Orbit Post Sitemap
💥 1.1 Billion Liquidated in 24 Hours! Short Shorts Swept, Bulls Still Being Cleared 🔥
24-hour liquidation data released, showing clear divergence across multiple assets: short-term shorts hit stop losses, BTC and ETH daily charts still clearing bulls.
Data Breakdown
$BTC: 1-hour short liquidations at 529K U, 4-hour shorts 739K U, 12-hour shorts 4.101M U, short shorts clearly swept; but 24-hour long liquidations at 66.608M U, shorts 40.922M U, daily chart still dominated by bull clearing.
$ETH: 12-hour shorts liquidated 997K U, higher than longs at 853K U; 24-hour longs 14.968M U exceed shorts 9.82M U, similar rhythm.
$SOL: 24-hour long liquidations 5.43M U, shorts only 1.737M U, heavier bull liquidation.
Deeper Contradiction
Short-term shorts hitting stop losses can be misread as a bullish turn; however, larger daily long liquidations indicate that upward chasing positions are still being cleared. Without sustained buying volume, the rebound looks more like a bear cover repair.
Personal Thoughts
Don't take 1-hour or 4-hour short liquidations as a reversal signal. First, see if short stops can hold with volume, then check if daily bull clearing has ended. In a divergent market, rhythm matters more than direction.
Market observation only, 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 #OKX、ICE与Trade.xyz联手，推动永续合约进入美国合规市场 $BTC $11 billion worth of options just settled, and the market makers have withdrawn their hedging orders used to "cap the market," like a tightly wound spring being released
The midterm elections are coming up (November 3). Many institutions that sell options to collect premiums are currently staying out of the market, waiting for the election results to settle
This means no one is "suppressing" volatility in the market these days
However, the options market's implied volatility for this election is not high (37.8%), far below the frenzy level during the 2024 election (when the premium was as high as 14.4%)
So it seems everyone thinks the election will be just so-so, without causing too much commotion
But low pricing doesn't mean there won't be pain
Once the hedging orders that suppress the market disappear, if the price breaks in any direction, the speed of the price drop or surge will be much faster than usual due to the lack of sufficient buffer underneath
Moreover, $ETH fees are still negative, and market sentiment is inherently fragile
For now, it's important to keep control and manage leverage. Once the election dust settles and institutions re-enter the market, the direction will naturally emerge, and it will still be timely to follow then
$BTC #MidtermElections$SNDK Price Update 📉
SanDisk closed Friday, October 30, at $1,150.89, down 13.47% in a single session.
The stock is now approximately 34% below its September closing peak of $1,739.89, despite remaining up roughly 385% year to date.
The earnings momentum remains impressive, but price action suggests investors are reassessing how much future growth is already priced in.
The next test is whether earnings growth and NAND pricing can sustain the valuation.
#SanDiskEarningsSelloff BTC New Market Trend
November 3rd Democratic Party, Republican Party, Election for Both Houses
【Baseline Expectation (60% Probability, Democrats Take Both Houses)】
✅ Short-term: Slightly bearish. Market prices in expectations of tighter crypto regulation, Nasdaq under pressure.
✅ Structure: Overall structure is bearish, most rebounds are defined as corrective rallies, making it difficult to directly reverse the major trend; many false signals near the end of the monthly candle.
【Scenario A: Republicans Sweep Both Houses (6.5% Low Probability)】
✅ Short-term bullish: Expectations of relaxed crypto regulation heat up, combined with tax cut expectations, BTC rises; but watch US Treasury yields, if yields rise sharply simultaneously, the gains will be suppressed.
【Scenario B: Divided Congress】
✅ BTC neutral and volatile, mainly following Nasdaq fluctuations, regulatory expectations remain largely unchanged, making it difficult to have an independent trend. $ETH ETF is running, whales are buying, who is making a mistake?
This is the most worthwhile topic to discuss over the weekend. On the surface, there are indeed many bearish factors. The US spot ETH ETF has seen net outflows for 23 consecutive trading days, setting the longest record since its launch. After heavy buying by traditional institutions in August and September, they are now systematically withdrawing. Meanwhile, the Glamsterdam upgrade originally scheduled for activation on October 26 was urgently postponed due to a Gas attack vulnerability in EIP-8037, making a mainnet upgrade within the year highly unlikely. ETF outflows plus upgrade delays, two bearish factors combined, it’s no surprise the price is falling.
But beneath the surface, there are undercurrents stirring. BitMine bought 126,971 ETH last week, three times the amount from the previous week, with total holdings now accounting for 4.59% of the total ETH supply, aiming to reach 5% by year-end. On-chain data also supports this — only about 11% of ETH supply is in triple profit status, the lowest since February 2017, and MVRV has fallen into a long-term accumulation zone below 0.8.
ETF is running, whales are picking up, this divergence itself is a signal. Retail investors see ETF outflows and upgrade delays, institutions see a historically undervalued range. Who is right or wrong, Devcon 8 will provide the answer.
Next week’s judgment day, the dual test of Devcon 8 and macro factors will be the grand finale of this fierce battle.
$BTC $SOL
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 US spot BTC ETF saw a single-day net outflow of $643.2 million, breaking the previous four consecutive days of net inflows. Breaking it down: IBIT outflowed $233.7 million, FBTC $201 million, ARKB $129.5 million, GBTC $53.3 million, BITB $25.7 million. The weekly total net outflow was about $202.4 million, with reports stating this is the largest single-day outflow since June.
From my own review, this doesn't seem like an issue with a single product. Several major issuers turning negative simultaneously looks more like portfolio-level rebalancing rather than an isolated case from one channel. Comparing with OKX spot, BTC-USDT is at 77643.6, 24h about +0.67%, with a volatility of about 1.91%; ETH is at 2253.96, 24h about +0.47%. Prices did not weaken along with the capital outflow—ETF funds and spot prices clearly diverged this time.
This kind of "capital withdrawing, price not falling" divergence, do you lean more towards it being short-term rebalancing, or is demand actually retreating? #BTC持续震荡，后续走势受多重因素影响 $BTC $ETH SanDisk just delivered a quarter that most companies would celebrate, yet the market responded by wiping nearly 13.5% off its share price in a single session. There is a bigger story behind that reaction than simple profit-taking. $SNDK closed Friday, October 30, at $1,150.89, down 13.47%. That puts it roughly 34% below its September closing level of $1,739.89, despite still being up approximately 385% year to date. For context, its latest fiscal Q1 2027 results were anything but weak. Revenue rI always thought that after the ETF was approved, institutions would continuously pour money in. But today I saw a number that was the opposite: the US spot ETH ETF has had outflows for 23 consecutive trading days, the longest in history.
More than twenty days, not a single day stopped. This is a bit awkward — when the product was just approved, everyone online was saying "traditional funds are coming," but now the traditional funds have indeed come, and they're redeeming.
$ETH is just stuck in the middle: the on-chain activity is as busy as ever, but no one is buying the price.
Honestly, I don't dare say this is the bottom. During these continuous outflow days, I haven't once guessed the turning point correctly.Collecting rent on one side, liquidations on the other, while chasing HBM4
$SLX 0.048
Solstice breaks down the long-term usage rights of real-world wafer fabs into on-chain shares, renting out each share quarterly at 0.048. Leases usually last 5 to 10 years and do not track spot memory prices. Intel's Q4 guidance missed expectations, chip stocks crashed, but SLX only dipped slightly—it belongs to the RWA track, aiming for stable cash flow, not short-term price differences. Trading volume is only 1.41 million, liquidity is thin; this kind of asset is suitable for holding to collect rent, not for short-term speculation.
$BTC 77,000
After Binance was hacked, the whole market went risk-off, and BTC dropped directly from 81,500 to 76,300, falling over 5,000 in one day. Leveraged long positions liquidated 1.5 billion, panic selling is happening. But at 77,000, which is much lower than a month ago, some have started bottom-fishing. This level is not the bottom, but some are already testing it.
$xMU 900
Micron makes DRAM, and HBM is its incremental business. Micron dropped over 5%, while Hynix's HBM4 orders exceeded expectations, indicating rising HBM demand. Micron, as a competitor, fluctuates accordingly. Micron's HBM4 progress lags Hynix by half a step; the market is pricing the chaser.
#英特尔Q4指引不及预期，股价暴跌近30%
This article is for market analysis only and does not constitute investment advice.🚨 SOL: RECOVERY OR ANOTHER DROP?
SOL holds near $96 after bouncing from $92.34.
🔹 Reclaim $98 → $101 becomes possible. 🔹 Lose $92.34 → downside risk increases.
RSI remains weak, and price is still below MA20 and Supertrend.
My take: Stabilization is developing, but reversal isn't confirmed.
#SolanaAlpenglowUpgrade
$SOL A rarely discussed record has quietly been set: the US spot ETH ETF has seen outflows for 23 consecutive trading days, the longest streak since its launch.
Let's clarify the nature of this matter first. Single-day outflows are noise, which can be attributed to a large holder rebalancing, a liquidation event, or some macro data; but 23 consecutive trading days of outflows in the same direction is no longer noise, it is a trend. It points to a simple fact — traditional funds entering through the ETF channel have been systematically reducing their $ETH allocation during this period, rather than waiting for a better price.
Mechanistically, it’s also easy to understand. The subscription and redemption of spot ETFs are institutional actions, not retail sentiment. Retail investors look at candlesticks, institutions look at allocation weights and portfolio rebalancing. When a product only sees outflows for more than twenty consecutive trading days, it means it is being downgraded on institutional balance sheets, which is a different matter from short-term price fluctuations.
So my judgment is: don’t take "ETF approval" as a long-term bullish signal to hold onto indefinitely. An ETF is just a channel; opening the channel doesn’t mean money is flowing in. The current issue is that money is flowing out.
One point worth pondering is: if even the most compliant and easiest-to-buy ETH exposure is being redeemed, then in this cycle, are crypto assets being allocated to, or are they being treated as high-volatility positions that can be liquidated at any time?Langlang🌊 shares: Brothers, this news is a solid positive for SOL!
Anchorpoint is a licensed stablecoin issuer in Hong Kong, with Standard Chartered Bank as a major shareholder, showing strong backing.
Now their Hong Kong dollar stablecoin HKDAP is launching on Solana, and the Solana Foundation is a strategic partner.
You should know that even ETH hasn't secured such resource support, so it's no wonder many are optimistic about SOL, thinking this bull run might challenge Ethereum.
The entry of compliant stablecoins means institutional funds and Hong Kong capital channels will gradually open up, greatly strengthening the ecosystem's confidence.
Of course, good news doesn't mean an immediate takeoff; we'll keep tracking the landing progress and avoid getting carried away.
Currently holding 142 spot tokens, aiming to increase to 200 and wait for the 🌊, this wave can't be small, the big one is coming!
$SOL $BTC $ETH 📌 After Maji Big Brother's liquidation, he quickly added positions, continuing to aggressively leverage long positions on $ETH $BTC
This morning, ETH long positions were fully liquidated; in the afternoon, he deposited 250,000 U, totaling 5.88 million U in long positions across ETH, HYPE, and BTC. The ETH liquidation price is only $86 away from the market price, leaving very little margin for error.
Total trading volume over one and a half years is 15.86 billion USD, with cumulative losses of 37.05 million USD.
My view: This model is not replicable. He has off-exchange assets as a backstop and uses a small portion of funds to gamble; ordinary traders do not have the conditions for unlimited margin calls. High leverage close to the liquidation line means risk and reward are completely disproportionate, so try to avoid this kind of play.
⚠️ This does not constitute investment advice $BTC But don't take the funding rate at face value as (high: long positions crowded, low: short positions crowded), make your own judgment.
Here are two examples,
Figure 1, when the aggregated funding rate is relatively low, the market is actually at the top. At this time, the net position is near a local top, so it seems that a relatively low aggregated funding rate cannot directly indicate short positions are crowded.
Figure 2, when the aggregated funding rate is relatively high, the market is actually at the bottom. At this time, the net position is near a local bottom, so it seems that a relatively high aggregated funding rate cannot directly indicate long positions are crowded (corresponding to the last pump starting point at 74.9K).
Is there a possibility that when the funding rate is relatively high, it is mainly due to spot market dumping, where the spot price falls faster than the futures price, causing the funding rate to move positive.Leverage is decreasing
🔥 Liquidations dropped from $1.5 billion to $360 million! Is leverage cooling down?
📊 On October 30, 24-hour liquidations were about $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion, with 84% longs (Cryptotimes); on October 31, 24-hour liquidations dropped to about $360 million, with longs accounting for 76% (DMarketForces); another source reported about $427 million (Cryptotimes).
🧮 Dropped from $1.6 billion to $360 million, a decrease of about 78% (my own calculation, different sources have different scopes).
📈 DMarketForces: The correlation between BTC and the Nasdaq ETF (QQQ) is about 82%, indicating that this round of decline also involves tech stock risk appetite factors.
Fewer liquidations indicate reduced leverage pressure, but it doesn't indicate direction; I'm not sure and might be wrong.
📍 The levels I'm watching:
• $76,000: Breaking below may trigger a new round of liquidations
• $78,000: Breaking above reduces short pressure
Do you think BTC will stabilize after leverage comes down?
$BTC $ETH #CanBTCHold80K #FedHikeOutlookDivided #OKXICETradeXYZPerps $BTC $ETH $ZEC $SNDK Direction: Long
· Entry: Enter long near 1340 - 1350 on a pullback and stabilization.
· Stop Loss: Firmly stop loss if it breaks below 1320.
· Take Profit: First target 1390, second target 1420 (near previous high).
⚠️ Note: Overall strong upward trend, currently a high-level pullback, MACD death cross indicates a short-term correction is needed. Wait for pullback to confirm support, do not chase the high directly, use light positions with stop loss.What exactly is being traded with oil prices above $CL 100?
The Schrödinger state of geopolitical premium. The Houthi forces have recently launched consecutive attacks on Saudi Arabia's largest Ras Tanura refinery and Rabigh refinery, and there was a tanker mine explosion and fire in the Strait of Hormuz. The tail risk of supply disruption has not been eliminated. On the other hand, diplomatic negotiations between the US and Iran are accelerating, with talks progressing on Iran reopening the strait in exchange for lifting the blockade. Every time hope for talks emerges, oil prices drop once. The geopolitical premium is shifting from a one-sided increase to a two-way pricing, rising due to geopolitics and falling due to geopolitics.
Macro hawkish pressure is tightening step by step. The 10-year US Treasury yield has reached around 5%, the Federal Reserve remains on hold but with hawkish wording, and the probability of a rate hike in December is still about 75%. High interest rates suppress forward demand expectations, which is a dull knife hanging over oil prices—not fatal, but wearing. Meanwhile, the Bank of Canada’s rate hikes combined with high oil prices have pushed the USD/CAD to a six-week low, and the strengthening Canadian dollar partially offsets the dollar’s pressure on oil prices.
The strong support on the physical side has not dissipated. EIA inventories continue to decline, OPEC+ seven countries maintain November quotas unchanged, and diesel shortages are expected to persist until mid-next year. The fundamental floor remains, which is the core confidence that oil prices will not fall deeply.
$BTC $ETH
#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化 #Perspectives du rapport financier de Palantir : une forte croissance peut-elle justifier une valorisation élevée #INTC plunged over 27% overnight, chips are fleeing, smart money is avoiding the PC sector and flowing into AI computing power. AI was originally the story driving its valuation, but now it has become a factor squeezing PC demand.
The market has already priced in a downturn in the PC industry through 2027, with memory resources continuously being absorbed by AI data centers. Capital is only reallocating within the industry, not betting on a short-term rebound.
Open the position panel and check INTC's pending orders. Different people see the same chip exchange.
$INTC $BTC $ETH $SOL Bitcoin absorbing significant selling pressure without a major price collapse is worth watching. It may indicate that strong buyers are stepping in to absorb available supply. However, we shouldn't automatically assume that institutions control most BTC simply because the price remains relatively stable. ETF flows, exchange balances, custody data, and actual spot buying need to confirm that picture. As for the $100K target, I agree that the AI-related uncertainty is an important factor to monito$BTC MicroStrategy surprisingly only bought 267 BTC last week, then turned around and pulled out $190 million to pay off debt and protect itself.
This is a top-tier bull that shouts buy signals every day, now preferring to hold cash to survive rather than injecting liquidity into the market. The underlying liquidity support has already dried up.
Everyone is watching the institutional cost line at 75,000, hoping the main force will hold firm if it drops to this level. Don't be foolish; supports are always meant to be broken.
Calculate the pressure from their bond issuance and interest payments—once 75,000 is smashed through, the biggest bulls can instantly become the biggest passive shorts, turning strong support into a super selling pressure zone.
At this position, the bulls are completely holding on hard, with no signs of capital taking over.
#BTC
$BTC
👇high, this is not high-level consolidation, but middle-to-late stage of deep correction. 77k means $100k psychological level long lost, leverage flush scale far bigger than previously judged — high-beta risk assets being centrally cut in tightening tail-end, continuous net outflows from ETFs draining liquidity, high correlation with Nasdaq amplifying drop. Current core issue is whether 75k-77k can form effective support. This zone corresponds to previous dense trading area, if it stabilizes, shoLast night, the global markets experienced an indiscriminate bloodbath. The Nasdaq plunged 2.86%, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index was hammered down 7.2%, even gold, long considered a safe haven, crashed 3.5%, and silver fell below the $50 mark, plummeting over 6%. Our BTC also couldn't hold up, directly dropping below $77,000.
Looking at this market, many were stunned. What exactly happened? The comments below revealed the truth: liquidity across the entire market has been drained, and everyone is indiscriminately deleveraging.
Look at the bond market in the chart: the 10-year US Treasury yield fell back to 4.93%, and bond prices surged sharply. What does this indicate? It means that at this extremely panic-stricken moment, large funds are frantically cashing out and exiting. To cover margin calls, even hard assets like gold are being indiscriminately sold off, and ultimately all the liquidity flows into risk-free US Treasuries.
In this deleveraging meat grinder, there is no such thing as an independent "safe-haven asset" rally. When institutions face liquidation and redemption pressure, BTC, gold, and tech stocks all turn into cash machines. This is a classic precursor to a liquidity crisis.
Back to our market, BTC has fallen below $77,000 and is now on an extremely dangerous edge. Looking further down, the 76,100 to 76,800 range is the densest liquidation zone for longs, very close by. If BTC continues to crash down with volume and breaks through this area, triggering a chain reaction of long liquidations, that will be the truly darkest moment. #美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化 $BTC Bitcoin is holding around $76.3K, with $77.5K acting as nearby resistance. However, approximately $643M in ETF outflows are creating additional pressure on market sentiment. Key levels to watch: 🔹 Above $78.6K: A reclaim could open the door toward $79K. 🔹 Below $76.3K: Losing support could trigger another wave of selling. My view: Buyers are still defending the current support zone, but a bounce alone doesn't confirm a trend reversal. We need stronger spot demand, improving ETF flows, and a coIf you were watching the market during that sharp drop in the early morning, you might understand the mix of relief and chill I felt this morning. Have you ever had those moments of "take small profits and run, but hold on tight to big losses"? Waking up to see the price already slipped below 80,000, my first reaction was relief that I hadn’t opened a real position. But when I checked my points record, my face flushed a bit. On October 27th, that $SNDK trade only made 1.4%, and I ran faster than a rabbit, proudly holding over 200 XP; but late on the 28th, I put all my principal at 50x leverage into SpaceX-related assets. The market was hammered for two consecutive days afterward, with almost no pre-market token support. I held on stubbornly for two whole days, but at 7 a.m. this morning, 139.64 was mercilessly liquidated by the system, wiping out over 1,100 XP to zero. From a derivatives perspective, this experience is quite representative. Taking small profits quickly is driven by fear of giving them back; stubbornly holding big losses is driven by unwillingness to admit mistakes. But the worst fear when going all-in with maximum leverage is the "false deadlock": the direction has already gone wrong, but the position can’t be moved and you can only wait for forced liquidation. When the macro environment is weak and pre-market depth is thin, market makers love to clear out these leveraged longs without stop losses. Once liquidation triggers, it’s often not the end but the start of a chain squeeze, with prices sliding along the thinnest side, dragging stop-loss orders and chasing longs down together. The bullish path isn’t impossible either: if the price can reclaim around 80,000, funding rates drop from highs, and positions get cleaned out, this sell-off might actually become a healthy deleveraging, clearing the way for a rebound later.The key point here is that all three are spot positions, so there is no liquidation risk from leverage. However, I would adjust the buying strategy slightly rather than simply placing fixed orders and increasing purchases whenever prices fall. My assessment: 1. BTC ($76,500–$74,500): A reasonable accumulation zone. I would split the allocation into several entries rather than buying everything at once. Keep some USDT available in case BTC breaks below $74,500. 2. ETH ($2,150–$1,900): More cautioThe average cost basis for short-term BTC holders is around $76,000, putting the market right at a level where investor confidence is being tested. The Short-Term Holder MVRV has also approached 1.0, indicating that this group is close to its break-even point. Back in late September, it reached 1.18, reflecting substantial unrealized profits. More importantly, the average cost basis has climbed from approximately $67,500 in mid-August, showing that many short-term investors entered during the la300,000 HYPE tokens suddenly unstaked—Is it a dump or a shakeout?
On-chain data just broke: an address unstaked 304,600 $HYPE tokens at once, worth about $27.19 million at current prices. Over twenty-seven million dollars worth of chips suddenly unlocked, it's hard for the market not to tremble.
Tracing this address reveals something interesting—the batch was bought from Galaxy Digital three months ago, most likely locked and staked immediately after purchase, then completely dormant for three months. Today it suddenly "resurrected," withdrawing everything cleanly and swiftly.
Whenever a whale with tens of millions moves, the market naturally speculates: is it preparing to dump and cash out, or unstaking first to reshuffle and shake out? It's not yet confirmed if they will sell immediately, but the signal itself is sensitive enough. Unstaking does not equal selling, but chips turning from locked to liquid means control returns to the whale.
Next, focus on two things: first, whether this batch of HYPE moves to exchanges; second, whether the market can absorb the selling pressure. If it's just a wallet transfer or repositioning, panic might create a golden opportunity; if it truly flows into sell orders, short-term pressure is inevitable. Don't rush to take sides—watch the on-chain follow-up actions first.
$HYPE #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 $WET vs $LSK
Both are pumping, and traders are still piling into shorts.
WET looks shaky to me. Neither side is making much money, and fresh selling is already outweighing buying. Wouldn't be surprised to see a pullback.
LSK is the one I'd keep an eye on. Shorts are heavily exposed and already taking losses, yet sellers keep showing up.
That could get ugly if buyers push again.
I prefer LSK for a potential squeeze, but chasing either after this kind of rally is asking for trouble.Zcash's 25-Second Speedup: Between Technical Narrative and Valuation Reality
Zcash is scheduled to launch the NU7 mainnet upgrade on November 5, reducing block intervals from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, and increasing the theoretical throughput of Orchard privacy transactions from 2.9 tx/s to 6.6 tx/s. Nodes must switch to Zebra 7.0.0 in advance, or they risk a fork.
One detail worth clarifying: the new mechanism plans to allocate 60% of each transaction fee to the network reserve, which will gradually be released as subsidy block rewards later. This is neither a "fee burn" nor a "total supply halving"—the 21 million coin cap and the original halving schedule remain untouched.
The speed increase does improve payment confirmation experience, but there is no necessary link between "faster" and "more expensive." After the upgrade, three observation points are more important than the coin price: whether node switching is smooth, whether the real usage of privacy transactions increases, and whether on-chain fees and activity match the capacity expansion. If throughput doubles but demand remains stagnant, technical progress is difficult to directly translate into valuation premium.
The next round of competition for privacy coins sees transaction speed as just an entry ticket. Wallet experience determines user retention, and regulatory environment determines survival space—the former relies on product refinement, the latter on jurisdictional battles, both harder to achieve quickly than changing block parameters. For ZEC, NU7 is an engineering milestone, not a demand catalyst. #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 $COIN earned $719 million this quarter, and breaking it down, $715 million came from the company's own holdings appreciating.
Excluding that, the actual business only made $78 million.
The stock price dropped more than 10% on Friday.
Binance being hacked dragged down the entire sector, and it bears half the blame.
The other half lies in the profits themselves; this quarter looks good because the coin prices were still high at the end of the quarter.
In October, BTC kept going down, so next quarter most of these paper gains will likely be given back.
Buying COIN compared to holding coins directly is like taking on the additional risk of a company.
I still prefer to just hold coins directly in a cold wallet.
I won’t touch COIN for now; if it doesn’t hold 160 next week, I’ll stop watching.
Would you rather buy exchange stocks or buy coins directly?
$COIN $BTC
#CoinbaseQ3净利润转正，交易收入同比降43% #Review of Palantir's financial report: can high growth support a high valuation bought The company's free cash flow for this quarter is approximately $6.309 billion, with adjusted free cash flow around $5.696 billion. The latter metric adjusts for activities related to Flash Ventures, as well as prepayments, deposits, and other items under the new business model agreements. This treatment is worth pondering. Customers paying in advance improves the current cash position, but part of it corresponds to future delivery obligations. Separating these effects makes it easier to observe the cash-generating ability of the current business itself. Of course, adjusted free cash flow is a non-GAAP metric defined by the company and should be considered along with its calculation method. But even by this measure, cash generation this quarter remains quite substantial. The company also returned about $5 billion to shareholders through buybacks. For me, this adds a layer of verifiable operational results beyond just hearing about profit surges. I am somewhat optimistic about this financial report. Strong demand is no longer only reflected in order descriptions but has also started to show in cash flow and capital returns. Going forward, we still need to watch subsequent deliveries, customer payment rhythms, and construction investments. High growth is attractive, and after clarifying factors like advance receipts, how much cash the business can still generate will better help assess the quality of this economic upturn. My personal judgment on the upcoming trend is: First, a review of yesterday: Yesterday was a Black Friday for global stock markets. Due to several global multinational companies' earnings reports falling short of expectations in recent days, the global stock markets were dragged down. Overall, it was somewhat of an irrational sharp decline, driven by panic sentiment. Over the two-day weekend, global investors can calmly reflect and think rationally to correct the deviation. Some targets with stable earnings growth over the next few years that were mistakenly sold off will be corrected next week, presenting opportunities for a strong rebound. For example, targets like SanDisk, Hynix, Oracle, etc.CORE's b14g staking contract was hacked, losing 97 million tokens, shattering the last hope of loyal fans
This incident did not happen to the CORE mainnet itself, but to the staking protocol b14g built on the Core chain. Hackers exploited a contract vulnerability to unauthorizedly transfer about 97 million staked CORE tokens. After discovering the breach, the project team urgently suspended the affected contract and simultaneously launched a fund tracking effort: approximately 68 million tokens remain on the Core chain, exchanges have helped freeze 9 million tokens, and the rest have been transferred by the hackers, making recovery very difficult.
This blow to CORE believers is fundamentally different from ordinary theft cases. Coupled with multiple past negative incidents, it has become the final straw crushing confidence.
1. Why this shatters the last dream of loyal fans
1. CORE’s narrative foundation has always been "Satoshi + Bitcoin hash power binding, BTC + dual mining, secure and reliable." Many holders have long held the coin attracted by the idea of replicating Bitcoin’s spirit and security.
Previously, it had multiple contract vulnerabilities, governance disputes, unmet expectations, and unlocking sell pressure issues. Many fans repeatedly chose to tolerate these, believing the project team could rectify and fix them.
2. The stolen assets were staked tokens—long-term chips locked by users to earn yield—not coins temporarily stored in exchange hot wallets. Staking is one of the most important sectors in its ecosystem, with a large amount of long-term faith capital deposited here.
Repeated incidents have made everyone realize: this is not just short-term operational negligence; contract audits and code risk controls have persistent shortcomings. The so-called "Bitcoin-level security" narrative has not been realized.
3. Fund differentiation: the portion still on-chain and frozen can be handled later; but the CORE already transferred by hackers will be continuously sold off in batches on the market, creating long-term selling pressure. Holders’ psychological defenses have completely collapsed, and many long-term holders no longer want to wait for fixes and choose to exit.
2. Boundaries of the incident itself
✅ Vulnerability location: third-party staking protocol b14g contract, not CORE’s underlying consensus or hash power layer compromised
✅ Unaffected part: BTC staked by users, locked on the Bitcoin mainnet, was not stolen this time
❌ Core risk: weak security audit system for Core ecosystem’s peripheral contracts and DeFi components, continuous failures in ecosystem support, ongoing credibility degradation
It is important to distinguish: the security of the public chain’s underlying layer and the security of upper-layer DeFi staking contracts are two separate systems. Even if the underlying hash power is intact, vulnerabilities in upper-layer contracts can still lead to staking asset theft.
3. Chain reaction in the current broader environment
The entire market just experienced a major Binance hack, and the market is highly sensitive to custody and contract security, with confidence fragile. CORE’s new large-scale theft will amplify market biases:
- The market will re-examine projects claiming "Satoshi, Bitcoin hash power" narratives, and narrative premiums will quickly fade;
- Funds will further differentiate between projects that simply replicate Bitcoin hash power narratives and those with native cryptographic security and quantum resistance, widening valuation gaps;
- It serves as a warning to altcoin ecosystems: repeated security incidents have limits to fan tolerance, and once trust is exhausted, it is hard to rebuild.
4. Summary
CORE’s loss of 97 million staked tokens is a continuation of a series of security trust failures.
The underlying hash power was not compromised, but ecosystem contracts repeatedly failed, wearing down holders’ patience. Many loyal fans bet on its security narrative and long-term vision, but this staking pool theft has dashed those hopes.
It may not directly go to zero, but the long-term faith consensus is basically shattered, and it will be difficult to attract funds again relying on the old narrative.$BTC is unbelievable, an old bug hidden for 7 years just took down an entire public blockchain 😂
On October 27, someone found a vulnerability on Iron Fish, this privacy chain, where the same funds could be spent multiple times. The hacker used a cross-chain bridge to Base and minted 2.98 billion wIRON in one day, overissuing by 38.7 times.
After dumping and cashing out $197,000, wIRON instantly became worthless, with liquidity in the pool dropping to just a few hundred dollars. Later, over 200 addresses trying to buy the dip and swap back to real tokens via cross-chain were directly trapped.
The most outrageous part is that in the early hours of the 31st, the team announced they would stop supporting the entire network, submitted a patch, and immediately archived the code repository...
This code was audited both internally and externally back then, yet no one found the issue. From now on, whenever you see the words "audited," you really have to question it.$SNDK The storage veteran is performing very weakly; compared to Hynix, it has fallen more sharply and is moving down heavily step by step.
Since the decline started from 2373.96, after a round of rebound, it turned down again, with the price being tightly suppressed by the moving averages, which is a very weak signal;
In the entire storage sector, Micron and Hynix benefit from HBM riding the AI dividend, while SanDisk's focus remains on NAND and enterprise-grade SSDs, with very little high-margin HBM;
Mainly affected by US Treasury bonds, interest rate hikes, and macro sentiment, it follows the downward trend and has fallen the most;
When capital withdraws, don't expect it to have an independent rally. If the NAND spot price can rise, maybe it can have a rebound, otherwise cut losses quickly.indiscriminate bloodbath. Nasdaq plunged 2.86%, Philly Semiconductor Index got smashed 7.2% directly, even gold, long seen as a safe-haven artifact, collapsed 3.5%, silver even fell through $50, dropping over 6%. Our big cake couldn't hold either, directly breaking below $77k. Looking at this board, many are confused. What exactly happened? A comment below nails it: liquidity was drained across the whole market, all doing indiscriminate deleveraging. Look at bond market in chart, 10-year TreasurWhen ma120 was reached, multiple entries were made in batches, but the current nodes are quite strange. Ethereum indeed reached this position first, but BTC hasn't gone there yet. The most awkward point right now is that if you go long on Ethereum, you might make a small profit. But the problem is, what if $BTC makes another move to test the 120 moving average? At that time, will Ethereum consolidate sideways or follow the drop? Actually, it is very likely to follow the drop. In this case, going long on Ethereum now is a relatively risky move. BTC is currently watching whether it will consolidate at this position or if it is just in a downward continuation. The next key level for BTC is its own 120-day moving average, around 74,300. Whether it continues to drop or pulls up again, it will most likely reach this level. It depends on whether it forms a solid candlestick or a wick! #FederalReserve officials release rate hike signals, December expectations still divided One big bearish candle after hours, Intel got smashed 22% straight, market voted with its feet. Lip-Bu Tan also laid it bare: PC demand is weak, but memory prices keep skyrocketing, this hole may not be patched until first half of 2027. Essentially not complicated - AI compute side popping champagne, traditional PC side fixing the roof. Past two years everyone hyped "memory supercycle", now aftereffects kick in: upstream players like Hynix, Samsung, Micron posting explosive profits, downstream P1. What is the relationship between STRK's BTCFi ecosystem and Bitcoin (BTC)?
In short: BTCFi is a second-layer execution + privacy + DeFi ecosystem built by Starknet (STRK) for Bitcoin. BTC is the underlying native asset, and Starknet is the independent upper execution layer; the two are not subordinate, nor an upgrade to Bitcoin, but a "base asset + upper application layer" cooperative relationship.
1. Core product strkBTC: Users stake native BTC to a bridging federation and mint strkBTC 1:1 for circulation on Starknet. They can choose public mode or STRK20 privacy pools to shield transactions and balance information, used for lending, trading, liquidity mining, and staking to earn yield—this is the core carrier of BTCFi.
2. Consensus binding: Starknet currently uses a dual-weight consensus, with STRK accounting for 75% and staked BTC 25%. BTC stakers participate in network security and receive STRK rewards, creating deep economic binding. However, Bitcoin mainnet’s block production, hash power, and consensus remain completely independent of Starknet control; Bitcoin mainnet remains the original POW hash power system.
3. Boundary distinction:
✅ Bitcoin mainnet: an independent POW public chain, the source of assets, hash power, and ledger, self-contained;
✅ BTCFi (Starknet): an "external execution layer" for Bitcoin, addressing Bitcoin’s native script limitations, lack of DeFi, and fully public transactions;
❌ It does not modify Bitcoin mainnet’s underlying code or change BTC mainnet’s signature algorithm (ECDSA elliptic curve).
A simple analogy: Bitcoin is gold itself; BTCFi is an independent vault platform designed to store gold, allowing collateralized lending and private transfers; the gold’s material remains unchanged, only gaining a new use case.
2. Will Bitcoin’s future post-quantum security rely on STRK technology?
Conclusion: Bitcoin mainnet itself will not directly "switch to STARK technology"; there are two parallel paths—one is native Bitcoin modification, the other is obtaining a post-quantum usage environment through Starknet BTCFi. These two are separate.
1. Native Bitcoin post-quantum security: an independent path, not fully dependent on STARK
Researchers from StarkWare have participated in Bitcoin BIP proposals (BIP360), QSB quantum-secure Bitcoin schemes. This scheme runs inside Bitcoin mainnet, based on Tapscript modifications, does not require STARK proofs, and is a native Bitcoin soft fork solution. Even without Starknet, this path can proceed independently.
In other words: if Bitcoin mainnet upgrades for post-quantum security in the future, it will be governed and soft-forked by the Bitcoin community itself, not directly integrating the STARK cryptosystem.
Bitcoin governance has a very high threshold; any underlying cryptographic changes require consensus from the vast majority of nodes and miners, and cannot be unilaterally led by Starknet.
2. Using Bitcoin inside BTCFi can rely on STARK to achieve post-quantum protection (this is the core narrative of the STRK track)
When BTC is wrapped as strkBTC and used on Starknet:
- Starknet’s ZK-STARK proof system is hash-based cryptography, natively post-quantum secure;
- Starknet has account abstraction, allowing account signatures to be individually replaced with post-quantum signatures without a network-wide hard fork;
- Future roadmap plans: strkBTC will upgrade to QSB, achieving quantum security at the Starknet layer. BTC-related operations within the Starknet ecosystem will be protected by the STARK system;
⚠️ However: the native BTC private key (Bitcoin mainnet ECDSA) is not modified.
That is: if you only use strkBTC inside Starknet, your on-chain proofs and account signatures are post-quantum secure; but if you redeem strkBTC back to Bitcoin mainnet, after redemption, the native BTC private key remains elliptic curve and is still vulnerable to quantum attacks.
3. Clarifying common misconceptions
Many people think Bitcoin’s post-quantum security will rely on STRK.
The accurate statement:
- Bitcoin mainnet native post-quantum security ≠ relying on STRK/STARK;
- Using Bitcoin assets inside Starknet BTCFi ecosystem is an alternative channel to gain post-quantum capability;
- The two paths are complementary, not substitutes.
3. Summary combining previous quantum risk discussion
BTCFi is an upper-layer ecosystem adding DeFi, privacy, and post-quantum usage scenarios to Bitcoin;
Bitcoin’s underlying cryptographic security is governed by the Bitcoin community and independent of Starknet;
STRK’s value is providing an execution layer where Bitcoin assets can be migrated to enjoy STARK post-quantum cryptographic protection, not replacing Bitcoin mainnet’s cryptographic locks.1. What is the relationship between STRK's BTCFi ecosystem and Bitcoin (BTC)?
In short: BTCFi is a second-layer execution + privacy + DeFi ecosystem built by Starknet (STRK) for Bitcoin. BTC is the underlying native asset, and Starknet is the independent upper execution layer; the two are not subordinate, nor an upgrade to Bitcoin, but a "base asset + upper application layer" cooperative relationship.
1. Core product strkBTC: Users stake native BTC to a bridging federation and mint strkBTC 1:1 for circulation on Starknet. They can choose public mode or STRK20 privacy pools to shield transactions and balance information, used for lending, trading, liquidity mining, and staking to earn yield—this is the core carrier of BTCFi.
2. Consensus binding: Starknet currently uses a dual-weight consensus, with STRK accounting for 75% and staked BTC 25%. BTC stakers participate in network security and receive STRK rewards, creating deep economic binding. However, Bitcoin mainnet’s block production, hash power, and consensus remain completely independent of Starknet control; Bitcoin mainnet remains the original POW hash power system.
3. Boundary distinction:
✅ Bitcoin mainnet: an independent POW public chain, the source of assets, hash power, and ledger, self-contained;
✅ BTCFi (Starknet): an "external execution layer" for Bitcoin, addressing Bitcoin’s native script limitations, lack of DeFi, and fully public transactions;
❌ It does not modify Bitcoin mainnet’s underlying code or change BTC mainnet’s signature algorithm (ECDSA elliptic curve).
A simple analogy: Bitcoin is gold itself; BTCFi is an independent vault platform designed to store gold, allowing collateralized lending and private transfers; the gold’s material remains unchanged, only gaining a new use case.
2. Will Bitcoin’s future post-quantum security rely on STRK technology?
Conclusion: Bitcoin mainnet itself will not directly "switch to STARK technology"; there are two parallel paths—one is native Bitcoin modification, the other is obtaining a post-quantum usage environment through Starknet BTCFi. These two are separate.
1. Native Bitcoin post-quantum security: an independent path, not fully dependent on STARK
Researchers from StarkWare have participated in Bitcoin BIP proposals (BIP360), QSB quantum-secure Bitcoin schemes. This scheme runs inside Bitcoin mainnet, based on Tapscript modifications, does not require STARK proofs, and is a native Bitcoin soft fork solution. Even without Starknet, this path can proceed independently.
In other words: if Bitcoin mainnet upgrades for post-quantum security in the future, it will be governed and soft-forked by the Bitcoin community itself, not directly integrating the STARK cryptosystem.
Bitcoin governance has a very high threshold; any underlying cryptographic changes require consensus from the vast majority of nodes and miners, and cannot be unilaterally led by Starknet.
2. Using Bitcoin inside BTCFi can rely on STARK to achieve post-quantum protection (this is the core narrative of the STRK track)
When BTC is wrapped as strkBTC and used on Starknet:
- Starknet’s ZK-STARK proof system is hash-based cryptography, natively post-quantum secure;
- Starknet has account abstraction, allowing account signatures to be individually replaced with post-quantum signatures without a network-wide hard fork;
- Future roadmap plans: strkBTC will upgrade to QSB, achieving quantum security at the Starknet layer. BTC-related operations within the Starknet ecosystem will be protected by the STARK system;
⚠️ However: the native BTC private key (Bitcoin mainnet ECDSA) is not modified.
That is: if you only use strkBTC inside Starknet, your on-chain proofs and account signatures are post-quantum secure; but if you redeem strkBTC back to Bitcoin mainnet, after redemption, the native BTC private key remains elliptic curve and is still vulnerable to quantum attacks.
3. Clarifying common misconceptions
Many people think Bitcoin’s post-quantum security will rely on STRK.
The accurate statement:
- Bitcoin mainnet native post-quantum security ≠ relying on STRK/STARK;
- Using Bitcoin assets inside Starknet BTCFi ecosystem is an alternative channel to gain post-quantum capability;
- The two paths are complementary, not substitutes.
3. Summary combining previous quantum risk discussion
BTCFi is an upper-layer ecosystem adding DeFi, privacy, and post-quantum usage scenarios to Bitcoin;
Bitcoin’s underlying cryptographic security is governed by the Bitcoin community and independent of Starknet;
STRK’s value is providing an execution layer where Bitcoin assets can be migrated to enjoy STARK post-quantum cryptographic protection, not replacing Bitcoin mainnet’s cryptographic locks.$BTC is hovering around 77,200 today, basically moving sideways all day with very small fluctuations. This sideways movement is meaningful because it occurs on the second day after a sharp drop and under the premise that there are no new negative news from the Binance incident, indicating that the 77,000 level has real market support. However, it should be clear that the current sideways movement is fragile because it lacks volume support; it is a "no one trading" sideways rather than a "bull-bear balance" sideways. Technically, 76,000 is the next line of defense; if broken, look at 75,000. On the upside, 78,000 is the first recovery target, and only reclaiming 80,000 can be considered a true recovery. QCP has an analysis that hits the mark, suggesting Bitcoin may be stuck at the current level until 2026 because holiday trading will drain market liquidity, and there won't be large-scale inflows of new funds before the end of the year. I basically agree with this judgment, so expectations for November should be lowered; don't expect a V-shaped reversal. It's more likely to take two to three weeks to repeatedly form a bottom between 75,000 and 82,000.#闪迪业绩超预期并宣布拆股，股价跌逾13% Will the PC winter continue until 2027?
Intel plunged 22% after hours, with Q4 revenue guidance between 15-16 billion, falling short of market expectations. This is a phase in the cycle where downstream hardware is squeezed by both demand and upstream costs.
In this phase, AI computing power chips are in tight supply, while PC demand remains weak, and storage price pressure will last at least until 2027. The divergence in tracks widens, with upstream storage benefiting from the cycle dividend, while PC chip segments bear the pressure.
Open your portfolio list and check the cost of your hardware holdings. How far would you set your stop loss for this kind of downward track?
$INTC $SNDK $SKHYNIX $BTC $ETH On-chain data just exploded, some dude suddenly unstaked 304.6k $HYPE! At current price that's $27.19 million, a solid $20M+ smash onto the books, who can handle that? I traced this address a bit, this guy has some history, he bought this batch from Galaxy Digital three months ago, estimated bought and directly locked for staking, then went silent for a whole three months, today suddenly came back to life and withdrew everything. Honestly, when a whale of this tens of millions level makes a move$ETH Ethereum has dropped directly by 17% in this pullback, while Bitcoin has only fallen less than 9%.
ETFs see daily net outflows, and whales are still moving their holdings into exchanges. Bitcoin is still some distance from the weekly support, but Ethereum has already been smashed through in advance.
At this position, the bulls are completely holding on desperately. As long as the market dips a bit more, there are no dense chips below Ethereum to catch the fall; the spot order book will break through with just one hit.
#ETH
$ETH
👇Banks are rushing to collaborate with Ripple (XRP), yet the price of XRP remains stable. Why?
Ripple continues to receive positive signals:
BNY has expanded its custody services for XRP and RLUSD.
Robinhood has introduced RLUSD into the institutional finance sector.
Ripple has received U.S. approval to operate as a national trust bank.
RLUSD's market cap has surpassed $2.5 billion.
But here lies a paradox:
The faster Ripple develops, the less likely XRP is to attract more buyers!
Because RLUSD’s operation does not require XRP. Custody trades or stablecoin reserve management trades may not necessarily generate demand for XRP.
Here are some noteworthy data points:
Whales hold 10 million particles. $XRP controls 68.5% of the supply.
The XRP spot ETF has attracted over $1.8 billion in net capital inflows.
Despite Ripple’s progress, XRP’s price still faces pressure.
The market needs more than just banks partnering with Ripple; it needs evidence that these partnerships actually create demand for XRP.
Do you think XRP is undervalued? Or is the market’s assessment of the gap between Ripple and XRP accurate? $ZEC The Winklevoss brothers made another calculation for ZEC: if privacy is worth 10% of Bitcoin's market cap, ZEC could multiply 5 times, with a unit price above $5000. This statement spread quite fiercely today. I casually checked CoinGecko, ZEC's current price is 1282, market cap 21.8 billion, while in their October 20 interview they said 25 billion — a drop of over 3 billion in eleven days.
I believe the first half. The more AI intensifies on-chain analysis, the more precious privacy becomes, no problem with that. The second half needs a question mark: the premise for 5 times is BTC's market cap staying flat, privacy share rising from 2% to 10%, and regulators staying silent. The knife to delist privacy coins hasn't been withdrawn these years.
So I take this framework as a story, not as a model. To really verify, watching shielded transaction volume is more reliable than watching others' target prices. $SUI is down 0.41%, with $7.68M volume shown. The selling pressure is relatively mild, so I wouldn't rush into a short. I'd watch the support zone and look for a liquidity sweep followed by a failed recovery.
OKX Signal: SHORT (Conditional)
Entry: 0.9010
SL: 0.9100
TP1: 0.8920
TP2: 0.8830
TP3: 0.8740
I want bearish structure and increasing selling volume before entering.#Perspectivas of Palantir's financial report: Can high growth sustain the high valuation? PLTR is going to beat earnings. Yes. Goldman upgraded it to Buy and the sovereign AI contract gives it a tailwind. It is volatile but the pre-earnings momentum is bullish. Positioned in perps with controlled risk.