentum. Based on their respective drops, both only recovered about 25% to 30%, not even reaching 38%.
The low points were tested twice; I compared these two times. BTC's first test was on the 24th, the second in the early morning of the 26th. The second test had 40% less volume and a 20% smaller rebound. ETH dropped more, with nearly 60% less volume and a 40% smaller rebound.
The low points were raised slightly, indicating someone was buying. Each rebound was smaller than the last, showing buyers are not in a hurry.
For now, I treat the upper boundaries as references, not as solid resistance. BTC's 80844 and ETH's 2344 were each touched only once, not enough evidence to block the price. I focus on the closing price.
If the close is above 80844, BTC's recent drop is considered repaired, and we look upward toward the retracement level and the mid-term moving average above. If the close is below 79220, the drop is not yet repaired, and we set another level down based on the drop. ETH uses the same criteria, with numbers replaced by 2344 and 2282.
My current bias is toward the downside. Both are still below the three moving averages, and the rebound hasn't even reached 38%. This bias is easy to change; it only requires the two upper levels to close above.
Finally, a few off-topic remarks.
Using the same rules, in backtesting I can accept a 30% retracement without emotion. With real money, I want to close positions after just a 3% drop. The rules haven't changed a bit, but I still want to exit during the toughest periods. So now, when I judge whether something will succeed, I first see if I would act when feeling uncomfortable.Looking at OKX's earnings season forecast targets this week, wow, they're all top tech companies.
The big players are busy figuring out how to expand capacity and boost profits, while I'm here calculating how to maximize the returns on my 553 XP points, climbing from Growth Helper to the Expert Leaderboard~
There are three days left until the weekly leaderboard closes on the 29th, so I'll pick two tech giants from the weekly leaderboard to study carefully and try to grab some of the weekly leaderboard bonus pool.
First up, SK Hynix.
My judgment is straightforward: the earnings report will most likely beat expectations, and it’s almost a sure thing.
The logic is so simple it’s almost boring. HBM capacity is sold out, DRAM prices are still rising, and the storage sector has long shifted from a cutthroat price war to a seller’s market. A manufacturer sitting at the fattest spot in the supply chain—if their earnings report looks bad now, that would be real news. So the question isn’t whether they can make money, but how much they make.
Next, Robinhood.
My judgment is also that it will likely beat, but this time it depends on whether the crypto market shows some respect.
Crypto overall has been trending up these past few months, retail sentiment hasn’t faded, and options are lively. Robinhood’s business model relies on taking a cut; the more people in the arena and the more active the betting, the better it is for them. So revenue, especially from crypto and options, is very likely solid. The HBM trade is becoming a capacity allocation story, not just an AI demand story.
When memory inventory gets this tight, chipmakers face a choice: prioritize high margin HBM or supply conventional DRAM. That competition can push memory prices higher, but it also makes supply normalization the biggest risk to the trade.
SK Hynix has the advantage today, but Samsung's progress shows that leadership is not guaranteed.
#SamsungQ3ProfitOutlook Why is it that the longer you research a coin, the harder it becomes to cut your losses?
The most dangerous kind of research is when you uncover more and more problems with the project, yet your reasons for holding on become increasingly justified.
Before buying, you look at the team, revenue, unlock schedules, and valuation; after getting stuck, the team selling coins is called improving liquidity, user decline is called an industry downturn, and breaking support is called a shakeout by the main players.
You use all your research skills, except to test whether you bought wrong.
There’s a psychological account hidden here: having spent so much time and gone through so much information, selling now would mean all that research was for nothing. So besides the purchase cost, there’s an additional layer of reluctance to give up.
But the market doesn’t pay you for research time. Understanding a project doesn’t mean its token is worth holding: business growth doesn’t necessarily bring token demand, and the money raised by the project won’t automatically be shared with token holders.
A practical self-check is: if you were empty-handed today, with the same information and price, would you still want to buy? If the answer is no, you should reassess your position and not let “I’ve held it for so long” make the decision for you.
Remember: research should clarify your exit conditions. If in the end you only have more and more reasons to hold, you may have stopped being an investor and become a free PR agent for the project team.#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ I think SK Hynix's Q3 might fall short of expectations, mainly because people may be overestimating HBM's profit-making ability. No matter how many orders there are, actual delivery matters, and ramping up production and new lines could still push costs higher. If the regular DRAM and NAND businesses perform just average, the overall profit might not be as good as imagined. The worst thing in earnings season is when a company makes a decent profit, but the market responds with: "Is that it?" Many people no longer remember the name Arbistar, the Spanish Ponzi scheme that collapsed in 2020. Today, the Spanish police released news that wallets associated with it before and after the collapse transferred over 1.1 billion USD worth of Bitcoin. When I see such news in a bear market, I always take a closer look.
On the market, BTC is now hovering around 79,700, with a 24-hour low of 79,455, missing the 80,000 mark again. The fee rate is 0.01%, with neither panic nor rush to accumulate; the contract open interest is still over 2.6 billion USD, and no major withdrawals are seen.
My view is that breaking 80,000 itself is not scary; what's scary is if it breaks and no one catches it. There is still volume supporting below for now. If it really crashes to a new low, that’s not a signal to bottom-fish, it’s a different matter. Just watch and keep your hands still.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 This $SNDK long position, 75x leverage, opened at 1235.7, current price 1286.6, floating profit 308.93%.
Three numbers govern this position: buffer 3.95%, resistance 1300, target 1350.
Buffer 3.95% — if it retraces 3.95%, this 308% profit resets to zero. With 75x leverage, there is no margin for error, no room to "wait and see." It's 0.38 percentage points thicker than the evening's 3.57% because it moved 5.1 points further, not because my judgment is more accurate. Positions with thin cushions have no right to talk about the big picture, only about rules.
Resistance at 1300 is 13.4 points (1.04%) overhead. This integer level is critical — if broken, 1350 can be expected; if not, this is the short-term top. 1280 has long been established (6.6 points below), but holding steady does not mean it can hold; a pullback confirmation is standard. If it falls back, this breakout must be questioned.
Review: Last night 1269, 202%, 2.69% → Evening 1281.5, 278%, 3.57% → Now 1286.6, 308.93%, 3.95%. The cushion is gradually thickening, but its nature hasn't changed — still a thin cushion position.
Trading discipline: protect principal and push up, no further exposure expansion. Once over 300%, half should be taken off the table, base position waits for 1300 confirmation. No adding positions, no holding losing positions. If it holds 1300, watch for 1350; if it falls back to 1235.7, admit the mistake. $BTC $ETH
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 There is a rather scary statistic: among the top traders on the four perpetual platforms Hyperliquid, Lighter, dYdX, and Pacifica, only 9% are long positions.
My first reaction was that it was another panic hype. Checking the original data, it’s the combined top 100 accounts by 7-day profit, with longs at $324 million versus shorts at $3.11 billion. The short positions are more than nine times the value of the longs; the numbers are not fabricated. But I’ve seen the same metric flip from 94% short to 80% long within 24 hours, a swing of 74 percentage points, so I treat it as a thermometer, not a steering wheel.
HYPE is now around 77.8, fluctuating between 76.7 and 80.6 in 24 hours, moving sideways enough to make people sleepy.
I’ve learned my lesson: the more I look at this data, the fewer trades I place, and my wallet stays more secure.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 Many people shout "recovery" when they see ETF inflows, but after reviewing the data, I just want to say: this is not a recovery market at all, it's a single-plank bridge market📊
Let's sort out the capital flow: In the past two days, BTC spot ETFs had a total net outflow of 774 million USD, the selling pressure has made the market very uncomfortable. Yesterday finally saw an inflow, a single-day net inflow of 110.3 million USD, but this money almost entirely came from BlackRock's IBIT, while the other ETF varieties basically remained flat with no capital movement.
What does this mean?
It's not a collective bottom-fishing by institutions, but just a single test move by a leading giant.
The volume is also insufficient to support a reversal: counting the whole of October, BTC spot ETFs still had a net outflow of 202 million USD, the gap remains.
ETH is even quieter, with yesterday's ETF net outflow of 88.6 million USD, and ETHA alone outflowed 104.7 million, the selling pressure continues to release.
The market also confirms this logic: BTC is now stuck at 79,700, continuously pressured below the 80,000 threshold.
The capital bleeding rate has slowed, but the market structure is far from repaired.
In summary: before the FOMC announcement, this wave is merely a test, not a counterattack.
Do not mistake IBIT's single purchase as a signal for a new trend start.
Coincidentally, ZECW and UAI in the group successfully captured gains this wave, again confirming the current market is severely differentiated, broad rallies have not arrived, only local opportunities can be seized.
The profit and loss calendar is here; the premise of stable gains is understanding the true and false signals of capital, not being fooled by short-term single data points into jumping in. I often look at on-chain prediction markets and first flip through the settlement rules, with the odds reversed at the end. When trading crypto, you can always argue about whether it's expensive or cheap, but when predicting an event, you have to clearly define what conditions count as the event occurring.
Stablecoin settlement and recording on-chain are quite crypto. But the odds are just judgments expressed by participants using money; if funds crowd on one side, it doesn't necessarily mean it's closer to the truth.
Especially when the question is vaguely written, I get a bit distracted: the money is on-chain, but if there's a dispute in the end, who will make the final call?Binance will remove 12 spot trading pairs on October 30. I counted them one by one, and they are all /BTC pairs—AAVE/BTC, TAO/BTC, ICP/BTC, PENDLE/BTC, XAUT/BTC, etc. There isn't a single USDT pair.
This detail is more interesting than the delisting itself. What's being cut isn't the coins, but the pairs that no one trades: altcoins paired with Bitcoin have had their liquidity drained long ago, so they're just placeholders now.
AAVE spot is currently at 132.96, fluctuating between 129.5 and 138.8 in the last 24 hours. The coin is fine; it's the trading pairs that are dead.
I also have a few BTC pairs in my wallet that I haven't touched for years; the exchange cleaned them up before I did.
#本周美联储将公布9月会议纪要