Orbit Post Sitemap
Binance updated on Saturday that about 90% of the approximately 6.3 billion stolen assets have been recovered, up from about 80% the day before.
BTC ETH USDT BNB SOL USDC XRP, these major coins are now 100% reserve-backed, the remaining 10% are low-liquidity tokens still being bought on and off the market.
The withdrawal plan reopens today, Sunday, but must first pass security checks. SAFU and the contract insurance fund have also been partially used; losses are borne by the platform, not passed on to users.
$BTC current price is around 77617, 24-hour high 77738, low 77065, funding rate 0.01%.
Weekend volume is light, the market is grinding above 77000.
Recovery to 90% plus withdrawal reopening can support some sentiment, but on Friday the ETF just dumped about 643 million, institutional buying hasn’t returned yet.
I don’t see the replenishment completion as a reversal, more like sentiment stabilization; short term, watch if withdrawals really open and if anyone cashes out.
Short term support at 77200, near last night’s low; cut losses if broken.
Resistance at 77750 first, if held above then look to 78000.
Stop loss below 76950, target first at 78800, position size remains small #加密行业协同守护资产安全 $BTC $BTC is temporarily unable to break below the 77,000 level, and market sentiment tends to focus solely on this price point to guess the direction. In contrast, two other signals deserve more attention: first, the relative weakness of ETH and SOL compared to BTC; second, the current funding rates.
During this round of decline, the real weakness is not in the leading BTC, but in the numerous altcoins and secondary assets following behind. The leader holding steady while the smaller ones fall first is a typical market feature indicating risk is being peeled away layer by layer from the inside out.
Looking at the funding rates, ETH's funding rate has quietly turned negative. A negative funding rate means short positions are overcrowded, with market participants heavily positioned on the same side; the more crowded the shorts, the stronger the rebound tends to be once an oversold bounce is triggered, specifically squeezing those short positions chasing the lowest points.
Therefore, do not be misled by "$BTC not falling". Not falling does not equal a trend reversal, but extremely crowded shorts combined with exhausted trading volume indeed create conditions for a short squeeze. Existing short positions can be held patiently, but it is not advisable to continue chasing higher or adding positions at the current level. #美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 📉 Yesterday, the two attempts to go lower didn't reach the target, just wasted a whole day. Today, I continue to be bearish.
77,065 didn't break, 78,400 didn't hold above, guarded until dawn and nothing happened.
Today, 9 one-hour candles only moved 338 USD. Volume is 78% less than the previous 24 hours.
Lower volume is not accumulation, it means no one is willing to trade at this price level.
The most expensive cost is the rent: BTC funding rate settled at 0.01000% for five consecutive periods.
Paid full rent for forty hours, yet the price still dropped 0.54%.
Liquidations have also stopped: 51.99 million in 24 hours, compared to 327 million at the same time yesterday.
The largest single liquidation was a short position of 906,600, opened at 77,588, the early morning sweep was short sellers.
Four consecutive higher lows: 76,265→77,065→77,316→77,400.
Target: retest 77,400 before 20:00 today, if broken then look at 77,065.
Invalidation line: 1-hour close above 78,000, 24-hour high above 261.
Contrary evidence: four consecutive higher lows, ETH funding rate turned negative, shorts also start paying.
If 78,000 holds above, then it's accumulation not endurance, count this as my mistake.
Is this accumulation or no one?
$BTC #BTC continues to oscillate, subsequent trend influenced by multiple factors
Not investment advice.$BEAT
Based on past patterns, unlocking usually causes a drop, but not today
Today, there's a high chance of a pump, followed by a direct sell-off later, not on the unlocking day but a waterfall within two weeks When I saw "withdrawal liquidity rebound," my first reaction was not to rush to translate it as "risk relief." After learning quantitative analysis, I developed a habit: when I see good news, I always want to find the denominator first, then think about how to write it as an observation condition. 🤖
The API snapshot on October 31 shows that the Jupiter Lend vault's $USDC deposit claim size is 441 million tokens, of which 6.3% can be withdrawn immediately, meaning the instant withdrawal liquidity has rebounded to 27.9 million tokens.
If I were to write this as a strategy, I would set a rule: if the amount and proportion of instantly withdrawable funds continue to improve, then increase the evaluation of the liquidity status; if it’s just a single snapshot, keep observing. My judgment is that this is somewhat positive for users with withdrawal needs, but not enough to label the entire vault as "safe."
The reasoning is practical: a rebound in amount means the current buffer available for withdrawal has increased; but compared to the claim size, the instantly withdrawable portion is still only a small part, so you can’t treat the claim balance as money that can be withdrawn at any time. This rule also has a loophole: if the proportion rises only because the claim size shrinks, then I suspect that looking at the ratio alone might overestimate the degree of improvement. Withdrawal liquidity and solvency are not the same thing.
Therefore, I prefer to track the continuous changes in amount, proportion, and claim size. If you were to write this condition, would you require continuous improvement over several snapshots, or prioritize setting a threshold for the withdrawable proportion?$BTC closed October at 77,532, down 7.3% for the month, marking the worst October in nearly 9 years.
Next, you might hear "Moonvember." Looking at OKX monthly charts for the eight Novembers from 2018 to 2025:
✅ Price rose 3 times: +44%, +37%, +9%
❌ Price fell 5 times: -37%, -18%, -18%, -16%, -7%
The average is about -0.6%, with a median around -11.7%.
The impression that "November always rises" is mainly supported by the big rallies in 2020 and 2024. In 2018 and 2025, which closed October down, November also fell by 37% and 18% respectively. With only two samples, this doesn’t prove a guaranteed drop, but it’s enough to show that the month’s name isn’t a reason to buy.
More important than the calendar is watching the price: whether the October low of 76,265 holds.
Not investment advice #美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 Is this really a retail investor… $VVV with a cost as low as $3.77 Smart money recharged again after 19 days, suspected to have sold tokens worth $14.28 million since 2026.06 🤨
In 3 hours, he recharged 100,000 VVV into the exchange, about $2.32 million; currently, 663,374 VVV transferred to the exchange have an average recharge price of $21.53, which if sold would yield a profit of $11.786 million, a return rate of 471.2%
Wallet address 0x331C9A4Dd35FEb0147E985aE7d378AAed141c427Term Structure Radar
The first-level positive basis for $BTC corresponds to a very small scale. The buy near sell far quote spread is +1.11%, with the first-level pair scale about $515; at a scale of 10,000, this only covers about 5%. Under small volume, impact will quickly eat up the spread.
$SOL mark basis is positive, but the buy near sell far first-level quote is already inverted. Near-month annualized +2.03%, far-month annualized +0.5%, the near end is more expensive; mark near-far spread +0.05%, buy near sell far first-level quote spread -1.37%. Based on the first level.A company with a market value of only $7.8 million holds about $450 million worth of Bitcoin, and now the board has given the green light to sell 🤔
According to the company's announcement on October 30 and CoinDesk reports:
🔹 Nasdaq-listed Next Technology (NXTT) holds about 5,833 BTC
🔹 The board approved selling or pledging in batches, with timing, price, and quantity decided by the CEO
🔹 The reasons given are the Binance security incident, exchange vulnerabilities, and quantum computing risks; the company says its coins are not on Binance
🔹 Currently, only authorization has been given, no transactions have occurred yet
On the same day, Tokyo-listed Iole also announced it will sell all 151.21 BTC by November 30, expecting a loss of about 254 million yen, with the funds redirected to invest in AI data centers.
At 08:38 (Beijing time), OKEx spot $BTC was about 77,610 USDT.
My view: 5,833 BTC can be handled through block trades, not necessarily directly dumped on the market. What concerns me more is the change in sentiment—coin-hoarding companies are starting to find reasons to "sell coins."
Do you think more companies will follow and sell?
Personal opinion, not investment advice Today's number is quite interesting: the Fear and Greed Index is 34, yesterday it was 30. The absolute level is not high, but the direction is upward.
First, let's clarify the 34. It still falls within the fear zone—the market sentiment has only eased from "very fearful" to "still fearful," still far from neutral, let alone greedy. Many people see two consecutive days of increase and think a turning point has come, but the index hasn't even changed zones.
What’s really worth pondering is not the number 34 itself, but the change from 30 to 34. Funds in fear won’t immediately turn into buying just because the index rises. The first phase of emotional recovery is usually a repeated test: prices rise a bit and some sell, fall a bit and some buy, volume doesn’t increase, and prices grind within a narrow range. For large-cap assets like $BTC and $ETH, this phase often results in frustrating back-and-forth movements.
Mechanistically, it’s also easy to understand. The fear index measures subjective feelings from surveys and market volatility, not capital flows. Feelings warm up quickly, but real money enters slowly—who pays for this mismatch? Usually, it’s those who treat sentiment indicators as position signals.
So my judgment is straightforward: this looks more like emotional bleeding control, not an emotional reversal. It can be taken as evidence that "the worst might be over," but it’s too early to see it as a signal to "add positions." The real turning point depends on whether the index can return to the neutral zone and hold there.
Here’s a question to keep in mind: if the index falls back to 30 tomorrow, does your judgment today still hold?$BTW 永续10倍空单，1.1544开，现1.0546，浮盈+86.45%。
思路很朴素：顶部横盘放量滞涨，波动率压到极致，说明筹码准备派发。一根放量阴线直接把价格从 1.1544 砸下来，典型的破位信号，追空不追多。10倍杠杆。走势一路向下，不给任何舒服的下车位，盈利直接起飞。
这位置我打算先减一半仓位落袋，剩下的一半止损提到 1.08 让利润跑。1.0 能放量跌破就继续拿，跌不动就全平走人。$BTC $ETH #美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 The Binance hacker incident is still unfolding, with the scale of frozen assets continuously expanding, and BNB was once hammered down to around $694. At the same time, a certain whale increased holdings by nearly 9,400 ETH at an average price of $2,264, a bottom-fishing move contrasting with the weakening price. In the past 24 hours, the entire network liquidated $319 million, with long positions accounting for $233 million; leveraged longs are the main bearers of this round of decline.
The position structure lays this split out on the table. ETH 30x full-position shorts are running with floating profits, with a mark price of 2,257; support around 2,240 is precarious, but the whale's traces of buying above 2,260 compress the space for further shorting. BNB 20x longs are passive, with a mark price of 718.8 and a liquidation price of 692.6, just a step away from the low point hammered by the hacker incident; the safety cushion is already too thin to withstand another dip. BTC shorts also have floating profits, with a mark price of 77,552. While the ETF side saw a single-day net outflow of 643 million, BlackRock's iShares reversed the trend by absorbing funds, and Morgan Stanley spent over $100 million buying on dips—the selling pressure comes from leveraged liquidations, the buying from institutional allocations; the battle around 76,500 is far from over. #加密行业协同守护资产安全 Bottom fishing got stuck halfway up the slope. After reviewing, the problem wasn't in judging the direction but in mistaking "cheap" for "safe."
First reflection: Anchored to the wrong reference frame. You focus on the previous high to calculate the drop—Bitcoin from 120,000 to 77,000 feels like "60% off," ETH breaking below 2,385 feels like a "historical bottom," but the market prices future liquidity and liquidation structure, not your memory cost.
Second: Mistaking support levels for buy points, and trend falsification for noise. In a downtrend, every support will be broken—2,385 breaks to 2,200, 2,200 breaks to 2,000, and below that are massive whale liquidation lines. The real reversal signal is reclaiming key levels, not just touching them. You buy when it "looks like it can't fall further," but the market hasn't finished falling yet.
Third: Using up all your position at once. Bullets are all spent "halfway up the slope," so when it really hits the bottom, you have neither money nor mindset and can only lie flat passively. The point of scaling in is not to lower the cost basis but to trade time for confirmation—let the market first prove that selling pressure is exhausted, then gradually add positions.
The most fundamental point: bottoms are hammered out by leveraged liquidations, not calculated by valuation. You think you're bottom fishing value, but you're actually taking over forced liquidation positions. Next time, the fix is simple: wait for ETF fund flows to turn positive, wait to reclaim key levels, scale in, keep cash—better to pay a bit more for confirmation than to buy at half price guessing the bottom.
#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化 $BTC #加密行业协同守护资产安全 $ETH $BTC The weakest link has never been BTC, but those who chased in around 82,000. Have you ever wondered why the so-called "good news" always appears at just the right moment? Recently, I've been focusing on a somewhat off detail: there is an election node in early to mid-November. Logically, the crypto market would need a somewhat bullish narrative to match, but BTC at the 82,000 level is actually not cost-effective for large-scale funds. Buying higher means high cost; pushing down creates space to recollect low-priced chips. The 71k to 73k range is actually a more comfortable zone for institutions to rebuild positions. In other words, the market is not trading on "whether the good news will come," but rather "who gets washed out first before the good news arrives." This distinction is very important. On the bullish side: if after the election the price only returns to around 80k, it means some selling pressure above has been absorbed, sentiment has a window for recovery, ETH and some altcoins will catch a breather, and risk appetite will briefly warm up. But the bearish risk is more worth watching: once the "pump then dump" scenario plays out, retail holders will return all their chips to exchanges during the rebound, altcoins usually fall deeper than BTC, and rotation will turn into one-way bloodletting. My own observation is that the most easily overlooked aspect at this stage is not direction, but rhythm. BTC holding steady does not mean safety, ETH rising does not mean altcoins will broadly rise, what really needs watching is whether volume keeps up during the rebound and whether there is another volume surge with stagnant price around 80k. In terms of risk management, I prefer to treat this phase as a "verification period" rather than 2026.11.01 缠论社区Web3早间资讯💥 1. 币安已覆盖黑客攻击90%损失，今日恢复提现 点评：赔付速度与覆盖比例均超预期，剩余低流动性代币的补足进度仍是后续观察点 2. 比特币失守7.7万美元后微幅回升，市场情绪脆弱 点评：目前跌幅相对可控，市场情绪尚未修复 3. 分析人士：被盗比特币恐难追回，可追回的只剩稳定币 点评：这是对“冻结30亿”叙事的重要修正 4. Strategy Q3账面利润195亿美元，Saylor提出最高300亿美元“数字信贷”购币计划 点评：300亿是理论融资上限而非执行承诺 5. Strategy现金储备483亿美元，足以覆盖优先股股息和债务利息3.2-3.4年 点评：“囤现金”与“囤币”之间的取舍是Strategy当前的核心矛盾 6. Strategy面临11月11日MSCI指数决定，或被移出全球指数 点评：若被移除，优先股+普通股双融资通道均将承压 7. Strategy优先股STRC今日起改为每日派息 点评：每日派息旨在稳定STRC价格、吸引买家 8. 市场等待美联储12月加息信号，押注超70% 点评：加息预期是趋势性的，后者对估值的影响更持"Liquidity available could be exhausted within two hours," the speed I’m watching is happening in a market supported by reUSD. The material also mentioned that when liquidity in the PT market dried up, Morpho’s borrowing rate surged to about 40%. As of October 31, the four tracked markets have fallen back to around 9% to 13%.
If I were to write this as a strategy, I would first set an observation rule: if available liquidity drops rapidly, mark it as liquidity stress; only when the balance stops deteriorating and the replenished funds can persist, would the mark be removed. The rate decline can only be considered a supporting condition, not a standalone pass. 🤖
My judgment is that for users relying on continuous borrowing, the fund surplus is more important than the interest rate inflection point. My speculation is that if the replenished funds are quickly borrowed again, then even if the price drops, subsequent borrowing arrangements may still be disrupted. Price recovery does not equal capacity recovery.
The advantage of this rule is that it is less likely to be appeased by a nice-looking interest rate figure, but its flaw is obvious: the balance decline may come from increased borrowing or from fund withdrawal, and looking at the balance alone can’t distinguish this. As a quantitative newbie, I still need to supplement it with fund inflow/outflow and borrowing changes, otherwise it’s easy to misreport.
If you were to write the condition for "removing the stress mark," would you require liquidity to be continuously stable for a period, or require new funds to exceed new borrowing? How exactly would you set it?Here are 8 revised versions for you:
*Version 1 - Original Optimized*
> Democrats take control of Congress, will Musk and $SPCX be liquidated?
> 1. The merger won’t be directly stopped, but regulatory investigations and hearings are very likely. Congress only has supervisory and pressuring power, cannot directly veto the merger; the decision lies with the SEC. A lengthy review will increase merger uncertainty and suppress market speculation.
> 2. This merger relies on a relaxed regulatory environment. If Democrats take power, they will pressure regulators, focusing on conflicts of interest after the SpaceX and Tesla merger. The market fears indefinite approval delays; once expectations weaken, SPCX’s premium will quickly fade, dragging Tesla’s valuation down.
> 3. Two market scenarios: if only one chamber is taken, expect a bearish pulse drop, not suitable for shorting; if both chambers are taken, it’s a strong bearish signal, suitable for shorting SPCX rebounds and avoiding Tesla longs at high levels.
> 4. Before the election, it’s an expectation game with high volatility; avoid heavy bets. If polls favor Democrats, short SPCX on rallies; if Republicans hold Congress, regulatory risks ease, and there’s rebound potential.
*Version 2 - Minimalist*
> Democrats take Congress, will $SPCX be liquidated?
> 1. No direct stop, hearings and investigations will come, Congress can only pressure, decision lies with SEC, lengthy review suppresses speculation
> 2. Merger depends on relaxed regulation, Democrats will pressure and question SpaceX×Tesla conflicts of interest, approval delays = SPCX premium drops +$CORE I just checked, and the number of holding accounts for this asset has dropped from over twenty thousand a few years ago to less than three thousand now, basically no liquidity left. Just over ten thousand dollars can push the price down by five points, so be very careful! Once trapped, you'll never get out in your lifetime, and it's a sure trap.周五美股被科技股拖着摔了一跤，跌幅是六月以来最大的一次。标普500收7580，跌1.82%；纳指跌2.86%到25437；道指跌572点到51770。表面看是又一次“AI怕高”，实际市场在重新定价一件事：烧钱能不能换来足够的回报。 科技板块跌了4.2%多，是当天最重的。芯片股尤其惨。英特尔单日跌近29%，创下几十年里最差的一天。它三季度本身不差，数据中心业务还涨了近八成，但四季度指引只有150到160亿美元，明显低于市场预期的170亿出头。公司说PC需求被高内存价格压着，以色列工厂事故也影响了供应。数据中心再强，也扛不住PC这块的塌方，市场直接把整条芯片链一起砸了。英伟达跌了四个多点，AMD跌幅更大。 亚马逊同样没能稳住。它继续加码AI投入，自由现金流被烧得厉害，投资者已经不太吃“先花钱再赚钱”这套叙事了。前一天谷歌母公司刚因为类似原因大跌，周五市场把这两件事连起来看，AI资本开支的回报周期被拉长了，预期被往下修。 防御性板块反而涨了。能源和必需消费走强，说明钱在从高估值科技往更稳的地方挪。VIX升到19.42，波动还没到恐慌，但已经不是之前那种无脑买科技的状态。整周标普小跌，纳指跌了#闪迪业绩超预期并宣布拆股，股价跌逾13% If we look at it superficially, SanDisk delivered an impeccable report card: quarterly revenue of $11.03 billion (nearly 4 times year-over-year growth), earnings per share of $49.51 (significantly beating expectations), a gross margin as high as 85.1%, while simultaneously announcing a 1-for-8 stock split and a $5 billion buyback as strong catalysts. However, the secondary market responded with a cold -13.47% large bearish candle, signaling a rush of capital exit. This kind of "good news fully priced in then disaster" scenario is a fundamental rule common to both financial cycles and the crypto world. So the question arises: why did the stock price plunge over 13% despite such stunning results? SanDisk (SNDK) reported its fiscal 2027 first quarter earnings which on paper are "impeccable": Revenue: $11.03 billion (nearly 4 times year-over-year growth, exceeding Wall Street consensus of $10.74 billion); Earnings: Non-GAAP EPS of $49.51 (well above the expected $46.73); Gross margin: soared to 85.1%, even surpassing the lucrative range of Nvidia GPUs; Additional catalysts: the board approved a forward 8-for-1 stock split and added a $5 billion stock repurchase. Multiple data points exceeded expectations, yet the market faced a brutal -1This reminder tonight hits hard: from iPhone 4S to iPhone 11, this series of older models has a hardware-level BootROM vulnerability. The trouble isn’t how hard it is to exploit, but that it can’t be patched—no matter how iOS updates, it can’t cover it up because the problem is buried in the chip’s boot process, a layer software can’t reach.
The attack path is also very clear: the attacker must first get physical access to the phone, then execute code via the USB port. Remote theft is impossible, but if the phone is lost, borrowed, or sent for overnight repair, that door is open.
There’s only one recommendation: don’t store mnemonic phrases on iPhone 11 or earlier models. If you’ve already done so, generate a completely new set of mnemonic phrases in a trusted environment as soon as possible and migrate your assets. Note that this means "regenerate," not just copying the old twelve words to the new phone—the old words have already been on an untrusted device, copying them over is like moving the risk along with them.
What’s really worth thinking about is our default trust that "phones are very secure." Cold wallets, multisig, offline signing have been discussed for years, but most people still keep their most critical mnemonic phrase on a device they use daily to watch videos, connect to public WiFi, and lend to friends for calls. The longer you hold $BTC, the greater the cost of this vulnerability.
Changing devices isn’t expensive, and regenerating mnemonic phrases takes just a few minutes. What’s costly is losing them and not being able to recover.💥$650 million short position ≠ simply bearish! Whales are earning "rate cash flow"🔥
On-chain monitoring shows that a certain address has built a short portfolio worth about $650 million using BTC/ETH/SOL, with a cumulative P&L of $220 million, and a profit of $74 million in the past 7 days.
Core ledger breakdown
ETH is the main position: opened nearly 100,000 shorts at $2,322, 5x leverage, unrealized profit close to $8 million.
BTC and SOL are defensive: BTC has an unrealized loss of over $2 million, liquidation price far above 136,000; SOL volatility is basically negligible.
Invisible income is the key
Just from funding rates, over $11 million extra earned in 7 days. In other words, this is not a bet on a one-sided decline, but using large capital to turn shorts into interest-bearing assets.
Deep insight
Actual leverage is low + full position mode, ordinary spikes rarely hit the safety cushion. The so-called dimensionality reduction strike focuses on position structure and funding rate income, not directional judgment.
Personal thoughts
This strategy bets on exchanging time for space. Once macro sentiment suddenly changes and chain liquidations resonate, the full position mode could also become fuel for a long rally. Don’t just watch whales take profits, also beware of the intense shakeout when they close positions.
Do you understand this arbitrage logic? When do you think the whales will exit?
Observation based solely on on-chain data, not investment advice
$BTC $ETH $SOL
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 This move before the market opens on November 4th is not about the earnings report release, but about Circle pushing USDC like a pawn to the brink of promotion: it's easy to add one more square of circulation on the board, but the hard part is whether the promoted piece can still hold the king's wing.
Let me lay out the situation first. USDC circulation growth is the pawn advancing on the chain, payment expansion is the spatial advantage, reserve income is the value of the pieces, and distribution cost is the price paid to exchange pieces. The market often focuses on the "check" sound, but overlooks the real calculation in the midgame: if income growth mainly comes from reserve interest, while payment settlement does not expand simultaneously, this pawn is just pushed to a high position without piece appreciation; if rising distribution costs bring channel penetration and real payment frequency, that's sacrificing a piece to open lines, and the endgame can be played; if it's just buying traffic and subsidizing channels, it's exchanging a minor piece for a flank pawn—lively on the surface but structurally leaking.
What to watch in Q3 is not a single profit figure, but three hidden lines of growth quality: whether the slope of USDC circulation is driven by payment demand; whether the scissors gap between reserve income and distribution cost narrows with discipline; and whether the profit margin can withstand the endgame test of falling interest rates. The essence of the stablecoin business is like endgame technique: reserve income is the king, the payment network is the pathway, and distribution cost is the passing pawn. No matter how strong the king is, if the pathway is blocked, it can only move back and forth in limited squares; no matter how many passing pawns, if they cannot promote, the final result is still a draw.
The linkage with $xINTC is more like a minor piece on the same restraining line. CRCL and USDC narratives provide direction, tokenized targets provide flexibility, but thin liquidity, shallow order books, and pre-market gaps can all turn into blitz attacks. Chasing a pulse just because of the USDC growth headline is like moving without fully calculating the opponent's response. Real linkage depends on whether the discount/premium can converge, whether order book depth can hold, and whether there is forced redemption near the liquidation line. The main piece hasn't moved; the minor piece moving first is usually noise, not initiative.
The winning move in this game is not about gaining a few more basis points in Q3, but whether USDC can break out from the comfortable endgame of reserve interest and push payment forward into an irreversible promotion; $xINTC is just a minor piece hanging on the same restraining line—if the main piece hasn't moved, its early move is noise. #circleq3usdcgrowth#闪迪业绩超预期并宣布拆股，股价跌逾13% Storage can't hold up either, where is the left-side bottom-fishing window?
The pre-market atmosphere remains grim. The storage sector, propped up by SK Hynix for a day, still caught up in a correction, the cover has been lifted. Google has returned near its March lows, Micron and SanDisk are testing July support, next to watch are the midterm election results and the evolution of the war.
There are roughly two paths: if both chambers are lost, the market may continue to sell off first, then brew a major reversal at some point; if Congress is split, it may directly reverse. My plan is to fully buy in batches on the left side before November 3, then increase leverage on the right side after news confirmation. This is a window for a capital scale leap, but leverage is a double-edged sword, discipline must not be lost.
Not investment advice, just pre-market notes.SOXL was hit twice this weekend, both times for nothing.
At 21:00, a sell of 36,593 contracts (more than four times the 8,525 contracts from the previous hour) pushed the 24-hour low to 76.79, closing at 77.14; at 22:00, all 24,246 contracts were bought back at 77.55.
At 06:00, the opposite happened: 18,285 contracts (more than four times the 4,100 contracts averaged over the previous four hours) pushed the price to 77.83, closing at 77.31, which is even lower than the opening price of 77.39.
Each time there was a fourfold volume spike on both sides, but neither succeeded — there were real buyers and sellers at both 76.79 and 77.83, but few were willing to pay in the middle range.
The current price of 77.45 just crossed above the MA20 at 77.37, still 12% below 88.17.
Triple-leveraged tokens lose value even if they don't move over the weekend; before 21:30, this price is just a shadow.
If it closes with volume above 78.39 (≥25,000) → pull back to 78.0~78.2 to go long, stop loss at 77.40, target 79.90, risk-reward ratio 2.6.
If it closes with volume breaking below 76.79 (≥25,000) → rebound to 77.1~77.3 to go short, stop loss at 77.90, target 75.60, risk-reward ratio 2.3.
No trades can be made in the middle range; a 1.6-point range is too tight for stop loss.
$SOXL
(Not investment advice, trade at your own risk) Treating Palantir's valuation as a load-bearing wall is like mistaking the reflective glass curtain wall for the building's structural strength—what really needs testing in Q3 is whether the steel rebar of orders can be welded into the main beam of revenue.
With Q2 revenue up 93% year-over-year and U.S. commercial revenue up 149%, and the full-year guidance raised accordingly, these indicate the speed of concrete pouring and the core tube's leap floors, showing that construction organization is not slow. But the danger of supertall buildings has never been about how shiny the facade is, but about the reinforcement ratio, node strength, and load transfer. Seeing the full-year guidance raise as a revision of the overall control schedule means management has a grip on the construction pace; however, a revised plan is not the same as structural topping out. What Q3 must deliver is the node acceptance report, not a rendering. A high valuation is an expensive curtain wall system; the greater the visual impact, the more stringent the wind tunnel tests; high market expectations are the ultimate wind pressure, and any order delay, revenue recognition mismatch, or gross margin deviation will be amplified as resonance in the curtain wall sector.
Q3 should not only look at the building height of revenue numbers but also whether the steel structure nodes of order reserves, the completion settlement of revenue recognition, and the cost control of profit margins are closed loops. I will first look at the order conversion rate as the vertical load-bearing component, then the revenue recognition as the horizontal floor slab, and finally the profit margin as the node welds; any honeycomb or roughness in any of these three will turn a high valuation into fatigue cracks under wind vibration. If order growth only stays at the contract level, it is like embedded parts without grouting; if revenue growth relies on one-off projects, it is like a cantilever beam without topping; if profit is eaten up by delivery costs, it is like the core tube being thinned. The higher the valuation, the lower the tolerance; this is not an aesthetic issue but a structural safety issue.
$xMU, this tokenized stock, is more like a presale condo and an external curtain wall hanging outside the main structure: the underlying stock is the core tube, and the token price is the floor vibration transmission. When linkage is smooth, it is a sensitive wind gauge; when liquidity thins, time lag occurs, and emotions amplify, the expansion joint will jam, and the damper will fail. Don't mistake the sensitivity of the external system for the safety redundancy of the main structure; it only transmits vibrations faster. If Palantir's high valuation encounters a mismatch between Q3 orders and revenue, and the underlying load-bearing wall cracks, the $xMU external system will sound the alarm first.
I only inspect the rebar, not the curtain wall reflection: if Q3 cannot weld orders into revenue and turn guidance into cash flow, the high-altitude valuation corridor will crack before the main structure does. #palantirq3valuationWoke up, was about to make some breakfast, casually checked the contract data, and instantly lost my appetite! Brothers, don’t think the weekend is about to end smoothly. These manipulative whales are taking advantage of everyone just waking up and still groggy, loading up all the leverage below, ready to launch a surprise attack anytime!
$BTC current price around 77500, 4-hour long-short ratio 2.63. Although the 1-hour chart looks sideways, the open interest hasn’t dropped, retail investors are all betting on a rebound today, stubbornly holding at the bottom. The resistance at 78000 can’t be broken, the main players definitely won’t kindly lift you up, most likely they’ll push down to shake things out.
Looking at $ETH now at 2254, long-short ratio 2.69. This one is still a follower; see how it moves—slow and hesitant when rising, but faster than anyone when falling. The funding rate keeps fluctuating, indicating the bulls’ confidence is seriously lacking. Don’t think you can bottom-fish just because it’s dropped a lot.
Finally, $SOL at 95.3. Look at the 4-hour long-short ratio, still high at 3.28! This data really makes you sweat; all bulls are stubbornly fighting. With such heavy positions, if the market shows any sign of weakness, the main players will definitely target SOL.
To sum up, liquidity is worst at the end of Sunday, and the main players love to trap people when everyone’s off guard. Any rebound without volume support is a bull trap, so don’t get carried away.
Brothers, Monday is coming soon. Are you going to stay out and watch, or get ready to bottom-fish?
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 #英特尔Q4指引不及预期，股价暴跌近30%
Can Intel be bought before the midterm elections?
1. Conclusion: It is not recommended to time the market by "waiting for the election." *The midterm elections are a secondary variable for Intel, with effects measured in days; company fundamental issues affect quarters.
2. The transmission effect of the midterm elections is very weak. *The only substantial path is: if the Democrats sweep both chambers, data center regulation tightens, causing cloud providers to slow capital expenditures, impacting Intel's only growth engine DCAI (Data Center and AI, +78% this quarter). The U.S. government’s 8.2% stake cost about $95, current price $65.76, a paper loss of 30%, the "national team bailout" logic has failed.
3. The real reason for Friday’s plunge is the earnings guidance. ** On October 30, the stock dropped 28.58% in one day; Q3 revenue and EPS both beat expectations, but Q4 guidance is revenue of $15–16 billion, EPS about $0.25 (expected $0.45), gross margin down from 44.1% to 38%; management calls 2027 the "year of investment," with full-year free cash flow negative.
4. Valuation is not cheap. *Up 76% year-to-date, retraced 54% from the high, price-to-sales ratio about 5.5x, TTM EPS loss, no P/E ratio available.
5. Trading discipline. Build positions in batches, first tranche ≤ 1/3 of planned position; no leverage or short-term options; position size based on "able to withstand another 30% drop" backward calculation. The real signals to wait for are Q4 gross margin holding at 38% and 14A public confirmation of anchor customers. U.S. tech stocks are discounted, and cryptocurrencies share the same fate
"Discount" refers to the valuation digestion of tech stocks, while cryptocurrencies are undergoing a "liquidity test." In the short term, cryptocurrencies will still "breathe and share fate" with tech stocks, with even greater volatility; in the medium to long term, institutionalization (ETFs, compliance) is building a bottom line for them, but the era of huge profits has shifted to "selective assets."
Key observation indicators: Nasdaq 100 index trend, 10-year U.S. Treasury yield, Bitcoin spot ETF net inflows, and AI monetization earnings reports from major tech giants (NVIDIA/Microsoft).
Scenario analysis
Optimistic (risk appetite rises): If AI investment returns are validated and the Federal Reserve shifts to easing, liquidity will flow back in, and Bitcoin is expected to challenge previous highs or even reach the $120,000–$170,000 range, ushering in a second wave of institutional-driven growth in the crypto market.
Pessimistic (liquidity crisis): If tech stock sell-offs evolve into systemic deleveraging, Bitcoin could drop to the $50,000–$65,000 range, and altcoins may face a clearance-style decline of over 80%.#苹果新CEO迎来iPhone18首份成绩单
Apple Q4 Earnings Preview: Likely Slightly Above Expectations, But Guidance Is Key
Apple will release its fiscal 2026 Q4 results after market close on November 2. Wall Street consensus: revenue around $113 billion (about +10% year-over-year), EPS about $1.98-2.00. The company previously guided revenue growth of 9%-11%, basically in line with expectations.
Historical data favors Apple—multiple past quarters have consistently beaten estimates. Double-digit growth in iPhone and resilience in services business are expected to support a slight beat, but supply chain constraints, rising memory costs, and the new CEO's first earnings call mean the market is more focused on holiday season guidance.
Numbers will likely meet expectations, but the real tone will come from management's outlook for the December quarter.
$AAPL$One detail often overlooked: a certain platform's user compensation fund is not held in U, but reserved in $BTC. To actually compensate, BTC must first be sold to convert into U, which means about 18,000 BTC (approximately $2.4 billion) could become potential selling pressure inventory. Although the hacker incident did not directly crash BTC, the panic sentiment combined with this "overhanging chip" creates significant pressure.
BTC's technicals have shown fatigue: the price is close to the 30-day low of 77,430, RSI is only 36.5, and MA7/20/30/60 are all pressing from above, with the bearish arrangement not yet reversed.
On the other hand, $ZEC has instead taken on the narrative of privacy and self-custody, with Grayscale Trust seeing net inflows for 8 consecutive days; the price stands above MA7/30/60, up 11% in 7 days, RSI at 51.8 is neutral, and the current price of 1,276 still has room to reach the 30-day high of 1,372.
$XRP is the weakest: the hacker-controlled XRP wallet still holds 290 million coins not transferred out, equivalent to a long-term looming sell-off risk, and Ripple's self-rescue efforts have little direct impact on the coin price. Technically, 1.2487 is close to the 30-day low, RSI 37.9, and all five moving averages 1.2932, 1.3124, 1.3581, 1.3961, 1.3294 are suppressing from above, down 16% in 30 days, the worst performance.
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 #OKX、ICE与Trade.xyz联手，推动永续合约进入美国合规市场 #加密行业协同守护资产安全 Before the December decision, BTC first watches the data closely 👀
My observation order: economic data > official statements. Inflation and employment are hard indicators; speeches are more about managing expectations.
September core PCE year-on-year at 3.1% indicates inflation stickiness remains; Musalem is somewhat hawkish, but individual voices cannot be directly equated with December actions. The key upcoming data are November 6th Nonfarm Payrolls and November 10th CPI. If both employment and inflation remain strong, tightening expectations may swing back, putting pressure on BTC's rebound; if data cools down, policy pressure eases, but weakening employment could also trigger growth concerns, so don't automatically translate "weak data" as "bullish" 😅.
Looking at the chart, BTC has yet to effectively reclaim the 24-hour rolling high near 78802 after the rebound. If data cools and price stands above and holds on a retest, the recovery is more credible; if it breaks below the low near 76265 and the bounce is weak, short-term recovery should be put on hold 📉.
My approach: don't short just because of a hawkish speech, nor go long on a single data point; wait for the numbers to land and see if rate expectations and price confirm each other in the same direction ✅.What I care about most is not the anniversary, but the phrase in the material: "Small businesses still face the impact of inflation and rising costs." The white paper is celebrating its 18th anniversary, and discussions about Bitcoin's original intention to replace the traditional financial system and repeated financial bailouts have resurfaced. I think this is more like a demand reminder and cannot be directly counted as a price boost for $BTC.
If I were to write it as a strategy, I would set a rule: if the pressure from inflation and operating costs persists, put the "demand for alternative currency" on the watchlist, but do not directly trigger price judgments. After learning quantitative analysis, I am a bit afraid of taking a story that sounds reasonable as an effective signal.🤖
The advantage of this rule is that it shifts attention from the anniversary back to the real pain points. My speculation is that if small businesses' dissatisfaction with the existing system deepens, alternative solutions may gain more attention. But the loophole is also obvious: complaining about high costs does not equal willingness to bear price volatility; paying attention to Bitcoin does not equal using it for payments. There is still a gap between sentiment and actual usage.
So I would rather add a confirmation condition of "actual usage" to the rule, rather than just the volume of discussion. If you were to write this condition yourself, would you choose whether merchants accept Bitcoin payments, or whether they continue to use it after acceptance? Which one better filters out the noise brought by anniversary topics?#AMD财报前瞻：HeliosAI系统商业化进展 A one-day drop of 10.88%, a one-month drop of 17.5%, the stock price of $504.80 directly hit the lowest point within the month — Intel's earnings report triggered both the PC slump and server supply squeeze, and AMD took the hit as well. The November 3 earnings report has the market focused on the commercialization progress of the Helios AI system, but Seeking Alpha bluntly states that most of the bull market logic is already priced in. Highlights: First, whether Helios commercialization can deliver better-than-expected order signals; second, whether the weak PC demand revealed by Intel's guidance will transmit to AMD; third, whether the valuation has become more attractive after the big drop. The bulls and bears are clearly divided: bulls say AI chip demand still exists and the pullback is an opportunity; bears say Intel has already laid out the industry's problems, and the high valuation cannot hold. My view: this drop is industry sentiment contagion, not AMD's own problem, but bottom-fishing before earnings requires courage, guidance is more important than numbers. Volatility? A 10% single-day drop says it all. Will you bet on a rebound before the earnings or wait until after November 3 to act? Not investment advice DYOR #AMD财报前瞻：HeliosAI系统商业化进展 💻 Breaking down the input by code review: Glassnode reports that the US spot Ethereum ETF has seen net outflows for 23 consecutive trading days, setting the longest record since its launch. Traditional investors who made large purchases in August and September are currently showing weaker demand.
My judgment: This is somewhat bearish for $ETH's capital flow, but directly concluding that "Ethereum is unwanted" has a logical flaw. Continuous net outflows indicate that buying support from this channel is weakening; however, consecutive days do not equal the scale of outflows. The data lacks amounts, so we cannot judge the selling pressure solely based on the record. ETFs are only part of the demand and cannot represent the entire market.
If it were me, I would adjust the evaluation logic to simultaneously consider the net outflow amount, the proportion relative to the fund size, and cross-verify with on-chain demand, rather than rushing to a conclusion. Please help me review: when judging this round of weak demand, which data would you prioritize supplementing? Are there any loopholes in my logic?Core PCE matching expectations is actually bad news: inflation remains pinned high, cooling down rate cut expectations 😮💨. The 10-to-2 vote split reveals public Fed internal divisions, with over 80% betting on a December rate hike; prolonged high interest rates have become a dull knife 🔪 hanging over risk assets. What funds fear is not a single rate hike, but the endless high rates, prompting a repricing of risk.
$BTC broke below 80,000, dropping over 5% in a day; ETF funds are stampeding out—this is not an ordinary shakeout. Heavy trapped positions above, no new macro liquidity, long-term spot holdings can be steady, but don’t rush to bottom-fish short-term 🙅. If shorting short-term, always carry a stop loss; don’t hold short positions as long-term shareholders—no stop loss is just handing chips to the market.
$ETH remains weak with sharper declines; the ecosystem lacks new narratives, and funds continue to withdraw. Don’t get itchy just because of the big drop; if Bitcoin tests new lows again, Ethereum’s catch-up drop will be even harsher—don’t catch flying knives 🩸.
$XAUT’s gold logic is stronger: high inflation, US bond yields hard to fall, compounded geopolitical disturbances, with safe-haven and central bank buying support, resilience is clearly stronger than in crypto ✨. Don’t use short-term emotions to trap long-term logic.
The rate cut trade is over; we have entered a defensive positional battle against high interest rate risks 🛡️.Suddenly, 500 million XRP appeared on the table, valued at about 626 million USD. Many people's first reaction upon seeing the word "unlock" is to panic sell, but this matter needs to be analyzed carefully.
First, look at the chips. 500 million tokens, 626 million USD, this is not a small amount. It's equivalent to releasing a batch of coins outside the original pool that can turn into sell orders at any time. The quantity itself is fixed; the uncertainty lies in when they will move.
Next, consider the mechanism. Unlocking does not equal selling; it only turns locked coins into "movable" coins. What really determines the price is where these coins go next: into exchanges, into market makers' inventories, or remain in cold wallets. So what we often see is not a crash on the day of unlocking, but sporadic, unclear sources of selling pressure appearing on the order book over time.
Then there's the time difference. Unlocking is an instantaneous action; digestion is a slow process. The market's biggest fear is never the known 500 million coins, but whether they will be sold all at once on the same day. This uncertainty usually weighs on the price more than the selling pressure itself.
My judgment is: short-term bearish, but no need to panic. For a coin with the scale of $XRP, 500 million won't crash the market all at once; it's more likely to grind downward gradually. The real observation point is not today, but whether the exchange balances rise significantly in the next few days.
Here's a question for you: if most of these coins eventually return to cold wallets, then does this "negative" event actually become a window for others to buy at a low price?🔥 The better SNDK's earnings report looks, the more bearish I become! Can AI storage continue to celebrate?
This time, I choose to stand against the market and bet on a short-term pullback for SNDK.
🔵 Performance: Revenue grew 378% year-over-year, with strong results and future guidance. AI storage demand remains hot, but the problem is that these positives may have already been priced into the stock.
🔴 Expectation fulfillment: When everyone expects an outperform, simply having excellent results may no longer be enough. If future guidance does not exceed expectations again, it is easy for positive news to be taken as a sell signal.
🟡 Industry cycle: The storage industry is cyclical. Currently, more attention should be paid to supply expansion, product prices, and future orders, not just single-quarter profits.
🟢 Market sentiment: AI hardware sectors like optical communication and storage are pulling back simultaneously, and sector funds are starting to diverge. For SNDK to strengthen independently, stronger capital support is needed.
My judgment: I am more cautious about the risk of profit-taking at high levels in the short term, but this does not mean I am bearish on the long-term development of AI storage.
⚠️ Risk reminder: A good earnings report does not guarantee a stock price increase, and positive news being realized does not necessarily mean a drop. Contrarian trading also requires strict stop-loss discipline!
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 $BTC $ETH $HYPE Let's first calculate the cost of capital: PT market liquidity has dried up, and Morpho's borrowing rate has risen to about 40%; if the strategy's returns can't cover the borrowing costs, then no matter how good the book profits look, it's all for nothing. A market supported by reUSD saw available liquidity exhausted within two hours. As of October 31, the interest rates in four tracked markets have fallen back to about 9% to 13%.
I think this is somewhat bearish for PT strategies that rely on borrowing. The key issue isn't how high the interest rates spike, but whether the capital can keep circulating. Liquidity shortages push up borrowing costs and squeeze profit margins; although rates have fallen, you can't judge liquidity recovery solely based on this—cheap borrowing and actually being able to borrow are two different things.
My choice is still to play it safe: first look at available liquidity, then calculate the interest spread, and don't rush to treat the decline as an opportunity. Facing this kind of PT lending market, would you play it safe and wait for liquidity to recover, or are you willing to take the risk of interest rates jumping up again?SKHY Today's key focus isn't the price, but the volume bar at 06:00.
Throughout the weekend, it hovered between 149.14 and 150.93, a range of 1.79, fluctuating 1.2% — a price in a vacuum, not forming a pattern.
But at 06:00, a volume of 2,858 contracts (compared to 195 the previous hour and 202 the hour before, more than tenfold) surged to 150.59, closing at 149.98, 0.05 lower than the open.
No one was scrambling to accumulate in the vacuum; this spike tested above 150.6, then was pushed back — there were more sell orders above than expected.
Current price is 149.77, with MA20 at 150.04 pressing down by 0.27.
The real pricing starts at the 21:30 open; orders now are queued:
Close above 150.93 with volume (≥3000) → pull back to 150.5~150.7 to go long, stop loss at 149.80, target 152.50, risk-reward 2.4.
Close below 149.14 with volume (≥3000) → rebound to 149.5~149.7 to go short, stop loss at 150.30, target 147.35, risk-reward 3.2.
No trades between 149.14 and 150.93; 1.79 range is too tight for stop loss.
$SKHY
(Not investment advice, trade at your own risk) #Federal Reserve officials signal rate hikes, December expectations still divided
Brother Maji's $ETH long positions were all liquidated, and he added funds to open more longs.
His $ETH longs were fully liquidated yesterday due to the drop caused by the Bn hack.
Yesterday afternoon, he deposited 250,000 USDC to continue going long, and currently has long positions worth $58.8 million, including ETH, HYPE, and BTC.
As usual, the leverage is quite high, so the liquidation price for this ETH position is very close: at $2161, just $86 away from the current price.
He has been heavily betting on Hyperliquid (hype) for nearly a year and a half, with a trading volume reaching $15.86 billion. He has lost a total of $37.05 million. #IREN矿企转型AI云服务，GPU交付进展待揭晓
Brothers, IREN is about to submit its report. The real game here isn't the orders, but whether those orders can turn into cash flow without relying on additional issuance.
Clear card: The first 50MW liquid-cooled cluster of Microsoft's $9.7 billion order has been delivered, AI cloud revenue has surpassed mining for the first time, earning the "face" of the transformation.
Hidden card in financing: FY27 capital expenditure is as high as $25-30 billion. The $3.6 billion GPU financing for the Microsoft project has achieved investment grade, but how to fill the huge remaining gap? The stock price has retreated 68% from its peak, and the market is pricing in "dilution from additional issuance."
Market: Bitcoin current price about 77,400, support at 76,500, resistance at 78,000.
Operation: If holding a position, stop loss strictly below 76,000; if no position, wait for a pullback to 76,500 with reduced volume and stabilization before watching.
Old Mo says: Delivery only proves the ability to "build," not the ability to "build without dilution." After the financial report, focus on financing details, it's more useful than focusing on revenue! $BTC $ETH $SOL $BTC smashed through the 80,000 mark, dipping as low as around 77,000, down about 4% intraday; $ETH lost the 2250 level; $SOL was pressed down to 95.📉 A few days ago, some people asked me: with the stock market hitting new highs and the crypto market sideways, is a catch-up rally coming? My answer remains the same: don’t mistake sideways movement for a buildup.😅
Once this AI trading cycle turns, crypto is no longer a “safe haven” but the peripheral nerve of risk assets. Tech stocks pull back, the semiconductor index weakens, and crypto leverage amplifies volatility first. The so-called “decoupling” and “digital gold” are mostly illusions during times of ample liquidity; when deleveraging really happens, it’s not narratives that matter, but whose collateral can withstand the pressure better.🧊
The question now isn’t "dare to buy the dip," but "is the liquidity still retreating?"💧 Quick hands might catch a rebound, but slow hands are better off waiting for sentiment and leverage to be fully cleansed. Will you catch the knife on the left side, or wait for confirmation on the right?🤔Star Xu openly said something that many people find awkward to hear: Don't use security as a marketing gimmick.
From Bybit and Bitget to this recent hot wallet breach, the problem often isn't the private keys themselves, but the permissions and operational access. What he wants is that during those critical minutes of an incident, teams can notify each other and jointly monitor suspicious addresses, rather than each writing their own PR statements.
Do you trust slogans like "We've never been hacked," or do you trust a system that can freeze dirty money through collaboration? Moscow Exchange has set the opening day as December 1: BTC, ETH, USDT will enter the stock market trading session, Moscow time approximately 6:50 to 23:50, with order book plus swaps, using the existing stock market infrastructure. Sales Director Boris Blokhin said this to reporters at the SmartLab meeting on October 31, and the original text was issued by RIA Novosti. Non-qualified investors have an annual limit of 300,000 rubles, with custody handled through digital depository. CoinGecko spot BTC is about $77,450 (snapshot around 08:06 Beijing time).
This is more like a small window opened by the domestic regulatory channel, not a sudden increase in global buying demand. The limit is roughly equivalent to about three thousand dollars, and self-custody wallets are not allowed to be mentioned. Opponents would say: under the sanctions environment, this local pilot has limited impact on on-chain circulation and USD pricing.
If after one week from the opening on December 1, verifiable order book depth cannot be delivered, or if the opening day is postponed again, then treat this as a policy progress indicator rather than new external buying demand already in place.
$BTC
#Bitcoin #MoscowExchangeTRX dropped nearly 10% in 24 hours, but the perpetual negative funding rate has already retreated from extreme levels.
OKEx spot at 08:08 is about 0.30286, down 9.6% in 24 hours, with a low of 0.30006 and a trading volume of approximately $59.85 million. The perpetual funding rate settled at -0.8522% on October 30 at 08:00, and has narrowed to -0.1091% today at 08:00. The negative funding rate still exists, meaning this round of shorts still need to pay longs.
My judgment is that the imbalance on the contract side has eased somewhat, but the spot price is still less than 1% above the 24-hour low. The funding rate's retreat cannot prove that the price has stopped falling; rushing to guess a rebound just because shorts pay less per contract unit easily overlooks this point.
I am more focused on the price near 0.30006 and the next funding rate settlement. If the price breaks the low again and the negative funding rate expands again, the judgment of easing must be withdrawn.
$TRX November 3rd: The biggest variable this week is not the capital flow
The Federal Reserve held steady on October 28th at 3.75%–4%, but the vote was 10:2, with two wanting a rate hike; after the meeting, the pricing for a 25bp hike in December briefly surged to 85%, and the 10-year US Treasury yield also broke 5%.
Then on November 3rd, the midterm elections. Bloomberg's numbers are very interesting:
Republicans hold both chambers → BTC year-end median 90,800
Democrats take both chambers → 76,450
Split control → 84,100
Kalshi shows Democrats have a 91% chance to control the House and 64% to control the Senate. Which is the market pricing in? You can tell by the premium; it’s already pricing in the worse scenario.
I won’t open new positions before the election. Volatility will return, but the direction is given by the event, not my guess. Three price levels are more useful than my single candlestick
Bitwise's framework is now the most practical:
82,000: The average cost zone for ETF investors, with dense trapped positions above, acting as resistance
77,600: True Market Mean, the overall breakeven line for capital gains and losses
74,800: The short-term holder cost baseline; breaking below this triggers underwater panic
Glassnode adds: About 4 million BTC are cost-stacked between 85,000–118,000, all representing sell pressure from unlocking positions. So if 85,000 is not reclaimed, talking about a reversal is premature.The basis dropped to 5%, and the arbitrage funds left
The annualized basis of CME Bitcoin futures for near and far months dropped to 5.11% on October 28 (it was 10.48% the previous day). A year ago, this level was 17%.
The basis is the "buy spot + short futures" batch of quant money's meal ticket. When the meal ticket is not enough to cover funding and fees, they close positions and leave — and this portion of funds used to be the most stable spot buyers outside of ETFs.
CME open interest fell from above 21 billion to below 10 billion, while Binance remained steady around 11 billion. The institutional spot vacuum cleaner has been turned off.Numb
Really numb!
Institutions' ETFs are frantically accumulating, while we are frantically cutting losses.
The panic index has dropped to 30, with over a billion liquidations across the network, all from long positions cutting losses at the bottom.
But guess what the institutions are doing?
BTC ETFs had a net inflow of $135 million in one day, quietly taking over 1,600 BTC.
And what about ETH ETFs? In October, they cumulatively withdrew nearly $1.32 billion, setting a historical record.
Got it?
Institutions are bottom-fishing BTC and are frantically abandoning ETH.
Meanwhile, we retail investors are still foolishly waiting for Ethereum to return to 3000, still feeling sorry for those spot holdings that have crashed badly.
Yesterday, a huge whale forcefully cut 36,000 ETH long positions, losing $38 million in one go just to avoid being completely liquidated.
They lost $38 million, accepted it, and ran.
What about you? You lost a few thousand USDT and are still asking in the group chat, "Can I hold on to die?"
This is the most disgusting part of this market:
Smart money has long chosen the direction, even at the cost of cutting losses to survive;
While retail investors are still holding onto those bloodied chips, fantasizing about miracles.
Stop asking where the bottom is.
Institutions won’t pump the price unless they’ve cleaned out your ETH.
Did you cut losses today?
Or are you still waiting for that nonexistent "big rebound"?
Be honest in the comments.
The above is just my personal review and does not constitute any trading advice.
$BTC $ETH