Orbit Post Sitemap
$SKHYNIX: Previously, SanDisk had more potential, but now Hynix has more potential. With the support of orders and performance in the coming years, I believe Hynix will rebound after a brief downturn. I just bought a small long position in Hynix tokens. Midterm Election Night: The Crypto Market Is Waiting for More Than Just Votes
On November 3, the U.S. midterm election voting takes place, with exit polls and preliminary counts to be released gradually from tonight through early morning. The restructuring of control over both chambers of Congress will directly determine the pace of crypto legislation such as the CLARITY Act, but the core conflict in the market right now is not in Washington. Bitcoin has retraced nearly 40% from its all-time high of $126,000 on October 6, Ethereum faced a record $1.6 billion net outflow from spot ETFs in October, and the Federal Reserve on October 28 kept interest rates steady at 3.75%–4% while the dot plot hinted at a possible rate hike again in December—these three forces combined with capital outflows following Binance's security incident on October 29 form the real backbone of this downturn. The election is merely an emotional disturbance; liquidity is the medium- to long-term main theme. This article, without predicting bullish or bearish outcomes, outlines the transmission paths of three election results, key structural levels for ETH and BTC, and an executable risk control framework. #苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 $BTC $ETH $SOL According to AI Auntie's monitoring, Arthur Hayes' operation of liquidating some altcoins on October 24 temporarily avoided the current market downturn. Dragged down by the decline in US stocks, the crypto market is under pressure simultaneously. Among the related tokens: ENA fell from $0.196 to $0.169, a drop of 13.77%; ETHFI fell from $0.6499 to $0.5727, a drop of 11.87%; ETH fell from $2375 to $2257, a drop of 4.96%; UNI basically remained flat, only down 0.28%. Among them, ENA had the largest decline, and UNI showed the strongest resistance to the drop.
$ENA Market Snapshot (Nov 3, 11:10)
Current price 0.1691, 24h -8.2%.
24h range 0.1677—0.1866, trading volume $25.52 million.
#ETH $BTCI don't play with high leverage. Seeing this kind of news, I'm actually glad I don't have to set deadlines for the market every day. Those holding spot can take their time to ponder, but those with leverage waiting for a macro condition to materialize probably won't have such a calm mindset.
This time, Maelstrom's Chief Investment Officer Arthur Hayes' judgment is: US dollar liquidity is recovering, but Bitcoin is expected to remain weak until the Federal Reserve or banks start expanding their balance sheets. This is his expectation, not a confirmed market scenario.
I prefer to treat it as a patience stress test rather than evidence of $BTC's long-term value impairment. The funding environment affects how much the market is willing to pay, but you can't judge the asset's long-term value based solely on this; this information also doesn't provide any insight into changes in Bitcoin's usage demand, so I won't substitute macro views for that part of the homework.
Another distinction: balance sheet expansion is a condition, not a calendar date. If it doesn't happen for a long time, in my understanding, the first to suffer might be those with funding costs who are also betting on short-term directions, rather than all long-term holders. This is also why I think it serves more as a warning for leveraged positions.
Anyway, I'm holding steady, but even holding steady means continuing to verify my judgments. A note to myself: don't use high leverage to rush a macro expectation without a clear deadline. Does $XRP election and risk appetite changes amplify event-driven trading of XRP? US political issues may alter market expectations for crypto regulation, but there is still a time lag between policy signals and actual rules. If the regulatory path becomes clearer and payment usage expands, XRP could gain independent catalysts. The opposing view is that event-driven trading rises first and then realizes profits; if on-chain payment volume and spot liquidity do not improve, political hype cannot be considered long-term demand. Judgment should return to actual settlement, active addresses, and transaction sources, avoiding chasing highs based solely on social media sentiment. For further confirmation, I will separate news shocks, capital flows, and real usage for examination; only if at least two of these remain aligned across multiple periods will I adjust the mid-term outlook. If only short-term price or a single indicator changes, maintain caution and wait for subsequent data. Let's calculate: this time the transfer amount is about 1.17% of the remaining holdings. Seeing this ratio, I want to put aside the visual impact of "trillions of tokens" for now: to judge the movements of large holders, the scale of individual transactions must be viewed in the context of the entire ledger.
① According to Yujin's disclosure, this early SHIB large holder transferred out 1.07 trillion $SHIB today, worth 4.94 million USD, which is about 9.1% of the previously accumulated sales of 11.73 trillion tokens. My understanding is that this transfer is relatively large compared to historical sales volume, but the transfer itself cannot yet be counted as new sales.
② The data states that this address initially spent 13,700 USD to buy in and has so far sold for a total of 74.74 million USD. From another perspective, the original investment has long been covered, so I would not directly interpret their holding choices as a confidence indicator like an ordinary holder; the cost pressures borne by both parties differ.
③ Currently still holding 91.6 trillion tokens, valued at 418 million USD, which is about 88.9% of the original 103 trillion tokens. This means a significant amount of funds have been realized while the vast majority of chips remain; both can be true simultaneously, and you can't just pick one number to tell the story.
My judgment is that this news is more suitable for observing the long-term exit progress and is not sufficient to independently characterize short-term bearishness. What really matters is whether they continue to realize holdings afterward. When looking at these early large holders, which indicator do you usually pay most attention to: cumulative realized amount, remaining chip ratio, or transfer frequency?#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Actually, all the experts have their analyses: the Republicans benefit more on the long side, the Democrats benefit more on the short side. But personally, I think the overall market trend is clear. Even if the Republicans win, it doesn't necessarily mean a big rally. The financial market is generally in a contraction phase, which can't be immediately reversed just because one party wins the election. For example, before Trump took office, he promoted making America great again and increasing job opportunities. Even if tariffs were aggressively imposed, in the end, reality prevails and things wrap up hastily. Until the overall financial market eases, I still see a bearish long-term outlook.$BTC and $ETH ETF data from yesterday still hasn't fully come out, and institutions are too lazy to even make a move.
Yesterday, November 2nd, the US stock market opened, so logically the ETF fund flows should have been known by this morning. But if you look at CoinGlass, there's only one entry so far: Fidelity's FBTC net inflow of $6.7 million, BlackRock's IBIT column is empty, and the rest are all zero.
$6.7 million, what does that mean? Last Friday, October 30th, Bitcoin ETF had a single-day net outflow of $643 million, with BlackRock alone pulling out $233.7 million. Running $643 million in one day, and only $6.7 million returned after one trading day, not even one percent of the smallest fraction. This is self-preservation.
It's not bullish or bearish, it's simply no action. Institutions' current attitude is very clear: the Binance hack issue hasn't fully settled, and US tech stocks are still cutting valuations. At this time, no one wants to be the first to enter the market.
To put it more bluntly: the over $600 million that ran away last Friday hasn't returned a cent yet. But what are retail investors doing? Bitcoin long-short ratio is 2.65, Ethereum is 2.68; among those opening positions, longs are more than twice the shorts. Institutions have withdrawn and are inactive, while retail investors are desperately adding longs. Which of these two groups do you trust?
Trading strategy: BTC: Light short positions on rebounds at 77300-77400, stop loss at 77800, target 76600, if broken look at 75000.
ETH: Short near 2280 on rebound, stop loss 2317, target 2237, if broken look at 2174!
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $BTC is hovering around 77,000, $ETH is shrinking near 2,250, the panic index has slid from 37 down to 26, Binance resumed withdrawals and saw $5.8 billion flow out, yet the price stubbornly didn’t crash. The SEC, however, updated its token classification FAQ just before election day, breaking down "who controls the network" in more detail; regulatory boundaries are moving forward, just slowly.
On the US stock side, semiconductors really took a hit: Marvell’s $115 billion acquisition was slammed down 12%, Lumentum dropped 18%, Philadelphia Semiconductor fell 3.37%, but surprisingly the Dow Jones was in the green, with Amazon and Home Depot rising. The money hasn’t fled, it just shifted out of chips and into food, drink, daily necessities, and energy.
The A-shares are even more colorful: the Shanghai Composite opened lower, but battery and military sectors surged straight to limit-up, the short drama concept Wen Tou hit 5 limit-ups in 6 days, over 4,000 stocks turned green, yet volume actually shrank. In Hong Kong stocks, Henderson Land opened higher, Xiaomi and JD.com were up, but the three major oil companies were dragged down by the oil price plunge.
Looking around, no one is panicking; everyone is just repositioning, and doing so quite selectively. 5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book, after $AKE amplified orders, slippage on both entry and exit sides increased significantly. Simulated slippage for 10,000 scale buy/sell is 0.23%/0.22%, and for 100,000 scale is 1.01%/1.02%. This is a cost table, not a direction; simultaneous increase in cost on both buy and sell sides indicates overall depth is relatively thin. $LITE large buy-in cost rises. Simulated slippage for 100,000 scale buy increased from 0.27% to 0.33%. Order size should be reduced or split into batches until cost returns to an acceptable range. An on-chain address just did something worth pondering. 0xfc667…7ca06 closed a $2.96 million SKHX long position, then opened a $520,000 short position, but ended up with only about $70,000 in hand. This address's contract account has accumulated profits of $35.63 million.
Let's look at the sequence of actions: first closing the long, then opening the short, not simultaneously. Closed $2.96 million long, opened $520,000 short, less than one-fifth. This indicates it's not "bearish so liquidate and reverse," but more like unloading long risk first, then using a small position to test the direction.
Now look at the remaining $70,000. Opening $520,000 but only $70,000 left means either partial closing or margin usage changes. Regardless, the final exposed position is very small—a person who has earned $35.63 million from one account is now only willing to bet $70,000.
This is the key point to note. Retail investors see "big player reversing to short" and follow directly, but the real information from the big player is not the direction, but the position size. The $2.96 million long was cut immediately, the $70,000 short is tested slowly; this asymmetry itself is a judgment: he has bearish thoughts but is not yet confident enough to take a heavy position.
So the signal $SKHX is sending now is not "going down," but "longs are not decisive." To truly confirm the direction, watch if he continues to add to the $70,000. Position size is more honest than any shout trade.#美国10月非农前瞻：就业增长或牵动12月加息预期
US October Nonfarm Preview: Job Growth May Influence December Rate Hike Expectations
US Stock Market Analysis: Nasdaq "A Sell-off" Enters Technical Correction, But Is AI's Ledger the Real Victim?
Last night’s market looked grim by the indices, but the sentiment was split. Nasdaq fell 1.07% to 25164, S&P dropped 0.51% to 7541, both briefly down over 1% intraday, only to be dragged down at the close by chip stocks.
Nasdaq 100 has retraced over 10% from its October high, officially entering a technical correction zone. However, the Dow Jones actually rose 0.41%, and 7 out of 11 S&P sectors closed positive — the sell-off targeted AI hardware, not the entire market.
The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 3.37%, Micron dropped 5.7%, Intel continued down 8.8%, Marvell plunged 12.7%, and Oracle’s stock collapsed nearly 9% after issuing $20 billion in debt financing.
Capital is not abandoning AI; it’s re-voting on "who is burning cash and whether it’s worth it."
On the other side, progress in US-Iran talks pushed WTI down over 8%, energy sector led losses near 4%, but airlines, consumer, and financials collectively took over. Spot gold pulled back to 3946, up nearly 1.8%; 10-year US Treasury yield fell to 4.915%, with both risk aversion and cost reduction happening simultaneously.
With midterm elections and nonfarm payrolls imminent, capital isn’t fleeing but changing seats. The indices look bad, but most stocks are green; this "A sell-off" targets concentration, not confidence.#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？
US Stock Market News Analysis: AI Giants Raising $50 Billion While Crushing Chip Stocks?
Last night saw a rise followed by a fall; the Nasdaq dropped 1.07%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 3.37%, while the Dow Jones held up with a 0.41% gain supported by defensive sectors. The top volume stocks were all in decline.
Micron fell 5.78%, with a trading volume of 24.98 billion ranking first; Nvidia dropped 1.26%, 24 billion; Apple down 1.83%, 19.6 billion; Microsoft down 2.83%; AMD down 7.52%.
The most striking was Intel, continuing to fall 8.80%, with a trading volume of 14.096 billion. Its Q4 guidance was a direct reveal—PC weakness will drag on at least until the first half of 2027. Marvell has dropped 32% over three days; its $100 billion all-stock acquisition of Lumentum was treated as negative news, with Lumentum plunging 18.59% in a single day.
The biggest news: Meta, Google, and Oracle all announced financing on the same day, collectively adding nearly $50 billion to AI investments. However, Google's bond issuance cost this time was noticeably higher than in May, indicating the market's patience for "burning cash to buy growth" is wearing thin.
What is the money trading on? It's not a wholesale abandonment of AI, but a brutal sorting within AI: who is spending money, whether the spending is worthwhile, and who is being crushed by costs.
Intel is overwhelmed by PC costs, Marvell is dragged down by acquisition uncertainties, and Apple was pulled back by gross margin guidance. Even the giants increasing AI financing did not rise, indicating that capital now demands tangible returns, not just stories. $UNI burn data for November 2 is here.
Month-over-month growth of 116.7%. Don’t get too excited yet; this only means that trading volume has somewhat recovered.
Yesterday, the entire network burned 26,000 UNI, compared to only 12,000 the day before. The doubling is real, but 12,000 was the 30-day low, and 26,000 is just a slight rebound, still a bit short of the 30-day median of 30,000.
On-chain data here:
Top is Ethereum, burning 12,000 UNI, accounting for 46.2%.
Second is Base, 6,000 UNI, accounting for 23.1%.
Third is Robinhood Chain, also 6,000 UNI, 23.1%.
Robinhood Chain data is starting to rebound. On October 31, Robinhood’s burn ratio was only 8.3%, and on-chain trading volume dropped sharply.
Yesterday it bounced back directly above the 30-day median of 21.1%.
Cumulative burn has reached 113.69M UNI.
Full data in the comments👇
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $UNI All three coins are falling, with the short positions overhead pressing down. $ETH has 21.42 million shorts waiting to be liquidated above, $BNB has shallow pain points both up and down, unable to drive direction, and $HYPE is moving down the most steadily.
$ETH | Resistance 2,297.36 | Support 2,228.52
Above $ETH at 2,297, there are 21.42 million shorts waiting to be liquidated, which is 1.6 times the 13.53 million longs below. Nearly 70% of recent liquidations in the past two days are shorts, conditions for a short squeeze are still building. The 4-hour Bollinger middle band is 0.52% below price, bandwidth 2.61%, amplitude 0.74%, still narrow, price hasn't moved much. But volume ratio at 3.98 shows clear volume increase, 3-hour open interest slightly up 2%, short-term buyers are stepping in. The sideways range hasn't broken yet, but volume is coming in, someone is buying at the bottom.
$BNB | Resistance 710.80 | Support 685.99
$BNB's pain points for liquidation both up and down are only about 700,000, roughly equal, unable to drive direction, following the weak market with a slight downtrend. It is moving close to the lower edge at 685.99, with a 1.57% long pain point below and 1.99% short pain point above. The 4-hour Bollinger middle band is 1.29% above price, bandwidth 3.35%, amplitude 0.85%, very small, open interest down 3.38% in 24 hours, volume ratio 0.90 showing reduced volume, indicating no buyers for shorts.
$HYPE | Resistance 85.888 | Support 82.537
$HYPE has resistance at 85.888, 3.1 away from the current price The valuation gap between UNI and AERO, which one would you choose to buy the dip?
According to current data, AERO has a market cap of about $503 million, with an annualized holder return of about $87.88 million, corresponding to a 5.7x return multiple; UNI has a market cap of about $4.55 billion, with an annualized holder return of about $96.34 million, corresponding to a 47.2x multiple.
In other words, the market assigns a very high valuation premium to UNI. For the same scale of holder returns, UNI's valuation multiple is about 8.25 times that of AERO.
If you compare purely from the perspective of cash flow and token value capture, AERO looks cheaper. Of course, UNI's ecosystem scale, liquidity, and long-term competitiveness are stronger than AERO's.
At the current price, if you were to choose to buy the dip, would you choose to buy the dip on $UNI or $AERO???Order Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After amplifying orders for $AKE, slippage on both entry and exit sides has significantly increased. Simulated slippage for 10,000 scale buy/sell is 0.23%/0.22%, and for 100,000 scale is 1.01%/1.02%. This is a cost table, not a direction; simultaneous increase in buy and sell costs indicates overall thin depth.
$LITE large buy-in costs have risen. Simulated slippage for 100,000 scale buy increased from 0.27% to 0.33%. Reduce order size or split orders until costs return to an acceptable range. I'm still slowly recovering my investment, and I feel somewhat anxious about messages like "others are already using it so aggressively." I'm afraid of missing out on another round, and also afraid of mistaking others' big moves as reasons for me to chase the hype. I need to control this mindset.
What I saw this time is that YC CEO Garry Tan said he spends $100,000 to $200,000 annually on AI agent Tokens. His agent has already accessed all his emails, Dropbox, and Apple Notes, including psychotherapy notes from 20 years ago. I was a bit shocked after reading this: it involves very deep personal information authorization.
My judgment is that this is more like a heavy user's demand signal, not yet evidence that the crypto AI sector broadly benefits. On one hand, the high spending shows willingness to invest, but no material was given on how much time is saved or value produced, so cost can't be directly counted as achievement. On the other hand, the more private the information the agent accesses, the more specific the concerns ordinary users will have; if permissions and data protection don't keep up, then no matter how powerful the function is, it might get stuck at the authorization step. This is my speculation.
The reminder this message gives me is: when looking at AI, distinguish between Tokens consumed for reasoning and crypto assets, and also distinguish between someone spending money and your own opportunity. The road to recovering investment is already stressful enough; what I want to see next is verifiable efficiency improvements. A word for myself and friends still enduring: don't let anxiety make decisions for you. 💪$BTC is hovering around 77,000, $ETH has retreated to near 2,250, the fear index dropped from 37 to 26, Binance resumed withdrawals and saw $5.8 billion flow out, but prices didn’t crash, shorts are piling up and longs aren’t in a hurry.
In the US stock market, semiconductors really took a hit: Marvell’s $115 billion acquisition was slammed down 12%, Lumentum dropped 18%, Philadelphia Semiconductor fell 3.37%, yet the Dow Jones is surprisingly in the green. Money hasn’t fled, it just shifted from chips to food, drink, daily necessities, and energy.
The A-shares market is even more extreme: the index opened lower but there’s a lot of activity underneath. The short drama concept Wen Tou hit 5 daily limit-ups in 6 days, battery leader Longpan surged straight to the limit, military and aerospace stocks followed suit, over 4,000 stocks turned green, and volume shrank, indicating it’s not a frantic rush but a selective move.
Hong Kong’s tech index bounced over 2 points, Chinese concept stock Jinlong rose over 2%, but oil stocks were dragged down by the sharp plunge in oil prices.
Looking around, the most conflicted is the crypto circle: money is flowing out but prices haven’t crashed; US semiconductor stocks took a hit but the Dow is up; A-shares themes are rotating limit-ups but volume is shrinking — none of this is panic, it’s money repositioning carefully, choosing spots to squat.#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？
❓Why does the crypto industry pay so much attention to an election that doesn’t choose a president?
❓Can these historical market trends be used to predict the next market moves?
This article will help answer your questions 🤔 Feel free to leave your different opinions in the comments 💬Don't just stare at the charts and draw gates there! Last night’s chain of bloodbath, how many people thought institutions had already packed up and left? But after checking last night’s spot ETF movements, wow, the moves of these Wall Street old foxes really made me laugh.
First, look at $BTC. A while ago (on the 30th), it plunged over 80 million in one day, making people’s scalps tingle, but yesterday, it actually had a net inflow of 850,000 USD. Although this amount is just a drop in the bucket in crypto, the signal is clear: institutions don’t want to cut losses at this point and have started tentatively buying in.
Next, $ETH is even more extreme. It was bleeding heavily almost every day recently, but yesterday it surprisingly had an inflow of over 14 million. Don’t get too excited though; this volume is still at retail investor level. Big players like BlackRock are still playing dead with no major moves.
The most interesting is $SOL. Yesterday’s ETF data was all zeros—zero inflow, zero outflow. Both whales and institutions have completely given up, with no desire to support or dump the price. It has now become purely retail investors cutting each other’s throats.
Summary: Current ETF data shows a halt in the decline and cautious observation. Short-term funds are trading inside, but big capital hasn’t put real money in. Without large funds supporting the bottom, the market rebound is all baseless water. Don’t get too excited and chase the highs.
Institutions are all watching from the sidelines now. Are you planning to cut losses during the rebound today, or hold on stubbornly?
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $BTC volatility code found: it’s all about clearing long and short fuel points back and forth!
$BTC long-short clearing map: Bitcoin’s movement yesterday was almost fluctuating around long-short fuel points. First, it cleared the short pain point at 78800, then after clearing, it oscillated downward, clearing the long pain point below at 77200 (see Figure 1).
The intraday long pain point is 76200, but there are three short clearing pain points at 77700, 78500, and 79000, indicating an increase in market participants bearish and shorting. (see Figure 2)
Wintermute believes that if 76800 cannot hold, $BTC will fall into a bearish trend; the founder of Formula News also sold one-third of his Bitcoin. Exactly. Beat alone won't pump if guidance is weak. Helios is the key - 8x GPU per rack, 100kW liquid-cooled = sticky infra revenue. If they guide +35% shipments into Q4, premium holds. Long but watching guidance $AMDWhat I most want to add to this judgment is "when is the judgment considered wrong." After self-studying quantitative analysis, I developed a habit: whenever I see a directional judgment, I try to find its failure conditions; otherwise, it's easy to rationalize any market movement. 🤖
According to PANews, Arthur Hayes stated on X that US dollar liquidity is re-accumulating; before the Federal Reserve and/or banks start expanding their balance sheets, he expects Bitcoin to perform weakly. I would treat this as a conditional judgment about $BTC rather than an already verified rule.
If I were to write it as a strategy, I would note: if no Fed or bank balance sheet expansion has been observed yet, maintain the assumption of "insufficient liquidity support," while recording whether the price continuously contradicts this. My judgment is that this message is more suitable as a research filter; using it directly to judge direction is a bit rough.
The advantage is shifting attention from shouting "bullish" or "bearish" to verifiable conditions, which facilitates post-analysis. The flaw is obvious: the material does not define the timeframe or magnitude of "weakness," so if it drags on indefinitely, it can't be tested. Conversely, even if balance sheet expansion occurs, it doesn't directly imply that funds will flow into Bitcoin; this is a link I believe needs separate verification.
I will first supplement the observation period and failure criteria, then see if this rule has explanatory power, without giving celebrities' judgments immunity from testing.On November 3rd, $BTC pulled back from a high, with major inflows of 721 million USD and outflows of 622 million USD, resulting in a net inflow of about 98.83 million USD, equivalent to 0.42% of a 23.8 billion USD trading volume. Large buy orders accounted for 65.7%, and active buy orders accounted for 53.7%. Simply put, the price is falling, but large orders are not selling off.
The spot ETF side shows the pressure more clearly: in the latest fund flow data, IBIT had a net outflow of 246.8 million USD, FBTC had a net inflow of 10.59 million, and ARKB, HODL, BTCO, BRRR, EZBC were all zero, totaling a net outflow of about 236 million USD.
In other words, this round of selling pressure mainly comes from the ETF side.
There is another variable: today, November 3rd, is the US midterm election voting day. In the prediction market, traders give the Democrats a 91.5% chance of taking the House and a 65.5% chance of taking the Senate.
In short: on one side, ETFs are flowing out; on the other, major large orders are biased toward buying, with sellers being somewhat stronger.
Short recommendation near 78,900, with simultaneous liquidation intensity of 1.2 billion USD across the three major exchanges, offering high cost performance. Midterm elections are not just a political contest; the real test for the crypto market lies ahead!
Don't just focus on the election results to guess price movements. What truly impacts the crypto space are the changes in U.S. fiscal policy, regulatory stance, and market liquidity after the elections.
1. Changes in Congress composition may pose obstacles to fiscal policy
The Democrats have a chance to contest the House of Representatives, but the Senate race remains intense. If partisan divisions deepen in Congress, fiscal stimulus policies may face resistance, and market liquidity expectations could be affected, causing BTC to face short-term pressure.
2. The CLARITY Act is the real focus for the crypto community
The bill previously stalled, and whether it can make progress again is critical. If the Republicans maintain their advantage, there may still be room to advance crypto regulatory policies; if the Democrats gain more seats, regulatory directions might shift, with particular attention needed on the impact on DeFi and altcoins.
3. $BTC and $ETH may follow different rhythms going forward.
BTC has stronger liquidity and may be sold off first during market panic, but it also tends to regain attention more easily when funds recover.
ETH requires extra caution. With prior outflows from spot ETFs and regulatory uncertainties, its short-term performance may be more sensitive. If the regulatory environment tightens, ETH and the altcoin sector could face increased pressure.
This election is not just about who wins or loses but about the ultimate direction of policy.
BTC's key focus is on capital inflows, while ETH's is on regulatory and ETF developments. $OKB prediction market data shows about a 92% chance the Democrats will win the House and about a 68% chance they will win the Senate, with the most likely outcome being either a split Congress or a Democratic sweep. The Republicans have only a 5.5% chance of holding both chambers. The blogger believes this will have three layers of impact: short-term pressure on cryptocurrency prices but possibly reverse liquidations triggered by contract speculation; a stronger hawkish stance from the Federal Reserve, possibly raising rates by 50 basis points in December; and tighter crypto regulation, weakening institutional buying. The conclusion is that the overall trend from now until the end of the year will be volatile downward movement. It is recommended to follow the main probability trend, keep a small position to guard against black swan events, and avoid betting on low-probability reversals. Everyone must be cautious; the results come out on the 6th, and these days are very critical. Control yourself and do not open new positions.The purchase of 27,553 ETH reminds me that in the futures market, large orders entering are often interpreted as "capital is bullish," but experienced traders still need to distinguish whether this is an active position build or serves another purpose. When I see such news, I usually first ask why the money is coming, rather than rushing to look at how big the money is.
Bitquery tracking shows that this previously considered whale trade purchase is linked to funds suspected to be stolen. What’s different in the crypto market is that on-chain tracking can trace the path of funds, but the true intent behind the addresses is still not necessarily clear, and "suspected" cannot be taken as a final conclusion.
My judgment is that this news weakens the bullish narrative of whale buying and cannot be directly interpreted as bearish for $ETH’s price. If the funds are indeed related to theft, then the purchase may not be an expression of confidence in the asset; this is my speculation. Going forward, I will pay more attention to verifying the source of funds rather than treating large buy orders as a market indicator.🐉 The Memecoin sector is undergoing a "polarization under a narrative vacuum." The overall share has shrunk from the bull market peak of 18% to 3.7%, with funds clearly flowing into sectors with practical logic such as AI and RWA.
🐕 $DOGE's functional narrative is delayed, and its liquidity structure is fragile. The market cap remains around $13 billion, but it has dropped about 60% this year, with the price running along the lower edge of the 30-day range. Early developers claimed that "adding smart contracts could push it into the top five," but no substantial implementation has been seen so far. A more hidden risk is that 70% of the trading volume is concentrated in two exchanges, with Binance alone accounting for over one-third. Despite the large market cap, it lacks distributed depth, and price elasticity is structurally discounted.
🐸 The $PEPE ETF is a real institutional bet, but the market has yet to buy in. Canary Capital has submitted an S-1 amendment for a spot PEPE ETF, intending to hold tokens directly on Cboe BZX. This makes PEPE no longer a purely sentiment-driven asset but has the embryonic form of a structured product narrative. However, the price is still repeatedly testing the weekly downtrend line, having retraced over 80% from the 2024 high. The fixed supply means there is absolutely no supply-side buffer, so price movements depend entirely on demand.
🐲 Whether a new meme born in 2026 will stably reach a $1 billion market cap; before that, the recovery of old coins is better seen as a liquidity pulse rather than the start of a new cycle.
#Robinhood链上交易激增，币股Meme成主角 $BTC is hovering around 76800, down nearly 2%, $ETH retreated to around 2250, and the fear index dropped from 37 to 26. After Binance resumed withdrawals, net outflows decreased from 7 billion to 3.5 billion, but order book depth shrank by 30%. The assets are being moved, not sold off.
In the US stock market, semiconductors are really in trouble. Marvell's acquisition of Lumentum backfired, with Lumentum plunging 18%. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 3.37%, yet the Dow Jones was actually up. The money hasn't left the market; it just shifted out of chips.
The A-shares market is completely disconnected. Yesterday, media stocks surged 7.77%, short dramas, games, and AI manga dramas hit the daily limit, brokers also moved, with trading volume approaching 1.8 trillion. On the policy side, swap facilities and repurchase loans are providing underlying support.
Looking around, the most conflicted is the crypto circle: money is flowing out, but prices haven't collapsed; shorts are piling up, and longs aren't panicking. Next, it depends on the election situation and which side of the order book breaks first. Prediction markets are heating up, and I think the crypto space has gained another entry point, but it's not time to celebrate just yet. Normally, trading focuses on prices, but here the focus is on whether a certain event will happen, which does allow for discussions beyond just candlestick charts. However, the odds are just judgments given by the funds within the market, not factual confirmations. With little money involved, it's easy to be misled. I'm a bit worried that newcomers, who haven't even figured out how to use crypto wallets, are already taking screenshots of odds as solid proof, which looks quite troubling.Damn! In the past three midterm elections, $BTC has plummeted!
Here is Bitcoin's performance after the last 3 midterm elections:
2014: Lost control of both chambers, bottomed around $171 within 71 days, a drop of -48%
2018: Lost control of the House, bottomed around $3200 within 39 days, a drop of -50%
2022: Lost control of the House, bottomed around $15500 within 13 days, a drop of -16%
Prediction market data shows the probability of Democrats taking the House surged from 92% to 95%, and the probability of Democrats taking the Senate is 72% #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？
Looks like losing the House is a done deal 🤔️, just worried about losing both chambers! In the term "maximum annual issuance rate," I think the "maximum" is more important to focus on than the reduction rate. To pour some cold water first: I don't take this news as a short-term supply-demand reversal; the positive narrative around $NEAR might be running ahead of the actual changes. The news says governance has voted to approve the issuance reduction plan, which is planned to be implemented in phases, but it still requires review and approval by the security council, a grace period, and then adoption by validators through an upgrade.
I am cautious for two reasons. First, the issuance cap does not equal actual sell pressure; fewer issued coins cannot be directly translated into an equivalent reduction in market sell-offs. If someone estimates that buying demand can easily push prices based on this, I think they skip the crucial step of whether holders actually sell. Second, improved supply constraints do not automatically bring new demand. My guess is that if usage demand does not keep up, this is more like easing dilution pressure rather than a sufficient condition for value revaluation.
Of course, bulls might also be right: verifiable supply arrangements themselves can reduce long-term holders' concerns about rule uncertainty. If the changes are actually implemented and we see sustained usage demand, not just lively discussions around issuance reduction, I will retract this bearish view. My reminder to myself is not to imagine that a slight reduction on the supply side means a large increase on the demand side. $BEAT Still not aggressively dumping? The dog whales' funds are slowly running away. 0.105-0.108 can't hold steady, 0.1 also won't drop further, hovering around the moving average. The upward momentum is somewhat strong. Are they really going to make a big move? Dog whales, if you're going to do something, do it quickly.
OKX BEAT Long-Short Ratio (Core Structure)
Retail investors: ↓ 2.31 → Bullish
Number of large holders: ↓ 1.42 → Bullish
Large holders' positions: ↓ 0.81 → Bearish
Main force inclination: Extremely bearish
The structure is a classic divergence of “more people bullish, positions bearish, main force extremely bearish.”
Retail and large holder numbers lean bullish, but actual positions and main force are extremely bearish.
This structure often leads to a "bull trap followed by a dump" or a high-level pullback.
Around the 1st of each month, about 17–22M BEAT (about 5–6% of total circulation, valued around $1.8–2M) unlocks, involving Community, Advisors, Foundation, Team.
A batch unlocked on November 1st, with more continuing in December and January.
Project progress: Recently token burns (~1.25M BEAT), weekly revenue about $128,000, some deflationary mechanism, but supply pressure remains.
$BTC $ETH #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ BTC
Current pattern: 76,732, 77,000 under pressure afterward
Resistance levels
Short-term resistance: $77,800–78,800 (rebound high range from November 1 to 2)
Mid-term resistance: $80,000–81,000 (psychological barrier, Strategy average buy price around $80,846)
Strong resistance: $82,000–83,000
Support levels
Current support: $76,000–76,500 (key level watched by the market, a valid break below may trigger a downside)
Secondary support: $75,000–75,500
Strong support: $73,000–74,000 (needs further verification)
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $BTC #Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？
The author predicts Circle's earnings report will show slightly better-than-expected profits but weaker revenue. It is unlikely to be a fully above-expectation report. $CRCL
Factors supporting a slightly better-than-expected earnings report: $xCRCL
Performance record 😇 Circle has exceeded Wall Street consensus EPS expectations in 4 of the last 5 quarters. In Q1 and Q2 of 2026, thanks to strong net interest income, the company achieved double-digit beats.
USDC circulation and reserve income 😇 A large portion of Circle's operating income comes from earnings generated by USDC reserves (short-term U.S. Treasuries and cash equivalents). The stable growth in USDC market cap this quarter and sustained short-term interest rates provide a predictable and high-margin income baseline.
Global ecosystem and enterprise adoption 😇 Expanding global coverage in international markets and establishing strategic partnerships (such as supporting ecosystem partners and entering new markets) help maintain active transaction volumes and wallet integrations. Apple’s 12% revenue gain and roughly 17% iPhone growth show demand remains resilient, but the Q4 read is not entirely clean: EPS included about $0.05 from tariff refunds. More important, 45%-46% gross-margin guidance puts memory costs and AI services at the center of the next test.
#AppleQ4MarginPressure Is it safe once it rebounds to $77,734? I've been watching the derivatives data, and it actually makes me more nervous. The strength of this pullback from 76K—can it really be called a reversal? After the Binance incident, BTC dropped near 76K and is now hovering around 76,900. On the surface, it looks like the decline has stopped, but when I check open interest and funding rates, it feels more like short-term shorts covering to support the price rather than new longs actively entering. There's a big difference between the two; the former fades once used up. The most fragile link is actually the leverage structure. After the price fell from around 79,300 to 80,000, the overhead resistance hasn't been digested, and during the rebound, the funding rate hasn't turned significantly negative, indicating shorts aren't crowded and the squeeze momentum is limited. In other words, this rebound lacks the fuel of forced liquidations and is rising somewhat "politely." The funding preference also reveals the sentiment. When mainstream coins rebound, altcoins haven't shown decent elasticity, indicating risk appetite is still contracting, and money prefers to stay on the sidelines rather than in attack mode. At times like this, chasing the rebound usually has a low cost-performance ratio. Of course, there is a bullish path: if volume can push and close above 79,300, shorts will be forced to cover, funding preference may quickly improve, and altcoins will have a window for catch-up gains. But the risk is that if 76,200 is lost, leveraged longs will be forced to reduce positions, the rebound structure will collapse, and sentiment will retest lows. My current judgment is: this is a correction, not a reversal. The real confirmation signal hasn't appeared yet; patience is more valuable than speed. The above is my personal observation and does not constitute any trading advice. #BBrent crude closed down 7.63%, WTI closed down 7.36%. In the early hours of the same day, a Hyperliquid whale spent $51.78 million to buy long positions in Brent crude, increasing the Brent position to 868,800 contracts.
The account looks like this: combined long positions in the two oils total $147 million, with Brent at $91.176 million showing an unrealized loss of $78,700, WTI at $56.192 million showing an unrealized loss of $876,200, totaling an unrealized loss of $954,900. Meanwhile, the US oil position was reduced by 600,000 contracts during the same period.
The losses on the two positions are completely asymmetrical, which is more noteworthy than the total loss. The Brent position of $91.176 million only lost $78,700, indicating the added position was close to the latest price; the WTI position of $56.192 million lost $876,200, reflecting an earlier, higher cost. The same person is bottom-fishing on one position and stuck on the other.
Why dare to add? The news is that the Iranian president stated the Supreme Leader has granted the government partial authority to advance peace negotiations. Peace talks mean a retreat of geopolitical premiums, which means oil prices fall—this is obvious. What he bought is not the current price, but the probability of "talks failing." Partial authority is not full authorization; the middle path is still long.
So this bet is on one thing: the market has priced peace too fully.
A question to leave: $147 million position with an unrealized loss of less than $95,000, or 0.06%. This is not stubborn holding, but position management. What should be learned is not whether he is bullish or bearish, but how he can hold on with such a small loss.The US stock market dragged down the overall market, but the whale Arthur Hayes made the right call by liquidating altcoins this time!
$ENA: $0.196 > $0.169, down 13.77%
$ETHFI: $0.6499 > $0.5727, down 11.87%
$ETH: $2375 > $2257, down 4.96%
$UNI: $6.93 > $6.91, down 0.28%
The liquidation on 10.24 avoided this wave of declines to varying degrees, with ENA dropping the most at 13.77%, while UNI was the strongest, almost holding steady On November 2nd, the trends of silver, copper, and natural gas were completely driven by their respective fundamental logics, showing a pattern of "silver rebound, copper consolidation, and gas divergence," which sharply contrasted with the macro sentiment triggered by the crude oil plunge.
---
🥈 Silver: Oversold rebound leads commodity gains
COMEX December silver futures closed up 2.91% at $50.71/oz, reaching an intraday high of $50.888, a 3.27% increase, making it the most resilient commodity of the day.
The core logic behind the rebound is that the oil price crash opened space for inflation expectations to ease. Silver, which had sharply dropped the previous day due to tech stock sell-offs and liquidity squeezes, found a recovery window amid bargain buying and a weakening dollar. Silver had fallen 7.74% over the past week, breaking key support levels, and the extreme short-term oversold condition provided technical grounds for the rebound. However, it is important to note that the probability of a December rate hike remains high at 74.9%, and the high interest rate and strong dollar environment have not fundamentally reversed. Thus, silver's rebound is more of a corrective move rather than the start of a trend reversal.
---
🔴 Copper: Tug-of-war between strong reality and weak expectations, consolidating at high levels
Copper's movement differs from the "macro sentiment-driven" crude oil and silver. The "strong reality" of low domestic inventories and mining constraints limits downside, while "weak expectations" from rate hike prospects and demand softness cap upside.
LME 3-month copper closed up 1.21% at $14,325.5/ton, Shanghai copper main contract closed slightly down 0.35% at 107,810 CNY/ton, showing slight divergence between domestic and international markets but overall maintaining a high-level range. Domestic electrolytic copper social inventory dropped to 73,100 tons, with Shanghai inventories hitting new lows for the year. Spot premiums remain strong between 1,100-1,450 CNY/ton, indicating a tight circulation pattern that remains unchanged. Mining constraints are also firm: Chilean copper output has fallen to the lowest in at least 20 years, with only a mild production rebound expected next year. The tight supply balance on the raw material side remains the strongest anchor for copper prices.
Pressure comes from macro factors: the Fed's year-end rate hike expectations continue to weigh, combined with high prices suppressing downstream consumption. End-user purchases are mainly on a replenishment basis, lacking clear demand-driven momentum. Copper prices are likely to continue wide high-level oscillations between $14,000-$14,500/ton in the short term. Directional breakthroughs will depend on AI terminal orders materializing or clarity on tariff policies.
---
🔥 Natural Gas: US production decline vs. European profit-taking, divergent trends
Natural gas showed a "strong US gas, corrective European gas" divergence, sharply contrasting with the crude oil plunge.
US market: Natural gas futures prices rose, driven mainly by weekend production declines, with the Appalachian shale gas region showing the most significant cuts, indicating that low prices are prompting producers to actively reduce supply. Additionally, slightly colder weather forecasts and the start of the heating season provide extra demand support. However, upside is constrained by two factors: most US regions are expected to remain above seasonal average temperatures in the coming weeks, and the volume of gas flowing to LNG export terminals has decreased, leaving more gas in the domestic market and creating pressure.
European market: TTF near-month futures fell 3% to about €101/MWh, and UK NBP futures dropped 3.2% to 249.40 pence/therm, representing profit-taking after a 34%-36% surge in October. However, the depth of the correction is expected to be limited. The EU gas storage rate is only about 74%, the lowest early November level since records began in 2009. Moreover, Middle East LNG transport disruptions force European buyers to continue competing with Asia for spot resources, so the tight supply-demand underlying structure remains intact.
---
💎 Summary
Silver trades on "inflation expectation repair after the oil price crash," copper on the "ongoing tug-of-war between low inventory strong reality and macro weak expectations," and natural gas on a divergence independent of crude oil between "US supply contraction" and "European profit-taking." The common feature among the three is that the macro sentiment shock from the crude oil plunge did not cause all commodities to collapse simultaneously; their own fundamental differences determine their directions. The rebound/resilience of silver and natural gas instead indicates that beyond macro noise, the market still prices commodities with real supply constraints.The $BTC address of the US government moved again, just now depositing 6,215 BTC to Coinbase.
Whenever these guys start moving coins to exchanges, historically the market never does well; it always drops first as a courtesy.
Over 500 million dollars worth of spot is hanging overhead, and the buying power on the exchange can't hold it at all.
It's obvious they're going to dump; whoever wants to catch the bottom can go ahead, I'm ready to watch it fall.
#BTC
$BTC
👇24h -1.90%, current price 2,251.97.
From 2,295.50 to now, -43.53.
Low 2,237.42, high 2,317.98.
Those who only look at gains and losses without considering position are playing the lottery, not trading.
This position in hand is still held, I haven't changed the position size.
I only guard one condition for this trade.
If it goes with the trend, let it go, no adding or reducing.
There are still 98.0 points away from 2350.
If 2350 doesn't hold, it means I was wrong about the direction.
I don't predict, I only wait for conditions to be triggered.
I haven't moved once on my side.
$ETH
#苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 Oil prices fell 7%, which should be a good thing.
BTC still dropped below 77,000.
Now around 76,900, ETH 2,256, SOL 92.
Yesterday all day, the market logic was reversed.
WTI crude oil plunged 7.36%, Iran softened its stance on negotiations. Oil price down = inflation pressure eased = theoretically good for risk assets.
But when the US stock market opened, money didn’t flow into tech stocks, it went to defensive sectors:
Philadelphia Semiconductor -3.37%, Nasdaq -1.07%, Dow Jones actually +0.41%.
The market’s patience for this round of AI spending is bottoming out. Oracle wants to raise 20 billion, Meta is considering issuing bonds, Microsoft just issued 25 billion last week. What used to be called expansion is now called debt.
Crypto is cooling off along with it.
So the current picture is:
Good news is coming out, but prices are falling.
This is the same as the night of October 29 — the decision met expectations, but BTC fell from 81,300 back below 80,000.
Good news not pushing prices up is more worrisome than bad news.
Because it means there aren’t enough buyers to take over.
But some are buying against the trend:
A listed company bought 124 BTC yesterday at an average price of 80,526 — now at an unrealized loss.
Tonight is the US midterm election.
At times like this, I usually do only one thing: reduce my position to a level where losses won’t affect my mood. #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $XAUT /USDT: Gold Faces a Critical Recovery Battle
Tether Gold trades at $3,935.60, down 0.07%. The 24-hour high is $3,958.80, while the low is $3,889.00. Turnover stands at $14.47M.
Market Insight: Price remains below MA10 at $3,964.90 and MA20 at $4,034.40, showing bearish pressure despite a recent bounce from $3,872.40.
Next Move: A breakout above $3,958.80 could strengthen recovery.
TG1: $3,960 TG2: $4,000 TG3: $4,035
#AppleQ4MarginPressure $BTC The US government wallet has dumped 6,215 BTC to Coinbase in the past two days, equivalent to $520 million in spot.
Historically, every time this guy deposits to exchanges, the market always dips first as a sign of respect; previous transfers were accompanied by sell-offs and pullbacks.
Large amounts of spot are sent directly to trading channels; whoever takes the position here gets burned. Just follow the trend and be bearish.
#BTC
$BTC
👇Will the security discount of the $BNB platform continue to affect BNB? Major security incidents on trading platforms cause users to reassess custody, reserves, and ecosystem connections. Platform tokens are usually more influenced by sentiment than the underlying public chain. If operations are continuous, withdrawals are normal, and disclosures are transparent, the risk premium can recede. The opposing view is that trust repair is slower than price recovery; if reserve doubts or service interruptions occur, valuations need further downward adjustment. It is necessary to separately observe platform usage, token rights, and net outflows; brand activity does not automatically increase value for BNB holders. When further confirming, I will separate the impact of news shocks, capital flows, and actual usage for examination; only if at least two of these remain aligned over multiple periods will I adjust the mid-term judgment. If only short-term price or a single indicator changes, maintain caution and wait for subsequent data. Lookonchain shows that Bitcoin ETFs had a single-day net outflow of about $614 million, and Ethereum ETFs about $102 million. The numbers are striking, but they only indicate that funds are moving, not automatically implying a directional judgment.🫠
I prefer to see this as a short-term risk budget tightening: some redeem to reduce volatility exposure, while others are just rebalancing. If onlookers directly translate "redemption" as "bearish," sentiment will be amplified, and prices are easily driven by the narrative.
But also remind yourself: single-day flow noise is large, and you can't draw trend conclusions from one day. Next, watch whether multiple consecutive days move in the same direction, whether spot prices dull the outflows, and whether funds return—this provides more information than fixating on a single number.
So my first reaction is not fear, but to ask: is this position management or an expectation change? If it were you, would you wait for data confirmation or trade based on sentiment first? #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ #苹果新CEO迎来iPhone18首份成绩单 The U.S. midterm elections do not elect the president, yet they attract attention from both the crypto industry and financial markets. On one side, crypto-related PACs invest large sums in congressional elections, supporting candidates they endorse or opposing those they do not; on the other side, the market discusses historical statistics such as "the probability of the U.S. stock market rising about 95% one year after midterms" and "BTC's past bear market lows have all occurred after midterm elections." #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Why does the crypto industry place such importance on an election that does not choose the president? Can these historical trends be used to predict the next market moves? ❶ Why does crypto heavily invest in midterm elections? The key lies in congressional seats. The U.S. midterm elections reelect all 435 House seats and about one-third of the Senate seats. The election results may change the majority party in both chambers of Congress, and legislative issues related to digital asset market structure and taxation are closely tied to Congress. Therefore, for the crypto industry, the midterms are not only about the victory or defeat of individual candidates but also affect the future composition of Congress and the legislative environment. 📌 According to CoinDesk, before the election, the combined election-related spending of three major crypto industry super PACs was about $170 million, including approximately $154 million spent by Fairshake and its affiliated organizations. These funds are used for election activities such as advertising, mail, and text messages to support or oppose different congressional candidates. Therefore, what deserves attention is not The current gold rebound mainly comes from three aspects:
First, the short-term decline in U.S. Treasury yields and the dollar has reduced the holding cost of gold.
Second, the sharp drop in international oil prices has eased inflation and tightening expectations.
Third, after the previous sharp decline, short covering and oversold buying have followed.
However, the large-scale moving average bearish structure remains, and until the daily chart retakes the 4000 level, bulls will find it difficult to gain control. More importantly, this week features a dense schedule with the U.S. midterm elections, ISM manufacturing PMI, and Friday's nonfarm payroll data. Before these data releases, funds tend to test short positions at high levels and cover at low levels rather than launching a unilateral rally directly. $XAU