Orbit Post Sitemap
· Macro "Super Week" Suppression: The Federal Reserve will meet on October 27-28. The market expects rates to likely remain unchanged in October, but there is a strong expectation of a rate hike in December. For the crypto market, this means liquidity tightening is still anticipated, and the foundation for a big rally is not solid.
· Uncertainty from Elections and Regulation: The U.S. midterm elections are approaching, and there is variability regarding the progress of crypto regulatory bills (such as the CLARITY Act). This uncertainty will make large investors more inclined to wait and see rather than enter the market rashly.
· ETF Funds Withdrawing: Although there are occasional inflows, the overall trend is not optimistic. The spot Bitcoin ETF recently experienced a single-day outflow exceeding $700 million. Without sustained large-scale buying, the continuation of technical rebounds is hard to guarantee.
· $BTC "Shrinking volume at the bottom, no one is selling anymore." In reality, the market is indeed focused on the $80,000 level. Once it breaks below, the next key support is around $76,000, and it might even test the $70,000 range. So, if the price really moves downward, the "can't wait for $75,000" mentioned in the post might actually come true.
· $ETH Oversold, "Can't break below 2200." Currently, ETH has indeed fallen below all moving averages. Although the RSI is low, the technical pattern is weak. If it breaks the key support at $2220, it could trigger further pullbacks. A rebound requires reclaiming the moving average resistance near $2473. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ 2785 ETH sold in one hour, about 6.42 million USD, with an average price of roughly 2305 USD each.
Wallets labeled as "related to the Ethereum Foundation" transferred another 4393 ETH to Kraken two weeks ago from two similar wallets.
In total, 7178 ETH, nearly 16.55 million USD.
Could this be an official sell-off? On-chain, we can only see address tags, not signatures, so no one can say for sure.
My view: the volume isn't large enough to move the market, but the sentiment is definitely suppressed. If they really want to reduce holdings, they would do it in batches, not bet heavily on a single piece of news. Sold 2,785 ETH in one hour, worth about 6.42 million USD, with an average price of roughly 2,305 USD each.
The wallet monitored by Lookonchain is labeled as "Ethereum Foundation related." Note that it is related, not personally signed off, so no one can confirm if this is an official sell-off.
But the timing is worth noting. Two weeks ago, two other wallets also labeled as related transferred 4,393 ETH to Kraken.
Combined, that's 7,178 ETH, roughly 16.55 million USD at this price. Not a small amount.
Here’s my take.
First, on-chain wallets are more honest than announcements. Whether the foundation says it wants to sell is less important than whether the funds have actually moved.
Second, this volume entering the spot market won’t crash the market but will definitely affect sentiment. When retail investors see the words "Foundation related," their first reaction is to run.
Third, what matters more is what they buy after selling. If converted to stablecoins and held, that means paying salaries, grants, and normal operations. If converted to other assets, that’s a signal.
My approach is simple: use this kind of news only to adjust position timing, not to set direction. If you really want to reduce, do it in batches; don’t bet everything on one piece of news.
Don’t rush to find reasons when the market drops; first check if the trading volume has truly increased. News can deceive, but trading volume won’t.The midterm election downturn curse is probably unavoidable; funds hedge in advance before the election, cashing in on the downturn early.
After Anthropic announced operational profitability, I confirmed there would be a rebound in the next couple of days. The AI sector's recovery also helped Bitcoin rebound sharply, but the high plateau of oil prices plus the high yields on U.S. Treasury bonds remain unresolved.
Don't expect the rebound target to rise too high:
The first resistance is around 82,200-83,200, which is the previous breakdown point during the earlier consolidation and decline. Combined with moving averages, there should be resistance upon the first encounter.
If the rebound exceeds expectations, it will be around 83,500-84,000, which is a strong resistance line. I've said before this is an absolute shorting position, only a collective big rebound in AI could change that.
Mainly explaining why Bitcoin can't avoid the downturn this election:
It's still the high oil prices causing inflation, high interest rates restricting the economy, and the high uncertainty risk of the midterm elections. So funds can openly reduce positions early to hedge, accelerating the downturn rhythm and amplifying the decline, then flow back after the election results are out.
Shorting time window:
Prioritize waiting for the rebound to reach the resistance levels above before starting to short in batches; don't wait until November 3rd to short.
If crude oil crashes to $95, inflation pressure significantly eases, and macroeconomic bearish factors are lifted, then do not short anymore.In-depth ETH analysis: The whale buying spree is winding down! Faith remains, but bullets are being reloaded ⚠️
$ETH heavyweight institutional data breakdown! Top whale Bitmine continues to buy against the trend, adding 10,452 ETH in a single week, spending about $24.6 million.
Its total holdings have now surpassed 6.0519 million ETH, accounting for 4.95% of ETH circulation, nearly completing the market-recognized "5% alchemy" layout. But the institutional cost is heavy, with an average holding price of $3,331, current price only $2,360, a floating loss of up to $6.1 billion, a drop of over 30%!
Big player Tom Lee remains firmly bullish, stating ETH's pullback is much smaller than that of semiconductor stocks in the US market, signaling a bull market continuation, boldly predicting an ETH target of $62,000 in this cycle.
However, core risks have already emerged! Institutional funds are quietly shifting focus, with stock buybacks costing $45.9 million in a single week, nearly double the amount spent on buying coins; coin purchases continue to shrink, hitting a new low since August. Currently, only 55,000 ETH remain before reaching the 5% holding cap, and the largest long buy orders are about to extinguish.
Faith remains, but the main incremental bullets have changed direction, ETH lacks core bottom-funding capital going forward, market volatility is huge, so caution is essential!
$ETH
⚠️ Market review is for reference only and does not constitute investment advice
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 Busy at work during the day, no time to look closely; at night, I spread out the market data and when I came across this, my drowsiness was pulled away a bit 🌙. "Escaping the strong sell-off zone" easily lifts one's spirits, but what I really want to know is: has the pressure eased, or has the room for profit shrunk?
Glassnode indicates that recently $BTC buyers have escaped the strong sell-off zone; in late September, almost all short-term holders' supply was in profit, now it has dropped to about 70%. It also believes that for buyers expecting a continued upward trend, the current entry timing is better than a month ago.
My judgment is that this is a somewhat positive signal after sentiment cools down, but not yet a trend confirmation. The decline in the proportion of profitable supply means the coverage of floating profits has narrowed, which cannot be directly equated with the exhaustion of sell orders. For short-term holders, the thinning of the buffer on paper means that whether they can hold on during subsequent volatility is more critical than "how many people are still in profit."
As for "better timing," the premise is precisely that the upward trend can continue. My speculation is that if follow-up support is insufficient, then the decline in the profit ratio may only be part of an adjustment process, and this indicator alone cannot be used to judge a bargain. My reminder to myself: don't interpret easing pressure as a guarantee of a rise. Who else is still awake at this point? Are you looking at the profit ratio of short-term holders, or the volume and price support?"Schrödinger Navigation" of Hormuz
On October 26, Saudi media leaked: Qatar's mediation proposed a "five-day mutual concession plan," Iran would open the Strait of Hormuz, and the US would lift the port blockade.
On the same day, Tasnim News Agency, affiliated with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, responded: false information. Iran has not proposed any new plan and does not accept the model of "exchanging strait navigation for lifting the blockade."
Who should you believe?
The answer is: you don't have to believe anyone.
What you need to understand is why these two messages can coexist.
Iran's logic hasn't changed at all.
Iran's parliament speaker Kalibaf has always held a list of seven conditions: lifting the maritime blockade, unfreezing assets, canceling oil sanctions, stopping military actions, US troops withdrawing from the border, war damage compensation, and no interference with nuclear capabilities.
The order is clear: the US must meet the conditions first, then navigation through the strait will "naturally return." It's not about trading the strait for benefits.
Why did Tasnim immediately deny it?
Because for Iran, Hormuz is not a bargaining chip, but leverage. A chip can be priced and sold, but as long as leverage is held, pressure can be continuously applied. If the outside world gets the impression that "the strait can be bought and sold," then any future Iranian demands will be met with bargaining.
What is being denied is not a piece of news, but the attribute that the strait as a pressure tool cannot be traded.
The US logic hasn't changed either.
CNN reported on October 27: US forces in the Middle East are ready, and at Trump's command, a new large-scale strike on Iran can be launched within 96 hours. Officials said the order might be given after the midterm elections in November.
On one hand, they leak "Qatar is working on a five-day plan," on the other, they have a knife on the table.
Negotiation news is for the market. Military preparations are for the opponent. Both happen simultaneously.
So what exactly is the "five-day plan"?
It is a media plan, not an execution plan.
None of Iran's core conditions have softened. The US's core pressure has not retreated a step. The only thing moving is the headline.
And oil prices are pricing the headline.
On October 26, Brent crude rose to $116.72, pushed to the highest settlement price since spring by Houthi attacks on Saudi oil facilities. War risk insurance premiums have risen to 10% of vessel value, compared to less than 3% before the war.
The "five-day plan" briefly pulled oil prices down. But has actual navigation through the strait resumed? Have tanker insurance costs dropped? Have the Revolutionary Guard's naval mines been removed?
No. The risk premium fuel has been piling up.
What is truly stuck is BTC.
BTC is testing the 80k level for the third time.
What is pressing it is not "whether the US and Iran fight," but a colder chain: oil at $116 → rising inflation expectations → Fed rate cuts locked out → no incremental funds for risk assets.
The Fed already raised rates once in September; the market's pricing for rate cuts this year is only about one-third. High oil prices and 3.7% inflation have welded shut the door to "rate cuts."
Negotiation headlines can make oil prices drop by two dollars. But as long as Hormuz remains in a "Schrödinger navigation" state, the inflation rope won't loosen, and the pressure on BTC won't truly lift.
There is a huge gap between the "headline" and the "execution" of geopolitical news. Those trading headlines are always harvested by those trading execution.
The five-day plan is a headline. The seven conditions are execution. The 96-hour strike readiness is also execution.
Oil prices may drop again tonight due to some tweet. But if insurance costs for the strait don't drop tomorrow, today's decline is just sending chips to the executors.
$BTC $CL $BZ To start with a cold splash, I don't directly count this stolen coin news as a positive for the security sector. According to Scam Sniffer monitoring, a user suspected of private key leakage had about $1.58 million worth of Ethereum and Base assets stolen; the attacker transferred 682 ETH in less than 2 hours, of which about 281 ETH were subsequently sent to Tornado Cash.
I'm stuck on two points: the attribution is still "suspected," so we can't conclude that a certain type of security product can block it; a large loss amount also doesn't mean users are willing to keep paying. My guess is, if the market only trades on panic, then security demand might be misread as growth in the value of related tokens, missing the evidence of revenue and value capture in between.
Of course, the bullish might also be right. If verifiable protective effects, payment growth, and a clear link between revenue and token value appear later, I would change my view. Regarding the impact of this news on the security sector, are you bullish or bearish? Share your reasons, don't just state the direction.Brothers, let's first lock in the calendar: tonight durable goods orders and consumer confidence data will be released, and the FOMC meeting is on the eve. Before any results come out, I won't draw any firm conclusions, just watch which side the positions are stacking on.
The total network positions increased to 140.28 billion, up 1.24%, but the stacking is concentrated: the largest one accounts for just over 20%, CME's share is 16.61%, and the top two combined are close to 40%. When the direction changes, the leaders move first.
SOL is the most aggressively added in the last hour 🔥, with a 1-hour position increase of 1.69%, and a daily position increase of 2.67%, but the price is hovering around the 100 mark. Positions are increasing but price isn't following; I treat it as a leading candidate and only add a small portion when the 1-hour position continues to increase, and exit if it shrinks.
ZEC's daily position increased by 6.48%, still the leader in gains, but the 1-hour increase is only 0.19%, showing a slowdown. Chasing the tail of the leader isn't worthwhile; I only watch if it can boost the 1-hour position.
BTC's daily position increased by 1.14%, and 1-hour by 0.33%. Positions haven't collapsed, but the price is fluctuating below 80,000. Until it recovers above 80,000, I only treat it as an anchor in the consolidation, not a breakout to follow.
ETH's daily position increased by 1.14%, and 1-hour by 0.16%. Both ends are increasing but not strongly, showing a follower stance. Without acceleration in the 1-hour position, I won't add positions separately.
I will follow the small positions with SOL's direction, only watch BTC and ETH positions without adding, wait for ZEC's 1-hour position to accelerate before deciding. With positions concentrated and data not yet released, chasing the price is just handing chips to the leaders 👀.On October 27, Brent crude fell to $114.81, and WTI returned to $101.02.
The reason seems quite reasonable: senior officials from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan went to Tehran, Qatar’s mediation side proposed a "five-day concession plan," and there are signs that the Strait of Hormuz might reopen.
The market breathed a sigh of relief and began pricing in the "reopening of the Strait."
But on the same day, the Houthis said one thing that most people overlooked: we bombed Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline.
What is the East-West Pipeline?
It’s a 1,200-kilometer pipeline crossing the desert from Saudi Arabia’s eastern oil-producing region straight to the Yanbu port on the Red Sea coast. Its entire significance is to bypass the Strait of Hormuz.
It was just attacked by drones in September, damaging pump stations and causing a temporary shutdown. It only resumed operation on October 6 at 5.8 million barrels per day, close to the 7 million barrels per day design capacity.
Saudi Arabia even plans to expand it to 10 million barrels per day because it is currently the only physical redundancy in the Gulf to bypass the Strait.
The market is pricing in the Strait reopening. The Houthis are voting to shut down the alternative pipeline.
This is the most painful part of the whole matter.
You focus on the negotiation table at Hormuz, thinking that as long as the Strait is open, oil flows, inflation stabilizes, the Fed softens, and risk assets revive.
But the Houthis tell you: there’s another route you can cut off.
The East-West Pipeline doesn’t need to be completely destroyed. Just shutting down the pump stations once more, cutting off Yanbu’s export for a few days, and the market will face a harsh reality—there is no Plan C beyond Hormuz.
By then, negotiation progress will be worthless. Oil prices will ignore all diplomatic rhetoric and jump directly.
Then what?
Oil price jumps → secondary surge in inflation expectations → Fed doubles down on hawkish stance → real interest rates rise.
BTC is now fluctuating around $80,000, once dropping below $80,000 to a more than one-month low. This week’s FOMC is very likely to hold steady, but everyone is waiting to see if Powell will mention "energy inflation."
In this macro scenario, BTC’s beta to geopolitical escalation is negative, not positive.
War pushes oil prices up, oil prices push interest rates up, interest rates kill risk assets. Bitcoin stands at the end of this transmission chain with no exemption.
So there is a huge pricing gap in the market now.
On one side is the "negotiation premium" embedded in oil prices—everyone believes the Strait will open, supply will return, so oil prices have retreated from their highs.
On the other side is the "supply cut option" written by Houthi missiles—the alternative pipeline is within range, and the global oil buffer is being drawn down one by one.
The price difference between the two is the risk you need to manage.
Don’t wait until the pump stations smoke again to remember the name of this pipeline.
$BTC $CL $BZ $CORE Colend (Core Chain Lending Protocol) Current Status 1. The contract has not been shut down; the on-chain contract still exists, and the frontend website is still accessible, but the business is basically "substantially frozen," with activity almost at zero. - In March 2026, a sharp price crash of the CORE token triggered massive cascading liquidations, severely damaging the entire protocol. Although the official statement claims the protocol code itself was not hacked and that the damage was caused by market leverage liquidations with no bad debt, liquidity was severely destroyed. - Currently, the TVL is only a few million USD, with the vast majority of collateral assets being CORE/stCORE; liquidity for stablecoins and BTC-type assets is almost depleted. - Almost no assets can be borrowed: even if collateral is deposited, the lending pool has no available liquidity; ordinary users can mainly only make deposits, and the lending function is basically unusable. 2. Token CLND Status - The CLND token is still listed on exchanges, but trading volume is extremely low, depth is poor, and the price has dropped significantly compared to its peak. - Colend's official social updates have greatly decreased in frequency, and large-scale incentive activities have ceased. 3. Key Reminders for Existing Users - The contract is not frozen; you can withdraw your deposited collateral assets by manually redeeming and withdrawing through the app; do not continue to deposit new funds. - The protocol has experienced extreme liquidation events, and the collateral is the highly volatile CORE token, carrying very high leverage risk. Simple Summary ✅ From a technical contract perspective, it has not been abandoned or closed, and is still accessible and usable There are three key moments this week, and the one I care about the least is the early Wednesday one. The interest rate decision at 18:00 UTC on October 28 is unanimously expected by the market to remain unchanged, so there’s really no suspense. This time, they won’t even release the economic projections summary or the dot plot; the only thing to dig into at the press conference is Powell’s wording on inflation. There’s no chance to ask about the path, so it’s normal that the market lacks momentum.
The real movers for the year-end pricing will be the preliminary Q3 GDP and September PCE at 12:30 UTC on the 29th. If rates stay unchanged in October, that’s basically locked in; the probability for December can only be adjusted based on these two numbers, with PCE being especially critical—if inflation readings fluctuate again in the past few months, the December probability will be cut sharply.
Positions before the meeting are not betting on direction. In the last round, spot $BTC ETF saw about $700 million outflow in a week; funds don’t plan to jump the gun before the decision.
Without the dot plot as a foundation, the information density this meeting can provide is very thin. The volatility on the 28th will most likely come from position adjustments themselves, with little new information.
The fork happens on the 29th: if PCE rises month-over-month combined with strong GDP, the expectation for a December rate cut will be cut, and $BTC’s limited rebound space ahead will be squeezed back; if both numbers are soft, then ETFs have reason to turn back to net inflows.
The work this week is to adjust the December pricing; direction is actually secondary. If the market moves in opposite directions between the post-meeting on the 28th and the data on the 29th, those two moves likely won’t last until the 29th data is fully released. #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 I just checked OKX BTC perpetual contracts; the accounts with the largest positions skewed further to the short side this morning, the most aggressive in these four days.
At first, I thought last night's drop was a false alarm and that the big holders had already pulled back from shorting. Last night I even said that if the short position ratio dropped below 0.912 before noon today, I would admit I was wrong. As of 11:00, it’s 0.910, so I admit this mistake.
The long-short ratio also surged to the highest in these four days, 2.23, with more than twice as many longs as shorts. The price has been grinding sideways all morning, while open interest has actually risen to the highest in four days.
Small accounts are increasingly crowding into longs, while the big holders on the other side haven’t budged at all; neither side has withdrawn. If by this time tomorrow the big holders’ position ratio returns above 0.92, it means the big holders have covered their shorts, and I’ll admit I was wrong.
Just to reconcile, I said yesterday that if BTC open interest dropped below 30,000 contracts by noon today, I’d be wrong. The same hourly candle shows just over 32,000 contracts, so it held up.💻 Breaking down the input by code review: Zcash co-founder Sean Bowe released a ZIP draft proposing to redirect the automatic 8% block subsidy allocated to ZCG to NSM. The draft states that ZCG holds about 91,452.98 $ZEC, valued at approximately $125 million, enough to continue supporting related activities. This is still a proposal and has not been implemented.
My judgment: It makes sense to re-examine automatic allocations, but "sufficient balance" should not be equated with "reasonable budget." Existing funds provide a buffer but do not mean subsequent funding needs disappear; without a clear spending plan, stopping allocations may affect developer expectations. Redirecting to NSM also depends on usage rules; changing the receiving address does not fix bugs.
If I were to revise it, I would require first disclosing ZCG's funding runway, pending funded projects, and NSM allocation rules before discussing the switch. Please help review: before stopping allocations, which data do you think should be supplemented most? Is there any key dependency my logic misses?Mainstream on-chain analysis (Santiment) defines addresses holding ≥1,000 BTC as BTC whales - latest statistics: 2,044 addresses ≥ 1,000 BTC, holding about 7.17 million BTC in total, accounting for nearly 36% of circulating supply. However! Addresses ≠ Genuine and independent individuals/institutions, which is the easiest pitfall: Includes cold exchange wallets, ETF custody addresses, platform reserve wallets, not all large individual users. For example, an exchange may have several such whale addresses, which actually belong to the same institution. More detailed layering (another sub-caliber) - Sharks: 1,000–5,000 BTC - Whales: 5,000–10,000 BTC (narrow sense) ≈ over 100 addresses - Humpback whales (super whales): > 10,000 BTC, fewer than 100 addresses. This includes MicroStrategy, the US government, early tycoons, and large custodians. Two key misconceptions: 1. It's impossible to know the real "number of whales": one person can control dozens of wallets; A single wallet could also be the money of many users (exchanges), and on-chain you can only count addresses, making it hard to distinguish the entities behind them. 2. Different platforms have different entry barriers: Some media outlets are a bit more lenient, calling ≥100 BTC 'big holder,' and the number of addresses increases to nearly 20,000, so they shouldn't be confused. In short, summarize by the most commonly used in the circle: 1Focus on KORU, first tier target to earn 10,000u, new system experiment, do not follow
6th order in October, currently holding 1 position
1st order stop loss long position entry price 11.03, stop loss price 10.8, loss -172.33, switched to short
2nd order stop loss short position entry price 11.04, stop loss price 11.94, loss -1467.72, switched to long
3rd order stop loss long position entry price 11.96, stop loss price 10.52, loss -3161.92, switched to short
4th order profit short position entry price 10.52, take profit price 10.2, profit 1018.45, continue short
5th order stop loss short position entry price 10.25, stop loss price 11.48, loss -3915.67, switched to long
6th order KORU long position [3-hour level], focus on trend-following trades, normal to have back-and-forth losses
Entry price 11.48
Position size 3487.35
Entry amount 40000
Pending take profit price 13.76
First tier target to earn 10,000u, still short 17699.19
KORU currently loss -7699.19, unrealized profit/loss not included in earnings$IRYS IRYS's panic sell-off this time is quite interesting.
After a round of liquidation, it couldn't even break 0.033; all sell orders were quietly absorbed.
Looking at the contract funds, a short-term 5-minute inflow of 408,700 was directly injected.
The negative unlock is still on the way, but the market is already playing out a short-seller's funeral.
Shorts can't break the bottom; once the panic chips are fully cleared, it's highly likely that a new major player will take over and push the price up.
#IRYS
$IRYS
👇#美伊讨论霍尔木兹开放方案，油价回落
Currently, the Middle East crude oil market appears to be resuming navigation on the surface, but the underlying logic is quite the opposite.
Moreover, high oil prices directly push up inflation and expectations of interest rate hikes, ultimately suppressing the entire risk asset market, leading to weakened liquidity and making capital reluctant to short oil.
As long as the cost of transporting oil does not come down, the high premium on oil prices will be firmly fixed, inflation expectations in the US cannot be suppressed, the Federal Reserve's room to turn dovish will be compressed, and US Treasury yields and the dollar will remain strong.
$ETH $BTC $ZEC #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ Hard fork ≠ creating two types of coins! Did CORE holders lose or gain from this upgrade?
When many people hear "hard fork," their first reaction is like Bitcoin's fork creating BCH, where holders suddenly get new coins. But this emergency hard fork by CORE to fix a validator reward vulnerability will not split into a second chain or airdrop new tokens. It is a forward protocol repair upgrade and will not roll back historical transactions. What the fork did: closed the vulnerability, stopped validators from over-mining CORE; executed on-chain destruction of excess tokens still held in addresses related to the vulnerability. What the fork did not do: approximately 69 million ghost tokens already transferred out to external wallets cannot be recovered, and historical transfers will not be reversed.
Did ordinary holders lose or gain?
In the short term, ordinary retail holders did not directly receive any token airdrops. The market originally expected huge sell pressure from the vulnerability incident, but the hard fork destroyed most abnormal tokens, somewhat alleviating inflation panic, which is positive; however, since 69 million ghost tokens remain in the market, the sell pressure has not been fully cleared, market confidence remains fragile, and the coin price has not seen a strong recovery. A deeper impact: this vulnerability incident exposed flaws in the protocol's economic model, compounded by the ongoing withdrawal of official validator nodes, further deepening investors' concerns about network security.
The hard fork was just a one-time stopgap; it did not solve fundamental issues like node loss, SatPay delays, or lack of on-chain revenue. In summary: no free forked new coins, the hard fork is a risk stop-loss operation, not a positive realization.#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ I lean towards "Q3 numbers are not a big issue, but the focus is on HBM4 guidance rather than betting on exceeding expectations." AI server demand + memory upgrade is the main theme, with tight HBM3E supply and HBM4 mass production progress supporting ASP/profit structure; however, capital expenditure, exchange rates, and equipment delivery times will pressure short-term margins, and the market is already fairly priced (related Outcome “Yes” about 83¢, odds are average).
Positioning: Currently holding a small position in SKHY/SKHYNIX for observation/not heavily invested, will consider adding after the 10/28 guidance confirmation, not chasing highs; only if management clearly confirms HBM4 customer validation and volume ramp-up pace would it be considered solid "exceeding expectations." Not investment advice. Stayed up last night waiting for a rebound, and today I see BTC couldn't even hold 80,000. 79,811, ETH 2,315, SOL 100.2. The most annoying thing is this kind of situation: it rallies and makes you feel like you shouldn't sell, then it pulls back and makes you feel like it's almost bottomed out. After grinding all night, my position is still taking hits in place.
For now, I want to wait for BTC to rebound a bit before shorting. The 15-minute 20 moving average is at 80,041; it bounced to around 80,300 this morning then turned down, with the high much lower than last night. Shorting at 79,800 feels late to me, and 79,650 and 79,450 are too close together, making it tough to catch a good entry. I want to wait for a return to 80,000–80,100 to see if it can bounce; if it can't, I'll try a small position. If it really pulls back to 80,350, I'll exit—don't want to fight another short trade. If it drops to 79,650, I want to take some off; I’m not daring to bet on breaking 79,450 yet.
I'll leave ETH alone for now; the 20 moving average at 2,321 hasn't been reclaimed, and 2,315 is stuck in limbo. Going long feels weak, and opening shorts quickly hits 2,300. Don't think SOL is cheap just because 100 is a round number; 100.57 is still pressing down on it. The latest DeFi Development announcement said SOL and equivalents increased holdings by 5,346 coins, totaling about 2.596 million coins, yet the price keeps grinding down. Damn, institutions have their patience, but I just want to do short-term trades. I'll wait for BTC to give some rebound; if it really hits 80,000, I guess I'll be staring at that bullish candle again, hesitating whether it will pull back.I'm doing something pretty dumb right now, manually scanning info on many coins every day and then recording it. Yesterday I scanned over 100, flagged 6-7 anomalies, and started tracking 2 of them.
One is $POLYX from yesterday. When I noticed the anomaly, the price was 32, then it rose to 38, and now it has fallen back to 32. The price fluctuations and trading volume aren't that big, so I'll keep observing.
The other is $q. I checked the flags I made: the contract trading volume was abnormal, spot trading volume halved, and looking at net inflow data, there was a large outflow from spot a few days ago which stopped yesterday, while contracts have been seeing large inflows continuously. Of course, I haven't had time to look closely yet, but today it has nearly quadrupled.
The point of manually checking these things is to personally feel every piece of data, so I can organize these changes and then incorporate them into the system logic.International crude oil like $BZ is currently somewhat declining, but Ajian does not believe the supply risk has eased. Although Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan have engaged with Iran, hoping diplomatic channels can reduce the risk of supply disruption, Saudi Arabia still faces attack risks, and the shipping security issues around the Strait of Hormuz remain unresolved. If diplomatic contacts do not translate into actionable easing measures, oil prices cannot continue to fall, and inflation expectations will still create obstacles for central bank easing. Subsequently, interest rate expectations, the US dollar, and the valuations of crypto assets will all be affected accordingly #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ $BTC 跌到79,993，$ETH 滑至2,309，盘面流动性近乎枯竭——但就在这个节点，多年来把比特币称为“骗局”的Jamie Dimon，其掌舵的JPMorgan却给出了未来十年年化10%的收益预测。这个反差本身就是本周最值得咀嚼的信号：当最坚定的怀疑者开始用传统资产定价框架丈量BTC，叙事的天平已经悄悄倾斜。 市场当下的反应却近乎冷漠。FOMC会议与中期选举两道宏观关卡横在眼前，长期利好撑不起短期价格，这是典型的“认知已变、资金未到”状态。流动性干涸意味着任何方向的波动都会被放大，但也意味着一旦新增资金入场，价格发现会来得比想象中更快。 10%这个数字被部分观点认为“过于保守”，但恰恰是这份保守暴露了真正的变化。它不是加密原生机构的乐观喊单，而是传统金融体系内部收益率模型的产物——换句话说，华尔街正在把$BTC正式纳入主流资产配置的坐标系，而不是继续把它当作边缘投机品。这个动作的意义不在于预测准不准，而在于定价语言换了。 历史反复证明，绝对利益面前没有永恒的敌人。Dimon的个人立场从未软化，但JPMorgan的预测模型已经先行一步。这种“人嘴硬、模型诚实”的分裂，往往出现在机The current drop is actually an opportunity. The macro environment is still dominated by bearish sentiment. The only real negative factor so far is the interest rate hike. Whether there will be more hikes later and how the midterm elections will go are still uncertain and haven't materialized yet, but when they do, the price will definitely reflect it.
You can refer to MicroStrategy's cost at about $75446 and Strive's at about $87785. Just buy some Bitcoin spot at your own pace, including the stage positions of mainstream altcoins like Aave and Solana.#The October FOMC rate decision will be announced this week. According to CME FedWatch pricing, the market unanimously expects the rate to remain unchanged this time. This meeting is not a quarterly meeting, so the dot plot will not be updated. The market focus is not on whether to raise rates, but on the wording of the post-meeting statement and Powell's press conference remarks to judge the December policy options.
⚠️ Three core variables
1. Inflation resilience risk
Oil prices have risen due to geopolitical factors, putting upward pressure on inflation. If the Fed takes a hawkish stance and keeps the possibility of a December rate hike, U.S. Treasury yields and the dollar are likely to strengthen, putting pressure on risk assets.
2. Strong economic and employment data
U.S. economic and employment data remain resilient, giving the Fed confidence to maintain high rates. If a signal is sent that "high rates need to be maintained longer," long-duration growth stocks and crypto assets will continue to face pressure.
3. Divergent views within the committee
Internal officials have divided opinions; some worry about inflation rebounding, while others fear high rates will harm the economy. Ambiguous statements may cause market volatility between bullish and bearish sentiments.
📊 Impact logic on the crypto market
• ✅ Dovish bias: Emphasizing inflation improvement, adopting a wait-and-see attitude → Dollar weakens, BTC, ETH have rebound opportunities
• 🦅 Hawkish bias: Indicating further rate hike potential and prolonged high rates → Dollar index strengthens, risk assets face pressure and correction $BTC $ETH $SNDK Tesla surged 5.21% yesterday (October 26), closing at $391.62, hitting a nearly three-month high, with a single-day market cap increase of about $85 billion. The core driver was Barclays' significant rating upgrade, combined with Q3 earnings resilience, improved Robotaxi operational data, strong energy storage orders, and the multiple resonances of the anticipated SpaceX merger.
🚀 Core catalyst: Barclays flips to bullish, sharply raises target price
The most direct trigger was Barclays upgrading Tesla's rating from "Neutral" to "Overweight," raising the target price sharply from $370 to $450, implying about 21% upside. Barclays cited four main reasons forming the fundamental framework for the day's buying:
· The core automotive business is expected to end two consecutive years of decline and return to growth.
· Robotaxi (autonomous taxi) business shows signs of a turning point, with recent significant increases in mileage.
· Energy storage orders for 2027 are nearly sold out, with very high demand visibility.
· A potential merger with SpaceX could bring an acquisition premium to Tesla shareholders.
📊 Earnings foundation: Q3 EPS beats expectations, multiple operational metrics hit records
Daiwa Securities' research report provided another support for the day's rise: Tesla's Q3 Non-GAAP EPS was $0.48, above the market expectation of $0.45. More importantly, Daiwa listed operational data indicating comprehensive improvement:
· Automotive backlog reached a four-year high.
· North American new car FSD (supervised) attach rate reached 75%.
· Austin Cybercab's unsupervised driving mileage increased eightfold.
· Energy storage business orders and backlog both hit all-time highs.
These data show the market that Tesla's fundamentals are not just a "long-term story," but short-term operational indicators are also improving simultaneously.
🤝 SpaceX merger expectations: from "speculation" to "substantive evaluation"
Barclays specifically mentioned in the report that Musk confirmed during the earnings call that both Tesla and SpaceX have established special committees to formally evaluate the possibility of a merger. Barclays believes the market already has strong expectations for this, and the deal should include a premium on Tesla stock, speculating that both parties may announce related progress before the December 3 annual shareholder meeting. This expectation provides an additional "option value" to Tesla's valuation.
🌊 Sector resonance: tech and chip stocks broadly rebound
Tesla's surge was not an isolated event. On the same day, U.S. tech stocks broadly rebounded, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rising 2.82%, ARM up 6.19%, and Intel up 4.04%. The AI narrative was restored following Anthropic's IPO filing, risk appetite improved, providing a favorable liquidity environment for high-beta names like Tesla.
In summary, Tesla's $TSLA surge yesterday was the result of the triple resonance of Barclays' rating upgrade providing a "fundamental anchor," Q3 operational data improvement providing "earnings validation," and SpaceX merger expectations providing a "valuation premium." The market is buying not just current car sales, but the simultaneous realization of the combined narrative of "automotive business bottoming + Robotaxi volume growth + high energy storage prosperity + merger option."$ETH 🚨 Counterintuitive Alert: ETH dropped to 2315, but the funding rate soared to 0.01%! Are retail investors frantically bottom-fishing?
📊 Practical Review:
Looking at the chart: The proportion of long accounts is as high as 71.64% (long-short ratio 2.53), but the active sell volume (110,400 ETH) exceeds the buy volume (97,300 ETH).
Sell orders pile thick above 2317 in the order book (9.45M), while buy orders support the bottom at 2300 (4.53M).
The large cycle daily MACD stubbornly stays below zero (-11.33), and the 4H Bollinger Bands cling to the lower band (2292).
💡 Core Logic:
Funding rate surge + OI hitting a new high (637,800 ETH) + extreme retail bullishness = a typical “long liquidity trap.”
Asian session shows low volume oscillation; the main force is using retail bottom-fishing sentiment to unload positions.
⏰ Trader’s Perspective:
It’s now the 04:00-08:00 “dead water slight ripple” period.
Don’t get stopped out by fake moves; save your energy for the 16:00 European session open.
👇 What’s your take on ETH’s outlook? Has the bottom arrived or is it a long trap? #Strategy财报前瞻：BTC账面收益大幅反弹 $BTC lost the 80,000 mark again at 9 AM, with Binance 1h dropping from 80,071 down to 79,756, hitting a low of 79,648 at 10 AM, and now hovering around 79,810. The surge to 80,844 last night has basically been retraced.
According to Coinglass data, the total liquidations across the network in the past 24 hours reached $175 million, with long positions at $106 million and short positions at $68.83 million. BTC longs accounted for $30.04 million, ETH longs $23.32 million, indicating bulls are still buying.
Despite the price dropping, positions have actually increased: Binance BTC contract open interest rose from 94,600 to 96,700 in 24h, funding rate returned to 0.01%, and the long-short account ratio is 2.35.
$ETH is at 2,313, contract open interest increased from 2.338 million to 2.365 million, long-short account ratio is 3.36, with retail investors overwhelmingly long.
My view is that the whales tracked on Hyperliquid are actually 72% bearish, with retail and large investors on opposite sides. Under this structure, I am more worried that the batch of longs below 79.3k will be liquidated first. First, there is a 90% probability of no rate hike, which is already priced in, so no rate hike is not considered a positive surprise. Second, the key is my stance on December. Currently, CME shows a 69% chance of a rate hike in December; if they just hint "December is not ruled out," Bitcoin will immediately drop to a lower level. Third, Brent crude oil is still above 110, the 10-year US Treasury yield is above 5%, inflation cannot be suppressed at all, and Powell has no reason to be dovish. I think the most likely scenario is: no rate hike but hawkish stance, Bitcoin will first drop sharply then rebound. Don't bet on the direction prematurely; wait until the decision is finalized before making moves. Reduce positions to the minimum before Wednesday. #OctoberFOMCRateDecisionToBeAnnouncedThisWeek #SKHynixQ3EarningsComingUpCanHBM4BoostProfitability? #MiddleEastOilTransportResumesWhyAreOilPricesStillHigh? $BTC $ETH $ZEC #富兰克林邓普顿推出美股股息买BTC新型ETF
"Franklin Templeton Uses US Stock Dividends to Buy Bitcoin"
Franklin Templeton has recently reached into the high dividend US stock sector, submitting an application to launch a new type of combined fund.
The underlying assets are all US blue-chip high dividend stocks, and the cash dividends generated will no longer be returned in the original form but will be automatically used to buy Bitcoin spot periodically. The principal remains in traditional blue-chip stocks for risk hedging, only using the dividends for dollar-cost averaging, which not only increases management fees but also locks in long-term buying for their own crypto fund.
The first regulatory response window is set for mid-next month. Once approved, by the end of Q4, this batch of pension funds will begin mechanical accumulation. $BTC 💻I treat this as a code review: Glassnode states that recent $BTC buyers have exited the strong sell-off zone, with the proportion of short-term holders in profit dropping from nearly 100% in late September to about 70%.
I think there's a bug in using this to infer "better entry": a narrower profit coverage doesn't equal reduced selling willingness; losing positions might also cut losses.
If I were to revise the logic, I would add a check on the actual selling behavior of losing positions. Everyone, please help review: does this fix the loophole, or should we change the judgment criteria?Robinhood is making money, but the three on-chain exchanges are reacting differently
$HYPE 76.7, on-chain order book exchange 📊
Hyperliquid runs its order book on a self-developed L1, with protocol fees flowing back to token holders. This week, news came out that Robinhood Chain's revenue surpassed Ethereum's, making the on-chain sector lively, but HYPE fell from 80 to 76.7 without following the rise, indicating funds did not choose it. 75 is the next level to watch; do not leverage before the decision.
$ENA 0.21, the yield protocol rose 8 points the day before yesterday 🚀
USDe collateralized short-term US Treasury yield, which rose 8 points the day before yesterday ahead of the rate cut expectation. It has been sideways these past two days without continuing to surge; high chasing funds have stopped. If tomorrow's decision is dovish, it can bounce; if hawkish, those 8 points could be given back. Do not chase.
$ASTER 0.701, multi-chain contract DEX still idle 🛰️
Perpetual contracts are deployed on several chains, but trading volume is only a few hundred thousand USD. Robinhood makes money because it has ready users; this kind of new chain DEX needs events to attract people.
This article is for market analysis only and does not constitute investment advice.
#Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ Conclusion first: Today, Hong Kong stock Zhipu surged over 12% intraday, currently at HKD 553 (+9.4%). The trigger was Anthropic submitting its IPO prospectus to the SEC the night before, with revenue of 16.286 billion USD in the first half.
There are three key numbers to watch for $ZHIPU perpetual contracts:
1) The rise is in the underlying stock, not leverage. Perpetual moved from 62.84 to 71.43, with funding fees settled twice today at 0; the last non-zero was 0.103% on 10-26. Southbound net buying was HKD 2.17 billion over two days. The real action is in the underlying stock; leveraged positions haven't entered yet.
2) Premium equals cost. Perpetual at 71.43, index at 70.73, premium +0.98%; the underlying stock is at 70.5 USD, so you pay 1.3% more. Hong Kong stocks close at 16:00, but perpetual contracts trade 24/7 without closing.
3) 25x leverage, no spot anchor. OKX has no ZHIPU spot; 1 contract equals 1 share, settled in USDT. To trade during the half-hour Hong Kong market open, you can only rely on perpetuals.
Fundamentals are not bearish: Zhipu's ARR is 1.8 billion USD, with year-end guidance raised to 3 billion. But on 9-28 it still closed at 622, and today is just a rebound from 460.8 on 10-22.
Would you accept the perpetual premium for Anthropic's valuation, or wait for the closing price to decide? Brothers, ZEC has returned to 1222, but what’s really worth watching isn’t the price, it’s the chip game in the last two weeks before the NU7 upgrade
$ZEC $1,222
ZEC has retraced from the September-end high of 1698 down to around 1222, a drop of about 28%. But today’s discussion isn’t about how deep the pullback is, it’s about what bulls and bears are doing before the upgrade.
ETFs just posted the strongest weekly inflow in six weeks. As of the week ending October 23, Grayscale ZCSH net inflow was $41.1 million, ending three consecutive weeks of outflows, with $20.5 million coming in on Friday alone. But the first three weeks saw a cumulative loss of $143 million, so this wave only recovered about 29%. ETFs are stopping the bleeding, but the wound hasn’t healed yet.
On-chain signals are contradictory. There are whales withdrawing coins to accumulate; on October 20, 814.7 ZEC were withdrawn, about $1.03 million. But on the derivatives side, longs are clearly under pressure, with about $10.03 million in long positions liquidated over 24 hours versus only $3.99 million in shorts. Big players are quietly accumulating while leveraged longs are being liquidated—two groups doing opposite things.
The NU7 date is locked in. Activation block height is 3,543,405, expected around November 5 to 6. Block time will be cut from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, and 60% of fees will be moved into reserves. The old Sprout pool will be permanently disabled after the upgrade, and holders of old addresses have less than two weeks left to migrate.
Technically, 1214 is the resistance at the 20-day moving average, with support between 1175 and 1100. Before NU7 lands, bulls and bears are both waiting for the last card.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 Akash Proposal 346 is still in the voting window: migrate the Cosmos sovereign chain to Solana, with AKT converting 1:1 to SPL. The Valopers panel shows about 98% approval and has passed quorum, with the deadline on November 2. This is currently just a directional vote, not a completed migration. CoinGecko spot AKT is about $0.68 (snapshot around 12:00 Beijing time).
More importantly, the process is split into two steps. This vote only concerns the token gateway; switching the market to Solana requires a separate vote, which must first pass audit and rehearsal. Opponents will focus on the one-way irreversible nature and that validators' income drops to zero after staking rewards stop on the old chain. However, DePIN projects tend to favor chains with higher liquidity, at least reducing the fixed overhead of maintaining a sovereign chain.
If the approval rate falls below two-thirds before the vote ends, or if the market switch vote is delayed on-chain, this will be considered an expression of intent rather than the compute rental market officially launching on Solana.
$AKT
#Akash #SolanaMeta's $35B financing plan matters because it turns AI infrastructure into a capital-structure question, not just a spending one. With Q3 free cash flow negative and capex guided at $135B-$145B, the funding mix may preserve flexibility while putting dilution squarely in view.
The real test is whether those assets create durable cash generation before financing becomes a recurring offset to investment.
#Meta35BAIFinancing Brothers, SNDK closed at 1255, but the real battleground between bulls and bears will be the earnings report two days later
$SNDK $1,268
SNDK closed up 1.42% on Monday at 1255.58, with an intraday high of 1287.84 and a low of 1229. The 1268 you mentioned is basically the position after a slight rebound post-close. From the June peak of 2354, the retracement is still around 47%.
The most eye-catching data before the earnings is the option pricing. Traders expect a 12.10% two-way price movement after the earnings release on October 29, equivalent to about $152 per share. In the past four earnings reports, SNDK’s next-day moves were -6.81%, +8.25%, +6.85%, and +15.31%, each time with significant volatility.
But the capital flow tells a different story. One trader gave a capital flow score of -89, indicating "strong outflow," with major players continuously withdrawing over the long cycle. Early session long positions bottom-fishing were directly liquidated for $369,800. Large funds are choosing to hedge before earnings, not to position.
Analysts’ target prices are still lofty. Among 17 covering analysts, most give strong buy ratings, with an average target price of $2205, implying about 75% upside. Mizuho reiterated a $2050 target price, optimistic about NAND prices holding firm through 2027.
Technically, 1229 was Monday’s intraday low and a key short-term observation level. In the last two trading days before earnings, the direction will most likely be dictated by capital flow.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #Strategy财报前瞻：BTC账面收益大幅反弹 这个时候看多Recently I saw the burn rules of a token, and the more I look at it, the more it seems like a joke.
The rules are written very nicely: the pool burns 0.25% every hour. But the trigger conditions need a closer look — someone must transfer, authorize, or actively call the burn function for it to execute once.
Here's the problem. It doesn't run automatically every hour; it accumulates. If no one interacts for 24 hours, and then you call it once, 0.25 multiplied by 24 means 6% of the pool's tokens are instantly gone. 48 hours is 12%, 96 hours 24%, and a week of inactivity means 42%.
This token is basically dead now, with very few daily active users and little liquidity in the pool. Who would bother to manually call the function? So the less people manage it, the larger the accumulated percentage becomes. One day, if someone accidentally makes a transfer or grants authorization, the pool could be slashed by a big chunk at once.
For holders, this is like a ticking time bomb. You see the pool sitting stable, but in reality, time quietly amplifies it into a pending deduction. Market makers stepping in will face uncontrollable slippage.
The project team probably never calculated this themselves. When writing the contract, they thought adding a burn would create deflation and pump the price, without considering what the accumulation limit might be. Many projects never seriously consider the economic model from day one; they just want to launch the token first.
When reviewing contracts, don't just look for whether there's a burn, tax, or lockup. You need to see who controls the trigger conditions, how often it executes, and what happens if no one triggers it. Every step that requires manual action is a potential point of failure in the future.
I won't touch this token, not because it’s dropping, but because its rules themselves don’t add up.The "Deflation Illusion" of Public Chains: Can Burned Gas Really Support Token Prices?
Public chain narratives are often deeply tied to "Gas burning" and "deflation." But when underlying transactions are diverted or inflation remains high, the so-called deflation logic is often just a filter.
$ETH: The L1 leader, once built a deflationary powerhouse through EIP-1559. However, with the prosperity of L2 siphoning off activity, L1 Gas fees have been depressed for a long time, sharply reducing burn volume. Currently, ETH has essentially returned to a mild inflation state, and relying solely on the "deflation" logic can no longer support its massive valuation.
$NEAR: Although inflation is suppressed to 2.5%, about $13 million new issuance occurs monthly, while funds used for buybacks are only about $1.9 million, and the repurchased tokens are not burned. Net supply is still expanding, and a deflationary closed loop is far from formed.
$SOL: The smart disruptor. Although daily Gas burns are minimal (about 650 tokens), it does not stubbornly pursue deflation but instead entrusts value capture to ecosystem activity and incremental ETF funds. It supports price through real on-chain demand and staking necessities.
Conclusion:
Don't blindly believe "burning equals price support." Verify whether burn volume outpaces issuance. Public chains lacking enforced deflation mechanisms can only rely on macro bullish trends and genuine ecosystem demand for long-term value. Seeing "taxes may be due even without selling," I was momentarily stunned 🤔. The Netherlands plans to vote in November: the current proposal would tax assets like stocks, bonds, and options upon sale starting in 2028, while cryptocurrencies, gold, and foreign exchange might still be taxed annually on unrealized gains at least until 2030. Industry groups warn this could trigger a sell-off of crypto assets.
My understanding is that this might be less friendly to new local users entering the market, but I'm not sure if that's correct. If holding the same assets, but cryptocurrencies require tax preparation earlier, then choosing assets involves an extra layer of concern; if taxes arise without selling coins, users also have to consider where to get cash from, not just compare paper returns.
I've only been in the space for a year and haven't figured out how loss deductions might affect the actual tax burden; the materials didn't explain that either. I'll keep watching the tax details and remind myself not to directly translate the industry's worries into inevitable price drops.$ETH fell another -3.5% last week, with a cumulative pullback of over -12% in October, currently weakly oscillating around $2310. More worrisome than the price itself are the liquidation landmines hidden below the market.
Coinglass data shows that if ETH falls below $2286, it will trigger about $700 million in long position liquidations; conversely, breaking above $2464 will ignite $526 million in short position liquidations. Both ends are "powder kegs," and which one ignites first depends on two key levels:
Lower defense line: $2240-$2260 — an important support near the rebound starting point in this round, and the last safety cushion for bulls. Once effectively broken, the liquidation chain reaction could quickly push the price down to $2180, where a whale holding $214 million in long positions faces forced liquidation.
Upper checkpoint: $2350 — previous support has turned into resistance; to reverse the weakness in the short term, this level must be reclaimed first, then look upward to the core resistance zone of $2440-$2480.
The biggest variable this week is the Federal Reserve's October 27-28 policy meeting. If dovish signals are released, ETH is expected to leverage the momentum to break through $2350 and quickly recover; if the hawkish tone is maintained, the risk of long liquidation will significantly increase. Combined with the extremely low on-chain Gas fee of only 0.1 Gwei — indicating that selling pressure has been largely released — the short-term is more likely to repeatedly bottom out in the $2240-$2350 range. Operationally, watch both ends closely and avoid chasing in the middle #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 .HYPE This pullback now looks more like a shakeout rather than a rally-chasing phase - for those who bought nearby, did they really get a bargain? I only saw Coinbase's spike to 72 at noon, and my ladder orders at 74 and 73 actually got filled. My first reaction wasn’t excitement, but to quickly check the perpetual positions and funding rates to see if they had flipped. Spot has retraced nearly a quarter from the highs, strong assets have dropped 25% to 30%, which to me has always been a range where you can slowly build positions, but the premise is that derivatives aren’t too crowded. What concerns me is the rhythm. When the price dropped sharply, there was no runaway cascade liquidation in the perpetuals, indicating leverage wasn’t stacked extremely, and shorts didn’t dare to aggressively add positions. Under this structure, rebounds often don’t need much buying power to push up; the bullish path is: spot ladder orders continue to absorb, perpetual funding rates remain neutral to slightly bearish, waiting for a volume-increasing bullish candle to force short-sellers back, and the squeeze naturally happens. But the fragile point is here. If funding rates suddenly turn hot and positions quickly build up, this pullback could turn from a shakeout into a double bottom test, and floating positions above 75 would become new selling pressure. I prefer to see it as a turnover in strong assets rather than a trend reversal, provided leverage isn’t added back during the rebound. Fundamentally, I do favor its model. With a global perpetual market size of 9.3 trillion annually, it only accounts for about 3%, so there’s still plenty of room; circulating market cap is under 20 billion, yet profitability is not inferior to some traditional financial benchmarks. Holding it is almost like holding a companyBetween 80,000 and 100,000, separated by a whole mood
BTC tested 80,000 for the third time, dipping as low as 79,330 USD before pulling back. You say "it can't even hold 80,000," but Glassnode sees another side: buyers are returning near 80,000, selling pressure is hanging around 85,000 and 87,000, and the market is trapped in a range, with no clear direction yet. Repeatedly breaking down and then recovering is itself a sign of bulls and bears exhausting each other at the same price level, not a one-sided collapse.
100,000 by year-end, the divergence is even greater than the price. Standard Chartered lowered its year-end target from 150,000 to 100,000, Bitwise's Ryan Rasmussen still believes that ETF and corporate buying demand is enough to push it, while CoinMarketCap's forecast falls between 85,000 and 92,000. The answer to "Does anyone still believe?" is: some do, but fewer are believing, and the reasons vary.
On the ETH side, your intuition is backed by data. 2,286 USD is a liquidation-heavy zone, ETFs had a net outflow of over 1 billion USD in October, and Arthur Hayes liquidated 6,400 ETH. The overhead supply is real, and you're not the only one wanting to run on the rebound.
But it's not shameful to have conflicting thoughts. Rationality lets you see the exhaustion at the tail of the bull, emotion makes you reluctant to let go of that 100,000 K-line you haven't touched yet. The market never moves forward on consensus; it is precisely in this kind of "wanting to run but hoping for a rise" conflict that direction is squeezed out little by little.
$BTC $ETH ETF连续八个交易日净流入之后，今天首次转为净流出1.172亿美元。资金拐点结束了吗？ 先说新闻。资金侧：最新单日净流出1.172亿（此前连续八天净流入）、5日仍净流入3.065亿、10日净流入1.607亿。价格侧：BTC报79,808.7美元，24小时 -1.03%、近一周 -2.6%；20日区间79,220.1到85,857.4。情绪侧：恐惧贪婪指数54到50。宏观侧：美元101.64（-0.17%）、黄金3,998.6（-0.23%）、标普500 7,623.68（-0.52%）。 再看资金影响。单日转负有两种可能：一是获利了结（前面八天流入的资金开始兑现）；二是趋势反转的开始（配置资金撤离）。区分两者的关键看5日和10日口径：如果5日与10日仍为正，说明只是短期波动；如果5日也转负，说明趋势真的变了。目前5日+3.065亿、10日+1.607亿，都还是正的。 对BTC的含义：现在更接近"获利了结"而不是"趋势反转"。但这已经是一个警号：连续八天的资金支撑被打破了。接下来两三个交易日，如果ETF重新转为净流入，资金拐点仍然成立；如果继续流出，那79,220的支撑就很难守住。 我接$STRK
Zero-knowledge technology can help blockchains process activity more efficiently, but technical sophistication is only one part of the equation. Starknet’s long-term position depends on whether developers can build applications that users actually prefer. Token supply dynamics, competition among scaling networks, and the conversion of ecosystem activity into lasting demand remain important factors in assessing its progress.#Intel's Foundry Transformation Welcomes New Variable Terafab The day before yesterday, $DOOD was suppressing short squeezes with negative funding rates, and today it surged 47% in one move.
Review: On October 21, when it went on contract, it surged to 0.0052. I said that was a bullish realization, but then it dropped 73% back to the original point.
The day before yesterday, when it stabilized at 0.0014, my bullish basis was the funding rate at negative 0.24% and the shorts being too crowded. Today at 9 AM, it jumped from 0.0020 directly to 0.00295, shorts were consecutively liquidated, and it rose 70% in 24 hours.
Now the funding rate hit negative 0.47%, shorts are still paying sky-high rent, so theoretically the short squeeze isn't over.
But the current price of 0.0024 has already pulled back from the high point; the surge to 0.00295 exactly hit the previous dense trapped positions area, chasing in now means getting crushed first.
My plan: Lightly buy on a pullback to stabilize between 0.00212 and 0.0020, watch for a second surge to 0.00295, if it breaks, look at 0.0032.
If it falls below 0.0020, the boundary between bulls and bears, the short squeeze fizzles out, exit immediately.
If you have no position, don't chase above 0.0029; this kind of market can move 20% up or down in one spike.
Are you betting on a second short squeeze breaking 0.00295, or is this just a one-day play with a pullback to the previous low?
$DOOD $BTC
#Doodles #Contract The midterm election has become a positioning problem for crypto traders, not just a political story. Prediction markets and polling point to Democratic momentum, yet Republican fundraising tells a different story: $1.1 billion raised by late August against $600 million for Democrats, with technology figures such as Musk and crypto-aligned donors backing the Republican side. That mismatch between sentiment and money is exactly the kind of divergence that keeps large holders cautious. The electio