Orbit Post Sitemap
"Net positions turned short two weeks ago," I care more about this time difference than the whale label in the headline. 💻 The input for this code review is: Glassnode states that Hyperliquid whales' Bitcoin short exposure has risen to the highest level since October 2025. It looks quite pressuring, but the data is not a trading instruction.
My judgment on this message is: it is more suitable for risk monitoring rather than directly predicting the direction of $BTC. The logic is simple: net shorts tell me the position bias of these accounts on this platform, but do not explain what they hold elsewhere. It's a local variable and cannot be directly used as a global state.
A potential bug is translating "increase in shorts" as "whales are determined to go down." If these shorts correspond to longs elsewhere, they might also be hedging; this is just my speculation, as the material does not provide complete holdings. Moreover, the short position turned two weeks ago, so treating an existing change as a newly launched signal can also lead to misinterpretation.
If it were me, I would change this reminder to "observe how positions and prices validate each other" rather than "guess the direction by following whales." What I want to see next is whether the change in short exposure can continue, rather than being driven by a single peak value.Bitcoin spent the weekend doing what it does best when conviction runs thin: grinding sideways and quietly taxing the optimistic. After printing near $75,994 late Saturday, $BTC slipped to $75,769 by early Sunday, a modest 0.18% decline over 24 hours inside a $75,569–$76,251 band. The headline number is unremarkable. The positioning behind it is not. Across the three majors, the long side is crowded. $BTC carries a long/short ratio of 2.98, up slightly from 2.94 the night before, with $2.613 bilThe Democratic Party is calling for a pause on data center construction. Will this stop the future of AI? This political turmoil has made the market start worrying about one issue: If the U.S. government restricts data center construction! There will be short-term impacts, but in the long run, political decisions are unlikely to stop AI technological progress and the development of global AI infrastructure. 1. Politics can limit data center construction, but it cannot make AI demand disappear. We need to distinguish between two concepts: one is data center construction, the other is AI technology development. 2. If data center construction is hindered, why should we instead focus on storage? This is what I believe investors should study in depth. 3. The more AI develops, the more important storage may become. Which storage companies are worth watching? 1. $SNDK 2. $MU 3. $SKHYNIX What we really need to be wary of is not politics, but whether AI capital expenditure truly declines! We must remain rational here. U.S. politicians pushing to pause data centers could indeed cause some project delays, increased approval costs, and changes in construction locations. According to a November 5 report by Data Center Dynamics on BMI research, more than half of the hyperscale data center projects in the U.S. may face greater regulatory resistance. But this is different from the AI industry stopping investment. I believe the focus should be on observing three indicators next: 1. Whether tech giants like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta, etc., reduce AI capital expenditure. 2. Enterprise SSD orders and NThe storage sector has experienced a disaster this week 😥
$SNDK fell from around 1170 at the beginning of the week to 835, hitting a low of 794 during the week, with a final drop close to 29%
Keep in mind, this was one of the most favored storage leaders in the market before...
Thursday's concentrated sell-off was especially extreme. After the Democrats won the midterm elections, the market began to worry about stricter regulations on US data center construction, causing the AI industry chain to collectively face valuation cuts
SanDisk, Micron, and Hynix were all not spared
Although the sector rebounded on Friday, the previous drop was too large, so the recovery remains limited
I think this crash needs to be distinguished between two things:
On one hand, concerns about AI investment returns and future expansion speed are indeed rising
On the other hand, a few days of sharp decline cannot directly prove that NAND demand has fundamentally reversed
But from a trading perspective, I am not in a hurry to guess the bottom
This level of decline has already broken the previous strong structure, so let's wait for the price to stabilize again before making any moves
#美股暴跌后科技股反弹，纳指周线仍跌约3.4% $NEAR
Account abstraction and simpler user experiences could become major drivers of blockchain adoption. NEAR's focus on usability and chain abstraction addresses a genuine problem: most everyday users do not want to manage complicated wallet and network configurations. However, better technology must translate into consistent user retention. The real measure of success is whether people continue using applications without needing to understand the underlying infrastructure.USDT (RGB) is expected to officially launch on the Bitcoin mainnet on November 28, which will bring indirect but tangible benefits to the Fractal ecosystem.
First, Bitcoin native assets finally have a usable stablecoin pricing and settlement method. The trading experience of assets like Ordinals, Runes, BRC-20 will improve, and some liquidity and trading demand can easily overflow to Fractal through the UniSat wallet—because UniSat deeply supports both sides, users can manage Bitcoin and Fractal assets in one wallet, making low-fee scenarios more attractive.
Second, Fractal itself is positioned as a low-cost experimental layer for Bitcoin. After RGB+USDT runs smoothly on the mainnet, developers will be more motivated to first experiment with payment, exchange, lending, AI Agent collection, and other functions on Fractal before considering bridging or migrating to the mainnet. This "experiment first, then mainnet" approach will enhance Fractal's practical value.
Overall, if USDT's return to Bitcoin can attract more institutional liquidity, OTC, and real payment scenarios, the capital and attention in the entire Bitcoin ecosystem will increase, and Fractal, as an extension layer deeply involved by UniSat, will generally benefit.
If UniSat later advances interoperability between RGB and Runes/BRC-20, the linkage between both sides will become more apparent. $BTC #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Liquidity in the crypto market was thin over the weekend. $BTC formed a doji near 75,700, with buying support holding at 75,300 below, while it struggled to break through 76,500 above. Neither side showed much strength. On the ETF front, money is still flowing out, but prices haven't crashed accordingly; the bears seem a bit blunt.
Several large on-chain holders are doing their own thing. One address withdrew nearly 30 million $ETH from Binance over six days at an average price of 2,290, currently holding with a floating loss of over 600,000. Another major staker did the opposite, redeeming 7,500 ETH from Ether.fi in three days and depositing them into Binance, clearly preparing to exit. The most eye-catching move was someone swapping 3,100 ETH for USDT, then opening 20x leverage on Hyperliquid, going long BTC and short ETH, with over 12 million on each side—purely betting on a split between the two.
On Friday, US chip stocks took a big hit; the Nasdaq bounced back slightly, but the Dow was dragged down by financials and industrials, falling 237 points. The nonfarm payrolls came in at 165,000, pushing the December rate hike probability to 70-80%. Whether this rebound is a dead cat bounce or a real stabilization will only be clear after the CPI release.When I see this kind of news, I usually first think: how long can the cash buffer last, and what is the yield based on for realization? Having a lot of money on the books can reduce short-term pressure, but it doesn't automatically improve the expected value of a single transaction.
According to Strategy disclosure, as of November 1, the designated USD reserve was $4.79 billion; by the performance report in October 2026, selling Bitcoin raised about $431.8 million for dividends and buybacks. STRC has no secured interest in the Bitcoin held by the company.
My judgment is that this is more like a demonstration of a payment buffer rather than a direct positive for Bitcoin. The reserve can alleviate immediate payment pressure, but selling coins to raise funds indicates that dividends and buybacks will consume assets, and holders cannot treat Bitcoin as collateral security. According to my speculation, if subsequent funding replenishment can cover the expenditures, this buffer is worth factoring into the odds; if the gap is continuously filled by selling coins, focusing only on dividends easily underestimates the risk. I will continue to watch whether funding replenishment can keep pace with consumption. Before the CPI release on November 10, let's review these three points first
Orbit wrote on the topic page last night: Beijing time November 10, the US October CPI will be released, which may further affect the December rate hike expectations.
The previous piece of the puzzle was the non-farm payrolls: 165,000 new jobs in October, expected only 65,000; unemployment rate 4.1%, lower than the expected 4.2%. After the data came out, the market increased its bets on a December rate hike. Daly also said that further rate hikes may still be necessary, but the timing and magnitude need to be judged carefully.
Before the CPI release, I first review three things. First, what to look at: overall and core, month-on-month and year-on-year, the direction is more important than a single number. Second, how the bets change: non-farm payrolls pushed the rate hike bets up one notch, CPI is the next piece of the puzzle; if the data exceeds expectations, bets will continue to heat up; if the data weakens, bets may retreat. Third, price levels: BTC is still around 75,900, ETH around 2,238; before the data is released, the level is more important than the forecast.
Before the CPI release, do you first look at the data itself or first look at how the rate hike bets move?
(Personal record, not investment advice. CPI and non-farm numbers, Daly's statements are quoted from Orbit's topic page last night; current prices are quoted from Orbit's coin price column. No price points, no calls, no position cards. Contract risk is extremely high, leverage with caution.) Maji just sold BAYC, then immediately opened a 25x leveraged long position on $ETH, resulting in another unrealized loss of about $32,000.
In the past 5 days, Huang Licheng sold 15 NFTs at a loss of approximately $505,000, cashing out about $223,000 in total.
Yesterday, he sold a BAYC for 12.5 ETH (about $28,000).
The funds recovered were once again bet on ETH! (ps: This is what an Ethereum believer looks like) Maji has been long on Ethereum all the way, ironically while institutions are dumping #BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元
Long position size: 540 ETH
Leverage: 25x
Entry price: $2304.23
Liquidation price: $2203.40
Current unrealized loss: about $32,000
Can $ETH save him this time? Last week, 12 US spot BTC ETFs had a combined net outflow of $1.28 billion, yet BTC still hovered around $75,000 over the weekend.
Funds are moving, but the price hasn't significantly dropped for now. This looks more like the market is digesting redemptions rather than proving that selling pressure has ended: these funds have had net outflows for two consecutive weeks; on November 6 alone, about $412 million flowed out, with IBIT seeing about $403 million outflow, but FBTC had an inflow of about $42.8 million the same day, indicating that funds are not withdrawing in the same direction.
The weekly total and daily data align, indicating a weakening in ETF subscriptions and redemptions; however, this does not directly imply that all institutions are exiting. The next trading week will reveal whether net outflows continue and if BTC can maintain support around $75,000.
If funds continue to flow out but the price holds, should the market interpret this as buying resilience or that selling pressure has not yet fully transmitted?$1.282 billion outflow in one week, ETF's account for this year has directly turned negative
At Monday's open, the net inflow for the year was still $368 million
By Friday's close, it turned into a net outflow of $914 million
In just one week, all the positive gains for this year were completely wiped out
This is the worst week since the end of June
Net outflow for the second consecutive week
BlackRock IBIT withdrew $1.21 billion in one week
Ethereum ETF has also had outflows for six consecutive weeks, with $365 million leaving this week
Bitcoin is holding near $75,900
It briefly dropped below $75,000 on Thursday but then pulled back
I think: institutions are not running away, they are waiting for direction
Money is out but the price hasn't collapsed, indicating spot buyers are stepping in
Invalidation level: BTC daily close below $75,000, or next week another outflow exceeding $1 billion
One of two options: the full-year turning negative marks the start of institutional retreat, or it can recover before year-end?
$BTC $IBIT $ETH
#VanEck：比特币或继续扩大市场份额 💻 This message is going into code review, and I will first mark it as "input incomplete." According to glassnode data, Hyperliquid whales, after net long positions for 7 consecutive months, turned net short two weeks ago, with BTC short exposure reaching the highest level since October 2025.
My judgment: Their risk management of leveraged positions is more important and not sufficient to be taken as a directional conclusion. There are two bugs in the logic: short positions on the platform do not equal all whale assets betting on a decline, lacking other positions means hedging cannot be ruled out; the last similar exposure accompanied by a significant drop cannot be directly written as "an increase in shorts necessarily leads to a decline."
If it were me, I would change the "bearish signal" to a "risk warning pending verification," then supplement the position background. According to my speculation, if the short positions correspond to spot long positions, the directional judgment must be rolled back. Please help review: only one field can be added, would you choose whale spot exposure or short leverage? Which better fixes this judgment flaw? $BTC is hovering around 75,700, with ETFs running off 1.28 billion in a week, the harshest since June, and net inflows for the year turning negative. Leveraged long positions have been buried again, with liquidations exceeding 32 million, 72% of which are longs, showing bulls are holding on stubbornly.
The on-chain situation is also unstable; Fidelity transferred nearly 27,000 $ETH to Galaxy in two days, worth over 60 million USD, clearly offloading. The U.S. Treasury is even harsher, directly kicking MEXC out of the dollar system, accusing it of laundering 16 billion for Iran and North Korea.
In Washington, the Democrats took both chambers, but the CLARITY Act failed in the Senate 49 to 50, effectively stalling crypto legislation, which ironically strengthens the SEC's hand.
On Friday, chip stocks in the U.S. market rebounded slightly, but the Nasdaq still fell over three points for the week, and the Dow also couldn't hold up. Nonfarm payrolls were too strong, pushing the December rate hike probability to 70-80%. CPI data is due Tuesday; whether this rebound is a recovery or a dead cat bounce will soon be clear.In the early morning, I analyzed a set of long and short borrowing data, and the more I look, the more uneasy I feel!
BTC, ETH, and SOL long borrowing continues to accumulate,with leveraged long positions reaching new highs,while shorts are almost inactive.
When the vast majority of leveraged funds cluster on the long side, it often hides liquidation risks, and a rapid shakeout could happen at any time.
$BTC: Long borrowing 1864.85 BTC, short borrowing 50.9 BTC
$ETH: Long borrowing 17,600 ETH.#伯克希尔Q3回购96亿美元，现金储备创新高 The bullish logic is simple: AI servers' demand for memory remains unchanged, storage capacity is expected to increase by about 22% by 2027, demand by about 26%, leading to a supply shortage. The three target stocks still have room to double their price.
After the US stock market plunge, tech stocks rebounded, but the Nasdaq weekly chart still shows a drop of about 3.4%.
The US AI and tech sectors began a full rebound on Friday, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rising about 4%, recovering part of Thursday's 12% plunge. Leading the way are the three storage giants: Micron up about 5.1% to $690, SanDisk up about 3.6% to $835, and SK Hynix up about 2.8%. On Thursday, Micron fell 17.5%, SanDisk 22.3%, so Friday's move is an oversold rebound.
The strategy is simple: don't chase highs, don't go all in, buy in batches at the bottom. When prices drop and opportunities arise, buy in batches; when prices rise, don't envy, save your bullets for the next wave.
Open your portfolio list and check the proportion of funds allocated to storage-related positions.
$SNDK $MU $SKHYNIX An additional layer of review may mean an extra time cost; this calculation is more concrete than guessing market ups and downs. The European Commission announced the establishment of a crypto sanctions task force to enhance the ability to detect and combat the use of crypto assets to evade EU financial sanctions. From my reading, the focus is on investigating sanctions evasion, not on defining the entire crypto industry.
My judgment is that this news has more significance for platform compliance than for market guidance. The task force targets detection and enforcement capabilities, which cannot be directly equated with capital inflows or outflows. According to my speculation, if platforms strengthen the verification of fund sources as a result, ordinary users may face more operational costs; if they can more accurately identify illicit funds, then the scope for mistakenly penalizing legitimate users may shrink.
Between stability and convenience, I lean towards stability but do not want to be repeatedly troubled by vague rules. Next, I will watch whether the execution boundaries are clear, rather than treating the "establishment of the task force" directly as negative news."Nonfarm Night Review: Strong Employment Shatters the Rate Cut Narrative"
October nonfarm payrolls increased by 165,000, far exceeding the expected 65,000, and the unemployment rate fell from 4.2% to 4.1%. This report is not "resilient" but clearly overheated, directly causing the market to reprice the policy path: the probability of a rate hike in December has rapidly risen, and rate cut trades have been forced to cool down.
BTC originally had support around 75,500; after the data release, it broke below 75,000, hitting a low of 74,762, marking a seven-week low. The market reaction was very direct—not panic selling, but a repricing following the negative news. The previous logic was economic weakening and the Federal Reserve shifting to easing; now, employment and unemployment rates both provide counter-evidence, reinforcing expectations that high interest rates will persist longer.
After trading for a long time, the worst is not bad data but having your logic overturned. Last night's decline essentially reflects a position adjustment after the rate cut narrative was disproven by the nonfarm data. In the short term, 75,000 has shifted from support to a level to watch; if a rebound fails to reclaim it, the weak trend will continue. However, after a sharp drop, technical recovery following the realization of negative news should also be guarded against. The key going forward is not guessing the bottom but seeing whether the market accepts this new pricing of "higher rates for longer."When seeing "panic," many people think the selling pressure is almost exhausted. I think about it the other way around: a cold sentiment does not mean the bulls have already given up.
At 10 AM Beijing time, $BTC is priced at $75,709, down 0.42% in 24 hours, with a fear and greed index of 28. I don't take panic as evidence of a bottom: BTC's hourly funding rate is still positive, bulls are still paying; it performs best in contracts with a turnover exceeding $20 million, yet it still falls, and relative resistance to decline does not equal strong buying. I will wait for evidence beyond sentiment.Latest activity of a suspected hacker address?
An address withdrew about 3100 ETH from a mixer last night,
directly sold on-chain to get 6.92 million USDC,
then opened about 27.61 million 20x hedge positions on Hyperliquid.
Currently, the long position is 20x full margin about 182.64 $BTC, nominally about 13.82 million USD, opening average price about 75,760 USD, liquidation price about 39,807 USD.
The short side is 20x full margin about 6186 $ETH, nominally about 13.79 million USD, opening average price about 2233.5 USD, liquidation price about 3254 USD.
$BTC is about 75,669 USD, down about 0.53% in 24 hours; $ETH is about 2231 USD, down about 0.78% in 24 hours.
This position is long Bitcoin on one side and short Ethereum on the other. What exactly is the intention? Could it be trying to hedge and wash to another account?
BTC and ETH are truly decentralized, but now it feels like no one cares anymore. #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Institutions have withdrawn 1 billion yuan for two consecutive days, dismantling not long positions, but arbitrage positions
Let's clear the accounts first: Just for BTC spot ETFs, 430.2 million flowed out on the 5th, and another 411.9 million on the 6th. The total withdrawal of the four coins in two days exceeded 1 billion. ETH withdrew 93.19 million, SOL withdrew 25.08 million, and only ZEC saw an inflow of 1.77 million. It looks like institutions are fleeing, but I think what’s escaping is not life, but the spread. 😮
Why? If those truly bearish on spot were dumping, the price wouldn’t be so stable: over 10,000 BTC were sold in two days, yet the price remained sideways, and market share even rose above 60%. The sell orders are real, but so are the buyers.
I trust another explanation more: basis arbitrage is being unwound. Buying spot ETFs and shorting futures to lock in the spread is the most comfortable risk-free trade for institutions; now the long cost is near the floor, and the spread is too thin to profit. This batch of money is closing both sides — outflows on the ETF side, and futures positions decreasing accordingly. The entire network is shrinking today, like two legs retracting together.
On the 6th, the largest product saw one institution withdraw 403 million, while another product saw an inflow of 42.8 million. At the same table, one is deleveraging arbitrage, the other is adding positions on the dip. Institutions themselves aren’t united, so where is the collective bearishness?
So I’m holding onto my two short positions but not adding more: the selling pressure from unwinding can suppress rebounds but won’t push to new lows; once the unwinding finishes — when ETF outflows narrow and futures positions stop falling — the selling pressure will be over. Until then, I won’t touch ETH and SOL, which were cut first. 💪The recent adjustment in the US stock market is indeed worth pondering 🤔. On Thursday, the Nasdaq dropped directly by 5.52%, and although it rebounded by more than 1% on Friday, it has already declined for four consecutive weeks. Nvidia, AMD, and previously well-performing stocks related to storage and data centers have all experienced significant volatility. A couple of days ago, we discussed a viewpoint that after several years of growth, US AI tech stocks are no longer cheap in terms of valuation. The market has given AI very high expectations, but when these investments will actually translate into sufficient profits remains an unavoidable question. ──── ✦ ──── This adjustment also includes several new influencing factors. First is the US midterm elections. After the election results came out, the market began to worry that future AI regulations would tighten further, especially regarding data center construction, which involves a series of issues such as electricity, water resources, and local approvals. Second is the Federal Reserve. The latest US employment data was stronger than expected, raising concerns again about further interest rate hikes. If interest rates remain high, the financing costs and valuations of tech companies will be affected. Additionally, given the current international situation, uncertainties exist in geopolitical conflicts, trade policies, and global supply chains. For tech companies that heavily rely on global markets, these factors also need to be taken into account. ──── ✦ ──── Personally, I am still quite optimistic about the long-term development of AI. After all, computing power, storage, data centers, and AI applications all have real demand. Especially since I am also involved in AI development myself, I canPhiladelphia Semiconductor Index fell 12.1% in a week, BTC only dropped 1.4%
This week, the US stock market was dragged down by chips
Philadelphia Semiconductor Index down 12.1% in a week, Nvidia down 8.8%, Tesla down 10.4%, Nasdaq down 3.4%
$BTC down 1.4% in a week, $ETH only down 0.5%
On Thursday when US stocks plunged, crypto also fell, but on Friday when stocks rebounded, crypto did not follow
Two days cancel each other out, looking at the week, crypto actually fell the least
I'm focusing on contracts
Before the big drop on Thursday, Binance BTC long-short ratio was 1.4
After the drop, it rose above 3, staying around 3.1 these two days
Positions were basically flat this week, but the number of traders was one-sided
Funding rates did not rise accordingly, they have been kept very low these periods
More long accounts appeared, but the money did not increase, most of these longs are small accounts
When retail investors all stand on one side, the first to be shaken out is usually that side
Next week won't be too quiet
#USStocks #BTC$BTC stubbornly held above 75,000 without breaking down, with ETFs running 1.9 billion in a week, and the price still steady at 75,800. The prediction market gives a 56% probability of returning to 80,000 in November. Leveraged long positions were buried by over 32 million, with 72% being longs; the bulls are purely holding on hard.
$ETH is grinding around 2,203, ETFs have been bleeding for seven consecutive days, and BlackRock alone withdrew nearly 100 million. The $SOL ecosystem is clearly cooling down, DEX weekly trading volume halved, Lombard was attacked again, and the co-founder and foundation are still in internal conflict, falling behind quite embarrassingly.
On Friday, US chip stocks took a big hit; the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rose 4.21%, AMD surged 11%, Micron followed up 5%, but the Dow Jones fell 237 points alone, and the Nasdaq was down for four consecutive weeks. Non-farm payrolls at 165,000 pushed the December rate hike probability close to 80%. CPI is due Tuesday; whether this rebound is a recovery or a dead cat bounce will be revealed soon.I am still slowly recovering my capital. When I see this kind of news, my first reaction is no longer to guess the price movement, but to think: Is the asset on the account enough to cover ongoing expenses? Having suffered losses in the past two years, I am now particularly sensitive to whether "cash is sufficient."
Strategy disclosed that as of November 1, the designated USD reserve was $4.79 billion; by the performance report in October 2026, about $431.8 million was raised from selling Bitcoin for dividends and buybacks. I think this is more like a cash flow reminder from the treasury model and should not be simply regarded as negative news for $BTC: dividends require cash, holding more coins does not mean no need to sell coins; STRC has no collateral rights on its Bitcoin, and its payment ability still depends on the issuer's resources.
What I have learned is that when looking at treasury companies, you can't just focus on the amount of coins held, but also need to see where the money comes from and where it goes. For friends who are also recovering their capital, don't be discouraged if it's slow 💪 How have you been recently? In this disclosure, do you value the USD reserve more, or the selling of coins to pay dividends?Bitcoin dropped from 80,000 to 75,800 and hasn't recovered in three days.
The reason is not the Federal Reserve.
It's the stablecoins.
As of today, the total network is 290.2 billion, down nearly 6 billion in seven days.
— That's the money used to buy coins in the crypto circle.
The latest Federal Reserve data shows bank reserves increased by 67.6 billion.
But this money wasn't printed; the Treasury spent 79.4 billion from its accounts, the money went into banks, not into the crypto circle.
The Federal Reserve is turning on the faucet, but the water in this crypto pool is decreasing.
No matter how much water is released, if it doesn't flow into this pool, why should it rise?$HYPE has pulled back these days mainly because the earlier ICE rally was realized, combined with Hayes and VC whales taking profits in concentration, and the unlocking expectations have been looming overhead. Even if the protocol revenue is strong, as long as incremental buying can't keep up with selling pressure, the premium will be pushed down. Coupled with the macro bearishness in the overall market, the correction has arrived.$BTC is gasping around 75,600, with ETFs running 1.28 billion in a week, marking the largest weekly outflow since June; institutional holdings are shrinking sharply. Liquidations aren't large, but 72% are long positions, so the bulls have been worn down a layer.
On-chain trends are very divided. One major re-staker redeemed 7,500 $ETH from Ether.fi in three days, worth over 17 million, then immediately moved it to Binance, clearly planning to exit. Another giant whale did the opposite, withdrawing nearly 30 million ETH from Binance in six days, not stopping despite a floating loss of 600,000. There's also a suspected hacker who took 3,100 ETH from Tornado, sold it for over 6.9 million USDT, then entered Hyperliquid with 20x leverage long on BTC and short on ETH, with 12.8 million on each side, purely gambling on their split.
Regulators haven't been idle either; the EU today established a special crypto sanctions task force to specifically block loopholes for borrowing coins to evade sanctions.
On the US stock side, the Dow Jones alone dropped 237 points, with financials and industrials pressured by high interest rates. The Nasdaq pulled back one point thanks to chip stocks. The nonfarm payrolls at 165,000 pushed the December rate hike probability to 70%. CPI is due Tuesday; whether this rebound is a recovery or a dead cat bounce will soon be clear.比特币目前徘徊在 $75,755 附近，24小时下跌约0.38%。价格波动有限，但资金流向和市场结构正在释放值得关注的信号。 🟠 1. ETF资金持续撤离 截至11月6日，美国现货BTC ETF单日净流出约 4.119亿美元。11月前5个交易日累计净流出约 12.82亿美元，期间只有11月4日录得约7,460万美元的资金流入。 这说明机构买盘暂时缺乏持续性，市场还没有出现明确的资金回流信号。 📉 2. 衍生品市场尚未出现明显拥挤 未平仓合约规模约512.1亿美元，24小时增长0.26%。资金费率为+0.8628%，虽然表面数值较高，但按照原始数据的历史中位数衡量，暂时不能单独视为极端过热信号。 不过，多空持仓比例约为75.5%对24.5%，多头明显占优。如果价格突然下跌，过度集中的多头仓位可能成为清算压力来源。 🏦 3. 交易所BTC储备出现净流出 截至11月8日08:00 UTC，15家交易平台合计净流出约3,500 BTC。 最大一笔转账约1,985.96 BTC，但整体更像分散式提币，而不是单一巨鲸的大规模转移。 这意味着交易所可交易供应可能减少，不过提币本身并不能直接证明Last night's non-farm payrolls wiped out a large number of people's positions. The 165,000 new jobs smashed against the expected 65,000, and the unemployment rate even dropped to 4.1%—this isn't just good data, it's so good that it can turn December's rate cut back into a rate hike. In the ten minutes after the data came out, all ten perpetual contracts I was watching were hit in the same direction, overnight briefly breaking through 75,000, finally closing around 75,800. The fear and greed index dropped to 15, labeled as extreme fear. Let me first say what I am not looking at. I'm not paying attention to who is calling the bottom. Clinging to the 75,000 line, calls for a bottom lasted all night, but the spot channel saw a net outflow of $537 million on November 6, with Bitcoin alone accounting for $412 million, marking the second consecutive trading day—money is flowing out, no matter how loud the calls are, they can't fill this gap. Looking at this from a political perspective makes it clear. Releasing this kind of tone at this time is not to calm the market, but for votes and the inflation ledger: as long as the employment numbers aren't bad, the White House has room to keep saying the economy is fine, and the interest rate button can be held down. Every week that rates are held down is a week of a stronger dollar and more expensive risk assets. The chain is straightforward—the rise in US Treasury yields makes the dollar more expensive, those borrowing dollars to leverage can't hold on, leveraged longs get liquidated, and prices fall on their own. The batch of longs liquidated last week were the first on this chain. I've seen this script before. In November 2022, bad news came one after another, the first rebound was all short covering, the real market came later; thisIf I were to write it as a strategy, I would set a rule: "If the treasury company sells coins to pay dividends or repurchase, add it to the funding source watchlist instead of directly judging it as negative for the coin price." 🤖 As a quantitative newbie, I want to separate event tags and trading signals first.
Strategy disclosure: As of November 1, the designated USD reserve was $4.79 billion; by October 2026 performance, about $431.8 million was raised by selling Bitcoin for dividends and repurchases. I am more concerned about the treasury model's funding constraints: having a USD buffer does not mean there is no need to sell coins; STRC has no collateral rights on its Bitcoin, so repayment still depends on the issuer's resources.
The advantage of this rule is that it can capture changes in funding sources; the loophole is that a single coin sale cannot indicate sustained pressure. If repeated coin sales for fundraising occur later, I will raise the observation priority. If you write this condition yourself, would you choose the frequency of coin sales or the proportion of coin sales relative to payment needs?BTC holding above 75,000 is just the beginning! The truly dangerous signals have been overlooked by many.
The crypto market is undergoing a risk appetite contraction. On November 6, BTC hit a low of 74,780 USD, with ETH simultaneously approaching 2,200 USD. In the past 24 hours, about 1.05 billion USD worth of liquidations occurred across the network, with long positions accounting for about 88%, indicating that this round of decline is not only due to spot selling but also concentrated leverage clearing.
More worrisome is the capital side. The US spot BTC ETF saw a net outflow of about 412 million USD on the same day (some fund data is still incomplete), marking two consecutive days of net outflows. Meanwhile, AI infrastructure investment returns and data center regulatory expectations triggered a sell-off in tech stocks, causing a clear correlation between the Nasdaq and crypto assets.
ETH faces dual pressure: on November 6, the spot ETH ETF had a net outflow close to 100 million USD, coupled with the delay of the Glamsterdam upgrade test, putting short-term market confidence under pressure.
My judgment: key levels to watch are 75,000 USD for BTC and 2,200 USD for ETH. Holding support only indicates temporary relief of selling pressure; the real reversal signal should be ETF capital inflows, strengthened spot buying, and price reclaiming key resistance. Until the capital returns, rebounds should still be approached with caution. $BTC $ETH #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 🔍 Net long for 7 consecutive months, why the sudden reversal? What I'm focusing on is the interruption of this position inertia, not "the whale has turned bearish again." According to glassnode, Hyperliquid whales turned net short two weeks ago, with short exposure reaching a new high since October 2025. The last time there was a similar scale, the price dropped significantly.
Don't rush to conclusions. An interesting detail here: this data gives a direction but not the motive for opening shorts. I judge that its impact on $BTC short-term sentiment is stronger than its proof of subsequent price movement; just because it fell historically doesn't mean it will repeat this time. This is my speculation: if whales also hold spot positions, then adding shorts might be a way to tighten risk rather than a one-sided bet on a price drop.
I will continue to watch whether these short positions are withdrawn as the price falls or continue to increase. Which subsequent behavior do you think better exposes "hedging" versus "betting on a drop"? Let's watch together and see whose speculation is closer.真正容易误判的，是把盘面平静当成利空出尽。 可你确定那根几乎不动的小阳线，真的消化完消息了吗？ 我盯着 OKX 现货页时，第一反应不是恐慌，是安静得有点不真实。BTC 报 75794.6，24 小时只抬了 0.05%，日内振幅 0.84%；ETH 报 2233.92，涨 0.25%。屏幕像一杯放凉的水，可切到资讯页，画风立刻变了：公开报道称 FinCEN 依据 Section 9714 下令把 MEXC Global 切出美国金融体系，指向非法资金流规模被指不低于 160 亿美元，涉及俄罗斯、伊朗、朝鲜相关渠道，联邦公报刊登后 30 天生效。MEXC 回应运营正常，正在审查 AML 流程。 这里我更愿意用资金偏好的镜头看，而不是简单喊"行业清洗"。大额和合规敏感的钱，第一动作往往不是砸盘，而是换地方待着：从中小平台往头部现货、往 BTC 和 ETH 这类更容易被机构解释的资产靠。所以盘面没崩，不等于风险不存在，只是这部分偏好还没走到"夺门而出"那一步。 偏多的路径是：事件被框定为单点执法，BTC 守住区间，ETH 跟随，山寨里杠杆最拥挤的角落先降温，资金回到主流币避险，情绪慢慢修复。偏Berkshire's financial report is out, and I've been staring at one number for a long time — cash reserves, which have hit a new all-time high again.
What's interesting is that while they repurchased $9.6 billion of their own stock, they also hoarded cash to the sky. What does this mean? It means they think their own company is cheap, but for other things in the market, they can't bring themselves to buy.
Look at the crypto circle's strategy: repurchasing their own stock is three times buying crypto, and it's also a way — save your own money first, don't reach out externally.
One doesn't buy stocks, another doesn't buy crypto; these sharp old money players are now all on defense. It's not that they don't have money, they just think it's expensive and the time hasn't come yet.
So we retail investors really don't need to rush. Buffett holds hundreds of billions in cash and isn't afraid of missing out. What are you afraid of with your small position? Cash isn't admitting defeat; cash is also a position, and it's currently the most valuable position.
When the old man starts spending big, we can follow and rush in — there's still time.
Is everyone now fully invested waiting for a rebound, or have you also kept some cash on hand?
#伯克希尔Q3回购96亿美元，现金储备创新高 $BRKB $BTC $AKE To pour some cold water first, I don't see Strategy's disclosure as new positive news for Bitcoin; it seems more like the company is maintaining its financing structure. The company disclosed on November 2 that as of November 1, the designated USD reserves were $4.79 billion, with an additional $132.7 million in cash; by October 2026 performance, it had sold Bitcoin to raise about $431.8 million for dividends and buybacks. Having thick reserves does not equal strong buying pressure.
I am cautious for two reasons. First, the use of funds: the money from selling coins is used for dividends and buybacks, not for new coin purchases. If the market interprets the company's actions to maintain the securities side as support for the coin price, I think a step is missing in between. Second, the rights boundary: STRC has no collateral rights over the Bitcoin held by the company; payments rely on issuer resources. If someone interprets "the company has coins" as "holders have collateral protection," that underestimates the credit risk.
Of course, the bulls might also be right: the USD reserves do provide a buffer, and selling coins itself does not directly indicate a cash crunch. If subsequent disclosures show that dividends and buybacks no longer require continuous Bitcoin sales for funding, and reserves can be replenished, I will lower my guard. What I will watch next is whether the source of funds improves, not whether the buyback authorization numbers look good.Messages like this tend to be interpreted as “celebrities favoring BCH.” According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a certain address exchanged 73.31 ETH for about 655.74 BCH via THORChain, valued at approximately $163,600. This address is suspected to belong to Roger Ver.
On the other hand, I think treating this as a market signal for $BCH is overestimated. First, the identity is still "suspected"; if the attribution is incorrect, then the celebrity endorsement interpretation falls apart. Second, this is an exchange between existing assets, which does not equal new funds entering the market; a single transaction can show what was exchanged but cannot explain why the exchange happened. I prefer to treat it as an observation clue rather than a directional answer.
What evidence do you think is needed to interpret this exchange as a clear bullish signal: address identity confirmation, or continuous inflow records? I welcome those with opposing views to debate.🔴 Breaking: Hacker cashed out 6.93 million USDC, then shorted Ethereum 20x
On-chain data shows that a hacker address received 3,100 ETH from Tornado 9 hours ago, sold it for 6.93 million USDC, then immediately deposited into perpetual contracts: 20x short 8,945.744 ETH, and simultaneously 20x long 263.81 BTC. Both sides nominally about 20 million USD, essentially shorting ETH/BTC.
I judge this is not just bearish sentiment but a cover for unloading: holders with large amounts of Ethereum slowly sell while hedging the decline with shorts, which is more comfortable than dumping directly. In the previous similar entry, ETH indeed underperformed BTC.
The order book also cooperates: BTC orders 31% bid vs 69% ask, 75,000 pressure on 24.95 million buy orders; ETH 32% bid vs 68% ask, 2,481 stacked with 15.3 million sell wall. Current price BTC 75,818 down 0.31%, ETH 2,237.92 down 0.42%.
But 20x leverage in thin liquidity can be pierced by a single rebound.
Key levels: BTC losing 75,000 targets 72,000, ETH losing 2,223 targets 2,100.
📊 Investment advice
• BTC — Bearish
Take profit 69,800
Stop loss 81,800
• ETH — Bearish
Take profit 1,970
Stop loss 2,506
⚠️ Disclaimer: The above is personal opinion only and does not constitute investment advice. The market is volatile, please DYOR, risk at your own discretion. Seeing my buddy sell three Bored Apes reminded me of the old market vibe of “celebrities bought it, so it will surely bounce back.” I used to easily mistake fame for confidence, but later I realized that just because someone bought it doesn’t mean someone else is willing to take it over.
This time the total loss from selling was $246,000. What concerns me more is the exit difficulty of NFTs, not that this means the whole sector is dead. My view is that the misleading effect of celebrity halo on ordinary people is more worrisome than the loss figures: if you only focus on past valuations, you’re likely to mistake “once expensive” for “cheap now,” ignoring actual transaction demand.
Honestly, now I stick to two rules: don’t boost myself with historical purchase prices; when looking at NFTs, first check real transaction prices, don’t treat listing prices as exit prices. Work is already tiring enough, no need to rely on fantasies to make overtime bearable. Have you ever had your judgment influenced by “celebrities bought it”? Would you be willing to share a rule that helps you avoid stubbornly holding on?Conclusion first: Base's DeFi funds (5.87 billion) surpass Solana's (5.19 billion), with Solana's TVL shrinking 15.75% in one month, and $SOL dropping 19.1% over the same period.
First, the money is moving. According to DefiLlama: Base has 5.868 billion, Solana 5.189 billion; 30 days ago, Solana was still leading. 24/7 Wall St also wrote about this crossover point today.
Second, transactions are still on Solana, but the money isn't. In 24 hours, DEX trading volume is 5.38 billion on Base and 53.8 billion on Solana. TokenPost on November 3 also said Solana leads in daily activity. But both sides are shrinking: Solana down 16.7% in 7 days and 49.07% in a month; Base down 61.64% in a month. It's not that Base took the transactions, but Solana lost the saved funds.
Third, the wallet: $SOL perpetual contracts traded 258 million in 24 hours, spot 1.69 billion, open interest 317 million, with funding rate slightly positive at 0.0001. As money flows to Base, $SOL is left with only IPO and transaction fees as valuation anchors, while $ETH remains the one with the sedimented value.
Which side are you betting on? 一份非农就业报告，把加密市场刚攒起来的暖意浇了个透心凉。新增就业16.5万人，市场预期只有6.5万，失业率同步回落，工资还在涨，这是教科书级别的鹰派数据。数据落地那一刻，12月加息押注迅速升温，美债收益率与美元指数同步冲高，流动性收紧的预期像一块石头压向风险资产。$BTC 和 $ETH 的快速下探，本质上是多头杠杆被集中清算的连锁反应。 真正值得琢磨的不是跌幅，而是市场对这条逻辑链的低估程度。$BTC 与纳斯达克的高相关性决定了它无法独善其身，现货ETF的资金流向最容易由流入翻成流出，一旦关键支撑失守，抛压会加速释放。但 $BTC 的市场深度更深、机构持仓更厚，抗跌韧性明显强于 $ETH，74,000一带是必须盯住的防线。相比之下，$ETH 的高Beta属性叠加DeFi与衍生品杠杆的共振，波动幅度被成倍放大。利率上行直接推高资金成本，DeFi生态的可用资金收缩，对 $ETH 基本面的压制更直接，调整深度通常超过 $BTC，2,200区域是下一个观察点。 这里有一个容易被忽略的节奏问题：这份数据更像是坏消息的兑现，而非坏消息的开始。第一阶段是数据公布瞬间的急跌，目的是清洗多头止损；第二阶Whale BTC short exposure hits a new high since October 2025. I see this as an increase following bearish sentiment, which will reinforce cautious expectations but cannot be directly taken as confirmation of a decline. The material also mentions that net positions have shifted from long to short, and the last time there was a similar scale of short positions, it was accompanied by a significant drop.
I have three principles for trend analysis: watch the price, don't guess the whale's hand—short positions may include hedging and cannot be directly equated with a one-sided bearish view; watch for continuation, don't determine direction based on a single change—if short positions continue to increase and prices keep weakening, then I will consider it a trend resonance, which is my speculation; watch the big picture, don't treat one platform as the entire market—this data set's impact on short-term sentiment, in my opinion, is greater than its ability to independently judge the market.
The trend is the best friend; I would rather wait for price confirmation than rush based on whale positions. Facing this increase in short positions, what are you all using now to judge the trend: moving averages, volume and price, or position changes?$XPL Looking at this continuously descending box, the drop is indeed sufficient, but when asked if it can rise, I can only say there's no chance at all.
The trend structure's center of gravity keeps moving down, and the rebound can't even reach the moving averages.
The most fatal thing is that the long positions account for as high as 71%, this extremely crowded chip structure means all above are retail investors stuck and holding on desperately.
The main force will never show mercy; most likely it will pierce down through the bottom edge of the box, using a panic-driven volume surge to completely wash out these bloodied leverages before it can bottom out. The current risk-reward ratio is extremely poor, don't touch it.On Friday, the Nasdaq rebounded 1.1%, the S&P 500 rose 0.32%, and the semiconductor sector also showed a clear recovery. But looking at the whole week, the Nasdaq still fell 3.4%, and the S&P 500 dropped 2.7%. AI tech stocks were heavily sold off in the previous days, and Friday's rebound looks more like a correction after a deep decline, not yet a full return of risk appetite. ① BTC's funding pressure is more obvious than that of the US stock market. On November 6, the US BTC spot ETF saw a net outflow of about $412 million, and the ETH spot ETF outflow was about $93.3 million. Throughout the week, BTC ETFs had a cumulative outflow of about $1.282 billion. Especially BlackRock's IBIT had a single-day outflow of about $403 million. While the US stock market rebounded, ETFs continued to bleed, and this divergence is worth watching. However, ETF outflows do not mean all institutions are selling BTC. ② The strong US employment data is actually causing discomfort in the crypto space. On Friday, October nonfarm payrolls increased by 165,000, and the unemployment rate dropped to 4.1%. Strong employment indicates economic resilience but also raises the possibility that the Federal Reserve will continue its tightening policy or even raise rates again. If US Treasury yields and the dollar strengthen, BTC and ETH may continue to face pressure; if the market focuses more on a soft economic landing, the impact may not be entirely negative. ③ Next week's CPI may be more important than the US stock market rebound. At 21:30 Beijing time on November 10, the US will release October CPI. If inflation continues to exceed expectations, the market may further raise rate hike expectations; if it cools significantly, there is a chance to ease pressure on the dollar and US Treasuries 💻 According to my code review of this: the input is that Strategy disclosed a designated USD reserve of $4.79 billion as of November 1; by the performance as of October 2026, about $431.8 million was raised by selling Bitcoin, used for dividends and buybacks.
Logically, I care more about STRC's payment rules rather than how large the reserve number is. From November 1, dividends are accumulated daily and processed on business days. I think this is mainly an experience optimization, not a security upgrade: a higher accumulation frequency does not mean an increase in payment resources; STRC has no collateral rights on the Bitcoin held by the company; selling Bitcoin to raise funds also indicates that the payment source cannot only focus on the reserve balance.
A potential bug is reading "daily accumulation" as "daily cash arrival," then misinterpreting it as being backed by Bitcoin. If I were to revise the display, I would separate accumulation, actual payment, and funding sources into different columns. I will continue to observe how payment resources change and will not give a high risk control score just for interface optimization.#软银重金押注OpenAI，Q2财报能否交出亮眼成绩？ In the quarter from July to September 2025, OpenAI revalued and recognized a one-time amount of about $14.6 billion (2.2 trillion yen), with a single-quarter net profit of 2.5 trillion yen, and a record high of 2.9 trillion yen in the first half of the year. Compared to this base, this year's year-on-year performance is obviously going to look bad. The price increase has already been accounted for; this time it's just paying the money.
3. Interest is a cash outflow; unrealized gains are just book figures
- In March, a $40 billion bridge loan was signed (led by JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Mizuho, Sumitomo Mitsui, and MUFG), with $20 billion drawn in April and another $10 billion in July
- In December 2025, an $11.5 billion margin loan was taken out using Arm stock as collateral
- In September, $11 billion high-yield bonds were issued, with yields of 9%–10%, meaning interest alone is $900 million to $1 billion per year, making it the largest non-financial corporate bond in the Asia-Pacific region
- In August, SVF2 again used OpenAI shares as collateral to borrow $10 billion
Result: This quarter's financial expenses were 328.7 billion yen, up 98.9% year-on-year, including 265.8 billion yen in interest expenses for the parent company, which is 135.5 billion yen more year-on-year. Bloomberg estimates FY2027 cash outflows of at least $6 billion, with LTV approaching the company's self-imposed 25% limit. The financial report is expected to look very bad...美国现货比特币ETF在截至11月8日的一周内录得12.8亿美元净流出，为6月下旬以来最大单周流出，也是连续第二周净流出。这一逆转已抹去年内全部净流入：12只基金今年累计净流出约9.141亿美元，而本周开始前年内累计净流入约3.68亿美元。仅周五一天净流出就达4.119亿美元，其中贝莱德IBIT流出4.03亿美元。 抛压并不局限于比特币。现货以太坊ETF本周净流出3.653亿美元，连续第六周录得净流出；Solana和Hyperliquid ETF均连续第五周净流出。这表明资金正在广泛撤离加密交易所交易产品，而非比特币单一资产的孤立事件。 资金外流背后的驱动因素 多重力量似乎正在汇聚。宏观逆风仍是首要嫌疑：美国国债收益率高企，美联储释放放缓降息步伐的信号，风险资产整体难以吸引新增资金。加密资产作为风险谱系中beta最高的板块，往往最先、也最剧烈地感受到这种转变。 获利了结可能也在发挥作用。比特币今年早些时候的上涨让许多ETF持有者坐拥可观收益，近期的盘整提供了在年底前锁定回报的动机。尤其是机构配置者，受再平衡和税损收割考量影响，可能放大任一方向的资金流动。 流出集中于IBIT值得注意。贝莱When I saw this message, my first thought was: The grand prize is tempting enough, but who will bear the cost of waiting? The reward structure of solo mining has eye-catching odds, but the expectation shouldn't be judged solely by the winners.
According to Soloblocks.io data, from February 11 to November 7, 2026, independent Bitcoin miners mined 36 blocks, accumulating rewards of about 113.149 BTC, including transaction fees; some cases involved small home mining rigs. I think this proves that "small devices have a chance," but it doesn't prove that "small devices are more cost-effective."
The successful cases did not disclose the total participating hash power and investment, so personal win rates cannot be adjusted based on this; electricity costs continue to incur, but rewards are unevenly distributed—these are two separate accounts. My guess is, if you already want to study mining and can endure long periods without rewards, participation makes sense; if you expect stable returns, this news is far from sufficient. If it were you, would you value the probability of continuous returns more, or the high odds of solo block mining?#软银重金押注OpenAI，Q2财报能否交出亮眼成绩？ In the quarter from July to September 2025, OpenAI revalued and recognized a one-time amount of about $14.6 billion (2.2 trillion yen), with a single-quarter net profit of 2.5 trillion yen, and a record high of 2.9 trillion yen in the first half of the year. Compared to this base, this year's year-on-year performance is obviously going to look bad. The price increase has already been accounted for; this time it's just paying the money.
3. Interest is a cash outflow; unrealized gains are just book figures
- In March, a $40 billion bridge loan was signed (led by JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Mizuho, Sumitomo Mitsui, and MUFG), with $20 billion drawn in April and another $10 billion in July
- In December 2025, an $11.5 billion margin loan was taken out using Arm stock as collateral
- In September, $11 billion high-yield bonds were issued, with yields of 9%–10%, meaning interest alone is $900 million to $1 billion per year, making it the largest non-financial corporate bond in the Asia-Pacific region
- In August, SVF2 again used OpenAI shares as collateral to borrow $10 billion
Result: This quarter's financial expenses were 328.7 billion yen, up 98.9% year-on-year, including 265.8 billion yen in interest expenses for the parent company, which is 135.5 billion yen more year-on-year. Bloomberg estimates FY2027 cash outflows of at least $6 billion, with LTV approaching the company's self-imposed 25% limit. The financial report is expected to look very bad...Brothers, SNDK has climbed back from the 803 pit to 837, but this rebound feels different from before.
$SNDK $837
SNDK closed near 835 on Friday and rose to around 840 after hours. From the June peak of 2354, the retracement is still about 64%.
The trigger for the rebound is extreme overselling. RSI dropped to the lowest reading since listing, and a technical rebound demand is accumulating. Most storage sector stocks strengthened on Friday, Micron rose over 5%, and the Nasdaq rose 1.09%.
But what really stands out is the valuation. The forward P/E ratio is only 3.67x, while the median for the tech sector is 19.16x. The market is pricing in that the 85% gross margin is unsustainable, but the company’s long-term contracts cover about half of the shipments for fiscal 2027, and Q2 guidance shows gross margins between 84.4% and 85.4%.
The divergence is widening. Among 25 analysts, 17 strongly recommend buying, with an average target price of $2047. But Wells Fargo cut its target to 1300, and RBC cut it to 1400.
Technically, 816 was Friday’s intraday low and is a key short-term observation point.
Let’s discuss in the comments: Is SNDK with a forward P/E of 3.67 a value trap or a golden opportunity?👇
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温
#美股暴跌后科技股反弹，纳指周线仍跌约3.4%