Orbit Post Sitemap
What’s most worth watching today isn’t the price increase, but the "dislocation" where prices should have risen but didn’t: $BTC stayed almost flat all day, $ETH also fluctuated narrowly, only showing a very slight upward tilt in the evening. $BTC returned to around $81,600, and $ETH hovered near $2,400. On the surface it looks calm, but underneath lies a repeatedly discussed macro variable — the probability of interest rate hikes is close to zero, and market expectations for rate hikes are extremely low. With expectations gone, why hasn’t the price immediately been pushed up? 🤔 This is exactly the signal most easily misread right now. Most people treat "good news materializing" as a switch for "immediate surge," but market digestion of expectations is never instantaneous. The fading of rate hike worries is a typical slow variable: it first changes the opportunity cost of capital, then alters position structures, and only finally reflects in price. The current sideways movement looks more like the market taking time to fully understand this logic, rather than rejecting it. In other words, the real divergence isn’t in direction, but in pace. What the crowd underestimates is that when rate hike expectations slide from "very low" to "almost zero," marginal changes have actually occurred, but prices haven’t fully priced it in yet. If in the next few trading days the market fully accepts this expectation, bullish momentum will likely be released accordingly. This is also the core reason I believe there’s still a chance this year for $BTC to challenge the 90k range and $ETH to reach the 28k range — not a trade call, but a judgment based on an expectation gap not yet fully priced in. 📈 What to look for as confirmation? First, whether this slight upward tilt in the evening can continue into consecutive closes higher; second,Uniswap governance token UNI has dropped 29% over the past four weeks, underperforming Bitcoin and Ethereum. Meanwhile, the total liquidity of the Uniswap decentralized exchange remains around $4 billion. (The Defiant)
Project updates need to distinguish between technical completion and commercial realization. Code release, testnet launch, mainnet deployment, and actual user payment are several different stages; progress in an earlier stage cannot be used to endorse results in a later stage.
The reputation of partners does not automatically translate into income for token holders. Whether business growth is passed on to tokens through mechanisms that rely on additional issuance or subsidies determines if project development and token holder returns can be linked.
My focus is on delivered products and sustainable usage, rather than converting a single announcement into an unfounded target price.
#UNI #BTC #ETH $UNI $BTCWild Swings for October $BTC
*BTC ETF Oct — whipsaw:*
- *Oct 7:* -$485M crash — biggest outflow since June
- *Oct 14-16:* -$343M more, cumulative -$915M low
- *Oct 19-21:* +$1.08B flip — Mon +$527M (IBIT $665M), Wed +$528M — BTC touched $84.8k, cumulative back to +$146M
- *Oct 22:* -$636M — erased entire rally in one day, largest since June 25
- *Oct 23:* -$138M follow-through
*Net Oct:* *-$175M to -$620M* depending on data source, vs +$2.65B Sep. Weekly volume still $2.6B+ — trading. The real highlight of this UNI move is not "how much was bought," but that "the path is clear" 🚦
Hayden personally confirmed that the first large UNI transaction executed through regulated traditional financial channels has landed. This is the first time a DeFi token has gone through this compliant settlement channel. Note, this is different from the UNI futures bulk trade completed by FalconX and GSR on CME — futures are cash-settled and do not touch the spot market. But looking at both together, the signal is clear: UNI is being integrated into the compliant toolbox of traditional finance.
For retail investors, don’t rush to interpret this as "institutions scooping up and locking chips" in the short term. The first layer of meaning behind opening the compliant channel is to provide institutions that previously wanted to participate but dared not, with legal participation and hedging tools, not to guarantee they immediately buy at the bottom. The real long-term variable is that UNI is gradually transforming from an "on-chain governance token" into an asset that can be allocated, hedged, and settled within the traditional financial framework. The logic of valuation is indeed changing, but what’s changing is the "entry qualification," not a "guarantee of price increase."
Compliance is a slow variable, not a pump button. After this channel opens, do you think UNI will first hold above 8, or first retest 7? Place your bet on the direction in the comments 👇BTC spot ETF funds fluctuate repeatedly, batch strategy under 80,000 support
I believe single-day ETF subscriptions and redemptions should not be overinterpreted. After net inflows from October 19-21, there was a slight outflow on the 23rd. The key is not the "outflow" itself, but that the outflow scale has significantly narrowed, indicating that short-term selling pressure is weakening. The repeated fund movements resemble chip redistribution within a key range rather than a systematic institutional withdrawal.
BTC has been consolidating around 80,000 for a week, with the previous dense trading area forming support. If continuous outflows only cause a quick dip followed by a rapid recovery, it is more likely a shakeout rather than a reversal. Long-term allocation funds will not change their strategy based on two or three days of data; what really needs to be monitored is whether the outflow continues to expand.
ETH's consolidation period actually provides a window for positioning: once BTC stabilizes, funds may spill over to ETH, whose ETF expectations have not yet been fully priced in. I continue to hold my long positions, betting on a catch-up rally after risk appetite recovers.
In terms of operations, do not chase highs or sell in panic; build positions in batches. If the ETF returns to sustained net inflows, consider it a signal to add positions. Currently waiting for support confirmation and fund inflow resonance. (Not investment advice)#HOODQ3TradingGrowth 3 keys for $HOOD & $xHOOD on Oct 27 (#HOODQ3TradingGrowth):
1. Bearish: On-chain txs & active addresses dropped sharply.
2. Bullish: 150K+ accounts activated the new AI Agent.
3. Catalysts: Robinhood chain support + Middle East expansion.
Odds sit at 72¢ for a Q3 beat. Longing the AI hype or shorting the on-chain drop? 🚀 or 🩸? 👇#亚马逊AWS增长提速，Q3能否延续？ Amazon's Q3 earnings report (after market close on October 29) focuses not on revenue but on cash flow.
First, AWS is indeed accelerating, with Q3 growth expected to reach 41% (Q2 was 37%). Demand is very strong, with nearly $500 billion in backlog orders. The main bottlenecks now are capacity and power supply, not a lack of customers.
Second, advertising revenue is expected to be about $20.8 billion, remaining steady.
However, behind the attractive profit figures is massive cash burn. The company's annual AI capital expenditure is close to $220 billion, directly causing free cash flow to turn negative over the past twelve months, reaching -$7.6 billion.
In short, this earnings report will likely show a split picture of "revenue and profit both exceeding expectations, but the cash flow deficit continuing to widen." The rebound in AWS growth can indeed boost confidence, but whether the market is still willing to buy into this "crazy cash burn for the future" story is the real variable that will determine the stock price direction after the earnings.#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ SK Hynix's Q3 earnings do not rely on HBM4; HBM4 is a long-term growth driver, not a short-term performance mainstay
The core of Q3's strong performance comes from the high-priced long-term contracts for HBM3E and the price increase of general DRAM. Institutions expect operating profit to surge significantly both quarter-on-quarter and year-on-year, with the report likely to exceed expectations.
HBM4 is currently only in the early stage of capacity ramp-up, with small-scale mass production deliveries to NVIDIA starting in July. Its revenue and profit contribution in Q3 is minimal and cannot effectively boost this quarter's earnings.
The real value of HBM4 lies in 2027: its unit price is significantly higher than HBM3E, combined with NVIDIA's Vera Rubin platform scaling massively and securing long-term contracts, making it a core pillar of high gross margin next year.
Short-term risks are clear: NVIDIA's memory specification adjustments, Samsung's rapid yield improvements squeezing market share, and slower-than-expected ramp-up in mass production will suppress HBM4's short-term realization capability.
Summary: Q3 performance is supported by existing HBM3 and traditional storage price increases; HBM4 only provides valuation narrative. The key focus of this earnings report is on HBM4 yield, 2027 capacity guidance, and customer order status, which are critical for subsequent profit explosion.📊 Selling pressure emerges above Hyperliquid: bulls taking profits and shorts opening coexist
BTO is temporarily reported at about $81,850. Today, 7 key addresses on Hyperliquid placed 90 limit sell orders in the $83,400–$85,112 range, totaling about 510.22 BTC, with a nominal value of approximately $42.896 million, about 1.9%–4.0% above the current price ⚠️
Structurally, bulls taking profits early is the main theme: 5 bullish addresses placed $30.846 million "reduce only" sell orders, planning to reduce long positions after a rise. At $83,583, there is another $5.349 million regular sell order to sell 64 BTC; this account holds 124 BTC long positions, so if the position remains unchanged, the transaction will reduce holdings by about 51.6% 📉
At the same time, at $83,700 and $83,820, there are $6.701 million short opening sell orders; the corresponding accounts currently hold no BTC positions and plan to establish 80 BTC short positions after a rebound. The largest cluster of position reductions is located between $83,500 and $85,000, covering 150 BTC, about $12.638 million, accounting for about 29.5% of the total amount in the range; at $84,666, there is another approximately $8.365 million "reduce only" sell order 🧐
Overall, the sell orders above are densely layered; in the short term, attention should be paid to rebound resistance and position changes 🚨Don't be led by the "run fast" hype in the group😮💨, first separate the two issues.
BlackRock transferred $356 million in assets to Coinbase Prime, which is alarming but doesn't mean they hit the sell button🧐. Custody rebalancing, market-making arrangements, and redemption preparations can all look like this; the transfer is a fact, but a dump is just speculation.
More attention should be paid to the "direction" of ETF outflows. DWF data shows that $BTC ETF fund flows have a 0.54 correlation with the price in the previous 5 days, but only 0.03 with the following 5 days — it looks more like redemptions following price weakness, not institutions rushing ahead🏃. The $635 million single-day outflow looks fierce but is essentially a pro-cyclical retreat.
Don't lump $BTC and $ETH together. $BTC is a short-term tightening of liquidity, not a mid-term structural collapse; 81,200–81,500 is near-term support, 80,700–81,000 is stronger defense, if volume breaks don't occur, the whale logic still holds💪. $ETH is more straightforward: October ETF net outflows of $1.08 billion, partly like adjusting carriers, but the liquidation zone below 2,286 needs attention, and the $676 million long liquidation intensity is the real test⚠️.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 10.25 Crash Review: Not a Single Negative Factor, But a Triple Squeeze
Macro View Hot: Stagflation Trading Returns
Brent crude oil broke through $116, with high oil prices reinforcing the Fed's hawkish expectations, causing risk assets to be collectively drained. Coupled with AI infrastructure credit pressure (CoreWeave bond yields soaring to 15%) transmitting to tech stocks and the crypto market, the Nasdaq dropped 2.6%, and BTC followed down relentlessly.
Institutional Withdrawal: Continuous Large ETF Outflows
$BTC spot ETFs saw a net outflow of about $774 million over two days, with BlackRock IBIT single-day outflow of $254 million, showing a clear weakening of institutional buying. ETH is even worse, with October ETF cumulative outflows exceeding $1 billion, led by BlackRock's sell-off, collapsing institutional demand.
Leverage Liquidation: Death Spiral of Longs Killing Longs
BTC lost support at 79,277**; $ETH dropped to $2,296, down 4.6% for the day. In 24 hours, the entire network liquidated $260 million, with ETH long liquidations exceeding $40 million. High-leverage longs were liquidated in a chain reaction: drop → liquidation → further drop.
My Perspective:
The next key support for BTC and ETH is 2,282; if broken, $2,200 will be tested. Don't rush to catch the falling knife; wait for ETF outflows to slow + liquidation volume to shrink, which will be the right-side signal. Before the Fed decision on 10/28, cash is also a position.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ In the first three days, over one billion just came in, but on Thursday alone, 635 million was lost.
This is the real force pushing BTC back below 80,000 in this wave. The US spot Bitcoin ETF had a net outflow of about 635 million USD in one day, wiping out about 60% of the 1.07 billion inflow from the previous three days. On Friday, there was another outflow of about 138 million, turning October into a net outflow month again.
Many blame the oil prices. Brent closed at 116.72 USD on Friday, indeed the highest since April, and the Middle East news is chaotic. But I prefer to see it as an amplifier: expensive oil drags down rate cut expectations, and risk assets shrink together. The real turnaround came from the institutional funds that were originally buying.
CoinGecko now shows BTC around 79,700, about a 6% pullback from this week's high near 84,800. Saying "crash" is a bit exaggerated, and saying "no problem" is also dishonest—both the 80,000 level and the ETF cost band have been breached.
If I'm wrong, it would be like this: ETF turns back to net inflow on Monday and Tuesday next week, and the price steadily recovers to 81,500. Conversely, if outflows continue and the Fed turns hawkish again next week, then 80,000 will just be a passing point.
From now on, just focus on one thing: the direction of ETF funds is more reliable than watching K-lines.
$BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ SanDisk's revenue up 372% but halved, can the next earnings report keep exploding?
First, a contrast: Last quarter $SNDK revenue was 8.965 billion, up 372% year-over-year, with a gross margin of 84.6%. Data center revenue surged 437%. The earnings report was explosive, yet the stock price fell from 2354 to 1238, nearly halving.
It will release a new earnings report in early November. Can the high growth continue? Let's break it down into two layers.
Year-over-year numbers will likely still look good. The CFO said the global NAND market will exceed 300 billion by 2026, tripling, and reach 500 billion by 2027, with AI inference as the core driver; 8 long-term contracts locked in a floor price guaranteeing 93.9 billion minimum, covering half of 2027 and two-thirds of 2028 shipments, with the largest customer adding more after signing.
But the market fears exactly this 93.9 billion. Locked-in floor prices in long-term contracts are a double-edged sword: they raise the floor to a historical ceiling, but the ceiling is nailed down too. NAND price increases and excess profits are locked into contracts, and 93.9 billion is only about half of its current annualized revenue. Last quarter's guidance missed expectations, dropping 8% after hours, which was already a warning.
My judgment: Year-over-year high growth can continue, but the period of the steepest quarter-over-quarter price increases is over. A 15x PE and analyst target price of 2173 means institutions are betting it’s not done yet; the halved stock price means some are betting the cycle has peaked. For the next earnings report, don’t focus on revenue growth rate, focus on gross margin and prices in new long-term contracts.
#闪迪存储业务高增长能否延续？ What is the most profitable business in the crypto world? Just look at the fee rankings 💸
Today's top five fee rankings are out, and the answer lies in the "retention rate" 👇
1️⃣ $PUMP: 24h fees 5.78 million, revenue 1.94 million, retention 34% — long-time leader, but buyback and burn intensity is weaker than HYPE 🔥
2️⃣ Aethir: fees 3.75 million, revenue 750,000, retention 20% — AI + gaming GPU computing power DePIN debuts on the list, a strong dark horse 🚀
3️⃣ $HYPE: fees 3.64 million, revenue 2.78 million, retention 76% — high revenue and retention, strongest buyback and burn, a real money printer 💰
4️⃣ Polymarket: fees 2.88 million, revenue 520,000, retention 18% — prediction market is lively, but retention is relatively low 🤔
5️⃣ $UNI: fees 1.77 million, revenue 160,000, retention 9% — most revenue goes to LPs, weakest buyback and burn, making face but not money 😅
Conclusion: The most profitable business in crypto is not the one with the highest fees, but the one with high revenue retention and strong buyback and burn. HYPE currently looks like a "good business," PUMP relies on traffic, Aethir relies on narrative, and UNI and Polymarket seem more like working for LPs. 📊 Understanding retention rate is more important than chasing rankings ✨Let's recharge everyone's faith, Bitcoin $BTC How high can this bull market really go?
In the past three times, buying 535 days before the halving and holding until the halving day always resulted in gains.
2015: +185%
2018: +100%
2022: +222%
Median 185%, starting from $80,000, this means about $228,000 by April 2028.
Minimum 100%, starting from $80,000, this means about $160,000 by April 2028.
Maximum 222%, starting from $80,000, this means about $250,000 by April 2028.
So, stop torturing yourself by staring at those few lousy candlesticks all day. From $80,000 to $200,000+, there will inevitably be countless spikes and shakeouts in between, but as long as the big cycle logic doesn't change, there's really only one thing you need to do: make more principal, buy, add positions, go heavy, hold on, and then wait for the wind to come.Grayscale's list reveals an industry truth: protocol profits and token holder profits are separated by a value capture gap 📊
Grayscale separates "token holder yield" (staking + buyback - new issuance) and "adjusted profit yield," resulting in a sharp divergence. $HYPE tops token holder yield at 8.0%, relying on **99% of protocol revenue automatically used for buyback and burn**, the shortest and most solid value path. CAKE leads adjusted profit yield at 14.4%, but looking closely at the mechanism, its V3 main engine has stopped buyback and burn, with deflation relying entirely on the old V2 version—earning more does not mean distributing more.
$UNI ranks in the top ten for both, but token holder yield is only 0.8%. The fee switch is indeed on, and revenue is used for buyback and burn, but it only deflates without distribution; holders receive the "indirect benefit" of reduced supply, not cash flow. More painfully, in the latter half of the list: AAVE has a profit yield of 3.7% but a token holder yield of -1.0%; JUP 3.5% versus -2.6%. New issuance directly eats up buybacks and dividends.
💡#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 #Strategy Earnings Preview: BTC Book Gains Rebound Sharply It is completely different from Netflix and Meta: Essentially, it is a Bitcoin holding tool stock; the software main business profit is negligible, and earnings fluctuations almost entirely depend on BTC holdings, coin purchase plans, and liabilities.
✅ Four Core Earnings Tracking Points (Priority from High to Low)
1. New BTC Purchase Quantity (Most Important)
The market buys MSTR betting on its continuous accumulation of Bitcoin. If the earnings report announces fewer coin purchases this quarter than market expectations, even if BTC price does not fall, MSTR is likely to drop; exceeding expectations in accumulation tends to push it up. Latest Q3 holdings: 848,000 BTC
2. Liabilities and Financing Plans
It relies on issuing bonds and stocks to borrow money to buy BTC. Key points: whether there are new bond issuance or stock increase plans, and interest pressure. If liabilities are too high, once BTC crashes, the market will worry about liquidation risk, severely cutting valuation.
3. Fair Value of Digital Assets (Unrealized Gains/Losses)
Current accounting standards require BTC price changes to be directly recorded in the profit and loss statement, so its net profit often shows tens of billions in huge losses or gains. This profit is book unrealized gains or losses, not cash, so it is for reference only and cannot be treated as ordinary company performance. BTC rising means profit; BTC falling means huge losses.
4. Management Guidance: Future Coin Purchase Budget
Saylor said in the conference call how much money is planned to be used to buy coins next quarter, which is the core expectation of the capital gameIf we treat this week as a sector stress test, then the strength ranking has quietly been set. When BTC is moving sideways, who is secretly falling behind? The most intuitive feeling from watching the market these past two days is: quiet, but not the kind of quiet that brings reassurance. BTC is grinding around 80680, trapped intraday between 80509 and 81079. Weekend volume is already thin, and this narrow range feels more like a pause than a decision being made. It actually dipped below 80000 mid-month, but buying quickly pulled it back, indicating that there is spot and institutional support below this round number, so it doesn't seem likely to be easily lost in the short term. What really concerns me is ETH. Currently around 2375, it only fluctuated between 2368 and 2384 intraday, with even smaller volatility than BTC, but this is not stability, it's weakness. ETH/BTC has reached 33.96; since October, BTC has outperformed ETH by more than 9.2%, and the exchange rate has steadily declined, indicating that capital prefers to stay in BTC when choosing, and ETH has not yet gained the initiative. This signal is more important than the price itself because it reflects preference, not noise. Looking at OKB, it ranges from 110.70 to 111.70, having retraced about 4.5% to 5.2% over 7 days, slowly sliding down from the weekly high of 118.13. Spot 24-hour trading volume is roughly 30 to 41 million USD, and the perpetual funding rate is 0.0034%, slightly neutral to low.The crypto market broadly declined over the weekend, with BTC falling below 80,000 and ETH dropping under 2,300. The core reasons are the rise in US Treasury yields and the delay in rate cut expectations, combined with continuous outflows from spot ETFs. Weekend liquidity was poor, and after breaking key levels, a chain reaction of leveraged liquidations accelerated the sell-off.
In the short term, a strong reversal is unlikely; the market will most likely consolidate and bottom out through oscillations. If the Federal Reserve adopts a neutral stance and selling pressure eases, an oversold rebound could occur, but heavy resistance above mostly comes from short-covering, so a rebound does not equal a trend reversal. If hawkish signals emerge, there is still room for further downside.
Going forward, focus on the Federal Reserve's FOMC decision, ETF fund flows, and US Treasury trends. Currently, this is a high-volatility trading range, unsuitable for heavy positions or leverage. Short-term trading must include stop-losses, and long-term investors should avoid bottom fishing in one go. $BTC $ETH #10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ According to Farside Investors data, the US Bitcoin spot ETF saw a cumulative net inflow of approximately $301.2 million this week, with BlackRock IBIT net inflows of $565.7 million, making it the main source of capital inflow this week.
Regarding institutional-related news, the most confusing aspect is who is bearing the risk. Whether the company buys with its own assets, asset management products allocate for clients, or platforms provide custody for clients, the names may be the same, but the ownership of funds and the impact on the balance sheet are completely different.
The financing amount is not a token purchase. Financing may be used for operations, research and development, or debt repayment; it cannot be assumed that these funds will enter the secondary market just because the company received money.
I only record disclosed actions as facts and do not add any purchases not announced by institutions. The larger the news scale, the more specific the capital flow needs to be explained.
#ETF #BTC $BTCIn the past two days of the sharp plunge, there have been widespread rumors that "whales are bottom-fishing." The data doesn't support this.
In the past 24 hours, about 32,000 $BTC flowed into exchanges, equivalent to 2.6 billion USD at current prices — the largest single-day inflow since April. At the same time, 40 new addresses withdrew 9,458 coins from the market maker Wintermute, worth over 700 million USD. With 2.6 billion coming in and over 700 million going out, the net inflow is close to 1.8 billion.
The withdrawal story spreads widely because it sounds like "big players are accumulating"; the data on moving coins around doesn't get shared because it sounds less appealing. But what determines the next trend is the net amount, not those few flashy withdrawals.
There's another layer: spot ETFs have also seen outflows in the past two days, totaling over 700 million USD. Institutions and whales are on the same side this time.
So this drop looks more like distribution rather than accumulation. To confirm that whales are truly buying, we need to see when these coins flow out of exchanges again — that would be real accumulation; right now, the coins have just been moved to the counter.
$ETH is weaker, with ETF outflows even more concentrated than BTC. The 2,350 trendline is its last dignity. On October 24, Bitcoin's seven-day average hash rate surpassed 1,000 EH/s, reaching 1,131 EH/s. On October 16, difficulty increased by +5.92% to 140.58T, and another +6.44% is expected on October 29.
Hash rate hits a new high. At the same time, a group of the most efficient miners are collectively exiting:
IREN announced it will exit mining by December 31, transferring all 23.2 EH/s. Cipher's Odessa (11.6 EH/s) will most likely exit by the end of 2027. Core Scientific paid a $41.9 million penalty to cancel an order for 15 EH/s mining machines, sold 3,136 BTC within the year, and cut reserves from 2,400 BTC to about 200 BTC, a 91.7% reduction.
The reason is a simple arithmetic problem: the weighted average pre-tax cash cost for listed mining companies in Q2 was about $75,500 per BTC, while the hashprice dropped to $27.7 per PH per day during the same period. Under the same electricity meter, AI yields an annualized profit of about $1.5 million per megawatt, while mining yields about $500,000—three times less.
Even harsher is the valuation: mining companies with AI contracts have an EV/NTM Sales multiple of 12.9, while pure mining companies have 3.7. If they don't pivot, they can't get cheap money.
The cost is also evident: contracted IT capacity exceeds 4GW, but actual billing is only 550MW; in the first half of the year, 12 mining companies collectively wrote down about $1.1 billion.
The paradox is explained as: large miners are leaving, and small operators are taking over. Hash rate is shifting from "capital that needs to be explained to shareholders" to "capital that doesn't need explanation."
The real test comes in 2028: the halving will cut the breakeven electricity price in half, from 12.2 cents to 6.1 cents. More than half of global capacity will suddenly become physically unviable.
The most decentralized moment for Bitcoin may also be its most undignified moment.
Not investment advice, risk at your own discretion.
#BitcoinMining $BTCFour Major Dimensions Supporting the Possible Collapse of the Bitcoin Myth
I. Scientific Basis (Cryptography, Quantum Information Science)
1. Bitcoin signatures use the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). Under the condition that a fault-tolerant quantum computer runs Shor's algorithm, the private key can be derived from the public key. This is a rigorous mathematical cryptographic conclusion, not a conjecture. BTC in addresses with exposed public keys is at risk of theft.
2. Bitcoin does not have a built-in, seamless, quantum-resistant signature scheme. Upgrading the entire network protocol requires consensus among miners, nodes, exchanges, and whales, which is a highly challenging governance task; assets in many dormant old addresses or with lost private keys cannot be migrated to a new quantum-resistant signature system.
3. AI is accelerating the development of quantum error correction, quantum circuits, and cryptanalysis algorithms, compressing the time window for "quantum cracking feasibility."
Key point: It is not that it can be cracked now, but that this underlying cryptographic system has a scientific boundary that can be breached.
II. Mathematical Basis
1. Bitcoin's total supply of 21 million coins and halving model are artificially defined mathematical rules set by code, not natural laws. "Scarcity" is scarcity defined by code, not an immutable mathematical axiom; once consensus collapses, this numerical cap loses value.
2. The mathematical essence of value pricing: coin price = capital absorption ÷ circulating supply. When continuous unlocking, whale concentration selling, and capital outflows occur, supply exceeds absorption, and prices will continue to decline; there is no natural mathematical floor supporting the price.
3. The mathematical law of network effects: network value rises with user growth but can also decline with participant loss; network effects are not a unidirectional, perpetually increasing function. Once exits exceed new entries, network value continuously shrinks.
III. Philosophical Basis
1. Entropy increase and cyclical philosophy: all self-organized human consensus and credit systems tend to age, differentiate, and dissipate. Historically, all credit bubbles detached from physical backing have ended. Consensus is a subjective human belief, which changes across generations and can be replaced by new things; consensus does not have eternal attributes.
2. Replacement evolution philosophy: the norm of technological evolution is that more adaptive and safer solutions replace old ones. If a new generation of value coins with quantum resistance, privacy, and higher efficiency (such as post-quantum routes like STRK) emerges, logically there is a possibility of value center shift; first-mover advantage does not equal permanent advantage.
3. Subjective theory of value: Bitcoin itself does not produce goods, services, or cash flow; its value comes entirely from collective human subjective recognition. Once group cognition changes, its value foundation will be shaken. It has no intrinsic inherent value; value is granted by consensus.
IV. Monetary Theory Basis
1. The three classic functions of money: unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value.
- Bitcoin's volatility is extremely high, making it difficult to serve as a stable unit of account;
- Transfer costs, confirmation speed, and compliance thresholds limit daily circulation;
- The premise of store of value is long-term stable credit consensus, but it lacks sovereign, tax, or physical asset backing.
2. Modern monetary credit logic: mainstream fiat relies on state taxation and sovereign enforced circulation. Bitcoin is a private spontaneous credit asset, not debt money; it has no lender of last resort and no crisis backstop mechanism. In the event of a bank run panic, no entity will intervene to stabilize.
3. Monetary competition theory: the currency market has always been competitive. Historically, countless once-popular currencies and precious metal substitutes have exited the mainstream stage due to technology, regulation, and credit reasons; digital assets are no exception.#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？
The October FOMC is very likely to "hold steady," but don't rush to interpret this as a dovish turn. Current data puts the Federal Reserve in a dilemma: nonfarm payrolls increased by only 29,000, unemployment rose to 4.2%, showing signs of cooling in employment; however, CPI remains at 3.7%, and core inflation is sticky. Rushing to raise rates again risks crushing employment and long-term yields, while pausing risks inflation expectations becoming unanchored.
The real uncertainties focus on four areas: first, whether core PCE and wage growth can continue to cool; second, if Middle East tensions and oil prices flare up again, the inflation narrative could quickly resume; third, if long-term U.S. Treasury yields tighten on their own, the Fed will have more room to wait and see; fourth, if data heats up again before December, the "pause" could turn into a "late rate hike."
Therefore, October looks more like a hawkish pause: watching the situation first, with the possibility of a follow-up move in December. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #HOODQ3TradingGrowth robinhood chain, robinhood's blockchain where users trade stock tokens, saw dex volume drop 30% to $6.35b in the week from October 6-12. But defi TVL increased to $1.058b from September 30 to October 12, and Morpho, a lending protocol, holds $486.8m in open loans there. So lending is now a major application, not just trading. In that week, borrowers paid about $417k in interest and liquidation bonuses on Morpho, but Morpho recorded revenueFour Major Dimensions Supporting the Possible Collapse of the Bitcoin Myth
I. Scientific Basis (Cryptography, Quantum Information Science)
1. Bitcoin signatures use the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). Under the condition that a fault-tolerant quantum computer runs Shor's algorithm, the private key can be derived from the public key. This is a rigorous mathematical cryptographic conclusion, not a conjecture. BTC in addresses with exposed public keys is at risk of theft.
2. Bitcoin does not have a built-in, seamless, quantum-resistant signature scheme. Upgrading the entire network protocol requires consensus among miners, nodes, exchanges, and whales, which is a highly challenging governance task; assets in many dormant old addresses or with lost private keys cannot be migrated to a new quantum-resistant signature system.
3. AI is accelerating the development of quantum error correction, quantum circuits, and cryptanalysis algorithms, compressing the time window for "quantum cracking feasibility."
Key point: It is not that it can be cracked now, but that this underlying cryptographic system has a scientific boundary that can be breached.
II. Mathematical Basis
1. Bitcoin's total supply of 21 million coins and halving model are artificially defined mathematical rules set by code, not natural laws. "Scarcity" is scarcity defined by code, not an immutable mathematical axiom; once consensus collapses, this numerical cap loses value.
2. The mathematical essence of value pricing: coin price = capital absorption ÷ circulating supply. When continuous unlocking, whale concentration selling, and capital outflows occur, supply exceeds absorption, and prices will continue to decline; there is no natural mathematical floor supporting the price.
3. The mathematical law of network effects: network value rises with user growth but can also decline with participant loss; network effects are not a unidirectional, perpetually increasing function. Once exits exceed new entries, network value continuously shrinks.
III. Philosophical Basis
1. Entropy increase and cyclical philosophy: all self-organized human consensus and credit systems tend to age, differentiate, and dissipate. Historically, all credit bubbles detached from physical backing have ended. Consensus is a subjective human belief, which changes across generations and can be replaced by new things; consensus does not have eternal attributes.
2. Replacement evolution philosophy: the norm of technological evolution is that more adaptive and safer solutions replace old ones. If a new generation of value coins with quantum resistance, privacy, and higher efficiency (such as post-quantum routes like STRK) emerges, logically there is a possibility of value center shift; first-mover advantage does not equal permanent advantage.
3. Subjective theory of value: Bitcoin itself does not produce goods, services, or cash flow; its value comes entirely from collective human subjective recognition. Once group cognition changes, its value foundation will be shaken. It has no intrinsic inherent value; value is granted by consensus.
IV. Monetary Theory Basis
1. The three classic functions of money: unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value.
- Bitcoin's volatility is extremely high, making it difficult to serve as a stable unit of account;
- Transfer costs, confirmation speed, and compliance thresholds limit daily circulation;
- The premise of store of value is long-term stable credit consensus, but it lacks sovereign, tax, or physical asset backing.
2. Modern monetary credit logic: mainstream fiat relies on state taxation and sovereign enforced circulation. Bitcoin is a private spontaneous credit asset, not debt money; it has no lender of last resort and no crisis backstop mechanism. In the event of a bank run panic, no entity will intervene to stabilize.
3. Monetary competition theory: the currency market has always been competitive. Historically, countless once-popular currencies and precious metal substitutes have exited the mainstream stage due to technology, regulation, and credit reasons; digital assets are no exception.As long as they can't kill me, I will keep holding onto $BTC $ETH
Just had a long discussion with a brother about why this round of sell-off happened? Neither of us could convince the other, viewpoints clashed, welcome to discuss.
My view leans more towards detaching from the macroeconomic side, purely a sell-off to liquidate longs, killing off leveraged long positions, lightening the load to continue moving north.
Because the macro interest rate hike expectations were actually anticipated long ago, this is definitely not the reason for this sudden sell-off. War is even less of a factor, basically no impact on the market.
The only factor is US Treasuries, but their yields have recently been falling, so funds should be flowing out of bonds somewhat, which logically is bullish for crypto and $BTC, so this can also be ruled out.
So I still blindly remain bullish on crypto, I am a loyal believer!
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ This FOMC meeting landed in the early morning of the 29th Beijing time. The rate was just raised to 3.75%-4.00% in September. The mainstream market expectation is to hold steady this time, with almost no chance of a rate cut.
Focus on two points: whether the statement retains room for future rate hikes, and how Powell guides for December.
The probability of a hawkish pause is the highest; if the wording softens, it is positive for Nasdaq tech; if it signals more hikes in December, high-valuation sectors will be under pressure.
There is no dot plot this time, so information is limited. A single decision should not change long-term investment plans, only serve as tracking reference, and does not constitute investment advice. #SK Hynix Q3 Earnings Report Approaching, Can HBM4 Boost Profitability? In the Q3 report, HBM4 is not the main driver of this quarter's profits and is unlikely to directly and significantly lift Q3 earnings; it is the "valuation and main growth line from Q4 onwards." Q3 profits mainly rely on HBM3E long-term contracts + server DRAM price increases.
1. Why HBM4's boost to Q3 is limited
1. Ramp-up pace: Q3 is early-stage small batch delivery, shipment volume is not large
HBM4 only started mass supply in Q2, and Q3 is still in the customer validation and capacity ramp-up phase, not a large-scale volume release period; many orders and certifications are delayed by NVIDIA's new chip schedule, resulting in shipment volumes below earlier optimistic expectations. HBM3E remains the fundamental base for HBM revenue and profit.
✅ Core of Q3 profitability: HBM3E long-term contracts + server DRAM price increases
⚠️ HBM4: Limited contribution in Q3, it is a "growth signal" of validation progress, not a profit engine for this quarter;
📌 Market watershed: Look at the earnings report for HBM4 shipment guidance, yield rates, and next year's order volume to decide whether to revise Q4 profits upward or downward. $NEAR vs $SOL : Smart Money Reveals Two Different Risks
Both assets are heavily shorted, but the difference is profitability.
SOL bears remain firmly in control, while longs face significant losses. This suggests continued selling pressure.
NEAR tells a different story. Despite falling nearly 9%, its massive short exposure is underwater.
My view: SOL remains structurally weaker, while NEAR offers greater short-squeeze potential if buyers regain control. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
I am not optimistic about the sustainability of Robinhood's trading business growth. The core contradiction is: the largest growth comes from event contracts, which are the most vulnerable to regulation, and capital inflows have already slowed down.
Event contracts are being regarded as gambling rather than derivatives by multiple states. Ohio requires compliance by October 16; the Sixth Circuit Court allows state gambling laws to apply to sports contracts; the Ninth Circuit Court's stance exposes Robinhood to criminal liability risks; platforms have already exited in Connecticut. The spread of state-level enforcement will narrow accessible markets, and Rothera's vertical integration is also restricted by exchanges.
The capital base is loosening simultaneously: net deposits in July were only about $4 billion; BTIG tracks about $12 billion in Q3, far below approximately $19 billion in the same period last year; the annualized growth rate of net deposits in August dropped to 14%, half of Q2's 28%. Crypto revenue in Q2 fell 38% year-over-year, shrinking its share from 27.2% at the beginning of 2025 to 12.6%.
The event contract surge also includes seasonal effects driven by the World Cup; sports contracts "are seasonal and bounded." When the hottest category faces regulatory risks and the most basic deposit growth simultaneously show red flags, high growth in trading revenue is unlikely to become the norm and looks more like a one-time pulse.Order Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After magnifying orders for ORDER and CT, slippage for both buying and selling increased significantly, with ORDER's simulated slippage at the 100,000 scale being the highest.
$IRYS large buy cost decreased, small buy cost remained almost unchanged. Simulated slippage for a 100,000 scale buy dropped from 1.26% to 0.96%. A 10,000 buy still hovers around 0.25%. Depth is improving, and the same order size is now cheaper.
$ORDER simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage is 0.19%/0.19%, and 100,000 scale is 0.73%/0.72%. Both sides became more expensive; consider reducing volume or splitting orders first.
$CT simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage is 0.11%/0.09%, and 100,000 scale is 0.56%/0.51%. A sign of thin depth is simultaneous increase on both sides. Why does money only flow to $BTC within the same ETF channel? 🤔
$ETH saw a net outflow of $1.08 billion in October ETFs, almost wiping out all the inflows from September, while BTC ETFs repeatedly attracted funds during the same period. On the surface, it looks like a "choose one of two" situation for capital, but breaking it down, ETH loses out due to three structural shortcomings.
First, the product design inherently carries a "discount." 🧩 BTC ETFs serve as a clean beta tool for institutions; however, ETH spot ETFs do not include native staking yields long-term. Within a risk-return framework, both expose crypto beta, but holding ETH ETFs yields no on-chain returns, naturally compressing institutional allocation willingness.
Second, the exchange rate is "voting" with the funds. 📉 ETH/BTC has dropped from 0.03294 in September to around 0.029, a decline of about 11%, even touching 0.02883 on October 18. When the rate consistently runs below 0.030, institutions see not "ETH getting cheaper," but rather "relative strength worsening," leading them to marginally cut exposure where conviction is weakest first.
Third, ETH's buying structure is too "narrow." 🎯 BTC has two relatively independent demand lines: ETFs and corporate treasuries; #10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ - HBM shipment volume, HBM's share in DRAM revenue, HBM yield guidance
- Shipment progress of 1c DRAM and 321-layer NAND
- Whether capital expenditure has been raised beyond the plan, management's comments on HBM supply and demand next year
- Free cash flow, subsequent dividend/buyback plans
- Renewal of long-term customer contracts, new order status
One-sentence trading perspective
Q4 earnings are very likely to be impressive in numbers, but "exceeding expectations is difficult, missing expectations easily kills valuation"; it is an AI growth premium within cyclical stocks, not a pure growth stock. HBM's high profit margin is a temporary dividend, not permanent.The selloff that pushed $BTC below $81,000 and $ETH to $2,350 this morning was less a verdict on crypto than a mechanical purge of crowded leverage. In a single hour, roughly $180 million in futures positions were liquidated across the network, and $170 million of that was longs. That asymmetry tells the story: the market did not collapse because sellers arrived in force, it fell because buyers had already arrived in force and left themselves no room to be wrong. Thin morning liquidity amplified#SKhynixQ3HBM4Earnings
#AIMemoryDemand
Markets expect roughly ₩77T in Q3 operating profit, driven by AI memory demand, rising DRAM/NAND prices, and HBM growth.
But the real test is forward guidance: HBM4 ramp-up, memory pricing sustainability, and 2027 demand visibility.
📈 Beat + stronger guidance = potential upside.
⚠️ Strong results but weaker outlook = sell-the-news risk.
My take: The earnings bar is already high. Watch guidance—not just the headline profit.
$SKHY $SKHYNIX $SNDK "After enduring for seven hours, it finally decided to go down — the sideways consolidation was not in vain."
$PEPE dropped from 0.000004667 steadily down to 0.000004294, a 7.99% decline, which magnified 50 times to +399.61%. This position had been consolidating sideways for over seven hours (303→309→283→272, back and forth grinding), at 21:11 it was still at 0.000004413, +272%; now it broke through the previous low of 0.0000043 in one go, adding 127 more points of unrealized profit. This indicates that the 0.0000044 equilibrium point was finally broken by the sellers, and the main downtrend continued. The lows keep moving lower, the rebound volume shrinks, and the bears have regained control.
My view: The sideways consolidation weeded out the impatient, and also thickened my cushion — from 5.76% back to 8.69%. But even at 50x leverage, 8.69% is still just a needle’s distance away. The strategy is simple: push for breakeven, lock in some profits, and treat the base position like a lottery ticket. 0.0000043 has been broken, looking at 0.0000042; resistance above is now 0.0000044, and 0.000004667 is the stop-loss point. No short covering, no chasing the dip — chasing right after a breakout is the worst, it just hands over your head to the pullback. $BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ Recently, I’ve been pondering the points gameplay of the "Divine Calculator" event and found a pretty obvious pricing mismatch. For the same event’s "No" side, predict.fun shows a 46% probability, but hardly anyone is playing points in the event, and you can buy "No" for 0.11. That means you’re taking odds based on a real probability of over 40% to gamble for nearly 9 times the points return. On the leaderboard, this is basically a free gain. The key isn’t really about predicting rise or fall, but about spotting this kind of gap between pricing and popularity. There are quite a few such mispricings in unpopular events; the less people play, the easier it is to find bargains. It’s safer to get a good grasp of the rules before making a move. $USDT$BTC approached the $80,000 mark again last night, marking countless tests of this level in a short period. Last week, it peaked at $84,890 but failed to hold, then dropped consecutively — this pattern of "rising then falling" is bringing a key question to the forefront: Is $80,000 a bottom, or just a pause before the next decline? 🔍 Most people simply see $80,000 as a round number, but its real significance lies in its dual nature: a psychological threshold combined with a cost concentration zone for ETF holders. This means there is short-term support logic at this level, but it is far from an "iron bottom." What is truly concerning is the shift in market narrative — last week's high of $84,890 did not translate into a valid breakout, indicating heavy selling pressure above, and every bullish attempt is draining momentum. Structurally, $83,000 is the prerequisite to judge whether $80,000 can hold. Until the price reclaims $83,000, any judgment that "$80,000 is secure" is premature. Conversely, if $80,000 is decisively broken, rushing to buy the dip is also unwise — the support strength near $78,000 is the next signal point to verify. This is not pessimism but a shift of decision-making basis from emotion to price structure itself. Zooming out, the macro environment before the U.S. midterm elections is likely to continue this back-and-forth oscillation pattern. Capital is reluctant to make large directional bets amid uncertainty, so $BTC is more prone to repeatedly test within a range rather than break out."Oil is strong, gold is weak, BTC is walking a tightrope"
The daily and 4H trends of USOIL are both favorable, and the momentum for going long on oil is indeed impressive (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧. Historically, when commodities and crypto "clash," I tend to respect the commodity direction first: oil rising and gold falling often indicate sticky inflation, tight liquidity, and rising US Treasury yields (￣▽￣). But BTC is very resilient this time, repeatedly holding the 80,000–81,000 level, like doing squats amid bad news. However, no defense line is limitless; once broken, sentiment could cascade downwards, so staying vigilant is not just a slogan (´･･`).
On the flip side: so many negative factors haven't broken through, indicating strong holding power. If oil prices fall back, US Treasuries weaken, and inflation cools down, BTC might rally to new highs, and 100,000 is not a dream (ง •̀•́)ง. Next, keep an eye on oil, bonds, inflation, and the 80,000 level. The above is just an observation, not investment advice.
$BTC $ETH $BZ
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？
#中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强
#BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ "Bearish Script Timeline"
October 26, 08:00: The second weekly candle closes below 83,000, confirming a false breakout
Following days: Retrace to the bull market support zone (just above 70,000 to 75,000), sweep the September 15 low, then rebound
October 29, 02:00: Federal Reserve meeting; if no rate hike but PCE is relatively hot that day, long-term yields may rebound, with the 10-year US Treasury returning near 5.3%
November 3: US midterm elections
Mid-November: Stock market decline drives BTC lower, long-term yields peak, forming Q4 lows
There is also a timing reference: local highs in July, August, September, and October all appeared around the 21st, except August extended to September 3. Based on this, the current peak falls between October 21 and November 3. However, with only four samples, this is for reference only.
The only condition to invalidate the entire script is if the weekly candle on October 26 closes back above 83,000. 🔥 220,000 liquidations! $200 million cleared in 15 minutes, BTC spike to 79773, ZEC inflow of $42 million yet bears hold tight
— This is not a bear market, this is a targeted slaughter of leverage.
At 22:15, BTC had a massive 15-minute bearish candle, dropping from 80700 straight through 80000, hitting a low of 79773; ETH simultaneously pierced 2350. Over $200 million in positions were liquidated within 15 minutes. In the past 24 hours, total network liquidations rose to $812 million, with 225,000 traders wiped out, longs contributing $668 million.
No single macro negative event triggered this; it was several blows at once: US spot Bitcoin ETF saw a net outflow of $635 million in one day, the largest in nearly four months; Brent crude surged to $116, reigniting inflation expectations; BTC daily closed below the 50-day moving average for the first time since August. Weekend liquidity was thin, so once a level broke, it turned into a stampede.
But ZEC’s trump card is far more complex than the overall market.
Grayscale ETF had a weekly outflow of $93.6 million, and whales sold 15,000 coins at high levels—these are the obvious bearish narratives. On the other hand: Zcash investment products saw a net inflow of $42 million last week, with $20.52 million flowing in on Friday alone. Funds are buying while prices fall; futures open interest dropped 12.45% over the same period, with short positions accounting for over 90% of top traders’ exposure. This is not simple dumping; it’s a typical structure where leveraged longs are being cleaned out while spot funds are absorbing. The U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) recorded a net outflow of $635.49 million on October 22, sharply reversing the previous day's net inflow of $528.4 million. The scale of this capital withdrawal is striking, but what is more noteworthy is the timing: Bitcoin's price has not yet fallen to the level historically associated with the most intense selling by ETF holders. DWF Labs' latest research identifies this critical price point, suggesting that the recent outflows may reflect caution or profit-taking rather than panic. Investors withdrawing funds before the usual critical point indicates a more proactive risk management strategy or signals a shift in market sentiment before a deeper correction. Why timing matters ETF fund flows have become a key indicator of institutional sentiment in the crypto market. Historically, large outflows tend to concentrate in price ranges where holders are most sensitive to losses. The October 22 withdrawal occurred above this range, implying investors did not wait for a triggering event to reduce risk. Proactive risk reduction: Investors may be locking in profits or reducing exposure ahead of expected volatility. Sentiment shift: A switch from strong inflows to significant outflows within 24 hours highlights the fragility of current market confidence. Liquidity dynamics: Large-scale ETF redemptions can amplify price volatility, especially when order books are thin. DWF Labs' research adds a quantitative dimension to the discussion, providing a framework to understand when ETF-driven selling pressure might intensify. If the market approaches this level, the risk of a feedback loop triggering more redemptions and price declines will increase. Regarding the crypto marketA single token wiped out nearly half a year of gains for one trader this week, and the episode says less about $IRYS than about how leverage behaves when a thin order book meets a large venue's liquidation engine. The account in question lost 90,000u after price ran vertically, defying the usual playbook of a pullback and retest. Only around 0.4 did the move stall, after large positions across exchanges had been cleared out. Price now chops sideways, and the trader's verdict is blunt: the exchan$SOL
99.57.
The triple-digit threshold for SOL disappeared just like that tonight, with a 24-hour low of 98.62, down 4.9%. Coincidentally, on the same day, there was an article praising Solana's network activity and stablecoin usage as stronger than XRP, but the price was dropping when it was published.
Looking closer, the SOL perpetual funding rate is now negative, shorts are paying fees, and there’s no one left to chase longs. The open interest still holds $310 million; how these long positions are handled after the breakdown is more worth watching than the news itself.
I’m not guessing the bottom. For round numbers like 100, the first break usually sees some fluctuation, but that fluctuation is for you to exit, not to go all in.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ 预测低于预期#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ Whether it can boost profits is not the main point; the key is whether the 2028 profit target can be sustained and if there is still strong demand.One overlooked risk in crypto is correlation.
You might own several different tokens and believe you're diversified, yet all of them may depend on the same ecosystem, narrative, or source of market liquidity.
When that shared driver weakens, multiple holdings can suffer together.
Diversification is about understanding different sources of risk—not simply collecting more tickers.$BTC
Fidelity analysts are back saying Bitcoin could go from 100,000 to 200,000 faster than expected. I thought that made some sense last week, but tonight, watching the 80,000 whole number level get smashed through, all that's left is irony.
Just pulled the numbers: OKX current price 79,664, 24-hour low 79,220, Binance low 79,178, both sides have solidly broken 80,000. In the past hour, the whole network liquidated $291 million, mostly longs.
What's interesting is the other side. Some stats say whales have increased holdings by 243,000 coins since July, selling stopped long ago. One side is accumulating addresses, the other side the price is breaking down, I can't believe both data points at the same time, for now I trust the market more—the buyers can accumulate slowly, but the liquidated can't wait.
I'm watching empty-handed. At this position, itching hands are the original sin.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ Bitcoin has fallen below 80,000 again, and now not only the stock market but also the crypto space is entering a state of widespread panic.
To conclude, I believe we are still in the early stage of a bull market; this is just a correction typical of the early bull phase.
Since August, I have maintained a bullish mindset.
According to on-chain data from CryptoQuant, the total holdings of Bitcoin whales have increased to 3.03 million coins.
The last time this number was reached was on November 21 last year.
Moreover, the 30-day accumulation rate is the fastest since February this year.
Although BTC ETF net inflows and outflows have been unstable, the volume on October 19 was not insignificant.
Currently, retail investors' attention is at its lowest; they feel weak and pessimistic.
However, this month there have been several tests of the 80,000 threshold, and each time near 80,000, the price has been pulled back.
1. Low retail attention, low search volume, and low sentiment.
2. Whale holdings have returned to last year's highs.
3. There is a large amount of turnover near 80,000.
4. ETF holdings and trading volume are high.
At present, I still believe this is not a bear market.
(Personal opinion for reference only) This does not constitute a trading recommendation.