Orbit Post Sitemap
Short positions have liquidated more than long positions.
A total of 992 million was liquidated across the entire network, with shorts accounting for 577 million and longs 415 million.
Usually, longs take the hit, but today it’s the opposite.
Last night, a cluster of short positions above 80,000 was wiped out in one wave, with 320 million liquidated in 30 minutes.
But this is not a reversal at all.
Open interest across the market has dropped to a 12-month low; most of the leverage that needed to be cleared has been cleared.
Strangely, the funding rate remains positive, meaning longs are still paying shorts.
The chips have been cleared out, but those remaining have not admitted defeat.
This is the most critical point.
The whales are also splitting.
The “top 100% win rate whales” couldn’t hold on; the remaining longs were liquidated two hours ago, taking a loss of 39.37 million USD.
Another whale holds nearly 400 million USD in positions and was only 30 USD away from liquidation last night; emergency margin of 9.21 million was added at midnight to keep the position alive.
Some are bottom-fishing, spending 133 million USDC over two days to buy nearly 38,000 ETH.
Those cutting losses cut losses, those adding margin add margin, and those taking over take over.
The ETF side is also conflicted: Bitcoin overall saw a net inflow of 74.6 million, but BlackRock’s IBIT saw an outflow of 201 million, supported only by other products.
Ethereum ETFs ended a seven-day outflow streak, barely turning positive.
Retail longs remain crowded, with the long-short ratio still biased toward longs.
Until the funding rate turns negative, the bottom is not considered reached.
#非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？
$BTC $ETH Moderna's GAAP figures are easily dragged down by three "non-operating items":
• Amortization of acquired intangible assets: In 2025, this alone created a gap of about $2.13 per share between Non-GAAP and GAAP
• Restructuring and impairment expenses: The company's full-year 2026 guidance explicitly includes restructuring costs
• Intangible asset impairments: In Q2 2026, there was a $666 million impairment recorded, directly pushing that quarter's GAAP to −4.41
In other words, this question isn't about sales, but whether there is another large impairment provision this quarter. If there is another impairment, the −1.28 threshold will suddenly become dangerous.
Normally, it will exceed expectations~ Some say prediction markets are more accurate than polls, and I think there's some basis for that. In surveys, casually picking an answer costs nothing, but when you actually have to put money down to express a judgment, you tend to think twice. For example, whether Bitcoin can meet a certain condition by an agreed time—what's traded is a clear outcome, which is different from just watching price ups and downs to make trades. Odds can be taken as a probability reference given by on-exchange funds, but they don't represent everyone's opinion. Especially when few people participate, I start to wonder: do these odds really reflect general consensus, or is it just a big whale with lots of money drowning out other voices?📊 The big Friday Nonfarm Payrolls are about to be released! Is this good or bad news for BTC this time?
This Friday, the U.S. October Nonfarm Employment Report will be published, which could be one of the most important data points for the financial markets this week.
Currently, the market expects new jobs to increase by about 59,000 to 65,000, the unemployment rate is expected to remain at 4.2%, and the average hourly wage monthly increase is expected to be about 0.3%.
Combined with Wednesday's ADP small nonfarm report showing 86,000 new jobs, higher than market expectations, it indicates the job market has not yet shown obvious signs of slowing down.
I have pre-analyzed three possible scenarios:
🟢 If Nonfarm Payrolls are significantly below expectations:
Employment cools down, the market may raise rate cut expectations again, if the dollar and U.S. Treasury yields fall, BTC and ETH may get support.
🔴 If Nonfarm Payrolls are significantly above expectations:
Employment resilience strengthens, rate cut expectations may cool down, if the dollar and U.S. Treasury yields rise, the crypto market may come under pressure.
🟡 If the data basically meets expectations:
The market may not only look at the number of new jobs; the unemployment rate and wage growth may determine the short-term direction.
My preliminary judgment: currently, it’s not simple to bet on either good or bad news. What really needs to be watched are the employment numbers, unemployment rate, wage growth, and the reaction of the dollar and U.S. Treasury yields after the data release.
One more thing to note: too strong employment may suppress rate cut expectations, while too weak employment may trigger recession concerns. So, worse Nonfarm Payrolls do not necessarily mean Bitcoin will definitely rise.
#USNonfarm #BigNonfarm #FederalReserve #BTC #ETH #BitcoinOn Wednesday, the US stock market posted its largest single-day gain of the year. The Dow rose 1,569 points, up 3.03%, closing at 53,356, returning above 53,000 for the first time since September 8; the S&P 500 rose 1.58%, and the Nasdaq $QQQ rose 1.44%.
Tech stocks split into two groups. During the session, Amazon rose 8%, Apple $AAPL nearly 7%, Google $GOOGL over 6%, Microsoft 4%; CoreWeave fell 10%, Nvidia dropped 3%. The reason is in the ballots: on Tuesday, 41 local votes nationwide related to data centers, 40 of which voters opposed; Democratic governors who called for pausing data centers in Texas, Georgia, and Ohio all won. Laura Martin from Needham said that higher regulatory thresholds protect the incumbents, and the mega cloud providers are the incumbents in AI.
After hours, Qualcomm fell 7%. Last quarter, mobile chip revenue dropped 26% to $5.14 billion; rising memory prices forced phone manufacturers to raise prices, suppressing demand. Data center revenue was only $650 million; CEO Amnon said they aim for $5 billion in fiscal 2027 and added, "It's not a demand issue, it's a supply issue."
Policy risks weigh on those still building data centers; companies with cash flow and ready power supply have become safe havens. This divergence is more important than how much the index rises. Nvidia's 3% drop is also a signal: if large companies' expansion is blocked in several states, the shovel sellers will suffer first. Before Qualcomm's $5 billion target is realized, the stock price must first see when mobile chips stop falling. #非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ $BTC What's the next step, where is the road ahead?
Last night $BTC stalled near 81199.9, $ETH once surged to 2451, spot gold rose above 4100; meanwhile, SanDisk $SNDK plummeted nearly 8%. Where is the money flowing? In short: political uncertainty is cooling down, funds first go to crypto and gold to "catch a breath"; but data center regulation expectations are heating up, storage chips took the first hit.
The Democrats swept Congress, risk assets collectively loosened; but the new Texas governor advocates pausing new data center construction, and Texas accounts for 27% of the US planned capacity. SanDisk sells data center flash memory, once expectations tighten, the logic is broken. Simply put, it's not that flash memory suddenly lost appeal, but "whether data centers will still be built" has become a new question.
Don't get carried away later, watch these levels:
BTC: resistance 80450—81500, only a stable break above counts as a true breakout; support 79800, break below leads to consolidation.
ETH: dividing line 2390, only above it is there a chance to see 2450—2485; break below looks at 2360—2330.
Gold: resistance 4080—4100, support 4045—4020, chasing highs after a big rise is risky.
Don't be fooled by a single bullish candle, nor scared to death by a single bearish candle.
#索尼财报前瞻：游戏与音乐业务表现如何？ Bitcoin remains steady above 80,000, Ethereum rose 8% in one day, and after the congressional reshuffle, there was actually a sigh of relief. CLARITY is likely to fade, with money flowing into coins that have their own stories; LINK, DASH, and ENA each have their own narratives.
$LINK around 11.57, Asian stock prices on-chain
Up 7.5% in 24 hours. On Tuesday, Chainlink expanded Asia-Pacific stock data streams from Japan and South Korea to include six exchanges in Shanghai, Shenzhen, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, covering a market cap of over 40 trillion USD. Resistance at 12.62 above, support at 10.25 below.
$DASH around 49.6, riding the privacy sector wave 🔥
Up 11.2% in 24 hours. ZEC's NU7 is expected to activate early tomorrow morning; funds are rotating early into privacy coins. Kraken has large orders sweeping the thin order book; DASH itself has no new news. In September, it surged to 78.68 before falling back to 54.
$ENA around 0.1835, climbing out of the hacker pit
Up 8.5% in 24 hours. On October 30, hackers who stole 217.5 million ENA from Binance crashed the price to 0.1658 at one point. This time it is rebounding with Ethereum; resistance lies between 0.20 and 0.22.
LINK is the strongest, with real expansion; only a break above 12.62 counts as a true breakout. DASH is the most precarious, relying entirely on ZEC to set the pace; if NU7 activation is fully priced in, the follow-up selling could outpace ZEC. ENA is stuck at 0.20; if the hacker wallets move again, the rebound will have to be given back. #非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ Emerging market sovereign and corporate bonds are the risk-return foundation I first consider when looking at this news. Schroders' first tokenized investment strategy has launched on Solana, with the token symbol SISF. I tend to view this as a positive for on-chain asset supply rather than a direct positive for public chain valuation.
My judgment is that this makes the scenario of traditional asset management continuing to try on-chain issuance more credible, but changing the carrier of bonds does not eliminate credit risk. Whether the odds are worthwhile still depends on whether the returns can cover the underlying risks and usage costs; you can't replace judgment with the institution's name.
According to my speculation, if going on-chain can reduce operational friction and improve information transparency, this kind of attempt is worthwhile; if it is just an additional layer of token packaging, costs may increase and expectations may not improve. I want to see the product terms and actual usage next, and will not give extra credit just for the words "on-chain".After the U.S. midterm elections, has AI really entered a bubble? I don't think so.
Many people attribute the sharp drop in $SNDK and the semiconductor sector to the "AI bubble bursting" after the midterms.
Long position on $SNDK opened at 1499.5, current price 997.7, floating loss -334%. On the surface, this looks like a brutal sell-off, but the real logic behind it is that market sentiment is exaggerating the issue, not that AI fundamentals have collapsed.
After the elections, with the Democrats taking key states, the market fears restrictions on data center approvals and obstacles to computing power expansion. Coupled with large funds using this opportunity to shake out positions, $SNDK was smashed from a high level down to triple digits. But this does not mean AI is doomed. The giants are still spending tens of billions of dollars in capital expenditures, the rigid demand for storage chips remains, and the industry’s prosperity is just shifting from "blind frenzy" to a "calculation cycle."
Looking back at my position, the forced liquidation price is at 735.4, which is already very close to the current price of 997.7. This is the real cost of high leverage during intense shakeouts: even if you are confident in the long-term logic that "it may not be a bubble," you can easily be completely liquidated by short-term political games and emotional panic.
The bubble may not have burst; valuations are just returning to rationality. But the most fatal issue now is not the market itself, but this precarious margin. No matter how solid the logic, it can't withstand the scythe of forced liquidation. If you need to reduce leverage, you must do so.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 Breaking down Circle's Q3 financial report, there's not much to say about the revenue growth. The main focus for Ajian is on the following two points:
First, USDC's on-chain transaction volume increased by 49% year-over-year to $13.9 trillion, marking a shift where stablecoins are moving beyond their traditional role as dollar substitutes and beginning to possess broader financial infrastructure attributes. Competition among stablecoins is increasingly leaning towards payment networks, circulation scenarios, and cooperation with financial institutions. This is evidenced multiple times in the report, such as the reiterated plan to acquire Singapore's cross-border B2B payment platform Tazapay, aimed at solving real commercial cash flow issues.
Second, while USDC usage and on-chain transaction volume are growing, Circle's profits do not come entirely from on-chain transactions; it still heavily relies on the yield from reserve assets. Therefore, if interest rates decline in the future, the stablecoin circulation must continue to expand, and payment and service revenues must increase; otherwise, relying solely on reserve yields will make it difficult to maintain high profits.
In summary, everyone's judgment of Circle should be more specific than before. If you can understand the efforts Circle is making in developing payments, custody, enterprise settlement, network infrastructure, and other services, you should be as firmly optimistic about $CRCL as Ajian is. #CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% Calculating roughly based on the minimum holding and reported valuation, each token is worth about $84. I usually separate accounts first: no matter how large the asset valuation is, it cannot be directly recorded as the achievement of new business.
① Reports say Hyperliquid's core contributors hold at least 238 million $HYPE tokens. The holding scale reflects vested interests but does not represent actual demand for the stock product. ② These holdings are valued at about $20 billion. This is not platform revenue, nor funds that can be directly used to support the new market. ③ Co-founder Jeff Yan went to London to meet policymakers and hinted at possibly offering stock tokens in the future, but no launch time or transaction data has been provided. The liquidity he mentioned may exceed that of traditional stock markets, but it remains a vision for now.
My judgment is that this is a directional signal, not yet business validation. Third-party product supply is very important, meaning platform willingness does not equal implementation capability; I will next watch who provides the product and how exactly the trading will be conducted. 💻 I treat this information as a code review: degentrading mentioned that H100 rental prices rose 26% year-over-year, GB200 rose 50%, which is contrary to the "hashrate depreciation" expectation.
My judgment is that this is still insufficient to prove chip demand expansion. Logical bug: supply constraints can also push up rental prices; price increases do not equal shipment growth. If it were me, I would additionally check new data center deliveries to verify whether expansion can be realized.
Help me review: Using data center deliveries as a verification metric, what variables might be missed?#CircleQ3USDCVolumeUp49% USDC's on-chain transaction volume grew 49% to $13.9T in Q3. That's a strong signal of growing stablecoin activity.
But there's another side: Circle's reserve income fell 8% to $658M as reserve yields declined.
The real story isn't just growth in usage; it's how sustainably that activity translates into revenue.Currently, the market's expectation for a December rate hike is close to 80%, which is already quite high.
Tomorrow's non-farm payrolls are expected to increase by 65,000, while the previous figure was only 29,000.
I think there's an interesting point this time: the market's tolerance for employment data might already be very limited.
If the data is strong, it will further reinforce rate hike expectations, and risk assets will continue to be under pressure.
If the data is weak, it might actually cool down this round of rate hike expectations.
But one thing: don't just focus on the number of new jobs added; the unemployment rate and wage growth are equally important.
I actually hope this non-farm payrolls report can give the market a clear direction. With the recent Bitcoin trend jumping up and down every day, there's really no good trading experience.
#非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ $ZEC ZEC's recent upgrade hype is pure nonsense. The development fund is about to shut down, and insiders are already fighting fiercely over how to split the money.
Big whale Big Z directly liquidated in protest, crushing the spot market badly. All the buy orders hanging below are fake support; with just a bit of selling pressure, they can disappear instantly.
In this situation where consensus is completely shattered, it's just a matter of time before the bulls waiting for code updates halfway up the mountain start a chain stampede.
#ZEC
$ZEC
👇$LSK LSK's 90% of tokens are locked in just ten wallets, and the spot market depth is as thin as paper.
What's even more outrageous is that the contract long positions account for as much as 65.4%.
Retail investors are all lined up in derivatives to catch the falling knife, while the whales casually dump a bit of spot, causing the market to crash sharply due to lack of support.
This highly crowded long structure, once a slight dip triggers a long position stampede, becomes a bottomless pit.
The current longs are purely acting as liquidity stepping stones for the whales to unload their positions.
#LSK
$LSK
👇There is a change that many people have not yet realized: the attack rhythm in the crypto industry has shifted from "periodic events" to "daily events."
CZ said that attacks used to happen about once a week or month, but now there can be several in a single day. The reason is simple—AI has fully automated reconnaissance, phishing, and vulnerability discovery. It used to take weeks of human effort to find a single vulnerability; now machines can scan thousands of targets simultaneously. Attack costs are decreasing, but defense costs are not.
On October 29, Binance suffered an attack amounting to $6.3 billion. The significance of this number is not whether Binance can afford the loss, but that it has exceeded the capacity of a single exchange to bear. The FBI attributed this attack to North Korean hackers, and CZ said the impact involves global finance and national security.
Therefore, he proposed a set of alliance mechanisms: sharing audit findings, exchanging attack experiences, and coordinating asset freezes. These three may sound plain, but each hits a pain point. Audit findings are the most reluctant information to be shared by each party, attack experience is intelligence, and freezing assets requires instant cooperation across platforms and jurisdictions.
The judgment is: the industry itself admits insufficient security investment. Holders of $BTC and $ETH are all on this chain—your asset security does not depend on how strong the exchange you choose is, but on how weak the weakest one is.
Something worth thinking about: if the alliance is truly established, exchanges will have to reveal their bottom cards to each other. The day this happens will indicate the maturity of the industry more than the next market cycle.Bitcoin $BTC is currently priced at about $80,675, up 5.23% in the past 24 hours, while Ethereum $ETH is even stronger, priced at about $2,430, up 7.73%.
Looking at the price range over the past 7 days, Bitcoin is positioned at about 79.2% from low to high, while Ethereum has climbed to a high of 92.8%. The strength of Ethereum's rebound clearly surpasses that of Bitcoin.
The volatility is also greater than in previous days. Bitcoin's 24-hour volatility is 7.09%, more than twice the 7-day average level. This amplification often corresponds to leveraged trading and a heating up of short-term sentiment.
In the market structure, it can also be seen that the open interest in the entire contract market increased by 4.01% within 24 hours, with liquidation amounts surging to $976 million, more than three times that of the previous day. Although the funding rate is positive, it is not yet extreme. The long-short ratio is almost evenly split, indicating that longs and shorts are still competing. The price was pushed up by a rapid short squeeze and covering.
$ZEC #非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ $LSK The old LSK chain completely shut down at the end of October.
The newly transformed business doesn't even have a single shadow of a customer, and the token will only be truly useful by 2027.
Right now, it's a complete empty shell.
But according to the official circulating supply, this empty shell's market cap still reaches $82.5 million, more expensive than L2s like Manta and Scroll that are actively competing in the ecosystem every day.
A coin whose chain has already shut down maintaining such a high valuation is completely baseless.
The long-term bubble will definitely burst; without solid buying support, it simply can't hold.
#LSK
$LSK
👇Midterm elections, the Democratic Party took control of both chambers of Congress. The president is still Trump, so it’s not "Democratic Party in power," but a divided government: the White House and Congress belong to two different parties. The White House makes the final decisions, while Congress controls the budget and legislation. Since the two sides are not unified, major issues will inevitably be contentious.
Regarding the US stock market:
Historically, during divided governments, the US stock market usually performs well. The reason is that with both sides blocking each other, major new policies are hard to pass, which the market actually views as a better expectation.
This time, the AI data center sector is hit most directly. The results in Texas have already caused a round of stock declines because Texas accounts for about 27% of the planned data center power capacity in the US (according to Wells Fargo data).
Uncertainty has increased regarding energy approvals and electricity price subsidies. Matters requiring congressional cooperation, such as tax cuts continuation and tariffs, will progress more slowly. Antitrust scrutiny on tech giants may become stricter.
Regarding the crypto space:
The stablecoin bill GENIUS has already become law, and issuer regulatory rules will take effect as scheduled from January 18, 2027; this election cannot change that.
What’s stuck is the market structure bill CLARITY: it has passed the House, but the Senate failed to advance the vote on September 15. This Congress ends on January 3. If it misses the deadline, it will have to start over, and the new Congress is likely to make it stricter.
Congress may focus on crypto projects related to the Trump family, such as WLFI, but real action can only happen after the new Congress takes office in January next year.
💰 What about the price?
On election night, BTC once dropped to about 75.7K (CoinDesk), then rebounded in a V-shape to about 78 On November 2 and 3, the US BTC spot ETFs saw net outflows of approximately $398.6 million and $115.6 million respectively, totaling about $514.2 million over the two days. The selling pressure has somewhat eased, but the direction of funds has not yet turned positive.
At the same time, corporate treasuries are not always ready to provide buying support. Their increased BTC holdings depend on their own cash flow, financing conditions, and shareholder acceptance. When the market environment changes, the pace of buying can adjust accordingly.
This makes me increasingly focus on one question: can the different buyers who supported the market in the past continue to provide funds?
ETF demand and corporate treasury demand can complement each other, but neither is obligated to take over if the other weakens. With both sides cautious, prices need to attract other investors or wait for existing buyers to increase their allocations again.
I don’t want to describe the outflows as a full institutional retreat, nor will I prematurely declare funds have returned just because daily outflows have decreased. The new round of data on November 4 still needs to be fully disclosed, and blank entries should not be taken as confirmed zero inflows.
If prices rebound first, I will be happy, but I want to see follow-up funds come in. What has tested patience most recently is that despite many positives, buying momentum has not been stable enough. Whether the rebound can go far ultimately depends on someone willing to keep paying.
#BTC现货ETF资金流出，企业财库增持放缓 $ETH fell from 2300 to 2225 in just half a night, but the strength of the rebound made the short sellers start doubting their lives. This trader placed a 15x leveraged short position on $BTC with a very heavy position. Although he said "I can hold on," he was already calculating the pain of liquidation in his mind—when someone starts convincing themselves with "a true bull market can't let me get liquidated," the market is often preparing to give the opposite answer. What’s truly worth pondering is not how much he lost, but the causal chain he described: first, a wave of high-leverage long positions triggered a chain of stop losses, then after the news landed, sentiment quickly switched to a bull market narrative. This sequence itself is a signal. Liquidation-driven declines usually come fast and recover fast, but if it’s a fund re-pricing after a narrative shift, the rebound won’t leave shorts any dignity. $ETH’s V-shaped recovery looks more like the latter—it’s not a passive catch-up rally but an active buy during the news window. Most people treat this kind of rebound as a “dead cat bounce,” reasoning that the macro hasn’t turned and incremental funds haven’t entered. But the market structure gives a more direct message: when shorts choose to “hold” rather than “capitulate” during a rebound, it means there’s still a batch of stop-loss orders above that haven’t been liquidated. The 15x short on $BTC may seem like low leverage, but a heavy position means a thin margin buffer, so every percentage point the price rises doubles the psychological pressure. These positions won’t close voluntarily; they will close passively, and the buy orders from passive closing are exactly the fuel for the rebound. The key divergence is: is this recovery a technical rebound after liquidation, or a narrative cycle🛢️ Oil prices plunge, Microsoft and Amazon rise over 6%, but AI infrastructure stocks collectively dive — what is the market trading?
The Democratic Party promises to push for an end to the Iran conflict, with funds betting on "cooling war and easing inflation." Brent crude closed down 8.67%, WTI down 8.29%, and U.S. Treasury yields fell in tandem.
But this rally shows key divergence: the market welcomes giants spending less, yet worries about companies relying on that spending for survival.
1️⃣ Giants: Slower capital expenditure = reduced cash flow pressure, and the scarcity of existing computing power actually appreciates in value.
2️⃣ Suppliers: The giants' costs are their revenue. When construction slows, orders are delayed, and payments slow down. Last night, Micron and SanDisk fell about 7%, CoreWeave dropped over 9%, and Marvell and Lumentum fell over 7%.
AI trading is shifting from "the faster the expansion, the better" to "who can hold onto cash and who can realize profits."
Next, two things need verification: whether the ceasefire promise can turn into actual progress, and whether data center regulations will truly affect the giants' investment plans. Statements can drive a day's market, but trends depend on orders and cash flow.The Layer 2 sector has been pushed to the extreme, with each project competing on TVL and ecosystem. But behind the impressive on-paper data, holders of L2 tokens often find it difficult to share in the ecosystem's prosperity dividends.
Comparing these three targets:
$ARB: The absolute leader in TVL. However, almost all the on-chain fee revenue flows into the DAO treasury. The token currently serves purely as governance voting power and faces massive linear unlocks for early investors and the team. Buying it is a bet on future governance passing empowerment proposals.
$OP: The core of the superchain. Early on, it designed revenue sharing and buyback plans. But with the independence and diversion of core chains like Base, the actual buyback execution has been greatly reduced, and the foundation refuses to commit to long-term buybacks. Buying it is more about buying into the "superchain" vision.
$METIS: Focuses on decentralized sequencers. Mechanistically innovative, attempting to let ecosystem revenue flow back, but limited by the relatively small overall TVL scale, the real protocol income and token buy pressure are relatively weak.
Conclusion:
ARB is "pure governance, no capture"; OP is "buybacks drastically reduced"; METIS is "mechanism innovation but too small in scale." When evaluating L2, don't just look at TVL; check whether real fees are forcibly converted into token buy pressure. $UMA
UMA runs an optimistic oracle, where data is assumed correct unless someone disputes it. That makes it efficient and flexible for things like prediction markets and insurance. Its weak point is human behavior: disputes and voting can be gamed if incentives aren't well designed, so governance history deserves scrutiny.$AAOI: Fundamentals unchanged, so why did the stock price halve?
AOI (Applied Optoelectronics) this year’s trend shows that the problem lies in valuation and shareholding structure, not in the CPO logic.
Price increase: In the past twelve months, the stock price rose over 700%, reaching a high of $233.67 on May 13. Such a rise has already priced in orders for the next few years.
Fundamentals: Q1 EPS was -$0.12, below expectations. Market cap is already in the tens of billions of dollars, but the company is still losing money. Whether gross margin can improve with shipment volume growth is the core logic of this stock. The market is willing to pay for the story, provided profits materialize, but the numbers have not kept pace.
Financing: The company announced a $600 million secondary offering plan, and the stock price dropped over 16% at the opening that day. This dilutes existing shareholders and indicates that the company itself chose this high point as a cash-out window.
Sentiment: On July 2, AOI fell about 16% in one day, closing at $116.86, less than half the peak. At that time, the market was selling off High Beta, unprofitable tech stocks, and when funds exit, they do not distinguish whose story is more genuine.
· Therefore, the CPO industry trend can remain unchanged, yet the stock price still halves.
· Industry logic determines the company’s ultimate value; valuation, dilution, and liquidity determine the price at which you buy it.
· AOI’s problem is that the price ran ahead of performance, coinciding with financing and style rotation.
#AAOI高速光模块放量，Q3财报能否超预期？ A net inflow of $53 million, and the ETF homeroom teacher in my mind immediately prepared to give out the "Class Progress Award." I quickly stopped them: Teacher, you’re looking at the total score without seeing who submitted the papers 😂 After seven consecutive trading days of net outflows, the US Ethereum spot ETF finally turned positive.
I think this is a positive signal for $ETH at the channel level, but it’s not enough evidence to prove a collective institutional shift. Net inflow is the result after offsetting subscriptions and redemptions, so it doesn’t show the full picture of capital movement. My guess is, if the inflow is concentrated in a few funds while other products are still being redeemed, then this warmth can’t be evenly distributed to everyone. I’d rather see the capital distribution than rush to leverage the sentiment.
For this net inflow, would you rather check the breakdown of subscriptions and redemptions, or the inflow distribution across funds? Pick one, let’s not just look at the total score and hand out awards to the whole class."May affect the overall Democratic Party crypto policy," I am focusing on this "may." 💻 According to code review habits, this is just an input condition, not a runtime result. The Digital Chamber calls Brown's victory the worst outcome for the industry and believes that consumer protection and regulatory accountability may receive more attention.
My judgment is that this message is more like a policy risk warning and is not enough to declare a bearish outlook for the entire industry. The potential bug in the logic is directly linking individual election wins, intra-party policy changes, and specific rule implementation into an inevitable execution process, without expanding on the conditional judgments in between.
If it were me, I would change "worst" to a pending verification item: if subsequent rules do not add business restrictions indiscriminately, then the industry pressure will have a clearer focus. This is my speculation, not a conclusion already given by the material. I will wait for specific policies to enter review before updating my judgment, and I am not in a hurry to let the headline draw conclusions for me.One or two oversold rebounds are nothing special, and it doesn't mean a bull market has arrived. A bull market involves a large influx of new off-exchange funds entering, with risk assets rising simultaneously. The current violent rebound in gold and Bitcoin is merely due to funds related to AI in the US stock market fleeing and buying for hedging. Once the buying dries up, the prices will just fluctuate back and forth. The current macro environment does not yet meet the conditions for a bull market.$SNX
Synthetic assets introduce an ambitious concept: providing blockchain-based exposure to different financial markets without relying entirely on traditional infrastructure. Synthetix has developed around this idea, but the model faces challenges involving liquidity, collateral requirements, risk management, and competition. Its long-term relevance depends on whether users find practical reasons to use these products.DePIN rose 5.79% in one day. Staring at this number, what comes to mind is the old problem of running a company: the books look lively, but can you actually pay the bills? According to SoSoValue data, this round saw a general rebound in the crypto sector, with Bitcoin and Ethereum also strengthening, and DePIN leading the gains. I prefer to see this as the market re-pricing this sector rather than as proof that the business model has already been validated.
Doing business means calculating input versus output. Equipment investment is just the beginning; there are ongoing expenses like maintenance and operations. Applied to DePIN, what concerns me most is: how much of the user payments come from genuine demand, and how much is propped up by incentives? A rising token price can improve participants' paper returns, but it doesn't automatically mean customers are willing to keep paying. These two accounts should not be mixed.
My judgment is that this rally is positive for sector sentiment but offers limited proof of operational quality. Here's my speculation: if revenue depends on token incentives but expenses must be paid continuously in cash, then when the market cools, cash flow gaps may be exposed. Risk reserves must be kept according to expenses and cannot be counted on rising market expectations.
When I look at this kind of news, I first separate the price increase from the operational accounts. Next, I want to observe whether projects disclose paid demand, ongoing costs, and reserve arrangements; attractive valuations can boost morale, but only cash flow that can survive the off-season convinces me.On November 3rd, the World Gold Council released the gold demand report for the third quarter of 2026. Central banks and other official institutions had a net increase of 321 tons, physically backed gold ETFs saw a net increase of about 211 tons, yet global demand for gold bars and coins declined by 19% year-on-year. Why, in the same quarter, do some channels increase holdings while others see demand decrease? First, align the comparison benchmarks. The 321 tons and 211 tons represent the net increases by official entities and ETFs respectively in Q3, while the 19% refers to the year-on-year decline in demand for gold bars and coins. Looking at year-on-year changes uniformly, official net purchases increased by 42%, ETF net increases for the quarter decreased by 6%, and demand for gold bars and coins decreased by 19%. Official entities bought 321 tons, of which about 120 tons have been publicly reported. The 321 tons is the net amount after deducting sales from purchases by global central banks and other official institutions. According to disclosed data as of October 30th, about 120 tons of net purchases have been reported at the national level, with the remaining approximately 63% estimated by the World Gold Council based on unreported activities. As further disclosures are made, quarterly data may be revised; current public information only supports country-level attribution for the disclosed portion. The World Gold Council views reserve diversification and risk management as the main drivers of official purchases. For official entities, increasing gold holdings is a way to adjust the overall reserve portfolio. This decision occurs at the reserve management level and involves different considerations than retail buyers choosing between assets, so these two types of demand can move in opposite directions within the same quarter. ETFs shifted from net outflows to net inflows, with a low scale of increase BTC briefly dipped to 75,691 today, ETH spiked to 2,226, but don’t just focus on the candlesticks. What’s more noteworthy is the shrinking positions: BTC perpetual 24-hour open interest dropped by 2.1%, ETH 7-day open interest decreased by 6.2%, indicating that old leverage is being withdrawn. This signal doesn’t mean the sell-off is fully cleared; it’s more like deleveraging on one side while re-betting on the other. The question is whether the new positions are bottom-fishing long or trend-following short — it’s still unclear.
Funding rates haven’t fully cooled off either: BTC remains at +0.01%, ETH has cooled but is still above the 7-day average. Price breakdown and total positions declining leave long costs relatively high, making the structure unstable.
Whether this is a fakeout or a real drop depends on where the new positions stand after the old leverage is cleared. Strategically, don’t rush to catch the falling knife; wait until funding rates truly cool down and BTC holds above 75,000 again before discussing further.
$BTC $ETH
#美国10月非农前瞻：就业增长或牵动12月加息预期
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 $BTC The US midterm elections are being held today, and this is positive for Bitcoin in the long term. History shows that BTC has always risen during the twelve months following the last three elections. 2014: +24.5% 2018: +44.9% 2022: +92.3% These elections are very important for cryptocurrencies. The CLARITY Act has already stumbled in the Senate, and if the Democrats win, the chances of its passage will decrease further. Not only that, but a Democratic win could push Trump to launch new attacks on Iran, which would lead to higher oil prices and inflation 🔥 ETH bulls shouldn't just focus on a rebound; what really needs caution right now is position risk!
📊 According to an order book data I follow, the short positions have reached 1.5 billion USDT, while the long positions are relatively weak. More importantly, some long entries are concentrated above 2890. If the current price continues to face pressure, these high-level positions could face greater unrealized losses and margin pressure.
⚠️ The most dangerous scenario is that a price drop triggers a batch of long stop losses, which then leads to forced liquidations of high-leverage accounts. The concentrated selling could turn a normal pullback into a rapid plunge. This process doesn't require all bulls to give up simultaneously; just a concentrated exit near key price levels can amplify volatility.
🔎 But I won't conclude that ETH must fall just because short positions are large. Large holders' positions may include hedges, and data from a single platform doesn't represent the entire market. What really matters is whether shorts continue to add positions and whether spot buying can catch the price during a decline.
🛡️ For today's operations, controlling leverage and setting good stop losses are far more important than guessing the bottom.
If you currently hold ETH longs, would you choose to reduce positions for defense or continue waiting for a rebound? #非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ I first put on the brakes for myself after reading: more equity VS less US dollars, you can't directly equate the two.
Hayes estimates that SpaceX may add about 8.6 billion new shares outstanding by June 2027, increasing share supply by about 50%, and warns this could drag down crypto liquidity.
I treat this as a risk contingency plan, not a realized negative. The transmission only holds if AI credit contraction leads to bank balance sheet shrinkage. Which side do you choose: to be alert early to dilution risk, or to wait for evidence of credit contraction? BTC pulled back to 80,000, I revise my view: short-term focus on recovery first.
On November 4, the daily candle closed at 80,508, up 3.94%. During the session, it dipped below the low before October 30, but ultimately recovered to 80,000, closing higher than the highest price of the previous two days.
Yesterday I was bearish, but after this bullish candle appeared, I can no longer pretend the market hasn't changed.
The short-term selling pressure was absorbed, marking a win for the bulls. Moving forward, I am more optimistic about the continuation of the recovery, initially targeting the 50-day moving average around 82,000.
However, the resistance zone between 84,000 and 85,000 remains, and a higher low has yet to be confirmed. Today, I am adjusting the short-term direction, but more evidence is needed to confirm a bull market restart.$BTC Every midterm election period marks the end of a bear market. This was the case in 2014, 2018, and 2022. After the midterm elections, there is another sharp drop, the market bottoms out, and the bull market begins. The difference is that each bottoming time has been occurring earlier. $xCRCL's earnings report exceeded expectations, but what I think is truly worth focusing on is not how much money it made, but the relationship between USDC growth and shareholder returns.
Circle's latest quarterly revenue reached $865 million, a 17% year-over-year increase, with earnings per share of $0.84, significantly surpassing market expectations. However, the USDC circulation at the end of the quarter was about $73.9 billion, basically flat year-over-year.
This is interesting.
Making money from stablecoin business does not necessarily mean the stablecoin scale is growing rapidly. Interest income from reserve assets, interest rate changes, and operating costs can all affect Circle's profits.
For on-chain US stock and RWA investors, what I care more about is: how much sustainable income can future stablecoin payments and tokenized securities settlement scale expansion bring?
CRCL stock reflects the company's equity value, while USDC is just a dollar stablecoin; the two are not the same. Even if you gain CRCL price exposure through on-chain products, you must first confirm whether you have real shareholder rights, as well as liquidity and trading session restrictions.
I will not chase the price just because of one earnings beat for now. The next focus is whether USDC circulation can accelerate again and whether non-interest business income can continue to grow.
#CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49%
@OKX星球 Microsoft: I used to not care when you called me "Giant Soft," what do you call me now?
Microsoft has rebounded from 504.96 to 555.8, soaring 6.68% in a single day, the king returns.
The market is straightforward: the daily chart closed above the BOLL upper band at 550.7, RSI6 surged to 71.7, a bit overexcited in the short term. MA5/20/60 are supporting at 527/531/510 respectively, the EMA structure remains intact, but the price is too far from the middle band at 530.9, technically a pullback is needed. The strong resistance above is at the previous high of 559.15, and the downside retracement target is 543.
The real story is in the news. FY27 Q1 revenue is 92.3 billion (+19%), Azure's constant currency growth rate is 48%, Morgan Stanley raised the target price to 650, the story remains attractive. But on the other hand, capital expenditure soared 70% year-over-year to 41 billion, free cash flow is being eaten up by AI infrastructure, 4,800 layoffs, and another 60,000 "voluntary departures" pushed, clearly "cutting headcount costs to pay for GPU expenses." The market is willing to believe "AI investments will eventually pay off," but no one guarantees the payback period.
Sentiment-wise, institutions are banding together, retail investors are following.
My view: Microsoft is not like Nvidia, a pure growth stock; it is "the most stable cloud leader + the most expensive AI bet." The long-term logic hasn't collapsed, Azure + Copilot moat remains; short-term, don't chase above 555, wait for a pullback to 531-543 to stabilize before considering, break below 505 to talk about weakness.
#软银重金押注OpenAI，Q2财报能否交出亮眼成绩？ The way the Korean stock market is falling today is indeed a bit scary😥
The KOSPI once dropped more than 5% intraday, even triggering a temporary limit on program trading. SK Hynix $SKHYNIX fell more than 7% at one point, and Samsung Electronics didn't fare much better.
What’s even more noteworthy is the capital flow:
By 11 a.m., foreign investors had net sold stocks worth over 1.2 trillion KRW, while retail investors were aggressively buying.
Last night, the three major U.S. stock indexes all rose, but semiconductors fell sharply against the trend, and today the Korean stock market is taking another hit.
I talked about this yesterday: after the U.S. midterm elections, the market began to worry that AI data center construction would face stricter regulations; but the Korean market has another problem—KOSPI is overly dependent on semiconductor giants like Samsung and Hynix.
As global capital starts to reassess the growth rate of AI capital expenditures, the Korean stock market naturally takes the brunt.
However, I believe that the current stock price plunge should not be directly interpreted as a problem with HBM demand:
Hynix’s fundamentals have not changed so drastically overnight, but market expectations for future growth have already begun to loosen.
Moving forward, I’m more focused on whether foreign capital selling can ease, because if foreign investors keep withdrawing, retail investors alone can’t support the entire market.
#美国中期选举：民主党赢得国会两院控制权 $BNB
$634 million. The amount stolen from Binance's hot wallet on October 29, the largest in history, with over $280 million still frozen.
Binance itself said it compensated 95%, the remaining 5% are illiquid niche coins, slowly being bought back both on and off the market. The third batch of withdrawals was unlocked today at noon, covering 36 coins, using the Ethereum network.
The strange thing is BNB. During the worst days of the incident, it didn't collapse; today it even rose by 2%, opening at 699.36 in 24h, touching 723.34 at 6 a.m., now at 713.5.
Looking closer, it’s not that good. At 10 a.m., a 1H candle released 543,000 contracts, touched 720.47 but failed to hold, then at 11 a.m. 208,000, 12 p.m. 161,000, 1 p.m. 217,000, volume dropped to one-third, price slipped from 715.9 to 713.7.
Fee rate 0.00456%, benchmark 0.01%, about 45%. Perpetual contract discount 6 basis points. Total market open interest only $49 million, thin among major coins, meaning no one is betting on BNB regarding this event.
Net outflow is real. On November 1, the first day, $4.6 billion withdrawn, $1 billion deposited, net outflow $3.64 billion, accounting for 2.1% of its asset management scale.
The books can hold up, but sentiment is slowly moving out. The real answer is not in BNB’s K-line, but whether the withdrawal queue for those 36 coins is still lining up.
#非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ Circle Q3 earnings breakdown: strong revenue, average quality.
Revenue of $865 million, up 17% year-over-year, adjusted EBITDA surged 85%, USDC on-chain transaction volume increased 49% — looks like a solid report card.
But breaking down the structure, there are three points to temper enthusiasm.
First, the profitable core business is shrinking. Reserve income was $658 million, down 8% year-over-year — this is the stablecoin company's most critical money printer; when interest rates fall, it stops working. This quarter's profit was supported by $207 million in "other income," of which $182 million came from selling its own ARC tokens, a one-time income. So net profit only increased 5%, a huge gap compared to the 85% EBITDA growth.
Second, volume rises but price does not. On-chain transaction volume increased 49%, but USDC circulation only grew 8% — the more frequent the transactions, the thinner the fee earned per dollar, indicating growth relies on "running volume" rather than "expanding the balance sheet."
Third, transformation is accelerating. Annualized payment network volume of $41.3 billion, acquisition of Tazapay, 5% layoffs to control costs — Circle is clearly pushing the narrative of becoming the "stablecoin version of Visa," reducing reliance on interest income.
The stablecoin sector has no long-term issues, but Circle's Achilles' heel remains interest rates — if rates really rise in December, it would actually be bad news for them.
#CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% Market: BTC rebounds in a V-shape from 75,600 to above 80,000
Overnight, BTC briefly dipped to about $75,618, then pulled back to the 80,000–81,200 range, rising about 3%–5% in 24h;
ETH surpassed $2,400, up 5%–7%
Sector-wide gains: DePIN +5.79%, RWA +5.47%, Layer2 +5.28%, individual tokens STX +11.31%, INJ +12.41%, RAY +17.73%
But the truth lies in derivatives: $936.1 million liquidated across the network in 24h, with shorts liquidated at $533.28 million; BTC single short liquidations about $370 million, with $215 million shorts liquidated within one hour.
Meanwhile, open interest actually dropped 4.36% to $347.73 billion — volume expanded but positions shrank, a typical short squeeze rather than new buying.
Sentiment hasn’t truly turned optimistic: put option demand is more than twice that of calls; BTC spot ETFs have seen a net outflow of $1.157 billion over the last three confirmed trading days, with over 130,000 liquidations across the market according to Sina’s data $BTC $ETH $SOL
Around 1 PM, I saw a breaking news that Schroders brought its first tokenized strategy onto Solana, and the comment section below was full of institutions entering.
I went to check the original announcement. This was actually released yesterday afternoon, but the news only got picked up a day later. It’s Schroders’ Emerging Markets Bond Fund, issued via Centrifuge, a brand with $1 trillion AUM, indeed the first active management strategy of this scale on Solana.
But the announcement didn’t mention the scale, the minimum investment threshold, nor did it provide the contract address.
The market didn’t give it any respect either. SOL touched 97.06 today then pulled back, currently at 96.05. The 1H volume bars at 9 AM were 418K, 10 AM 347K, 11 AM 364K pushing higher, 12 PM 291K, and from 1 PM till now 185K, volume shrinking with each bar.
The fee rate is 0.00225%, benchmark is 0.01%, just over 20%. The perpetual contract is even trading at a 4 bp discount, with a $334 million position unchanged for a day.
If big money really came in on this news, it wouldn’t be at this fee rate. I acknowledge the RWA line, that’s a three-to-five-year play, but short term it’s about who’s getting paid. The ±1% order book shows 9.17 million buy vs. 8.62 million sell, just standing off against each other.
My judgment is this news is worth a research report, not a single bullish candle.
#非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？ After the chaotic US midterm elections, the market is trading on an expectation: a change in the US Congress composition may reduce the likelihood of the US escalating the conflict with Iran further, thereby easing energy supply risks. However, Ajian does not believe that yesterday's drop in oil prices means inflationary pressures have disappeared, and the recent rebound of $BTC cannot yet be called a trend reversal.
It should be noted that in the past month, the crypto market capitalization has shrunk by nearly $300 billion, influenced not only by macro interest rates but also by factors such as AI asset valuations and security incidents on trading platforms. The reality is that the market has not yet re-established a sustained spot buying demand, and one must not compress a transmission chain into a simple conclusion of price rise or fall.
Therefore, from a macro perspective on Crypto, I suggest continuously focusing on this logic: changes in energy prices → changes in inflation expectations → changes in bond yields → changes in Federal Reserve policy expectations → changes in risk asset valuations.
That is all, DYOR #USMidtermElections: Democrats win control of both houses of Congress The whale's "short rent collection technique": not worried about floating losses, funding fees provide the safety net (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
This whale has cast a big net in perpetual contracts: BTC, ETH, and SOL all covered on the short side, with a nominal position of about $660 million. On the surface, the BTC short position shows a floating loss of $3.62 million, which looks a bit glaring, but the funding fee income of $3.59 million almost fills the gap; the ETH short position has a floating profit of $2.35 million, plus funding fees collected of $4.56 million; the SOL short position has a floating profit of $346,000, with funding fee income of $3.96 million. The total funding fees from the three positions amount to about $12.12 million, not only covering the overall floating loss but also contributing positive returns (￣▽￣)ノ
Its strategy is not to bet on a short-term crash but to "collect rent" on long-term shorts, exchanging time for space. Positions use full margin mode, with 5x leverage on BTC and ETH, and 7x leverage on SOL. The opening average prices are BTC at $76,383, ETH at $2,322.71, and SOL at $94.33; corresponding liquidation prices are approximately $137,256, $3,793.19, and $292.81 respectively.
The sweet spot of this portfolio is the continuous inflow of funding fees, but the risk is obvious: full margin collateral linkage means that if extreme market conditions approach the liquidation prices, the three positions could drag each other down ⚠️. So, while the whale seems to be sitting steadily on the fishing platform, it is actually still racing against extreme volatility.
$BTC $ETH $SOL When it comes to results landing, the market never waits for who wins, but rather "is it over yet." Once uncertainty clears, risk assets dare to raise their positions: BTC surpasses 80,000 for the first time, ETH surges 6% in a single day. This rally is not driven by fundamentals, but by pricing power shifting from the shorts back to the longs. On the policy front, let me be clear: with the Democrats controlling both chambers, the market structure bill the industry wants has already been blocked in a procedural vote in the Senate. No one will pay for crypto votes in an election year; they want a posture of no trouble. Those still expecting Washington to gift the industry should wake up this round. What truly pushes prices are money and leverage, not legislation. On the two days results landed, $236 million worth of positions were liquidated within two hours, 80% of which were shorts—shorts forced to buy back on the order book, that's how the 80,000 line was formed. Whoever is forced to liquidate is the one paying the bill; this rule is tougher than any policy. On the institutional side, the trend is opposite. Spot products saw net outflows for three consecutive trading days, totaling just over a billion in three days, with the harshest day seeing $640 million withdrawn; only on election day did it turn positive for the first time, adding back $230 million in one day. Leveraged longs push prices up, institutions reduce positions first then come back—whether these two forces converge is what to watch next—not Washington, but capital flows. History must be laid out: after the November 2018 midterms, Bitcoin ground down from below $6,000 to $13,000 by Q2 2019; 2022Don't be fooled by this bullish candle; this rally is driven by short sellers "self-destructing," not new money entering the market.
$BTC BTC (80,727): Short positions closed in the last 24 hours reached $533 million, but open interest actually shrank by 4.36%. ETFs have seen a net outflow of $859 million over the past 6 days, and IBIT has been bleeding for 10 consecutive days. The rebound pushed up by short covering is just a paper tiger without incremental follow-through.
$ETH ETH (2,434): 1.23 million ETH are queued for staking, with almost zero withdrawals, which looks solid. However, ETFs have had over $1.2 billion outflows this month, and staking yields have dropped to 2.2%—the locked tokens represent existing believers, not incremental buyers chasing highs.
$SOL L (96.77): Spot ETFs saw a record weekly outflow of $71.47 million, whales dumped 1.49 million SOL on exchanges within 10 days, and hackers continue converting SOL to BTC and fleeing. No matter how lively the on-chain activity is, it can't withstand selling pressure coming from all directions.
Summary: The fireworks from short covering are over. Next, we need to see if stablecoin supply can stop falling and if ETFs can turn to net inflows. Do you think this rally is the start of a reversal or just a "one-day tour" of short covering? Show your positions in the comments!🔥BTC surged over 7% but failed to hold above $81,199! What does this indicate? A strong rebound does not mean the uptrend is confirmed. The real focus of today's market move should be the capital structure behind the rise, not just the big bullish candle.📈
First, looking at the news: The US midterm election results are becoming clearer, with the Democrats taking both chambers. The market briefly worried about changes in crypto regulation, and the progress of the CLARITY Act might be hindered, causing BTC to dip near $75,700. Then, as uncertainty eased and market sentiment recovered, the price quickly rebounded.
📊 Next, looking at the derivatives market. According to CoinDesk, on election day, BTC options block trades had a notional value of about $660 million, with roughly $420 million in call option buys and about $105 million in call option sells. Increased bullish bets and short covering may have created additional buying pressure, driving the price up rapidly.
⚠️ The issue is that after BTC hit $81,199, it pulled back, possibly releasing pressure from profit-taking and trapped positions above. My short-term strategy remains to look for shorting opportunities on rebounds, not chasing shorts at lows or longs during sharp rallies. If volume supports a stable hold above $81,200, a reassessment will be necessary.
Going forward, I’m more focused on whether spot buying can continue the momentum. Do you think this is a brief short squeeze or the start of a new trend? #非农在即，就业数据能否强化12月加息预期？