Orbit Post Sitemap
The Binance theft incident is a new type of risk brought by Ethereum's EIP‑7702 account delegation mechanism, where a signature can authorize a contract to take over the entire wallet, representing a newly added special attack surface on Ethereum.
AVAX, APT, DOT, Celo, Mina, RVN, and Ronin are not absolutely secure; they also have vulnerabilities in contracts, nodes, and private key custody.
The difference is: RVN is PoW UTXO, and signatures are limited to single transactions; Mina, Celo, AVAX, APT, DOT, and Ronin have not enabled account delegation features like EIP‑7702, so their underlying systems do not have a mechanism where "signing one authorization permanently transfers account control."
They avoid this new attack paradigm exploited by hackers this time, and the risk boundaries at the protocol level differ from those of Ethereum.The situation in the Middle East is converging toward a specific point in time.
There are reports that the US has informed its Gulf allies to prepare for a short but intense airstrike as early as November 4. This date is worth watching—it is the day after the US midterm elections conclude.
Why is this important? It shows that the decision-making is tied to a political timeline. Acting after the election minimizes domestic interference, but the market faces a "date set, scale unknown" window. This kind of window is the least friendly to risk assets: you don’t know how big the strike will be or whether it will affect energy routes, so the only option is to reduce positions first.
I assess such events with a three-step framework.
First, see if it’s just a pinpoint strike. If the target is limited and the duration short, the market usually drops sharply that day but then recovers as uncertainty is digested.
Second, see if it impacts energy. If there’s any expectation of a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, rising oil prices will push inflation expectations higher. This line is a real suppression for risk assets, not just sentiment.
Third, see where the money flows. Gold and the US dollar benefit first. The role of $BTC is ambiguous; sometimes it’s treated as a risk asset and sold off, sometimes as a safe haven and bought. Recently, it’s more like the former, so don’t expect it to act as a refuge in the first wave.
The operational rule is simple: during such a window, reduce leverage to less than half the usual level, and when going long, don’t place stop-loss just below a round number—that’s where stop-hunting spikes tend to hit. The real opportunity comes in the second wave, when the scope is clear and sentiment has been released, then the trend becomes clear.
What you should do is adjust your position to a level where you can sleep well, rather than guessing the exact day the strike will start. The reopening of the strait is just a paper progress; oil prices did not fall accordingly.
Iran said the strait could reopen four days after sanctions are lifted.
Oil prices on the market rose again that day.
How is this number calculated:
Brent year-end forecast was raised to $110.
Not because of oil shortage, but because no one dares to guarantee it can reach that level.
Who is affected:
Crude oil can bypass the Red Sea via pipelines, but Qatar's LNG can only pass through the strait.
This route has no alternative.
The sequence is locked, so the plan is just a plan.
$BTC has been grinding below 80,000 after breaking down.
Energy prices don't come down, so rate cuts are pushed back.
Market makers' orders never look at news headlines.
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高
#$BTC Triple short positions in hand, relying on funding fees to maximize fault tolerance space
On-chain whale currently detected with triple short layout, total position value 650 million, profit and loss differences among different targets widening, continuously thickening the safety cushion through funding fees.
📊Positions
✅ BTC short｜5X full position
Holding: -2319.6 BTC, position value 180 million
Opening price: 76366.1
Unrealized P&L: -693,100
Funding fee income: +3,375,200
Margin: 35,566,400, liquidation price: 137601.41
✅ ETH short｜5X full position
Holding: -100,000 ETH, position value 220 million
Opening price: 2322.74
Unrealized P&L: +8,602,800
Funding fee income: +4,332,700
Margin: 44,726,000, liquidation price: 3639.03
✅ SOL short｜7X full position
Holding: -696,100 SOL, position value 66,366,700
Opening price: 94.3346
Unrealized P&L: -698,400
Funding fee income: +3,899,700
Margin: 9,481,000, liquidation price: 293.68"A 0.43% buffer against the daily fluctuations of $ETH — this is the riskiest part of this trade."
$ETH 100x leverage, 2234.45→2244.02, +42.82%. Conversely: it only needs to pull back about 0.04% for that 42% gain to vanish completely.
What does 0.04% mean for $ETH? A normal downward wick, or even a large sell order on the order book. In other words, this trade doesn't require any fading of bullish momentum, a trend reversal, or even someone deliberately shorting — a purely technical pullback is enough to wipe it out.
100x leverage magnifies 0.43% into 42%, but it also magnifies 0.04% into zero. It offers you huge returns but is always ready to take them back.
The market itself is holding up: price is running high. But the key support below isn't far away.
So I never decide to close based on "how much I've earned," only on how far the price is from my cost line. 0.43% looks like a buffer, but the asset's fluctuations never make sense.
The only move: push to break even, at worst lock in zero, and don't increase exposure. $BTC $SOL #美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 [October 30 Spot ETF Fund Flows: Slight Net Inflow for Bitcoin, Continued Outflow for Ethereum]
Bitcoin ETF:
1. Single-day net inflow of 395 BTC (approximately $30.47 million), 7-day cumulative net inflow of 3,503 BTC (approximately $271 million).
2. BlackRock IBIT +158 BTC, Fidelity FBTC +130 BTC, Bitwise BITB +108 BTC; Grayscale -5 BTC.
3. Total Bitcoin ETF holdings approximately 1.2808 million BTC (approximately $98.9 billion).
Ethereum ETF:
1. Single-day net outflow of 27,947 ETH (approximately $62.28 million), 7-day cumulative net outflow of 109,709 ETH (approximately $244 million).
2. Outflows mainly from BlackRock ETHA, single-day -30,764 ETH, 7-day -134,822 ETH; Grayscale and Fidelity had slight single-day net inflows.$SNX
$8.4 million. Synthetix's DAO recovered this amount from the Binance hack, frozen on-chain, and the money has returned to the community treasury.
Interestingly, the market. Before the recovery news came out, SNX was hovering around 0.1696; now it's at 0.1848, pulling back 9 points from the low, and the 24-hour decline has shrunk to within 1 point.
I used to think DAO governance was just for show—proposals get debated for three months, execution drags on for another six months, and recovering assets like this was unthinkable. This time, I was proven wrong. On-chain freezing has precedent, but no one treated the DAO as an entity capable of quick action. This time they moved fast, and the speed itself is a statement.
But don’t rush in just because of the recovery. What was recovered is stolen assets, not dividends for token holders; the treasury’s money should be used as intended and has nothing to do with the secondary market’s trading.
Whether the remaining 20% can be successfully recovered is the real suspense in this drama.
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 In this disclosure of the ten bosses' position updates, the BTC long position is still held, while the SOL and ETH short positions have both been historically closed. The most noteworthy difference is between unrealized floating profits and realized gains and losses. BTC: 150 units, 10X full position long, average opening price 76738.5, marked price at update 76769.6, floating profit +4664.09U, return rate +0.40%. The disclosure standard is to continue holding the base position. SOL: 15,000 units, 10X full position short, average opening price 224.66, average closing price 117.95, realized profit +1,580,233.61U, return rate +468.94%. This historical profit is very outstanding, but the position has ended, so it cannot be used to judge that there is still a SOL short exposure now. ETH: 1 unit, 10X full position short, average opening price 2591, average closing price 2598, realized loss -7U, return rate -2.70%. This small position loss exit is obviously different from the scale of SOL's profit. My view. Putting the three orders together easily lets SOL's historical profit overshadow the price fluctuations still borne by BTC. BTC's floating profit is unrealized and cannot be mixed with historical closed profits as the total account performance; ETH's small loss is also insufficient to indicate how the entire set of trades controls drawdown. The update's evaluation of BTC margin status is relatively optimistic, but it does not provide specific maintenance margin rates or account equity, so the safety buffer's thickness still lacks a basis for judgment. Full position risk also depends on the account's available margin and cannot$BTC
76260. This is the lowest price BTC hit in the past 24 hours, currently hovering around 76700.
A 3% drop, not severe on its own, but it slid all the way down from 79200 without any decent rebound along the way. Last night was even worse for the US stock market; the Nasdaq closed down 2.9%, with the semiconductor sector dropping over 8% intraday. The crypto market’s old problem of following the drop but not the rise was proven again today.
I have no positions this round, which actually makes me feel relieved. Last week, a friend asked if it was worth chasing near 79000, and I said there were many trapped positions above, so chasing would just be carrying others’ burdens. Now I see that was half right—he actually meant 78500, and that level is even more firmly trapped now.
Some blame this drop on Binance being hacked. I don’t quite agree. The hackers did steal funds, but you’ve seen Binance’s recent announcement: 80% of the money has already been recovered, and withdrawals will be restored in phases within 34 hours. The dump happened before the announcement, and the recovery came after. In this price gap, sentiment accounts for only a small part, while macro factors dominate. Fed officials are still hawkish, saying at least two more rate hikes are needed. That statement is sharper than the hackers’ knife.
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 $CORE This pump-and-dump operator is inhuman, dumping every day!#AMD Earnings Preview: Progress in Commercialization of HeliosAI System Hackers are just the fuse; the real explosion is in the chips 💣
Last night the crypto market crashed suddenly, and many pointed fingers at the black swan event of Binance losing nearly $6 billion. But looking calmly, hackers seem more like scapegoats; the real reason the market is suffocating is that the chip structure is already critically ill 🫠.
The data is painful: $BTC profit positions are only 4.03%, meaning 96% of holders are struggling underwater; the average cost is about 78967, with a large block of red trapped positions still pressing in the 78000–81000 range 🧱. This means the resistance above is not ordinary but a dense "exit for breaking even." Once the price rebounds, those eager to recover losses will line up to sell, naturally increasing selling pressure layer by layer 📉.
So now there are triple blows: the black swan crash, everyone trapped underwater, and selling pressure as soon as the rebound hits ⚡. Before the heavy trapped positions are truly digested, the rebound looks more like an escape window rather than a safe starting point. Don’t mistake a rebound for a reversal; before bottom fishing, ask yourself: who will take the chips above? 🤔 Beware of blind bottom fishing; staying alive is more important than chasing rebounds 💡. #美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 #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 In the disclosed delivery records of the eleven bosses this time, the BTC long position has realized a profit of +263,055.44U, while the ETH short position has realized a loss of -7,207.44U. Both trades used 30X full margin, showing a significant contrast in profit and loss. The BTC long position recorded 449.99 units, with an average opening price of 79,497.2 and an average closing price of 80,144.7, yielding a return of +22.06%. However, there is an inconsistency in the position description: the record states "maximum position 200 units," but also mentions adding to the position mid-way up to 449.99 units, making it impossible to accurately reconstruct the position changes based on this. The ETH short position was 1,000 units, with an average opening price of 2,247.23 and an average closing price of 2,253.56, resulting in a return of -9.62%. According to this record, a stop loss was chosen after the price moved unfavorably, ending the trade. My view: The original interpretation summarized this set of results as "big wins and small losses." Regarding the two disclosed realized profits, BTC's gains indeed covered ETH's losses; however, to evaluate whether the stop loss was appropriate, it is necessary to know the preset stop loss, drawdown during the position holding period, and the account margin situation. Looking only at the final delivery results is insufficient. I am more concerned about the risks of holding both long and short positions simultaneously: opening opposite positions across different coins cannot be directly regarded as risk hedging. Position size, price volatility, and correlation all affect the actual exposure, and 30X full margin will put greater pressure on the account margin. One profitable trade covering a loss is not enough to prove that this approach can be repeated long-term. When evaluating this type of trade, do you focus more on the final profit and loss, or on the drawdown and margin risk borne during the process? A seasoned short seller known for "holding on to the end" suddenly closed two fully leveraged short positions last night — $BTC 10x full position short, entry at 86195, exit at 81788, pocketing about 150 BTC with an unrealized profit of approximately $705,000, a return rate of 54.55%; $XRP also 10x full position short, from 1.5022 down to 1.3132, a position of 1.2 million units netting about $230,000, a return rate as high as 127.96%. The two trades combined nearly a million dollars. 💰 What’s truly worth watching is not how much he earned, but why he chose to exit now. $BTC is still hovering around 80,000, and given his "unwavering" temperament over the past year and a half, he certainly has the capital to wait longer. Closing positions proactively at this point can only mean two things: first, to prevent a short squeeze — after continuous declines, the short camp is increasingly crowded, and any sudden rally would evaporate profits at the fastest speed; second, the support below has temporarily weakened, so he cashes out first and plans to rebuild positions after a rebound. The $XRP trade’s return has more than doubled, which looks more like active profit-taking rather than passive stop-loss. 🔍 There is a signal here that is easy to misinterpret. Many see a big short seller closing positions and immediately think "he’s turning bullish." But from a behavioral logic perspective, this is more like a tactical shift: switching from "holding hard" to "collecting rent." If the price rises back, he can wait for a more comfortable shorting point; if it doesn’t, the most certain profits are already in the pocket. In other words, this is not a bullish signal, but shorts optimizing their risk-reward structure. The short-term direction of $BTC and $XRP has not changed because of thisA 378 percentage point year-over-year growth rate is not just a bullish candlestick; it's like suddenly having a breakthrough pawn appear in the center of the chessboard, forcing everyone to recalculate the entire variation. In this game of SanDisk, Q1 revenue was $11.031 billion, up 378% year-over-year and 23% quarter-over-quarter; data center revenue was $4.802 billion, up 61% quarter-over-quarter, like a king's wing stacking rooks for a strong attack; consumer revenue dropped 29% quarter-over-quarter, like a weakness in the rear wing pawn chain. Management attributes the growth to strong and rising product demand, which is a proactive move that controls the opponent: you can't just look at piece scoring, you have to see if it forces the opponent into your forced variation. The Q2 guidance is $12.2 billion to $12.6 billion, with pre-split non-GAAP diluted EPS of $0.55 to $0.57, effectively handing control over to the endgame: not a single-quarter checkmate, but continuous compression of the opponent's activity space. The alphabet token assets' linkage is like the queen's long-range diagonal, and the storage chain is coordinated like rooks and knights; if data center capital expenditures continue to thicken the center, SanDisk's strong points have backup, but the consumer side's weak squares will be repeatedly probed by the opponent. A grandmaster doesn't chase every pawn but first looks at pawn structure: thick center, thin wings, most afraid of being exchanged into the endgame. A 378% growth rate can be a beautiful sacrifice or a bait; the key is whether order visibility can nail down the consumer bleeding in a controllable square. If you only press your position on this tactical combination, it's like exposing your king on an open file. What really needs to be calculated is twenty moves later: whether data center demand can push the product structure toward high-value squares for two consecutive quarters, rather than using a single year-over-year figure to divert the market from the center. Position management is the same: the initiative is not full position, but making the opponent have no waiting moves; piece advantage must be converted into spatial advantage, and spatial advantage into forced moves by the opponent. A 29% quarter-over-quarter drop in the consumer side is not a decimal point; it's the opponent creating a breakthrough pawn on the rear wing; if data center growth cannot be converted into pricing power and order visibility, the king's wing offensive will be counter-constrained. Pre-split EPS coordinates are like the rules before promotion; a good number does not mean promotion is complete, you must see if subsequent pieces land on the correct squares. In this market linkage game, alphabet token assets provide long-range firepower, the storage chain provides rook and knight coordination, but any coordination fears piece exchanges: once data center growth is dragged into the endgame by consumer bleeding, the strong points become isolated pawns. Professional judgment: if the 378% growth rate cannot continue to suppress consumer bleeding in the next game, it is a sacrifice that lures the opponent away from the center; the real winning move lies in the continuity of orders. #sandiskq1revenueup378%A net profit of 719 million USD, when spread out in a profile, looks like a beautiful main beam—but as soon as you chip away the concrete, you'll see that 715 million comes from the fair value revaluation of held assets. This isn't money earned from construction; it's the land itself appreciating. The actual usable area poured by operations is only 78 million. Designers understand: height gained from foundation settlement doesn't count as floor height.
Even more critical is the load-bearing system. Trading business revenue dropped 44% year-over-year to 5.9 million—that was the original main shear wall of this building, now being hollowed out bit by bit. You can use revaluation gains to gild the facade, but gold leaf doesn't bear weight. Once the coin price stagnates or retracts, this beam immediately exposes its stirrups.
However, there is indeed a new structure on site: the prediction market's annualized revenue has surpassed 200 million, and daily traders increased by over 60% month-over-month. This isn't renovation; it's like adding an atrium next to the original main building—the flow of people has been rearranged, and the load path has changed. My judgment criteria are strict: first, check if it has an independent foundation, then see if the settlement joint with the main building is wide enough. If traffic is merely redirected from the old hall to the new atrium, that's flow optimization, not additional building area; if these people are attracted by the new structural logic, that is a genuine expansion permit. Currently, the 60% increase is only enough for a construction start report, not for completion acceptance.
As for the linkage with the US stock token $xTSM, that's like two adjacent buildings sharing an underground diaphragm wall. When the main building shakes, the annex inevitably shifts too, and the dampers haven't been fully installed yet. The market likes to call this coupling a "synergy effect," but we call it "resonance risk without seismic isolation design."
I don't look at the renderings in the white paper; I only look at the reinforcement ratio and concrete grade. If a company's profit statement relies on revaluation to support 99% of its height, then it's not building a building, it's making a show unit.
The main shear wall continues to be thinned, and the newly added staircase has not yet undergone load testing. #coinbaseq3profitreturns $BNB pricing has two pillars: exchange revenue expectations and ecosystem activity, plus supply contraction from quarterly burns.
The advantage is its thick order book and narrow spreads, with slippage among the smallest in major coins — so the wear and tear on this entry and exit is less than with smaller coins. The trade-off is limited range; a 50x leverage tolerance corresponds to about 2% downside space (currently 8.68%, already cushioned by unrealized gains).
Looking at both pillars together: this should be treated as "a phase of decline," without assuming it can keep going far. Burns are a slow variable and won’t save short-term moves.
Follow-up strategy: manage according to a phase of the market, without setting long-term targets. Finish collecting at three decreasing levels: 690, 650, 620, and don’t add new targets just because the drop is smooth. $BTC $ETH
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 $BTC
Since June, the "coordination" between Bessent and Wash has been ongoing. Previously, Bessent explicitly praised Wash's decision to cancel the "dot plot" and weaken the "forward guidance."
From Bessent's remarks, it is evident that there is an attempt to redefine the "drivers of inflation" and to downplay the market's panic over rate hike expectations.
In this rate-setting meeting, Wash also clearly pointed out that the plan to cancel the dot plot and weaken forward guidance is gradually advancing, which will make future markets filled with more uncertainty and greater volatility.What you need to do now is to believe in yourself!
On the path of cyclical trading, most of the time is "trash time." Truly certain and worthwhile opportunities to act are very few. If you can't see clearly in the short term, just follow the trend, as long as the overall direction is correct.
The image below is a "Exchange Buying Power" monitor, where green indicates positive buying power and red indicates negative buying power; I can use it as an example to explain:
Based on the highs and lows of the green and red waveforms, we can intuitively divide a cycle into four different emotional stages: panic, caution, optimism, and greed (the lower the red value, the more panic; the higher the green value, the more greed).
As traders, we should let our emotions be one step "faster" than the market! That is:
When the market is in the "panic" zone (red), we should be "cautious";
When the market is in the "caution" zone (orange), we should be "optimistic";
When the market is in the "optimism" zone (green), we should be "greedy";
When the market is in the "greed" zone (blue), we should be "panicked";
Returning to the current market sentiment, it is clearly no longer extreme panic, but also not very optimistic. The most reasonable characterization should be "cautious and divergent," which is what I often call the "bear-bull transition period."
According to the above logic, at this stage we should actually be "optimistic."
Pay close attention! Within the orange range, whenever the "Exchange Buying Power" shows a negative value, it is a relatively certain and worthwhile time period to seize.
However, this data can only give us a vague area, not precise timing.⚠️ Leveraged Long Crowding Watch: BTC, ETH, and SOL borrowing for longs heating up simultaneously, but coin prices remain weak.
📊 $BTC: 1,363.3 borrowed long, 73.05 borrowed short, a huge long-short gap, long trades are relatively crowded.
📊 $ETH: 16,800 borrowed long, 742.8 borrowed short, strong willingness to add positions, but price hasn't followed, short-term pressure exists.
📊 $SOL: 110,700 borrowed long, 3,085.99 borrowed short, longs are also clustered.
🌍 Macro: US September core PCE rose to 3.1%, inflation stickiness remains, rate hike expectations warming up, risk assets may be suppressed.
🧠 Personal view: What to guard against more is "price weakening while longs keep adding." If key support breaks, stop-loss and forced liquidation may trigger in chain, amplifying short-term declines. But borrowed coin volume ≠ actual holdings, so direction cannot be judged by it alone.
🛡️ Trading reminder: Don't rush to bottom-fish, nor short just because longs are crowded; focus on price, volume, and liquidation changes. #美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 #OKX、ICE与Trade.xyz联手，推动永续合约进入美国合规市场 $ETH Many people set stop-loss orders at the cost price, but actually place them in the wrong spot.
This 100x position's initial margin can withstand a 1% adverse fluctuation; with an unrealized profit of 519.08%, it adds an extra 5.191% buffer. Altogether, it can endure a 6.191% rise calculated from the entry price—that is, the price must reach 2510.1 to truly break even.
This is 146 points higher than the cost price of 2363.78. So even if the price rises back to your entry point, this position won't die; only the profit will return to zero.
Follow-up strategy: Don't keep fixating on 2363.78. The real observation level is 2300—once it stands above that, the unrealized profit drops to only 270%, and that's when you should reduce your position. Don't wait until it returns to cost to take action. $BTC $SOL
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 $AKE 195.94% is unrealized profit, but breaking it down into four numbers reveals the true nature of this position.
First: 7.84%. The actual drop. From 7.349 to 6.773, a move of 0.576 points, magnified 25 times to 195.94%.
Second: 8.51%. The fallback. Converting 0.576 points back from the current price equals 8.51%. It doesn’t match the 7.84% because the denominator is different—loss is calculated from the opening price, breakeven from the current price. The deeper the drop, the harder it is to break even.
Third: 3.35 versus 4.03. 7.0 is 3.35% overhead, 6.5 is 4.03% below. The resistance above is closer than the target below—pullback is more likely than further decline. This is a warning embedded in the numbers.
Fourth: 11.41. The distance to 6.0. The first target 6.5 requires only 4.03%, but the major target 6.0 requires 11.41%—almost three times the distance. Don’t treat "breaking 6.5" as "reaching 6.0".
One more calculation: under 25x leverage, every 1% it moves back reduces my unrealized profit by 25%. If it jitters 1% around 6.773, my profit bounces between 171% and 221%—every twitch seen on the chart is noise, none is a signal.
With these four numbers laid out, the plan is set: realize most profits, secure the principal and push upwards. Reduce position once it stands above 7.0, only consider 6.0 if it decisively breaks 6.5, do nothing in between. $BTC $ETH #AppleQ4iPhone18Outlook I think Apple will beat Q4 earnings despite iPhone 18 Pro supply cuts. Services revenue and strong iPhone 18 base model demand should offset it. My bet is Yes for AAPL earnings beat on Nov 2. $AAPL #AppleQ4iPhone18Outlook[Quick Comment] Intel's flash crash of 22%, don't mistake a "deep pit" for a "golden pit" (￣ω￣;)
This post-market stumble is not just a simple emotional stampede, but more like a collective alarm from the PC industry chain. Chen Liwu made it clear: PC demand is weak, but memory prices keep soaring, and this cost gap might not be filled even by the first half of 2027 (╯﹏╰). The market reaction is straightforward: AI computing power keeps popping champagne, while traditional PCs first need to fix the roof.
The "storage super cycle" was loudly proclaimed in the past two years, but now the bill has come: SK Hynix, Samsung, and Micron are making huge profits, while downstream PC manufacturers and chipmakers are being squeezed by high-priced storage. End products aren't selling, costs can't come down, and the more they produce, the harder it gets ( •̀ ω •́ )✧.
So, a sharp drop doesn't mean a bargain. A rebound in a declining sector doesn't mean a reversal; where the money flows in the industry chain is the key. Currently, AI computing power and upstream storage are still attracting capital, and the tough days for the traditional PC chain may not be over yet. Hold your positions steady, don't get carried away, let the flying knives wait for the bullets to fly a while (￣▽￣)ゞ
#英特尔Q4业绩指引低于预期，股价大跌 #OKX、ICE与Trade.xyz联手，推动永续合约进入美国合规市场 Despite concentrated negative factors, Bitcoin holds steady in its "stress test" 📉
With the Fed leaning hawkish, rising oil prices, hot CPI, global bond yields climbing, and a strong dollar, combined with Ledger being hacked, Strategy (MSTR) delisting risks, and AI transformation controversies, Bitcoin is undergoing an intense "stress test" 🧪. Normally, these factors would be enough to push it below $70,000, but the price remains range-bound, indicating selling pressure is gradually being absorbed 🛡️.
What’s more noteworthy is that the price did not break down when bad news was released in clusters, often meaning pessimistic expectations have been partially priced in. The market may be building a temporary bottom, digesting macro and sentiment shocks through sideways movement 📊. This is also a common resilience trait in bull markets: not a straight upward rise, but holding key ranges amid negative news ⏳. If macro pressures ease later, risk appetite may recover; but if the dollar and yields continue to rise, the range could still be tested 🔍.Everyone seeing the 390% unrealized profit on short positions with $SNDK's first reaction is "How much further can it fall?" I think the other way around: with 75x leverage, a 3% rebound from 1149.1 would reduce that 390% to about 165%.
The deeper the drop, the stronger the shorts' impulse to take profits. That final little upward turn is a signal—someone is secretly buying back.
So I do the opposite: the smoother it goes, the more I reduce. Lock in most of the 390% first, secure principal and the bulk, keep a small base position to watch the previous low. If it really breaks, then buy more; if it rebounds, no regrets. This is called handing the judgment over to position sizing. $BTC $ETH #OKX、ICE与Trade.xyz联手，推动永续合约进入美国合规市场 Sun Yuchen "quietly increasing" PEPE holdings, is the ETF expectation heating up first? 🐸
The PEPE spot ETF application has stirred up again—the first related application has reported new progress, instantly igniting market sentiment 🔥. Interestingly, on-chain data "spoke" earlier than the announcement: over the past ten days, Sun Yuchen's address has continuously bought PEPE, totaling about $51 million, making him the largest individual holder of PEPE. Based on the current market price, the unrealized profit on the books has already reached over ten million dollars 💰.
What’s even more intriguing is that before the news broke, he barely mentioned PEPE, but his fund movements were quite honest. So the community started speculating: did Sun catch the ETF rumors early? 👀
However, looking calmly, only an application amendment has been submitted so far, and the SEC has not given any approval response. Whether it will pass remains unknown; right now, it looks more like expectation-driven trading rather than a definite positive ⚠️. PEPE is highly volatile, so buckle up when chasing hot topics～🚀Originally thought gold could still hold the ground
But once it refreshed 3900, it was directly smashed through
Spot price bottomed around 3891, down over 3% intraday
Silver also broke 50, gold price has cumulatively dropped over 6% this month
Oil prices remain high, fueling inflation expectations
PCE is a bit stronger, December rate hike pricing heats up again
The opportunity cost of holding gold suddenly rises
When gold and silver both get hit
Don’t rush to find a safe-haven narrative $INTC
Intel closed at $65.76, down 28.6%, with an intraday low of 63.2. Breaking news says this is the worst single day in at least forty years, with market value evaporating by hundreds of billions of dollars in one day.
I mentioned in my earnings report article yesterday that the Q4 guidance looked bad, but the real answer would come at tonight's open. Now the answer is out, and it's even worse than I expected.
The INTC token on OKX is now at 65.41, basically in sync with the US stock close, with a 24-hour low of 63.29. Interestingly, the perpetual funding rate is still positive, with longs still paying, and the position size of $37 million hasn't shrunk much. Even after such a drop, there are still people lining up to go long—braver than me.
I haven't been wrong about the semiconductor sector this round; I just kept saying it's a big test but didn't dare to submit my answers early.
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 十月收官：钱没走，只是全部缩成了刺猬 把整个月摊平，一句话总结：不是撤离，是蜷缩。 证据是反着的。稳定币总盘子 3034 亿，不涨不跌；比特币 ETF 月度还微微净流入 1.27 亿；矿工把电挪去给 AI 托管，新开机器的动力在下降；老持有者的 SOPR 掉到 1 以下，便宜筹码已经换过一轮。这些都不是崩盘该有的样子。 可抬头看又是另一幅画：ETH ETF 一个月跑掉 145 亿、创历史纪录；BTC ETF 单日能翻出 -4.88 亿；永续合约多头还在付 7% 的年化费率、同时被爆掉八成；比特币 dominance 从 55% 爬到 60% 以上——资金只要最硬的那一块，别的都嫌烫手。 压在最上面的是三层宏观：油在 114、10 年美债在 5%、12 月加息概率八成。这三样不松动，任何反弹都是缩量反弹。 我给自己定的十一月观察清单，就四条，不添第五条约： 7.64 万守不守得住（期权 max pain，也是近期底） BTC ETF 能不能连续三周净流入，而不是单日 1700 万的噪音 比特币站回 8.15–8.4 万，把 8 万从压力变支撑 11月3日选举后，SEC/CFTC 那条"行There are three days left until the election, and the prediction market has already written the script. The November 3 midterm elections currently show one-sided odds. According to the Reuters/Ipsos poll on October 26: among registered voters, Democrats are at 47%, Republicans at 36%, and 11% undecided; among the most likely voters, it's 53% to 44%. Trump's approval rating has climbed back to 32% from last week's historic low, with a net value dropping from -19% to -27%, much worse than his -11.7% at the same time in 2018. On the prediction market side, Democrats winning the House is basically considered a done deal, while Republicans still have some maneuvering room in the Senate. Why is this a big deal for crypto? Because the friendly regulations expected in 2025 are fundamentally based on Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress. Losing either chamber means the "Trump dividend" portion related to deregulation will be discounted. I previously wrote about the median from Odaily's survey; here’s a different perspective: Republicans hold both chambers → BTC median price by year-end $90,800 Democrats sweep → $76,450 Split control → $84,100 The difference between these two scenarios is $14,000, which is the volatility tax of the election. What concerns me more is the "uncertainty discount" itself. Option sellers now dare not place long-dated orders; market makers are pushing up implied volatility for the first few days of November because on the night the results come out, price spreads will be much more severe than usual. Ordinary people’s response is not to bet on direction but to avoid opening new leverage positions in the two hours before the results—the volatility during those few hours is intense.$AKE When does a coin falling from a high point most easily cause people to lose money?
Often, it's right after the first major drop, when everyone starts to think it has fallen enough.
This round with AKE is very typical. After a rapid sell-off, there was indeed a rebound, but the price never managed to shake off the weakness and later continued to hit new lows.
My short-selling approach is very simple: since the price keeps searching for support downward, there's no need to stubbornly guess the bottom and fight the trend.
Currently, this short position's unrealized profit has already multiplied by 5.89 times, and the space gained is quite considerable.
Now the price has further dropped below 0.014, and the risk of a short-term oversold rebound cannot be ignored either.
When trading, you can't just focus on profits continuously growing; you also have to consider how to handle the situation if the market reverses. $BTC $ETH #美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 $SOL
HKD stablecoin HKDAP, a small news item in tonight's quick update, with few people talking about it. Anchorpoint, holding a Hong Kong government licensed stablecoin, plans to run it on the Solana chain.
On the market side, SOL is now at 95.26, basically unchanged in 24 hours, opened at 95.55, high 98.5, low 92.26. BTC is still down 0.87% at this moment. The perpetual funding rate has turned negative; it was positive yesterday, so today shorts are collecting money. Open interest is 3.41 million contracts, $3.2 billion, no sign of shrinking.
Narrative-wise, they are laying out stablecoins and real assets as slow plays, but on the contract side no one is willing to pay to go long. My view: what SOL lacks this round is not a story, but money willing to chase prices. It's harder to push sideways than to dump, but don't expect it to lead the way.
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 昨天晚上（10月30日）那场联动，值得单独记一笔。 布伦特原油盘中站上 114 美元（12 月合约收 114.88），WTI 收 102；胡塞袭击沙特设施的消息出来后，收盘还在往上顶 现货黄金跌 2% 出头，报 3929.84，从 1 月高点回撤 29%，本月跌 4% 现货白银跌破 50 美元，日内跌超 4%，10 月累跌 17%，从高点回撤快 60% 比特币早盘砸穿 7.7 万，24 小时跌 3.5% 以上，年初至今 -11% 纳指期货盘中砸 2.5%，英特尔一晚跌 28% 往上，标普低开 1.17% 一套组合拳，全是"通胀不走、央行不放水"的定价。 最反常的是黄金白银一起跌。按老剧本，油涨推通胀，资金该逃进黄金；这次金和银反而被卖，因为实际利率在抬——10 年期美债稳稳站在 5% 上方，持有不付息的资产的成本实打实变贵了。比特币夹在中间最难受：它既没黄金那种避险的腿，又跟科技股绑着一起跌。 所以现在别问"比特币是不是数字黄金"。答案是：在利率往上走的时候，它就是个高 beta 的科技股。真想看它脱钩，得等油从 114 下来、或者 PCE 掉回 3% 以下。3000 亿稳定币趴着不动，这是个被忽略的危险信号 先看池子多大。 CoinGecko 口径：截至 10月14日，美元稳定币总市值 3034 亿美元，USDT 占 60.6%、约 1841 亿，USDC 占 23.9%、约 726 亿。Stablecoin Beat 那边 10月13日是 3036 亿，周环比还跌了 0.56%。全年在 3000 亿到 3130 亿之间来回磨，90 天只涨了 1.4%，基本停住了。 集中度更是吓人：俩巨头合计吃掉 85%，HHI 指数 4244，超过 2500 就是"高度集中"。USDC 供应量不到 USDT 一半，却占了链上交易量的六到七成——说明它是机构和大额结算的那把尺子。 为什么我说这是危险信号？因为过去两年稳定币扩表，几乎就是加密的"隐性印钞"：新铸的 USDT 进来买币，币价跟着水涨。现在池子不涨了，等于水龙头拧小了。 也有好的一面：支付场景在起量，Visa、Mastercard 都在搭稳定币通道，链上月均转账价值维持高位，同一块钱被循环用了更多次。所以这不是"钱跑了"，是"钱不增产了"。 结论很直接：别再拿稳定币市值创新高当利多喊了，它已经SEC quietly opened a door: U.S. stocks are going on-chain. The hype around this has been overshadowed by the market, but it could be the most significant regulatory change this year. The action posted on the SEC official website is the "Innovation Exemption," allowing qualified trading venues to use blockchain liquidity pools to trade tokenized NMS stocks (the on-chain versions of listed stocks like Apple and Microsoft) on a five-year pilot basis, while soliciting opinions on permanent rules. Two key supporting details: The FAQ updated on October 15 states that after the platform submits a notice, it can publicly name "which stock is preparing to go on-chain," but actual trading must wait 30 calendar days after the notice is delivered. These 30 days are reserved for the issuer to raise objections—if the company objects, trading must stop unless the SEC rules it can continue. On the other side, the CFTC also followed up on October 5 by soliciting public comments on leverage retail crypto trading rules and new registration categories; the SEC's custody proposal on October 1 allows state trust companies to custodian clients' crypto assets. Putting it all together, the CLARITY Act died in Congress, but regulatory authority has already slipped from lawmakers' desks to two committees, and they are pushing forward using "exemptions + pilots" without voting. This is indirectly positive for Bitcoin: when stocks and funds can be compliantly on-chain, Bitcoin's position as the "native collateral and settlement layer" becomes even stronger. Risks must also be mentioned: this whole setup bypasses Congress Honestly, this $INTW trade feels a bit marginal.
Short at 7.72, 7.44, +92%. The numbers are average, and the stop loss is only 3.76%, so I kept my position size very low; the absolute profit isn't much.
Also, that candle is dragging — it dropped then bounced back. I prefer a clean drop straight down; this kind of drop that retraces halfway usually needs a rebound confirmation. So I'm in a "holding but not fully trusting" state, closed the main position, and kept a small position to watch it play out.
7.5 is key. Just sold at the top with 0.81% overhead. If it climbs back above, I have to admit I was wrong; if not, there's still a chance.
Only breaking below 7.4 (0.54%) counts as a real breakdown, and 7.0 (5.91%) is the real space — from 7.44 to 7.0 is nearly six points, so it's not a short distance.
If it climbs back above 7.5, I’m out; if it breaks 7.4, I’ll watch 7.0. No adding to the position; in a headwind trade, only reducing. $BTC $ETH
#美国9月核心PCE升至3.1%，加息预期仍高 矿工不搞比特币了，跑去给 AI 打工 这条线很少有人讲，但可能是明年最大的变量。 先看传统矿企的账。Riot 二季度营收 1.742 亿，同比涨 14%，挖了 1587 枚 BTC（去年 1426 枚），看着不错吧？可它的挖矿收入从 5560 万掉到 4340 万，平均挖一枚的成本（不含折旧）已经 49,912 美元，比去年高了快一千刀。电价涨、扩厂、全网算力往上顶，矿越来越不划算。 再看更狠的：Core Scientific 二季度营收 1.642 亿，同比 +109%，可挖矿收入从 6242 万腰斩到 2154 万，毛利率 -56%。钱从哪来？高密度托管（AI/HPC）收入 1.367 亿，占总营收 83%。这家曾经的挖矿龙头，已经是个数据中心公司了。 MARA 也在跑同一条路：二季度末持币 35,577 枚，比去年同期少了 29%，当季挖 2422、卖 2213，均价约 7.3 万。一边挖一边卖，一边把电和机房交给 AI 客户。 这对币价是个慢变量。矿工关机 = 抛压变轻，但前提是币价别再跌。如果 BTC 长期卡在 7.5 万以下，这批转去做 AI 的机器也回不来，算力会软着陆；The most ironic scene in the contract market: bulls are paying and still getting liquidated
This set of data on perpetual contracts will make those who understand frown.
Coinperps snapshot early this morning: BTC perpetual mark price 77,385, down 3.2% in 24 hours, but 24-hour trading volume is $109.3 billion, double that of the previous day, open interest (OI) 5.37 billion, only up 0.84%.
See that? Volume exploded, but positions barely moved. This means funds are being wildly rotated, not new money entering, but old money cutting, shifting, and wash trading.
Looking at details: funding rate +0.0067% (per 8 hours), annualized about 7.3%, bulls are paying bears. The long-short ratio is 0.93, yet 87% of the $466 million liquidations in 24 hours are bulls. On one side, bulls are still paying premiums and holding on hard; on the other, bulls are being repeatedly liquidated.
Breaking it down by platform makes it clearer: Bybit, OKX, Bitget, Hyperliquid have funding rates capped at 0.0100%, MEXC is almost zero. This "very high here, very low there" split indicates funds are looking for the cheapest place to short or arbitraging by moving positions; the market has no unified direction. The on-chain profit and loss line is currently exactly at 1.00
There’s an indicator that’s been unusually quiet lately, so quiet it’s unsettling: SOPR.
Simply put, it looks at "whether the coins moved that day were sold at a profit or a loss." 1.00 is the critical threshold—above 1 means profitable coins are being sold, below 1 means coins are being sold at a loss.
Latest reading (October 27): all sellers at 1.0000, buyers in the last 155 days at 1.0070, long-term holders at 0.9893. These three numbers are squeezed right around 1.00, like a tightly stretched string.
What does this translate to? The money that rushed in over the past six months is now selling at breakeven. These people are the most prone to panic and also the most flexible in dumping—because they haven’t lost much, they have no psychological burden to run. Meanwhile, the long-term holders have dropped below 1, indicating that chips have already changed hands at low levels, which is actually a good thing: cheap coins have moved to newcomers, and old selling pressure has been partially absorbed.
I’m watching two trigger points. If this 1.00 line is cleanly broken down, short-term holders collectively move into loss, and a stampede will come; if it holds here and the coin price doesn’t hit new lows, it means "those who wanted to run have already run."
Don’t use this to catch a bottom; it only answers one question: is the current selling panic or unloading.On October 30th Eastern Time, Ethereum spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $184 million across nine funds, with none seeing inflows. Leading the outflow was BlackRock's ETHA, which lost $118 million in one day; it still holds a historical total of $14.206 billion, showing a solid base but a bleak trend. ETHW had an outflow of $31.14 million, ranking second.
Looking at a longer timeframe is even more alarming: from October 1st to 29th, over 21 trading days, there was a cumulative net outflow of $14.515 billion, breaking last November's record of $14.236 billion. On October 6th alone, $202 million exited. Interestingly, 92.6% of this money came from just one product, ETHA—more like a large-scale rebalancing at the issuer level rather than a market-wide panic.
This explains another figure: Bitcoin's market dominance has climbed back above 60%, whereas it was just over 55% at the start of October. The money hasn't left crypto; it has shifted from the "Ethereum narrative" back to the "Bitcoin narrative." Historically, such shifts usually occur mid-bear market or during style rotations—not a bottom signal, nor a crash signal, but rather "capital favoring the hardest asset."
Ethereum holders, don't rush to criticize; first consider this question: with interest rates still rising, why would capital pay an extra risk premium for smart contracts and Layer 2 solutions?During the one hour Binance was hacked, someone was arbitraging on-chain and earned about 3.47 million USD in that hour.
Just after 4 AM today, a hot wallet of Binance was hacked. The hacker, fearing that the $USDT in hand would be frozen by Tether, kept swapping it into $ETH on-chain. Binance then paused withdrawals, so cheap ETH from the exchange couldn't be moved on-chain.
As a result, the same ETH had two prices. On on-chain exchanges, ETH was bought by the hacker around 2600 USD, with some trades exceeding 3000 USD. However, the lending protocol Aave priced ETH based on exchange quotes, staying around 2280. This price gap lasted for nearly an hour.
The biggest earner was this address:
They had already deposited 37 million $USDC in Aave and entered the market 24 minutes after the incident. They first borrowed ETH from Aave at around 2280 USD, then sold it on-chain for over 2600 USD. The proceeds were deposited back into Aave, then borrowed again, then sold again.
They sold over 12,000 ETH at an average price of 2580 USD. When the price fell back, they bought back at an average price of about 2297 USD to repay the loan, pocketing 3.47 million USD.
Aave's contracts had no issues, and they didn't hack anyone.
The hacker was buying on-chain regardless of cost, and this person was on the other side, selling to the hacker trade by trade. $BTC $ETH Changing listing rules ≠ opening the gate for new products.
NYSE Arca moved the already listed Bitwise 10 Crypto Index ETF from the special approval track to the general commodity trust listing standard — the SEC disclosed this exchange rule filing on October 29.
Why it matters: This is "pipeline standardization," not the approval of another spot single-coin ETF. The general rules still allow a tolerance of up to about 15% NAV in assets that do not fully meet the criteria — that is a rule clause, ≠ the fund now allocating according to this. After filing, there is usually about a 30-day observation window, and the SEC can also call a halt midway.
In short: The system is fixing the plumbing; don’t interpret "changing rules" as "adding a new batch of coins tomorrow."
Confidence: Medium-High · SEC disclosure/media summary (changing shell ≠ new product approval)
What do you think the general listing standard will benefit first: index types or spot single-coin?
$BTC $ETH October Wrap-Up: Three Forces Pressing Down, Strength Reversal Requires All Three Conditions
Looking at the whole month evenly, Bitcoin is weighed down by three layers, each tougher than the last.
The first layer is money. ETF single-day outflow of -488 million, twelve ETFs all in the red, but on the 29th still +17.07 million, indicating a "sudden withdrawal but not far away." Meanwhile, Solana and Hedera ETFs are seeing inflows, meaning funds are relocating, not exiting.
The second layer is companies. Strategy stops buying, turns to repurchase preferred shares; Coinbase quarterly report adds 299 million. Long-term positions haven't withdrawn, but short-term rigid buying has stopped.
The third layer is the US dollar. Interest rates at 3.75–4%, with an 80% probability of a 25 basis point hike in December; Logan says two hikes are coming, Ferguson suggests possibly 50 basis points, with the US, Europe, and Japan all leaning hawkish. Without a shift in this layer, the support from the first two layers will be discounted.
October's monthly candle will most likely close bearish; "Uptober" is completely off the table.
I set three confirmation conditions for a strength reversal, all must be met: ① Hold 76,400 (options max pain / recent bottom); ② ETF net inflows for more than three consecutive days, not just a single-day 17 million noise; ③ Reclaim the 81,500–84,000 moving average band, turning the 80,000 round number resistance into support. Meeting only one or two conditions is just a rebound. The US, Europe, and Japan all hawkish in the same week — this is the first time in 2026
Zooming out globally, you’ll see this isn’t just a Fed show.
The US held steady on October 28 with a 10:2 vote, and the probability of a rate hike in December is 80%. The next day, the ECB also kept rates unchanged at 2.50%, with Lagarde stating "the direction of rates is clear"; Eurozone inflation in September was 3.8% year-on-year, with the energy subcomponent soaring from 14.3% to 18.9%. The market prices about an 88% chance of a 25 basis point hike on December 17. The Bank of Japan on October 30 held at 1.25% with an 8:1 vote, the sole dissenter Takata wanting to raise to 1.50%, while Tokyo core CPI remains at 2.6%.
This milestone-level synchronization among the three hasn’t happened for many years.
What does this mean for Bitcoin? Simply put: global liquidity pricing is shifting right together. Bitcoin’s biggest beta over these years has been cheap global money. Now that the US, Europe, and Japan are all saying "it’s not time to ease yet," the "easy money premium" layer in its valuation model must be discounted.
Oil is at $114, inflation isn’t coming down, and central banks refuse to ease. As long as this combination line isn’t broken, don’t expect Bitcoin to run an independent bull market. Conversely, if Japan is the first to falter and pivot, or if US PCE falls back below 3%, Bitcoin will be the most elastic asset.Miners earned 1.12 billion in September, but the hash rate is still declining
A set of numbers with a big contrast.
Miners' total revenue in September was about 1.12 billion USD, the highest since January, 11% more than August's 1.008 billion. The reason is simple: the coin price rose from over 60,000 to around 80,000, while difficulty only increased by about 6%, so the extra price difference all went into miners' pockets.
On the other hand, the hash rate hasn't returned to its peak. The 7-day average at the beginning of October was about 945–983 EH/s, nearly 20% lower than the peak of 1110–1160 EH/s in November 2025. Difficulty is around 132.72T, 15% lower than the historical high of 155.97T.
Why is no one deploying new machines? Two words: electricity. Public mining companies moved about 75 EH/s from the network in the first half of this year to AI and high-performance computing hosting, signing long-term contracts worth over 70 billion USD, and plan to move another 35 EH/s before 2027. Once mining farms allocate power and facilities to AI, even price increases can't bring them back.
This is actually a hidden support for the coin price: no increase in hash rate = lighter new selling pressure. The block rewards per T are higher than a year ago; old miners that survive this round can continue, while weaker ones have been pushed out by AI. The chain's health is better than the candlestick chart looks.🍊👉HYPE is currently trading around $91 to $93, with a volume surge of over 15% in the last 24 hours.
The contract trading volume is $13.47 billion, while spot volume is only about $1 billion, and open interest has increased to $4.02 billion.
This rebound is driven by leverage, not by spot buying demand.
Technically, it is a "correction period after a volume breakout." The price has risen above the dense MA5 and MA20 zone at $91.8, with moving averages forming an early bullish alignment. The RSI is between 62 and 65, not yet in the overbought zone. However, the MACD histogram remains negative (-0.3048), and the daily-level death cross above the zero line has not been repaired yet, indicating a clear gap between momentum indicators and price movement. The first strong resistance above is in the $94 to $98 range, with the upper Bollinger band at $96.83 acting as the immediate ceiling; if $91.8 support fails, the next structural support is at $87.65. The most noteworthy news is the standoff of "small money withdrawing, big money accumulating." The ETF side is indeed cold: HYPE-related products saw an outflow of $9.4 million in early October, and the spot ETF has had no net inflow since October 6. Meanwhile, the protocol itself continues to buy back and burn tokens, with a cumulative burn of 49.87 million tokens, accounting for 4.99% of the maximum supply. In the past month, the protocol's revenue was about $63.94 million, ranking first among all protocols. The price pushed up by contract volume needs spot trading and ETF inflows to sustain; if it is just leverage moving, a pullback to $91.8 or even $87.65 is not surprising. Coinbase holds $299 million in Bitcoin, a signal more stable than ETFs
The same PA Daily report contains even stronger data: Coinbase increased its Bitcoin holdings by $299 million in Q3.
Don’t confuse this with the $488 million outflow from ETFs. ETFs represent secondary market fund flows that can reverse in a day or two; coins on a public company’s balance sheet reflect quarterly-level actions and won’t be sold just because prices fluctuate this week. Coinbase is one of the few public companies that "both facilitates trading and holds coins itself," so its accumulation is closer to a business decision: no matter how volatile the fee business is, it still prefers to convert cash into BTC.
Looking at institutional holdings together, the picture becomes clear:
Strategy: 848,517 coins, cost $75,400, current price only about 2% above cost
Spot BTC ETFs: cumulative net inflow of $61.38 billion, accounting for 6.71% of market cap
Coinbase: added $299 million in Q3
On one side, ETF short-term funds are withdrawing; on the other, the public company’s long-term position is still increasing. This kind of "short-term cold, long-term hot" divergence usually appears during correction phases rather than end phases. Of course, the premise is that interest rates don’t continue to hawkishly rise—if there is a 50 basis point hike in December, long-term funds will recalculate their positions.Strategy stopped buying coins and turned to repurchase 200 million preferred shares
Strategy's 8-K filed on October 26: From October 19 to 25, no Bitcoin was bought or sold, and the ATM share issuance was also halted. Holdings are locked at 848,517 coins, just over 4% of the total 21 million, with an average cost of $75,446, totaling about 64 billion.
Where did the money go? $204.9 million was used to repurchase 2.07 million STRC preferred shares, and the company's cash dropped from $447 million to $242 million, almost a one-to-one correspondence. Note that its $4.83 billion "reserve" remained untouched; that is specifically reserved for paying preferred stock dividends and debt interest.
The interpretation of this news is crucial. STRC has an annual dividend of 12%, with interest rates hovering around 4%. The financing cost of this type of preferred security is a fixed expense. Seller chose to pay off the "expensive interest" first rather than continue accumulating coins, indicating that the financing window has become more costly.
Some in the market interpret this as bearish, but I think it's not that simple. They didn't sell coins, just paused for a week, and historically have paused several times. What really needs attention is: as long as the ATM remains closed, the world's largest "certain buy-side" is cut off. At the scale of 848,517 coins, if they don't buy for a day, the market loses a rigid demand of several hundred BTC.BlackRock's Bitcoin spot ETF (IBIT) traded $5.2 billion today, entering the top ten ETF trading volumes in the US. This news might be easily dismissed as just a market footnote, but it actually represents a slice of the structural change in the Bitcoin market.
First, let's look at what it means. The top ten ETF trading volume list has long been dominated by familiar names like the S&P 500 index funds, Nasdaq ETFs, and Russell 2000, backed by pension funds, insurance money, and retail investors across the US. A Bitcoin product launched only in 2024 breaking into this list shows that Bitcoin is no longer just a niche position in "alternative assets"; it has started competing for the same mainstream broad-based trading flows.
Next, why is trading volume a more important metric than size? Assets under management (AUM) only indicate that some investors are willing to hold long-term, while trading volume shows active daily buying and selling. With dense secondary market trading, market makers can be supported, creation/redemption arbitrage can operate efficiently, and the spread between primary and secondary markets narrows. The result is faster price discovery, smaller intraday premiums and discounts, and Bitcoin's pricing power shifting from offshore exchanges to regulated US stock markets.
For holders, this is not an abstract narrative. The deeper the liquidity, the harder it is for price spikes to occur, the smaller the slippage on large trades, and the lower the risk of being dragged down by a single platform during extreme market moves. Bitcoin is being transformed into an asset "that can be conveniently bought and sold within brokerage accounts," and this transformation process is more worth watching than the price itself.