Orbit Post Sitemap
$BTC
Tether holds 150,000 BTC, which is worth $11.5 billion at the current price of 77,000. Since September 30, it has added another 50,000 BTC.
At the same time, the total market cap of stablecoins has dropped to its lowest in over a year, down 17 billion in six months.
These two facts together are quite contradictory. Stablecoins are the bullets in the market, and the bullets are shrinking; USDT itself is using its profits to buy up coins, locking in the supply before retail investors enter.
The market isn't giving any favors. It fell another 1.25% in 24 hours, hitting 76,360 at 2 PM, then pulled back to 77,044 at 5 PM with a volume of 2,832 coins, 40% more than the previous bar. But it can't hold above 77,000; it touched 77,126 at noon and then retreated. Open interest is 2.627 billion, and the fee rate remains at 0.01%.
My view: There are real buyers at 76,360 below and real sellers at 77,000 above. Tether can support the bottom by buying coins, but it can't change the trend. Wait for the fee rate to turn negative or for open interest to drop before talking about a rebound.
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ #Binance Hacker Tracking EP02｜Continuous Updates
About 7,500 BTC from 165Eurv was transferred out in one transaction today: at 13:56, 7,499.99999322 BTC was sent to bc1qhp7n, balance cleared to zero, ownership of the two addresses is pending verification.
SOL side: from 13:12 to 14:48 AffzF made 12 main transfers totaling 37,609.33 SOL, the largest single transfer was 14,585.57 SOL to CveMg1.
Balance at 15:01 was 339,469.74 SOL, followed by 14 transfers out totaling 36,657.22 SOL, at 18:35 the balance was 302,573.21 SOL, none of the recipient addresses have exchange or cross-chain bridge tags.
Transit addresses: 7SDuV made 6 transfers out totaling 3,052.33 SOL, basically emptied; DdwZZ transferred out 2,568.97 SOL, cleared to zero; 4BcRU received 1,406.29 SOL, currently holding 407.14 SOL.On Tuesday evening, Bitcoin sank back below 77,000. U.S. chip stocks have dropped 12% over three days, the Nasdaq 100 has pulled back 10% from its high, and with the midterm elections voting today and results coming out tomorrow morning, the crypto market is holding its breath along with the Nasdaq. The three major cryptocurrencies are all in the red, and when the ETF accounts are laid out, it's clear who will crack first.
$BTC is around 76,940, hugging the 100-day moving average
Down 1.4% in 24 hours. On Monday, BlackRock's IBIT saw an outflow of $405 million, the largest since June 26, and the spot ETF had a net outflow of $399 million for the whole day. The intraday low was 76,400, the lowest since August, with the 100-day moving average around 76,463.
$ETH is around 2,265, bleeding for six consecutive days 🩸
Down 1.1% in 24 hours, the smallest drop among the three. However, the spot ETF had a net outflow of $140 million on Monday, marking six consecutive days of outflows, with BlackRock's ETHA alone withdrawing $138 million.
$SOL is around 92.2, with no inflows or outflows
Down 2.2% in 24 hours, the weakest among the three. Seven SOL spot ETFs saw no movement on Monday, with a total outflow of $63.4 million over the previous five trading days.
Bitcoin is the most uncomfortable, with the 100-day moving average right underfoot. If it tests 76,400 again, there’s little to stop it before 75,000. Ethereum’s smaller drop is deceptive; all the money over six days has exited through ETHA, and as long as BlackRock keeps selling, there’s no bottom in sight. SOL’s ETFs are stagnant at zero, with buying pressure gone first. If the election results tomorrow morning cause another hit to the Nasdaq, SOL will be the first among the three to break down. #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ The 12 major cases total $9.74 billion, with Binance alone accounting for 65%.
BlockBeats compiled 12 major cases related or suspected to be related to North Korea from 2022 to 2026 based on TRM and FBI data.
Binance ranks first with about $6.3 billion, Bybit second with $1.5 billion, and the remaining ten cases total $3.44 billion.
The US government directly named TraderTraitor only in three cases: Binance, Bybit, and DMM. Of the remaining nine cases, eight are attributed to the Lazarus group. The Bitget case has not yet been officially confirmed.
The 65% figure should be understood in context: it is based on these 12 major cases, not the total amount stolen by North Korea, nor the losses of South Korean users.
#Crypto #SecurityIBIT dumped $405 million in one day, while FBTC is still making small buys!
US stock market on November 2 (Farside): BTC spot ETFs had a net outflow of about $399 million, almost all from IBIT alone (about -$405 million), while FBTC actually had a net inflow of about $6.7 million. Adding the approximately -$643 million on October 30, about $1.04 billion was withdrawn over two trading days, wiping out the roughly $441 million inflow accumulated in the previous four days. ETH spot ETFs have also had outflows for six consecutive days, with about $140 million more withdrawn on November 2. Are institutions withdrawing or repositioning? Spot BTC is about $76,897 (Beijing 18:42, Coinbase). Image source: Farside.
$BTC $ETH $ZEC BTC has dropped sharply in the past three midterm elections! Will it happen again in 2026?
Historical data is indeed worth caution. After the 2014, 2018, and 2022 US midterm elections, BTC formed stage lows approximately 71 days, 38 days, and 13 days later, with maximum drawdowns of about 48%, 50%, and 16% respectively. The time to bottom shortened each cycle, but this is just a historical coincidence over three cycles and does not prove that the election caused the decline.
This year's political expectations are also worth attention. Pre-election prediction markets showed that the implied probability of the Democrats winning the House once reached about 94%, and the Senate about 74%. Note, this represents traders' pricing of the outcome, not polls or final results.
More importantly, this cycle's BTC stage low already appeared on July 1, about 125 days before the November 3 election, indicating a deviation from historical timing.
My view is that history can provide risk warnings but cannot directly serve as a trading signal. Going forward, focus should be on post-election USD liquidity, ETF fund flows, and BTC price structure. Don't short early just because of past declines, nor blindly chase longs due to optimistic market expectations. $BTC #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ After losing 5.88 million, he reversed and opened a 43 million position an hour later. When writing down this number, I was wondering how much is actually left in this person's account.
The three losses were 4.4 million in $BTC, 1.13 million in $HYPE, and 600,000 in $ZEC. Note HYPE — just lost 1.13 million on this coin, and it appeared again in the newly opened long position.
The liquidation price is only 5% to 6% away from the current price. This gap doesn't require a black swan event; a single ordinary bearish candle is enough.
Either he really sees something we don't, or he just refuses to admit this loss. On-chain only records positions, not reasons.Someone just lost 5.88 million USD, and an hour later opened a 43 million USD long position. Same hour, same address—this is the most intriguing on-chain data I've seen today.
Let's break down the losses first. This address closed three positions, totaling a loss of 5.88 million: $BTC lost 4.4 million, $HYPE lost 1.13 million, and $ZEC lost 600,000. BTC alone accounts for about 75% of the total loss.
Now look at the actions within that hour: they reversed and opened 43 million USD worth of $ETH and $HYPE long positions. The key to watch is HYPE—just lost 1.13 million on this coin, yet it’s back in the new position. Losing and immediately buying back the same asset is the hardest to explain.
What really determines the risk isn’t the 43 million, but the liquidation price: only 5% to 6% away from the current price. A decent bearish candle moving against the position will trigger liquidation; a 5% buffer in this market is effectively nothing.
Putting these three points together, the structure is clear: they’re not waiting for a better entry, they’re betting on a direction, doubling down with money lost. Averaging down and refusing to admit defeat are completely different motives, but on-chain they look the same.
On-chain data shows what they hold, how much leverage they use, and how close they are to liquidation—but it can’t reveal why they made this call. The only certainty is someone has placed 43 million USD just 5% away from the cliff.24小时清算数据刚落地：全网9799万美元清算额里，$BTC独占24.9%，而真正刺眼的是$SOL——2577万美元清算中2326万来自多头，空头仅250万，近九成爆仓单压在买方。这不是普跌，是一场针对追涨盘的精准清扫。 先看结构。$BTC清算6691万多头对3108万空头，买盘爆仓量是卖盘两倍有余，说明前几日顺势加仓的多头在回调中被整批抹去。$ETH同样偏多，3879万多头对2998万空头，差距清晰但烈度低于$BTC，趋势买盘承压却未到极端。三者合计勾勒出同一条线索：杠杆多头是这轮出清的主要燃料。 为什么$SOL最值得盯？它的多空清算比接近9比1，远超$BTC和$ETH。这种集中度意味着短期投机资金高度同向，一旦价格反向，止损与强平会连锁触发。换句话说，$SOL的筹码结构比另外两个主流币更脆，反弹时的抛压释放也更集中。市场往往只看到清算总额，却忽略清算的“方向偏斜”——偏斜越极端，说明拥挤交易被拆得越彻底。 由此引出一个容易被低估的判断：清算潮退去不等于趋势反转，它更常见的产物是震荡拉锯。卖压确实被部分消化，盘面会轻一些，但真正的底部信号不在“爆仓数字大”，而在“爆仓数字持续收窄、多Apple's earnings exceeded expectations, but the stock price fell more than 4% in after-hours trading! $AAPL
The first earnings report delivered by new CEO Thunus showed 12% revenue growth, 17% iPhone growth, and 21% growth in Greater China.
But what the market really worries about is not that Apple can't sell, but that profits are being eaten up by costs.
Memory prices continue to rise, and Siri AI adds cloud costs. The gross margin guidance for the December quarter is only 45%–46%, below market expectations.
What’s more noteworthy: Apple has already adjusted prices on some products, but management expects memory costs to keep rising.
So the question arises:
Will Apple continue to raise prices, or turn AI into a new revenue stream?
Hardware price hikes test consumers, AI charges test user stickiness.
In the AI era, whether Apple can maintain its profit margin is more important than mere revenue growth.Apple $xAAPL could drop nearly 5 points in pre-market trading, which basically becomes a huge source of instability for the overall market. If semiconductors remain weak today, that would be another massive shock.
Previously, among the tech giants' earnings reports, only Tesla performed relatively well. Apple missed several expectations, and its buyback was also weak, so the sell-off was quite severe.
Apple has always been a support stock, so the market is now watching to see if Apple will plunge sharply after the open and then rebound significantly. If a rebound occurs, it would definitely be unfavorable for tech, proving that even if Apple's earnings fall short of expectations, funds are still seeking safety and remain concerned about AI risks. #苹果Q4营收超预期，下季度毛利率指引承压 The CSRC's optimization of the "supportive buyback" rules this time (mainly focused on buybacks necessary to maintain company value and shareholder rights) is a strong "policy floor" signal released by regulators during the current market downturn, aiming to encourage listed companies to put real money into the market to support prices through regulatory relaxation.
These three core adjustments (adding the "break-issue price" scenario, removing the 6-month listing restriction, and removing the auction session restriction) impact the A-share market from the following dimensions:
1. Adding the "break-issue price" scenario: precise rescue, supporting overvalued and newly listed stocks
· Rule change: Previously, supportive buybacks usually required the stock price to fall below net asset value (break net) or continuous sharp declines. Now, "break-issue price" (stock price falling below the IPO issue price) is included as an allowable buyback scenario.
· Impact: This is a targeted benefit for newly listed stocks and the STAR Market/ChiNext. In recent years, due to tightening market liquidity, many high-priced tech stocks and new stocks have severely broken issue price, damaging market confidence. Allowing them to buy back shares gives these companies a self-rescue tool, effectively alleviating selling pressure on broken-issue-price stocks and repairing valuation expectations for the tech growth sector.
2. Removing the 6-month listing restriction: speeding up self-rescue for newly listed stocks
· Rule change: Previously, companies had to be listed for 6 months before conducting supportive buybacks; now they can do so immediately upon listing.
· Impact: This greatly shortens the "shock period" when new stocks face extreme declines. This means if a new stock encounters irrational dumping early after listing, management can immediately stabilize the market through buybacks. This directly benefits short-term sentiment in the newly listed stock sector and effectively counters malicious short-selling forces in the early listing phase.
3. Removing the auction session restriction: direct intervention in the closing session, strengthening the support effect
· Rule change: Previously, buybacks were restricted during the opening and closing auction sessions; now these restrictions are fully lifted.
· Impact: The A-share market is known for "deciding the outcome at the close." Allowing buybacks during auction sessions means companies can concentrate purchases in the last 3 minutes of trading (14:57-15:00), directly lifting the closing price. This not only creates visually appealing K-line charts (avoiding breakdowns) but also greatly suppresses intraday short-sellers’ momentum, allowing supportive funds to influence market sentiment with maximum efficiency.
---
📊 Overall impact analysis on A-shares
① Sentiment: clear "policy floor" and "support" expectations
Against the backdrop of continuous adjustments and shrinking trading volumes in A-shares (especially ChiNext and STAR Market), this move continues the CSRC’s "activate capital markets" strategy. It signals to the entire market that regulators are closely monitoring declines and are ready to deploy tools to provide liquidity support at any time.
② Capital: introduction of incremental funds, improving micro liquidity
Share buybacks by listed companies are currently one of the most certain sources of incremental funds in the A-share market. With relaxed rules, more companies (especially cash-rich central state-owned enterprises and quality tech leaders) are expected to join the buyback ranks. The entry of real funds can effectively offset selling pressure caused by foreign capital outflows and mutual fund redemptions.
③ Trading game layer: beware of "empty talk buybacks" and "fake buybacks"
· "Hype buyback" risk: With relaxed conditions, some companies might opportunistically announce buyback plans to boost stock prices but execute minimally or not at all (e.g., only buying the minimum few million shares or delaying purchases).
· Short-term impulse vs. long-term value game: Buybacks usually trigger short-term impulses (next-day gap up), but only large-scale cancellation buybacks represent substantial long-term benefits.
💎 Summary and trading strategy
This is not a "full bull market" signal but a "defensive counterattack" signal.
· Market level: In the short term (such as the next one or two weeks), this policy clearly supports the index floor, especially stabilizing the continuously falling ChiNext and STAR Market indices, reducing the risk of systemic market crashes.
· Stock selection strategy: Funds will likely focus next on "newly listed + break-issue price + high cash flow" targets. You can prioritize screening tech companies that have been listed less than six months, have fallen below their issue price, have abundant cash on hand (cash > 20% of market cap), and have recently announced supportive buybacks.
Reminder: A policy floor does not equal a market bottom. If macro liquidity (such as US Treasury yields) continues to suppress or domestic economic data disappoints, buybacks can only temporarily relieve individual stock distress and cannot reverse the macro trend of the broader market. Long positions on rebounds still require strict position and stop-loss control.Migo first clarifies the timeline: The US October nonfarm payrolls won't be released tonight; it's actually scheduled for 9:30 PM Beijing time on November 6. What we're discussing now is actually the cold data from September plus expectations for October, so don't be misled by the headline.
The September data was indeed weak: only 29,000 new jobs added, unemployment rate rose to 4.2%, average hourly earnings increased by just 0.1% month-over-month and about 3.0% year-over-year, and companies are clearly slowing down hiring. The market's expectation for October is roughly 55,000 to 60,000 new jobs, with unemployment holding around 4.2%, which is not strong—just a stabilization.
But Migo's judgment is straightforward: a cooling job market doesn't mean rate cuts are on the table. The Fed held steady in October, keeping rates at 3.75% to 4.00%, with a 10-2 vote; the two dissenters wanted to raise rates directly since inflation is still far from the 2% target. Currently, the market is pricing in over an 80% chance of a rate hike in December. The debate is about whether to hike or not, not about cutting.
For trading, Migo gives three tips: First, don't heavily bet on direction before 9:30 PM on November 6; expect volatility once the data is out. Second, focus on the three key indicators: new jobs, unemployment rate, and hourly earnings. Only if new jobs are near zero and unemployment spikes above 4.4% can it be considered truly cold data. Third, BTC is still hovering above $77,000; don't panic sell on bad data—keep positions light and use stop losses. What do you guys think? For the November 6 nonfarm report, should Migo focus first on new jobs, or on unemployment and hourly earnings? Let's discuss in the comments. #美国10月非农前瞻：就业增长或牵动12月加息预期 #伊朗授权政府谈判，霍尔木兹重开能否提速？
The boss has something to say
There is new progress in the Middle East situation. The Iranian president stated that the Supreme Leader has authorized advancing peace talks, and Qatar proposed a three-day confidence-building plan. Trump also expressed that Iran hopes to reach an agreement and is not in a hurry to decide whether to resume military strikes.
But I think it's not that simple. Both sides have yet to achieve substantial breakthroughs; the previous "two-day reopening plan" is still stuck on lifting the blockade and sanctions.
Looking at the market is clear: oil prices have not dropped at all. Today, CL rose 1.10%, BZ rose 1.08%. Comments are insightful; negotiations are prone to reversals, and shipping recovery is slower than the market's one-time pricing. Moreover, the Strait's navigation has not yet returned to normal; crude oil supply is limited and shipping costs are high, which is the hard logic supporting oil prices.
So don't be fooled by negotiation signals. As long as the Strait is not fully navigable, oil prices won't come down. Inflation expectations won't cool down, the Fed's room for rate cuts is locked, and the ceiling for risk assets remains.
BTC is now fluctuating between 77,000 and 80,000, with funds waiting for data. Let's see if it can stand back above 80,000. If it can't hold, expect deeper corrections, with resistance above at 84,000 to 85,000. Don't chase the rise or kill the fall; set stop losses properly.
The above analysis is time-sensitive; orders must have stop losses set. Good luck. $BTC $ETH $ZEC 最脆的一环从来不是价格，是那个被强平线追着跑的人。 25倍杠杆的账单，你猜市场先同情还是先收割？ 昨晚看到一位老哥的ETH多单被抬走，心里咯噔了一下。2725枚ETH，约615万美元，25倍全仓，开在2263，爆在2227。数字摆出来像一串冷冰冰的坐标，但背后是一个人盯着屏幕看着清算价一步步逼近的窒息感。更微妙的是，他倒下之后CORE那边有人坚持反向做，这种"你爆你的我赚我的"画面，其实比K线更能说明当下市场的结构。 我想说的重点不是谁亏谁赚，而是这件事透露的定价逻辑。2263到2227只有36美元的空间，25倍杠杆意味着价格波动1.4%左右就能决定生死。这种仓位密度说明什么？说明不少人是在用极窄的容错去博一个方向，而不是在交易趋势。当市场里挤满这种"差一点就活下来"的仓位，价格往往不需要真跌，只要轻轻一戳，连锁清算就会自己完成剩下的工作。 偏多的路径也在这里：如果ETH能稳住2250上方并快速收回2300，这批被清掉的杠杆反而成了燃料，空头回补叠加踏空资金，反弹会比预期急。山寨端会更明显，风险偏好一旦回暖，CORE这类逆势叙事的标的容易被短线资金拿来当情绪出口。 但风险同样清楚。25The real transmission of the midterm elections: not "bullish or bearish," but a "legislative window"
The market tends to simplify the midterm elections as "which party winning is better for BTC," but the real impact path is more indirect.
The dominant force in short-term pricing remains macro liquidity and ETF funds. Bitcoin's sensitivity to congressional control is lower than that of assets like DeFi and stablecoins, which rely more on legislative clarity. The midterm elections change the composition of the next Congress, thereby affecting the political arithmetic of market structure legislation such as the CLARITY Act when it restarts in 2027, rather than directly determining short-term capital flows.
Historical patterns provide a reference that needs to be discounted: in the 12 months following the last three midterm elections (2014, 2018, 2022), Bitcoin rose approximately +25%, +45%, and +92%, respectively, but in the weeks immediately after each vote, it first fell for a period. DWF Labs also points out that 2026 is a cycle exception—the price is closer to the peak, possibly bottomed in June, so the applicability of historical patterns needs to be adjusted downward.
The market state before the election precisely confirms the "no one dares to bet": the sideways movement is not due to a balance of bulls and bears, but because no one is willing to bet the day before the election. If a direction is to be chosen, it will most likely be after November 4. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #美国10月非农前瞻：就业增长或牵动12月加息预期 Bitcoin enters a US data double-header with its downtrend intact, and the calendar itself is becoming the trade. A minor nonfarm payrolls reading lands Wednesday, with the main report following Friday. That sequencing matters: two labor prints in one week give macro traders two separate chances to reprice December rate expectations, and crypto's most liquid pairs sit directly in the firing line. $BTC remains in a downtrend, with the 72,000-74,000 zone still the downside reference. The debate amoIntel Earnings Report: Q3 revenue approximately $16.5 billion, strong growth in data center/AI business, actual performance better than some expectations. However, Q4 guidance is only $15–16 billion, adjusted EPS about $0.25, and the company expects no positive free cash flow this year.
Stock Price Reaction: On October 30, the stock dropped nearly 29% in a single day, and on November 2, it fell about 9% again to around $60. From the high at the end of September, market capitalization has roughly halved. Previously, due to optimistic demand for AI server CPUs, the stock price had risen sharply within the year.
Sector Spread: Since October 6, chip and storage stocks have collectively lost about $3.7 trillion in market value. Micron, AMD, Marvell, and storage-related stocks have fallen more; Nvidia has been relatively resilient, but the overall sector remains under pressure. On that day, most stocks in the US market rose, but chips almost all declined.
In the short term, this is a sell-off driven by "expectation gap," not a comprehensive deterioration of fundamentals.
Intel's core contradiction is: strong AI data center demand, but weak traditional PC business, coupled with supply disruptions such as the Israel factory incident and high capital expenditures. The market had priced in the "AI-driven CPU recovery" story too fully, and a weak guidance triggered a sharp correction. This is similar to the "sell news" reaction of some AI-related stocks in 2024–2025.
At the sector level, this is a partial correction after a period of frenzied gains. Chip stock valuations are already very high, combined with concerns about the sustainability of AI capital expenditures, interest rate environment, and memory supply-demand imbalance, funds are choosing to take profits.
$INTC ETH remains volatile: election results unclear, Iran situation adds fuel to the fire
Currently, ETH faces not just a single negative factor but simultaneous political and geopolitical risks. The U.S. midterm elections are underway, with the House needing 218 seats and the Senate 51 seats to form a majority; the final control may not be decided on election day. Market expectations for policy direction therefore have room for repeated adjustments.
The Middle East situation also cannot be ignored. According to the Associated Press, the U.S. has warned regional allies to prepare for possible military actions against Iran after the election and potential Iranian retaliation; the UK's Financial Times recently reported that Israel is pushing the U.S. to resume strikes on Iran, but Trump has not made a final decision, and diplomatic negotiations are ongoing.
These two types of risks may transmit to the crypto market through the dollar, oil prices, inflation expectations, and global risk appetite. My approach is: avoid chasing price moves based on news pulses, reduce leverage, and wait for ETH to break out or fall below key ranges before judging direction. The more intense the news flow, the more trading discipline must lead over emotion. $ETH #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ $ETH outperformed $BTC by 0.41 percentage points in the last 24 hours.
My first reaction wasn’t excitement, but to confirm: is this a market rebound, or are a few contracts stealing the spotlight?
① As of now, among the top 5 by 24h trading volume, $ETH rose -0.80%, at 2270; $BTC -1.21%. The volume threshold limits the observation scope, so don’t treat this list as a thermometer for the entire market.
② The leading gainers are $BTC -1.21%, $HYPE -1.68%, $SOL -1.81%. $ETH’s strength didn’t synchronize with these assets, appearing more like a local standout rather than a broad rally.
③ $ZEC -7.39%, differing from $ETH by 6.59 percentage points. Such a large gap at both ends of the observation window means focusing only on the top can overlook volatility at the bottom.
My judgment: this is useful for identifying divergence but not enough to confirm an overall rebound. The list provides trading volume but not changes in liquidity, so the quality of the rise is still unclear.
When looking at these gain/loss lists, do you focus most on the percentage change, relative strength to BTC, or changes in trading volume? Let’s discuss in the comments #币圈The most challenging aspect for ETH recently is not the lack of direction, but the multitude of variables influencing that direction. The U.S. midterm elections are underway, and control of Congress could change the fiscal battles, regulatory agenda, and policy advancement pace for the next two years. Reuters pointed out that the House race is drawing attention, while the Senate competition remains highly uncertain; even if control of Congress changes, the president still retains executive power and veto rights, so policies will not immediately or completely shift. On another front, the situation in the Middle East is equally significant. Iran's Supreme Leader recently stated that if attacked, Iran's response would not be limited to a specific geographic area; the U.S. has also warned regional allies to prepare for possible military actions and Iranian retaliation after the elections. On November 3, Brent crude oil rose 1.7% to $106.58 per barrel, with geopolitical risks already starting to impact the energy market. These two risk lines affect ETH differently: elections mainly influence policy expectations and institutional participation confidence, while geopolitical conflicts may affect capital allocation through oil prices, inflation expectations, and global risk appetite. If energy prices continue to rise, concerns about maintaining high interest rates may also resurface, and as a risk asset, ETH can hardly remain completely unaffected. Therefore, I believe the most important thing now is not to guess whether the next piece of news will make ETH rise or fall, but to observe whether the price can hold steady after the news impact, whether trading volume supports it, and whether capital flows back in. When macro variables are dense, chasing gains or cutting losses can easily come at a cost. Control leverage, reduce positions, wait for uncertainties to gradually be digested, then look for opportunities US Midterm Elections Impact Crypto Market: BTC Watches Macros, ETH Focuses More on Regulation?
Today, the US midterm elections are officially underway. Changes in congressional control may affect the legislative pace for the crypto industry over the next two years. However, this does not mean the election results will directly determine BTC and ETH price movements next year.
The crypto industry has already invested about $176 million in this cycle, covering over 100 congressional races. Such large-scale political investment aims not only for short-term policy support but also to build long-term, bipartisan legislative alliances.
ETH deserves special attention. The market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, involves the regulatory boundaries of digital assets and the division of responsibilities between the SEC and CFTC, directly impacting compliance expectations for trading platforms, staking, and on-chain financial services. But whether ETH is classified as a security cannot be decided solely by one bill or election outcome. The bill previously failed to advance in a Senate procedural vote by 49 to 50 and will require further bipartisan negotiation.
My judgment is: elections influence policy expectations, but the real change in industry valuation comes from legislation implementation and institutional capital flows. In the short term, it is unwise to bet on a single election result; control your positions and wait for policy signals and market capital to jointly confirm the direction. $BTC #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ Behind ZEC's decline, the real danger is not the drop itself, but how leverage changes.
When trading ZEC, you can't just focus on the price. On November 2nd, ZEC spot ETF saw a net outflow of $3.6 million in a single day, marking two consecutive trading days of outflows; however, there was still a net inflow of about $12.1 million over the past 7 days, indicating a divergence in capital and that it’s too early to simply conclude that institutional buying has dried up.
Derivative data is even more worth watching: ZEC open interest is about $2.34 billion, down 3.94% over the past two days. This suggests a contraction of existing positions rather than a large-scale addition of shorts. The price decline combined with a drop in open interest implies that deleveraging may be underway.
Next, focus on the $1100 level. If it breaks down with increased volume and open interest rises again, then beware of a new leverage-driven acceleration of the downtrend; if open interest continues to fall, it may just be ongoing position liquidation. My approach is not to blindly short now, but to wait for a resonance signal from price, volume, and open interest. Opportunities are important, but the basis for entry is even more important. $BTC $ETH #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ SOL fell below 94, and my altcoin positions gave out before BTC did.
Reviewing this morning's ETF data, the clearer it gets.
BTC is struggling around 76,000, with a single-day ETF outflow of 643 million; ETH is barely holding at 2,250, with ETF outflows for five consecutive days, 156 million in a single day; SOL is the most direct, at 93.29, losing 95 support, with ETF outflows for five consecutive days totaling 71.5 million, and a recent single-day outflow of 10.74 million.
I don't hold much BTC, altcoins make up the majority of my positions. This data translates to one sentence: money is shrinking into BTC, ETH is barely holding, and liquidity is being drained from SOL and altcoins. If a rebound really comes, the leaders will recover first, not my positions. Maybe feeling uneasy
This deeply trapped bottomless position
All for profit
Continuous decline
The market is so tough
No one knows where the rise point is
Nobody can predict
what wi11 happen
The only thing to do is to desperately add positions
Swear to turn the floating loss into floating profit
Hold tight and don't let go
Keep adding positions
Shout out, this time it's definitely a win
Shout out wow! Hang in there
Until the profit is so much your hands go weak
From now on
What do you see?
Ignite my profits
A full year of gains after the midterm elections in history. I believe the direction must be up.
Historically, in the 12 months after the midterm elections, BTC rose three times, about +25%, +45%, +92% respectively. But in the weeks after each vote, it first fell for a while. This time BTC is about 76,700, still 3,000 short of 80,000, short-term grinding is highly probable
$ETH about 2,250, still falling in 24 hours. ETH needs extra verification of capital flow recovery, it can't take off right after the election ends. I don't hold ETH, but watching the 2,200 level, breaking it is an opportunity, not a disaster
$SNDK pre-market up over 2% to 1,102, storage chip stocks are rebounding. The AI capital expenditure narrative is not dead, SanDisk is the most direct ticket on this line, if fiscal expectations warm after the election, it will react before the crypto circle
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ @你的爱播Misa As of November 3, 2026, I believe Bitcoin still carries a short-term risk of further decline, and it cannot yet be confirmed that the bottom has been reached. In the coming days, I lean towards a cautious bearish view but do not rule out a strong rebound.
I analyze from three aspects: technicals, capital flow, and possible upcoming trends.
Market data as of November 3:
* BTC price: approximately $76,400.
* Past 24 hours: down about 2.2%.
* Past 7 days: down about 3.6%.
* From the 2025 all-time high of $126,080, it has retraced about 39%.
The market is clearly weak at the moment.
Why do I think it might continue to fall?
I believe there are four important reasons.
1. Continuous outflow of ETF funds
U.S. Bitcoin spot ETFs:
* Net outflow of about $643 million on October 30.
* Net outflow of about $399 million on November 2.
This indicates that institutional funds have not formed a sustained buying force currently.
This is a signal I am quite concerned about.
2. Market confidence is hit
The recent Binance security incident has triggered market concerns, raising investors' risk aversion.
3. Leverage funds still pose risks
There have been long liquidations in the market, indicating some investors are still using leverage to buy the dip.
If prices fall again, it may trigger a new round of cascading liquidations.
4. Technical trend has not truly strengthened yet
Bitcoin is still under short-term selling pressure and has not yet formed a clear reversal structure.【Tether Holds 150,000 $BTC, Corporate Accumulation Begins to Carry Weight】
Tether's CEO stated that the company's Bitcoin holdings have reached about 150,000 BTC, valued at approximately $11.5 billion at current prices, accounting for about 0.75% of Bitcoin's circulating supply. A single company holding this much BTC is continuously converting circulating market chips into long-term reserves.
Tether has the capacity to keep buying, backed by solid profits. The company’s net operating profit reached $1.5 billion in Q3, totaling $4.5 billion in the first three quarters, and as early as 2023, it decided to allocate up to 15% of realized net operating profits to purchase BTC. This means its buying power is sustainable, not solely dependent on short-term market trends, adding a heavyweight player to the corporate holding sector.
However, BTC is still hovering around $77,000, and on November 2, the US spot Bitcoin ETF saw a net outflow of about $399 million, indicating institutional funds have not yet formed a short-term consensus. Tether’s long-term allocation and the ETF’s short-term capital flows are clearly moving in different directions at present.
The long-term accumulation of 150,000 BTC means further reduction in circulating supply; if other companies follow suit, the supply-side impact will gradually accumulate. Short-term, market capital needs to return, but in the long run, Tether is using its profits to provide sustained buying support for Bitcoin. Bitcoin's timing window is becoming very subtle.
Looking back at the timing of previous cycle bottoms:
2014: 71 days after the midterm elections
2018: 39 days after the midterm elections
2022: 13 days after the midterm elections
The next midterm election is today.#US October Nonfarm Payrolls Released: Is There Still a Chance for a Rate Cut? Regarding shorting the Nasdaq, I'm not bearish on tech; I just feel that this market tells its stories too fast, and the ledger can't keep up with the delivery speed.
This week is nonfarm payroll week. Once the data is out, rate cuts will likely be postponed further, possibly until next year when the calendar is worn out and we still haven't seen one. So recently, I've been focused on one thing: "physically cooling down" the Nasdaq.
The three-layer joke logic is as follows:
1) The AI story burns cash faster than it makes money
Hundreds of billions in capital expenditure poured in, like renting an entire floor of a data center in Las Vegas.
Looking back at the revenue side: still the same advertising fees, plus some cloud subscriptions.
Spend 100, earn 4, but the market prices it as "earning 100 next year, going public on another planet the year after."
This isn't investing; it's handing out bonuses for PowerPoint presentations.
2) Interest rates don't cooperate; the denominator is colder than before
US Treasury yields hang high overhead, rate cuts delayed again and again.
Growth stocks rely on "bringing tomorrow's cash flow to the present to pamper,"
But when the discount denominator tightens, valuations kneel first—like buying a phone on installments, suddenly the interest doubles, and you rush to sell the phone on a secondhand market overnight.Profit halved, yet the stock price is the only one rising among the seven giants.🤨🤨
10/20→11/2 close:
$TSLA A +8.1%
$NVDA -6.7%
$AMZN -6.5%
$META -12.6%
$GOOGL -18.0%
Tesla Q3 operating profit down 56% year-on-year, P/E ratio over 400 times.
What supports the price is the story: Robotaxi rolled into Fort Worth on Monday, Sweden registrations up 248% in October.
AI capital expenditure was dumped, but the autonomous driving narrative was bought? 22 million USD,
transferred out from his own wallet within a few days.
Then, he posted the tweet.
He is Arthur Hayes, co-founder of BitMEX.
On October 15th, he shouted: buy Bitcoin, buy Ethereum.
A few days later, he sold over 22 million USD worth of coins.
Today, he continues tweeting bearish:
Bitcoin will weaken further.
How long will it stay weak?
Until the Federal Reserve or banks start printing money again.
Let's get the order clear:
Sell first, then talk bearish.
Words can be said casually,
but wallets don't lie.
Why does he dare say this?
This year, the USD supply increased by 4.5%.
But the leader hasn't started.
The Fed hasn't printed money, and banks haven't lent out.
The liquidity is in the pool but hasn't flowed into crypto.
The market is playing out like this:
Global money supply hit a record high.
Bitcoin, however, fell back to two months ago.
More money, but coins don't rise.
It's not money that's lacking.
What's missing is the printing press restarting.
So don't try to guess the bottom now.
Just focus on one signal:
The Fed's balance sheet expanding again.
Here's the key point:
The day the printing press opens the floodgates.
Before that, it's all grinding.
Grinding until you can't hold on,
grinding until you can't resist chasing highs.
Wait for the signal to light up, then talk about bottom fishing. 苹果这份成绩单是分裂的：营收1,144.77亿美元、同比增12%，每股收益2.10美元、增14%，iPhone增17%、Mac增24%、服务收入316亿美元创历史新高——全超了市场预期。转头给的下一季指引就软了：营收增7%到10%、服务增8%到9%、毛利率45%到46%。服务增速比这一季的10%低，毛利率比本季的47.9%低，盘前直接砸下去4%以上。 问题不在需求端，在成本端。管理层把话说得很直：内存价格前所未见，采购承诺比6月季度多出约330亿美元，全财年研发支出457.65亿美元、同比增32.5%。Siri的AI每天被调用25亿次，云端推理的账单已经大到要琢磨塞进订阅里收钱。这不是手机卖不动，是"AI税"从成本表底下捅上来了。 政治高手的看法：这份财报卡在中期选举前两天落地，这几天科技股集体挨刀，标普跌0.5%、纳指跌1.1%。业绩超预期的公司被卖掉，说明卖的人不是在看利润表，是在腾仓位。这种时候谁在卖、为什么卖，比财报数字重要得多。 金融高手的角度，这条链条要看清楚：AI资本开支上来，内存和算力就涨价，科技公司的成本吃掉利润率，而估值分母那头——实际利率——一分没降。分子先被压，Gold $XAU has some data today that's quite worth studying🤨
The World Gold Council just released its Q3 report, cutting this year's gold investment demand growth forecast from 400 tons directly down to 200 tons
But on the other hand, global central banks net bought 321 tons of gold in Q3, a 42% year-on-year increase, and gold ETFs also recorded a net inflow of 211 tons😯
Here we see a big contrast:
Ordinary investors' enthusiasm for buying gold bars and coins has clearly cooled, yet central banks and ETF funds are still continuously allocating to gold
Especially central bank gold purchases, which have reached 675 tons in the first three quarters of this year, even surpassing the same period last year
I think this report reflects a divergence in gold demand structure:
High interest rates and a strong dollar do suppress some investment demand, but reserve diversification, fiscal risks, and macro uncertainty still support another segment of buying
Of course, heavy central bank buying doesn't necessarily mean short-term gold prices will rise
What’s really worth watching next is whether ETF funds can continue to flow in, and whether central bank purchases can offset the slowdown in private investment demand
#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化 @OKX星球 @可乐Cola_OKX #With the US midterm elections approaching, which results are worth watching?
Analysis of the closing markets in South Korea, Hong Kong, and A-shares: The same AI, South Korean stocks are cutting losses, while Hong Kong and A-shares are shifting pockets
The semiconductor sector fell more than 3.3% overnight, with Intel, Micron, and Marvell continuing to take hits; this sentiment has yet to subside in today's Asian session.
South Korean stocks took the direct hit.
KOSPI closed at 5648.79, down 3.59%; KOSDAQ was even worse, down 4.08%. Foreign investors net sold 1.52 trillion KRW, institutions dumped another 511.8 billion KRW, while individuals bought 1.66 trillion KRW, a typical "foreign capital withdrawal, retail investors holding on hard" scenario. Samsung Electronics dropped 4.15%, SK Hynix fell 5.03%, with semiconductor heavyweights hit hard by the US AI hardware sell-off.
Hong Kong stocks took a different path.
The Hang Seng Index closed at 23,525, up 0.57%, with southbound funds net buying HKD 23.4 billion, ending 14 consecutive trading days of net outflows. But the structure was very fragmented: AI hardware and optical communications were heavily sold, with Zhongji Xuchuang down over 10%, Lenovo down over 6%; the beneficiaries were big consumer and insurance stocks, with Haidilao up over 6%, Mengniu and China Resources Beer up over 4%, and China Pacific Insurance up over 4%.
A-shares followed the same script.
The Shanghai Composite Index fell 0.82% to close at 3608, with turnover shrinking to 1.72 trillion CNY. The index looked weak, but there was rotation underneath. Electronics saw a net outflow of 8.7 billion CNY, with semiconductors and memory chips being the hardest hit; CATL saw a net inflow of over 1.2 billion CNY, rising 3.8%; Kweichow Moutai surged nearly 3%, with a single-day net inflow of 2.2 billion CNY, approaching 1,500.BREAKING Bitcoin has a curious relationship with U.S. midterm elections. Historically, these political events have sometimes been followed by sharp market pullbacks and traders are watching closely as voting begins.
But history is a reference, not a guarantee. This time, macro conditions, liquidity ETF flows and investor positioning could change the outcome.
I'm watching how $BTC reacts around key support levels. Will sellers take control again or will Bitcoin break the historical pattern? The parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, ICE, has signed an agreement with Trade[XYZ] to bring the Hyperliquid perpetual futures into the U.S. regulatory framework, covering crypto, stocks, commodities, and forex. On the announcement day, October 29, HYPE jumped about 13%; as of now, the approval and launch dates are still unknown, and the price has retraced from its peak.
An agreement does not mean U.S. retail can already use it. Opponents will watch closely: no CFTC approval, no clearing member list, so the paper cooperation does not support a real channel; the price surge and retracement seem more like the market digesting expectations rather than realizing new inflows.
Consider the approval progress as a gate. If no substantial filing action is seen within three months, or if the spot price continuously falls below 80 and fails to recover, treat this as a narrative boost rather than an open channel. Snapshot around 18:07 Beijing time, Binance spot about $84.4, 24h about -1.7%.
$HYPE
#Hyperliquid #PerpetualContracts #CryptocurrencyThe U.S. midterm election voting is happening today, and there's an account in the prediction market that has already staked about $7.9 million 😂
There are roughly 100 positions in total, with the majority all bet on this election. The most aggressive bet is that the Democrats will take both the House and Senate, bought at an average of $0.30 per share, now up to $0.755. The principal is about $1.14 million, with unrealized gains of around $1.73 million.
The remaining bets are much more conservative. Three positions were bought near $0.94, approximately $1.52 million, $1.42 million, and $1.29 million respectively, betting that the Republicans won't take the House or won't sweep both chambers, which are high-probability outcomes. Each of these has only earned about $10,000 so far, roughly a 6% return on over a million dollars.
There are also losses. The bet that Republicans take the Senate and Democrats take the House, with about $700,000 invested, is now worth only around $560,000.
The entire account is currently valued at about $9.1 million, with unrealized gains of approximately $1.13 million.
On the other side, it's even more exciting. A new account registered in August made its first trade today, dumping about $176,000 within 4 minutes to bet on Republicans sweeping both chambers, bought at $0.061. The market gives this outcome less than a 5% chance, so if it hits, it would roughly multiply 16 times.
On one hand, someone is risking millions to earn small returns; on the other, someone is betting $176,000 for a 16x payoff. When the results come out tomorrow Beijing time, someone definitely won't be able to sleep.
For beginners, it's recommended to watch more and trade less; when buying coins, only buy $BTC #PalantirQ3 revenue grows 96%, stock price falls instead of rising
Palantir delivered its strongest revenue performance since going public in the third quarter of 2026, but the market voted with its feet.
Quarterly revenue was $2.313 billion, up 96% year-over-year and 20% quarter-over-quarter, surpassing the $2 billion mark for the first time. Adjusted operating income was $1.427 billion, with a margin of 62%; GAAP net income was $1.128 billion, a net margin of 49%, nearly eight times the $144 million from the same period last year. More notably, there was a structural shift: U.S. commercial revenue reached $984 million, up 148% year-over-year, surpassing U.S. government business revenue of $953 million for the first time in a single quarter. The commercial business has transformed from a past "supplement" to the "main engine" of the U.S. market. The full-year revenue guidance was raised accordingly to between $8.53 billion and $8.534 billion, an increase of about 91% year-over-year.
However, after-hours trading saw the stock price drop about 3.8% to $171.52; it had already closed down 3.08% during regular trading hours. An almost flawless earnings report was met with selling.
The reason lies not in the numbers themselves, but in how those numbers were priced. 【Capital Flow Daily Report】Past 24 Hours
Money is coming in, but no coins are going out: U net inflow to exchanges is 580 million, ammo for buying coins is accumulating
BTC and ETH zero recharge consolidation—no one is moving mainstream coins to sell
Large orders: 182 transactions totaling 152 million, selling 103 vs buying 79, pressure remains
Perpetual openings 282 vs closings 239, leverage is still increasing
Overall looks like "pressing while collecting," not a one-sided decline
Focus on two things: Has U started buying yet (look at active large buy orders); Have coins started entering exchanges yet.
Our platform: 81 large orders, 69.26 million, accounting for 45% of the top four
Abnormal: HOT fee rate -2.00%; USDT issuance increased by 4.07 billion
Noteworthy: A major exchange's ETH perpetual active buy 3.6 million; leading exchange BTC sell-off 8.19 million; perpetual addresses closing short BTC 38.38 million
Data is verifiable, does not constitute trading advice.Funding markets are telling a quieter story than price charts. $BTC is still bleeding leverage, yet the perpetual funding rate refuses to turn negative, with buyers continuing to pay for the privilege of holding longs. That stubborn premium matters more than any single candle: it signals that conviction, or at least stubbornness, has not been flushed out. A single $643 million daily outflow from spot ETFs sits alongside expanding derivatives positioning, a combination that looks less like capituInterest rates are still pressing down, money has become precious, and at this time, looking at whether a coin dares to rise is actually about whether it has real income in its pocket.
$TRX is the one that dares to rise, with stablecoin settlement fees rolling in steadily. Something that has fallen for a year is actually turning green during the event week. Assets that collect cash flow have a valuation floor during tightening periods; this logic holds true in any market. Hold the base position, don’t focus on short-term.
$ENA has fallen the hardest, over six points. Its essence is to productize interest rates, and in a high-interest-rate era, its model suffers the most; there is a reason for the drop. I won’t chase it; this kind of headwind situation waits for a turning point.
$WLD lives on narrative; the story of burning money to buy growth only works in easing periods. Now no one is willing to pay for a story five years from now. I’m watching at the low range, not participating.
Cash flow and narrative, when interest rates change, valuations swap places.Don't just focus on the price ECG line—USDC circulation growth is merely an increase in preload; what truly determines survival is whether the reserve income coronary artery can still deliver oxygen to the myocardium. Circle will release its Q3 results before the market opens on November 4, like receiving a hemodynamic report before surgery: USDC circulation and stablecoin payment expansion represent volume and collateral circulation; reserve income is perfusion pressure; distribution costs are afterload; profit is stroke volume. Only looking at circulation expansion and calling it recovery is like only checking blood pressure without looking at lactate. If distribution costs stick with scale and reserve yield is eroded by falling interest rates, marginal profit will show low perfusion: numbers grow, but myocardium is hypoxic.
Payment expansion is like building collateral circulation, which is good, but you must check if microcirculation is leaking—compliance, clearing, on-chain congestion, and counterparty risk are capillary permeability. Tokenized stocks like $xTSLA linked to stablecoins are more like crosstalk between adjacent ECG leads: you can't diagnose primary ischemia just by ST segment elevation; conduction interference must be ruled out first. The price crash before earnings is just a symptom, not the root cause; the real issue lies in reserve asset duration, rigid distribution rebates, and the true stickiness of payment scenarios. Price can pause briefly due to sentiment, but reserve income quality won't restore sinus rhythm just because of a bullish candle.
What worries surgeons most isn't bleeding but seemingly stable high output with low resistance: beautiful circulation volume but collapsed perfusion pressure. If USDC growth can't cover distribution costs and risk buffers, it's volume overload without increased ejection fraction. Watch three tubes: whether coronary blood flow of reserve income is eroded by short-duration assets; whether vascular resistance of distribution costs only rises; whether the capillary bed of payment expansion is truly repeatable. If these three don't align, growth is pseudo-filling; the prettier the report, the worse the postoperative leakage.
I care more about urine output the first night after surgery than the beautiful cardiac output on the table. If Circle's reserve income heavily depends on interest rates, it's like the heart relying on high doses of positive inotropes: pump pressure looks good, but myocardial oxygen consumption rises; withdrawal day is the real test. Distribution costs are like reperfusion injury after aortic clamping; the larger the scale, the easier it is for rebates, channels, and compliance frictions to form microcirculatory thrombosis. If stablecoin payment expansion just shuffles the same liquidity on the books without new real settlement demand, it's an arteriovenous fistula—high flow but poor tissue perfusion.
The linkage between tokenized stocks and stablecoins is like two pumps in extracorporeal circulation: flow can be borrowed mutually, but oxygenation cannot be faked. If $xTSLA volatility only triggers monitor alarms without changing USDC clearing needs, it's just lead interference, not a cardiac structural change. What really needs open-chest exploration is how much net reserve income can be squeezed per unit circulation and whether payment expansion forms a repeatable capillary bed. Until the suture knots are tied, every premature ventricular contraction on the monitor is not noise but myocardium compensating for the balance sheet. #circleq3usdcgrowth Is it time to bottom-fish $UNI?
Originally, I thought the Bn hack incident would trigger a pullback and test the October 29 low of $6.25.
In the past two days, Uniswap's trading volume and Holders Revenue have dropped significantly compared to October 29 and 30, basically returning to the levels before the BN incident.
As event-driven trading activity cools down, the protocol revenue-driven demand for UNI burn has also weakened, and UNI has pulled back again as expected.
However, part of the protocol fees generated during the event were converted into UNI burns through Uniswap's fee mechanism, permanently reducing the token supply. This burn actually happened and has somewhat improved the supply-demand structure of UNI.
Therefore, although event-driven buying is unsustainable, the burn mechanism's improvement to market supply still exists.
I believe there is likely support around $6.25, and even if it breaks below $6.25, the important support area near $5.8 is still worth watching.
Based on this judgment, I have already started placing staggered buy orders in the $6.3–$6.9 range to build a spot position.
Of course, considering that $BTC has not yet confirmed the completion of its mid-term adjustment, UNI may still be dragged down by BTC's decline.
Therefore, I will not rush to fully load my position; currently, I have only set orders for 50% of my target position and will consider further accumulation after Bitcoin confirms the completion of its adjustment. #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？
The midterm elections kick off tonight, and the market is not focused on who wins, but on how divided it will be. All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for election; Democrats lead polls by about 8–10 points, with over a 90% chance to retake the House. The real suspense lies in the Senate—Republicans hold a 53:47 advantage, Democrats need a net gain of 4 seats. The seven key battlegrounds—Michigan, Ohio, Kansas, Maine, Alaska, Texas—are all within the margin of error; any flip would rewrite the landscape.
The underlying issues are clear: inflation and energy bills are the top variables. September CPI year-over-year is 3.7%, gasoline prices up over 34% year-over-year. Nearly 80% of voters blame living costs on tariffs and the Iran conflict. Trump's approval rating has slipped to the 31%–37% range; the midterm penalty effect is playing out.
Three possible outcomes correspond to different pricing logics:
Democrats sweep both chambers—fiscal expansion contracts, long-term US Treasury yields decline; AI computing power and big tech face increased state-level regulation and antitrust scrutiny, putting short-term pressure on crypto assets.
Divided Congress—legislative gridlock and uncertainty clear out; historically, US stocks rise an average of 14% in the six months after midterms, making this the market’s most comfortable scenario.
Republicans hold both chambers—tax cuts and deregulation continue, deficit expectations push long-term rates higher; tech and crypto lean bullish, but the dollar’s credit is discounted.
A hidden variable is vote counting delays. Mail-in ballots concentrate in key states, some seats may take 1–2 days to finalize. The real focus is which red states flip blue in the Senate—that will determine whether Trump’s last two years are tied hands or a continued solo fight. $BTC $SOL 92.36 funding rate is still positive, longs are still paying, I won't short this and lose money
$SOL current price 92.39, down 1.67% in 24 hours, high 94.97 low 90.87, price hovering around MA7, MA25 pressing at 92.61, RSI 58.9 neither overbought nor weak, Bollinger Bands narrow between 93.2 and 91.22. In short, it's a consolidation with no clear direction yet, don't rush to get emotional.
You say the funding rate 0.0031% is positive, longs are still paying so you want to short? Brother, a positive funding rate just means longs are crowded, it doesn't mean the price will crash. The real pain is — this rate is as thin as paper, meaning longs don't have much confidence, no one is heavily positioned, shorting now will likely get chopped back and forth. Look at BTC, funding rate 0.01% is thicker, current price 77079 below MA25 77150, RSI 55.9, even BTC is weak, how tough can SOL be?
My view is straightforward: I won't short this. If you want to short, wait for SOL to rebound to the Bollinger upper band at 93.2 and for the funding rate to clearly thicken. Shorting at 92.4 now has a poor risk-reward ratio. If $SOL really falls, wait for it to break below the lower band at 91.22 before chasing; if it doesn't break, just watch the 91.2 to 93.2 range. Don't open positions emotionally over a small funding rate, you risk your own capital.Can't stop laughing, I found another piece of evidence that AI has no bubble.
The perspective from the US stock market guru is super interesting: Walmart and many consumer sector stocks have price-to-earnings ratios clearly higher than AI stocks. So where exactly is the bubble?Brother Feng put the Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500 on a logarithmic scale, drawing a single line, which clearly shows the difference!A logarithmic scale assumes growth is exponential;after taking the log,
removing the exponentialOn November 4th, during the quiet period before the U.S. stock market opens, Circle will lay out the score sheet on the table. The whole world is focused on one number—the USDC circulation volume. This is the amateur chess player's flaw: counting pawns but ignoring the board.
What does a grandmaster look at? The piece structure. Reserve income is the heavy piece in this game, but it is led around by interest rates. Once the interest rate is cashed out by the opponent, the midgame immediately collapses from an open position into a closed endgame, and no matter how beautiful the pawn formation is, it won't gain any advantage. So, the growth in circulation volume is essentially a battle for the center: first occupying the squares, at the cost of distribution expenses—that means sharing half the board with allies. You agree with your ally "I play white, you play black," sharing the joy of winning equally, but the loss is fully recorded under your own name.
The real watershed is whether the net piece difference has expanded. If every newly issued coin requires paying nearly proportional channel commissions, that's not expansion; it's piling a hanging piece on your own king's wing—looking like you have many pieces, but a single strike can scatter them all.
Now look at another board. Moving U.S. stock assets on-chain is like opening a different variant board next to the original one, with pieces able to jump across boards. Liquidity is the least loyal thing: it flows to whichever board has shorter move times and lower tolls. USDC plays the role of the passage pawn that everyone must pass through between these two boards—collecting a toll with every step forward, but it can never promote. This is the endgame essence of the stablecoin business: not to be the king, only the passage.
The true initiative is not in the issuance volume but in retention. When circulation growth starts to rely on subsidy-based distribution, the game shifts from offense to a draw; only when reserve income covers distribution costs with surplus can the passage pawn truly be pushed to the seventh rank. On the November 4th score sheet, I only watch two things: whether the net yield per unit circulation is widening, and whether the distribution cost ratio to reserve income is being controlled. The rest of the excitement is just applause from the audience.
The most dangerous moment for a player is never being in check, but thinking they are winning. #circleq3usdcgrowth#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ As the U.S. midterm elections approach, macro uncertainty continues to rise, increasing risk premiums and becoming one of the core variables in current asset pricing. Personally, I feel the Republican Party is highly likely to maintain its majority in Congress. If the Republicans maintain control of Congress, regulatory constraints will marginally ease. Resistance to digital asset framework bills like CLARITY will decrease, potentially clarifying the jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC, reducing uncertainty caused by enforcement-style regulation. The market will play out valuation recovery driven by improved regulatory certainty, and risk assets will experience a round of expectation-driven beta rallies, with sentiment in the crypto sector and related concept stocks being notably boosted. However, this should be viewed objectively; this rally is more about expectation trading, with no substantial improvement in fundamentals, making it difficult to directly trigger a trend-level major rise, so excessive bullishness is not advisable. It is important to note that party division should not be the sole criterion for judgment, as there are still divisions within party members, and the bill negotiation and bargaining cycle is relatively long. The pace of subsequent bill implementation is the core factor affecting long-term valuation, so do not form a one-sided bullish expectation based solely on election results. During the election window, funds tend to reduce exposure to hedge tail risks, and the market is prone to a "buy the rumor, sell the fact" trading structure. Even if the results are somewhat positive, there is a possibility of a pullback after the good news is realized. It is strictly prohibited to heavily bet on a single expectation. From an operational perspective, it is recommended to control risk exposure, prioritize waiting for event outcomes, trade with the trend after confirming fund behavior, and strictly set stop losses to hedge against sudden volatility.These days there's been widespread talk: Binance was hacked, and the hacker withdrew ETH, so the exchange's ETH decreased. Sounds plausible, but the data tells an awkward story.
On October 29, the hot wallet did transfer out about 200,600 ETH, which is alarming. But on the same day, the exchange's address actually held more ETH, increasing by about 39,000. They transferred out 200,000, yet the balance went up—probably just moving to another internal wallet.
The real decrease happened from November 1 to 2, when about 313,000 ETH left over two days. The whole week saw a decrease of 297,000 ETH, down 5.4%. Sounds serious, but the real culprit seems to be different.After the Binance hack, a very straightforward explanation circulated: the hacker withdrew ETH, so the exchange's ETH decreased. The data only supports the first half of this.
Let's look at the total amount. From October 28 to November 2, the ETH held by major exchange platform addresses decreased by about 297,000, a drop of about 5.4%. The decrease happened in two phases, and only the first phase coincides with the hacker's withdrawal time.
The contradiction lies on the most dramatic day. On October 29, TRM Labs recorded about 200,600 ETH transferred out from Binance's hot wallet. If it was truly an exit, the exchange's inventory should have collapsed accordingly. But on that day, the ETH held by major exchange platform addresses actually increased by about 39,000. Transferring out 200,000 while inventory rises indicates this was most likely an internal address swap within the system.
The real decrease happened later. From November 1 to 2, about 313,000 ETH decreased, more than the previous five days combined, and this period was already several days after the hacker incident.
So the first phase was a stress-driven transfer triggered by the event, while the second phase was the actual inventory loss. The former affects custody structure, the latter affects available supply. Mixing these two leads to the conclusion that the hacker dumped the market, but the data tells a different story.
What is worth pondering is: since these 313,000 ETH are unrelated to the hacker, who moved them in early November?