Orbit Post Sitemap
$ZEC short whale count has risen to 680, setting a new record for this market cycle. Among them, 166 positions were just opened in the past day, and the price was rising at that time.
The liquidation zone around $1364, $10.7 million mentioned last time, has been completely cleared out. Currently, these short whales have a combined loss of $7.6 million, with an average entry cost of $1261.
Key levels to watch:
- Support: A $5.6 million buy wall near $1295, only 1.2% away from the current price
- Above: $8 million liquidation orders near $1450
- Below: $6.4 million near $1198
The conclusion is simple: as long as the $1295 wall holds, the record short positions remain in unrealized loss.From $67 to $373 in two months, today stuck at the 205 mark without moving 🧱
On September 24, the clearinghouse selected Quant to build a tokenized deposit network.
But the network won't launch until 2027, and the announcement didn't say banks would buy QNT.
On November 5, the news circulated again, surged to 204 then fell back to 189.
At $199, the trading volume is only $11.4 million.
I think the narrative has prematurely priced in the 2027 event; 205 can't be broken, so let's watch for a pullback first.
$QNT The European Central Bank presidential candidate Hernández de Cos publicly stated that monetary policymakers must continue to monitor the inflation risks brought by high energy prices. The statement was brief but denied a premise on which the market was betting.
The original script was: energy prices fall, inflation naturally cools down, and the central bank follows suit with rate cuts. His view is that the expectation of falling energy prices has not yet materialized, so the first page of the script is stuck.
The mechanism is that rising energy prices first push up overall inflation, then through transportation, electricity, and production costs permeate into services and wages—this is called the second-round effect. He said it has not yet appeared, not to signal safety, but to say this is still on the way. The central bank will not wait for it to appear before acting; waiting until then would be too late, so the tendency is to tighten early.
He also pointed out another line: some economies have public debt at historically high levels, fiscal deficits remain high, and once borrowing costs rise, interest payment pressure immediately amplifies. Policy space is squeezed from both ends—one end inflation, the other fiscal.
For crypto, this is not a sign that the downside is fully priced in, but that the timing of rate cuts is pushed back. The fuel for this rally is liquidity easing; if the fuel arrives late, valuations have to wait longer. $BTC carries both safe-haven and risk identities simultaneously, making the tug-of-war more obvious; $ETH pricing relies more on on-chain activity and funding conditions, making it more sensitive to interest rates.
What is worth watching is not just this statement, but the next combination of energy prices and core inflation: if energy rises but core inflation does not, there is still room to maneuver; if both rise together, that is when liquidity expectations are truly overturned.Is unlocking $17 million necessarily more stressful than unlocking $300,000?
$ENA's next unlock is about $17.03 million, accounting for 0.88% of the circulating supply.
$OPN unlocks about $451,400, accounting for 2.42% of the circulating supply.
$MAVIA unlocks about $307,700, accounting for 10.09% of the circulating supply.
ENA has the largest amount, but relative to the existing circulating supply, MAVIA corresponds to a higher proportion of newly added tokens.
To assess the impact of unlocking, three things need to be considered:
First, token ownership and release schedule:
Figure 2 of ARB shows the overall allocation structure and cumulative release plan. The funding needs of the team, investors, and DAO treasury differ, and the supply rhythm of concentrated release versus phased release also varies.
Second, market absorption capacity:
A high 24-hour trading volume does not mean the current order book can absorb sell orders of the same scale. The price impact differs greatly between selling the same batch of tokens dispersedly versus concentratedly.
Third, whether expectations have been priced in advance:
The public unlocking plan may have already influenced price trends before the actual unlock. With no formal text, the reported House Democratic proposal is still a direction of travel, not a legislative catalyst. Its focus on SEC/CFTC roles, investor protection and conflicts suggests the debate remains anchored in guardrails that can attract scrutiny as readily as support.
The 401(k) rule review widens the policy backdrop, but digital-asset details are pending. That uncertainty keeps implementation risk high.
#CLARITYActOutlook There’s a familiar feeling from the last round again: when one wallet presses the open position button, onlookers start writing the script for it. Now when I see this kind of monitoring, I tend to suppress the thought that "big players must know something" first.
This time it’s Core Trader 66 (0x5559da…3d43b) opening a short position on $NEAR with 10x leverage, nominal position about $100,000, reference price $3.754. This is a newly opened position; the outcome is not yet decided.
Compared to the last round, my focus on this kind of operation has shifted: I used to be easily attracted by the amount, now I care more about how much adverse volatility it is willing to endure. My judgment is that the value of observing this order lies in how it is managed afterward, not the act of opening a short itself.
The reason is practical: without knowing the wallet’s total assets, $100,000 can’t be directly translated as a "heavy bet"; roughly calculating with 10x leverage, if the price moves about 1% against the position, the initial margin loss is about 10%, and the actual loss is also affected by margin mode and fees. Leverage turns the judgment into a choice under time pressure; even if the direction is right, it may not withstand the process.
So I will look at subsequent position increases or decreases and whether margin is replenished together: if it continues to add positions during adverse volatility, that’s my risk observation point, not proof of confidence. Experienced players understand after seeing many longs: opening a position can express a stance, but how to handle unfavorable situations is where the real skill shows.Just saw this message, my first reaction was: so there are so many people in prediction markets who "just watch but don't participate" 🤔 Kalshi said that the midterm election market viewers are 5 times the number of traders, with millions checking election odds this week without placing bets; the page also shows a congressional election map and continuously changing predictions.
I've been in the circle for just a year, and I used to judge a platform's usefulness by trading volume. This time my judgment is that this message is somewhat positive for the "information entry" value of prediction markets, but it can't be directly taken as evidence of increased trading demand. Watching the excitement and being willing to bear the cost of wrong judgments are indeed two different things.
What I understand is that the map combined with constantly changing odds turns complex election situations into a more intuitive page, and just watching might satisfy information needs. If these people keep coming back to check later, then the platform might form a usage habit beyond trading, which is my speculation. However, more viewers do not equal more people participating in pricing, nor does it prove the odds are more accurate.
What I haven't figured out yet is how much value this spectator traffic can really accumulate. I'd like to ask experienced prediction market veterans: to judge whether it is a reliable information entry, would you prioritize looking at trading depth or the long-term deviation between odds and final results? Why?#After the sharp drop in US stocks, tech stocks rebounded, but the Nasdaq weekly chart still fell about 3.4%. The core of this week's market is: concentrated panic selling on Thursday, followed by an oversold rebound on Friday. However, the rebound is a technical pullback and is insufficient to reverse the weekly adjustment pattern. The Nasdaq has experienced four consecutive weekly declines, entering a technical correction range.
The trigger for this round of sharp decline was the US midterm election results. The market had priced in the Democrats controlling both chambers in advance, raising concerns about tighter restrictions on AI, data center energy consumption, and construction approvals, directly impacting growth expectations for the computing power chain. Coupled with previously high valuations in the AI sector and continuous large-scale bond issuance by tech giants raising financing costs, funds were concentrated in cashing out. The semiconductor sector collapsed first, dragging the Nasdaq down sharply in a single day. On Friday, the non-farm payroll data exceeded expectations, pushing up the probability of a December rate hike and US Treasury yields, but the market did not experience a second sell-off. Instead, it rebounded, essentially due to short-term selling pressure being exhausted and short covering. Chips, optical modules, and AI hardware led the gains, representing an emotional recovery after overselling rather than a trend reversal.
Here lies a contradiction: strong employment proves economic resilience, reducing hard landing fears and supporting tech earnings; but at the same time, rising rate hike expectations continue to suppress valuations of high-growth stocks in the long term. Institutional opinions are clearly divided. Some funds are using the sharp drop to buy into the long-term AI theme at lower prices, while others continue to reduce positions to avoid the dual uncertainties of regulation and interest rates. $BTC $ETH $SNDK This week, the US Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $1.282 billion. On its own, this number isn't shocking, but the story changes when you break it down.
Out of the $1.282 billion, BlackRock's IBIT alone had a net outflow of $1.209 billion, accounting for over 90%. This isn't an industry-wide run; rather, a single institution's redemption turned the whole week's figures negative. In the same week, Fidelity's FBTC had a net inflow of $93.1 million, moving in the exact opposite direction.
Mechanically, IBIT is the main channel for institutions to allocate $BTC, being the largest and earliest entrant. Its redemption doesn't necessarily mean the narrative is broken; it looks more like rebalancing or realizing profits—typical position adjustments. The real signal isn't whether people are selling, but whether the sellers and buyers are the same group. IBIT outflows and FBTC inflows indicate the money hasn't left the category, just switched products.
In terms of timing, single-week data is the easiest to misinterpret. A weekly net outflow can be a turning point or just the trace of a large redemption. To judge trends, look for continuity: if IBIT continues outflows next week, that signals a reduction; if it quickly returns positive, it's just a one-off event.
So reading the $1.282 billion as institutional retreat or $BTC peaking is jumping the gun. It's more likely that the largest player is reducing while others are absorbing. The key points to watch are whether IBIT will have a second consecutive week of outflows and whether FBTC's inflows can continue.
Worth considering: when an ETF is so large it can sway the entire industry, how much of the "market sentiment" we read is just the redemption and subscription rhythm of BlackRock alone.$BTC was still at 81k the day before yesterday, then dropped back to 76k in one day and started consolidating!!
From today's market perspective, 77k is the intraday resistance level. If it effectively breaks through the 77000 mark, the CEX cumulative short position liquidation will reach 958 million.
The midterm election results delivered positive news, causing BTC to surge to 81000 before quickly falling back. Obviously, the selling pressure above is too strong. Yesterday's non-farm payroll data was negative but did not immediately drag BTC down, indicating there is buying support below, but it only slowed the decline rather than stabilizing the bottom!!
From the four-hour chart, the bullish trend has not changed. My view: if 77000 cannot be broken in the short term over the weekend, I still expect a high short on the rebound. If the support at 75000 breaks, then I look to 68000!!!
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Today's Meme Watch: Three Uptrend Scenarios, Don't Mistake Them for the Same Hype (｡･ω･｡)
Each of today's three Memes has its own "storyline," but hype doesn't mean they're all good entry points.
$ARB: The community staking proposal passed, with 100 million ARB tokens entering the staking mechanism, removing part of the circulating supply. This logic leans toward institutional approval, not just hype. However, the price is still low and flat; it takes time for the proposal to translate into market gains. Small spot positions for a stealth entry are fine, but chasing high as a reversal is not recommended (￣▽￣)ノ
$PEPE: Justin Sun has become the largest individual holder, with over $50 million on-chain value. The celebrity effect combined with an oversold rebound means sentiment can ignite quickly. But this wave seems purely sentiment-driven, and when sentiment fades, sharp dips are likely. Treat it like a lottery ticket position, not a guaranteed win (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
$DOOD: The token of Doodles, driven up by IP consensus and capital rotation, with no fundamental catalysts seen yet. It belongs to the NFT sector rotation arbitrage, highly volatile, suitable for quick in-and-out trades, not for long-term holding as a belief (｀・ω・´)
Summary: ARB reduces circulation, PEPE rides celebrity hype, DOOD benefits from rotation—three distinct logics. I once blew up my position on early meme coins; now I treat Memes as observation samples without taking positions; main positions go to mainstream spot assets. For these, just analyze and watch the show. Handle it as you see fit (ง •_•)ง
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Trump: "Before midnight tonight, I am still the Chief Hua Detective!"
After losing the midterm elections, many called Trump the "lame duck president." Don't be naive, as long as he is still in the White House, he has 100 ways to choke the Democrats. Losing Congress only means he can't legislate at will, but he still holds executive power:
1. Ultimate shield (veto power): Democrats want to raise taxes or kill AI regulation? Trump just slaps a "VETO." Without a two-thirds majority in both houses, the bill is dead.
2. Unilateral offense (executive orders): Congress is bickering, Trump directly signs executive orders to loosen restrictions on Silicon Valley and the crypto circle, Democrats can only watch helplessly.
3. Control of national machinery (SEC/FTC): Democrats want to investigate Musk? The DOJ and SEC are Trump's people, they can completely "not cooperate," even support Musk with federal contracts.
4. Tariffs and diplomatic power: This is the president's exclusive privilege, no congressional approval needed.
What does this mean for our trading?
"Bipartisan division" has never been bad for the market. Because no one can go to extremes. Democrats can't impose harsh AI bans, and Trump can't push extreme fiscal stimulus.
Policy deadlock means don't bet on extreme regulatory crashes. What really determines the fate of US stocks and BTC is still the Fed's liquidity. Liquidity first, political noise second!
Brothers, do you think the bipartisan bickering is good or bad for tech stocks? $SNDK Last night, the US stock AI hardware sector was really strong, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rising 4.21%, $AMD surging 11.04% to close at 449.04, Micron up 5.12%, Nvidia rebounding 2.78% to close at 186.64, and the Nasdaq also up 1.09%.
I originally thought before going to bed that the crypto market might catch some of the rebound this morning, but unexpectedly, BTC is still fluctuating around 76000, completely unmoved!
This contrast is indeed a bit surprising.
In the past, when AI chip stocks rallied, the crypto market would usually ride some of the heat, but now it's clearly different. US stock funds are willing to flow back into AI hardware but have not obviously transmitted to the crypto market, indicating that the capital rotation between the two markets has already diverged.
More importantly, last night the Dow Jones still fell 0.46%, and although the Nasdaq rebounded, it has closed down for four consecutive weeks on the weekly chart, with a cumulative decline of 3.37%.
So, folks, a one-night rebound does not mean a trend reversal, and you should not blindly be bullish on crypto just because US stocks rose.
Next, the focus remains on observing the support strength around BTC 76000 and whether US stock funds can continue to flow back. #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 ETH, DOGE, and SOL have no supply cap, with inflation continuing nonstop. Even if their market caps shine in the short term, they ultimately cannot withstand the long-term continuous release of tokens, making their prices prone to gradual dilution and weakening.
RVN, Celo, and Ronin currently have modest market caps, but their total supply has a hard cap, and their scarcity continues to accumulate over time, giving them long-term potential for value appreciation.
RVN relies on distributed PoW computing power with no project team backdoors; Celo focuses on mobile-friendly inclusive stablecoin payments with a low entry barrier; Ronin sidechain offers low gas fees, suitable for high-frequency transactions in blockchain games.
SOL has an annual inflation of about 3.5%, DOGE about 3.7%, and ETH about 1%, with new tokens released every year, continuously diluting the value corresponding to each token.$AVGO
AI hardware fluctuates together, will Broadcom's custom chip logic fail?
This week, the semiconductor sector faced a concentrated sell-off, indicating that capital is raising its expectations for AI investment returns. This shock will first compress the valuation across the entire chain.
Custom chips can reduce the cost of specific workloads, but customers still adopt them based on business scale and the economics of in-house development. Customer concentration also amplifies the impact of changes in individual projects.
I focus on mass production pace, network demand, and customer budget execution. If multiple projects continue to scale up, and profits and cash flow follow, differentiation becomes more apparent; if projects are concentratedly delayed, one cannot ignore the decline in revenue visibility just because custom solutions have cost advantages.Backtested annualized return of 30%, why might live trading differ significantly?
Because the ideal assumptions in backtesting may not hold true in the real market.
Five key points need to be checked:
1. Overfitting: Is the strategy too closely fitted to historical data?
2. Execution conditions: After a signal appears, can orders really be executed as expected?
3. Trading costs: After deducting fees, slippage, and funding rates, how much net profit remains?
4. Market environment: Does the original trading edge still exist?
5. Risk metrics: Besides annualized return, how are the maximum drawdown and performance in extreme conditions?
Out-of-sample validation, reasonable cost models, and small-scale live testing all help identify strategy weaknesses but cannot guarantee future profits. I see this as a trend of refining the rules rather than a signal of a market strengthening.
Trend is the best friend, but don't mistake rule updates for positive news.
HyperEVM currently has a minimum transfer limit of 1 $USDC to HyperCore; transfers below 1 will not be credited.
I judge the trend by three criteria: looking at capital, which hasn't shown incremental growth; looking at usage, where the clear threshold can reduce operational errors; and looking at sentiment, which feels more like a localized reminder and is unlikely to support optimistic market expectations. I will continue to observe actual usage and not let headlines drive my emotions. Right now, it feels more like a phase where speculation and position washing are mixed together; it's not the time for mindless chasing of gains. Are the positions you hold driven by sentiment or by strength and weakness? Last night, I watched the numbers for SNDK for a long time: from 689 up to 2373, almost a textbook M top, followed by a waterfall decline. The bulls struggled around 1800 but were still pushed down, now resting at 843, just one step away from the starting point of the rise. This position is very delicate; it’s not only the lifeline for SNDK itself but also a small mirror reflecting capital preference.✨ My own feeling is that the market is currently trading on "who is more resistant to decline" rather than "who rises more sharply." BTC is moving sideways at a high level, ETH is relatively stable but lacks active buying, and altcoins are clearly split into two groups: those with narratives can still hold, while purely sentiment-driven ones have started to leak air. SNDK, which has retraced more than 70% from its high, is exactly the type that gets abandoned first when risk appetite contracts. What people often overlook is that this kind of individual stock collapse is rarely an isolated event; it first affects the momentum players in the same sector, then gradually transmits to the overall confidence in altcoin holdings. There is also a bullish path: if the 830 to 840 range can hold and form a double bottom, a short-term rebound to 900 to 950 is not exaggerated, and ETH along with some oversold altcoins will also catch a breather. But the cost of this path is that volume must confirm it, not just self-comfort with a small bullish candle. The risk side is more direct: if 830 is effectively broken down by a large bearish candle, the M top is fully confirmed, and panic will ensue.$SOXL is a 3x leveraged long ETF for the US semiconductor sector, what does that mean?
When memory semiconductors rise, it can increase by 3 times the memory sector's gains. It holds stocks like Nvidia, Micron, Intel, and other memory semiconductor companies. Although SK Hynix and SanDisk are not directly included in the US-listed index, their price movements are strongly correlated with SOXL. Hearing this, doesn't it feel like money is just flowing in? 🤪
Today, the US semiconductor stocks are collectively trading in a range-bound pattern. I checked on-chain data, and the top ten net capital inflows in the last 24 hours are all in US stock tokens, indicating short-term capital is flowing back, but this doesn't guarantee a big rally!!
At least from my perspective, the bearish trend hasn't reversed yet, so my personal advice: if you want to be safe, wait for a rebound and continue shorting. Recommended entry point: $60 #Berkshire's massive cash reserves, the earnings report will reveal the latest developments 3. Several scenarios for tonight's earnings forecast
1. Positive scenario: significant cash decline + large acquisition announcement / major position increase + sustained buyback efforts
Interpretation: Abel dares to act, finds high cost-performance assets, and the market will recognize his capital allocation ability.
2. Neutral scenario: slight cash decline, fewer buybacks, no major acquisitions
Interpretation: Still cautious, slowly building small positions in real estate and other niche areas, continuing a wait-and-see approach, stock price likely to fluctuate.
3. Slightly negative scenario: cash continues to hit new highs, buybacks almost halted, insurance underwriting profits decline
Interpretation: Management is very conservative about the future market, the market will worry that "money remains idle, underperforming the market in the long run," likely to face pressure.It now feels more like a post-shakeout game phase, not a mindless chase of the rally. BTC's net inflow suddenly expanded; why should altcoins be watched even more closely? The most intuitive observation from the market over the past two days is that BTC's buying demand has returned, but market sentiment hasn't followed suit. According to data from November 7, BTC had a 24-hour inflow of about 9.63 million coins and an outflow of about 8.32 million coins, resulting in a net inflow of about 1.31 million coins, which is an increase of approximately 195% and 256% compared to the previous day and the same period last week, respectively. Meanwhile, liquidation amounts dropped to about 41.65 million USD across 3,152 transactions, a nearly 80% decrease from the previous day and more than half less than a week ago. After leverage was cleared, the market indeed feels lighter, but whether this lightness is a buildup of strength or a lack of participation requires layered analysis. What concerns me more is the strength and weakness across sectors. BTC receiving net inflow first indicates that large funds are returning to the most stable anchor; ETH usually follows after BTC stabilizes, and altcoins come even later, requiring a clear rise in sentiment to sustain buying. Currently, the sentiment indicator is still at zero, meaning this wave looks more like a recovery, not a full risk-on. For trading rhythm, BTC strong, ETH following, and altcoins slow is a typical defensive warming structure. The bullish path is: leverage bubbles get squeezed out, net inflows remain positive, BTC consolidates, then ETH catches up, driving altcoin rotation, making right-side chasing comfortable. The risk is that the expanded net inflow might just be short-term turnover; if sentiment doesn't pick up, altcoins are prone to spike and then fall back; also, the cumulative net outflow of ETFs within the year is about $UNI
Uniswap represents an important experiment in decentralized financial infrastructure. Its relevance extends beyond individual token swaps because decentralized liquidity is fundamental to many blockchain applications. However, growing trading activity doesn't automatically translate into proportional token value. Fee economics, governance decisions, competition from alternative exchanges, and regulatory uncertainty remain important factors when evaluating UNI's longer-term fundamentals.As soon as the non-farm payroll data came out, the US dollar surged, but the crypto market was drained dry
Brothers, simply put, last night’s non-farm employment data can be summed up in five words: the US dollar won big!
The US added 165,000 jobs last month, while the market expected only 65,000. Employment far exceeded expectations, meaning the Federal Reserve not only can’t cut interest rates but might even raise them. The result: the US dollar soared, and US Treasury yields jumped to 4.85%.
This is a draining blow to the crypto market!
The logic is simple: when the dollar is strong, US Treasury yields are high. Since buying US Treasuries guarantees a 5% return with no risk, who would want to take big risks in crypto? All the money flows to risk-free interest, instantly draining liquidity from the crypto market.
Without new capital inflows, the market naturally cools down. Many leveraged traders, seeing the unfavorable situation, got stopped out by a sudden spike. This is because macro liquidity was drained by US Treasuries, and no one was left to take the other side.
What’s next??
Focus on three things: whether 75,000 jobs can hold, whether ETF fund flows turn positive, and the Federal Reserve decision on December 10. As long as US Treasury yields don’t fall, the crypto market will likely continue to oscillate and bottom out. Don’t rush to go all in to catch the bottom. #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Transferring the same 1 USD, why do different stablecoins carry different risks?
Because having the same price target does not mean the underlying mechanisms are the same.
When evaluating stablecoins, focus on:
* Issuance mechanism: fiat reserves, crypto asset collateral, or derivatives and hedging?
* Reserve assets: Are the asset composition, custody arrangements, and public reporting clear?
* Redemption capability: Who can redeem? What conditions must be met?
* Market liquidity: Is it easy to exchange? How large is the bid-ask spread?
* On-chain risks: Are there freezes, transfer restrictions, or upgrade permissions?
* Network risks: Is the current version officially supported? Being able to transfer does not mean you can redeem at 1 USD anytime; historically close to 1 USD does not guarantee no future depegging.
Don’t just look at the price; look at what supports the price and what might happen in extreme situations. The quality of a rebound has never depended on how much it rises, but on who is buying. Mainstream coins: the shell propped up by short covering, the skeleton absent of spot funds. BTC returned to $80,650, up 4.9% in 24 hours, reclaiming the 80,000 mark. But data from Bitfinex and Gate simultaneously point to an awkward fact: this rally is mainly driven by short liquidations, with spot funds not keeping pace. ETFs have seen net outflows exceeding $410 million for two consecutive days, and institutional buying remains absent. 81,000–82,000 is short-term resistance, 80,000 is the lifeline; a daily close below exposes 77,600 again. ETH retreated to 2,240 after hitting resistance at 2,450; the daily Fibonacci 0.786 support lies here, and if broken, the liquidation concentration zone at 2,170–2,200 will be the next stop.
In trading, remove "rebound magnitude" from your buying criteria. For mainstream coins, watch if spot buying returns; for altcoins, watch if BTC market share loosens. Until both shift, the rebound is a correction, not a reversal.
When the tide recedes, many swim naked; when liquidity stratifies, those holding the oars are few. #伯克希尔巨额现金储备，财报将披露最新动向 Dropped 8%, the long-short ratio is still 2.89
$BTC fell from 81,000 to 74,762, with 1.2 billion liquidated.
Long positions still account for 74.32%.
How this number is calculated:
The long-short ratio 2.89 is 74.32 divided by 25.68.
Despite such a big drop, this number barely moved.
Who is placing orders here:
The trapped long positions haven't exited, all are holding on hard.
On October 8, this number was only 1.5, now it has doubled.
What will happen next:
The price has already broken down, and those holding positions remain.
If 74,000 breaks again, this batch of orders will be sold off by the system in a chain.
Sell orders push the price down, and the next batch will be sold as well.
Stop loss is not admitting defeat, it's taking back the initiative.
#BTC现货ETF年内累计净流出约4.16亿美元 $BTC ⚠️ Nonfarm payrolls greatly exceeded expectations but couldn't shake gold or BTC! The market isn't really waiting for a rate hike
October nonfarm employment data significantly surpassed expectations, showing exceptional labor market resilience, directly boosting the probability of a Fed rate hike in December. The US dollar index and US Treasury yields surged accordingly. According to traditional interest rate pricing logic, assets highly sensitive to real interest rates like gold and BTC should have come under pressure and declined, but the market behaved counterintuitively: after the data release, both only briefly dipped before quickly bottoming and rebounding. The negative news did not break key support levels; instead, they rallied against the trend.
The core of this abnormal movement is that market pricing logic has already shifted in advance. This nonfarm report is essentially a "boot dropping" type of negative news; the market had already priced in expectations of weakening employment. The moment the data was released, short-seller momentum was fully exhausted, with short positions closing out quickly, causing selling pressure to dissipate and naturally supporting prices. The market generally understands that nonfarm payrolls are just a policy reference point; the real anchor determining the direction of the December rate hike is the November CPI inflation data. Before the inflation results are released, capital will not blindly bet on a unilateral rate hike. Both bulls and bears tend to observe cautiously, and safe-haven buying continues to support gold and BTC, further offsetting valuation pressure from high interest rate expectations.
From a trading perspective, do not blindly short at key support levels; the current downside support is very strong, and shorting risks being shaken out by volatility. Conservative traders can continue to wait and watch, waiting for clear signals from the CPI data and the December FOMC meeting before positioning for directional moves.
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 DEX trading volume decreased by 25.7% in one day. My first thought is the worst-case scenario: if the volume contraction is accompanied by a thinning of pool depth, the actual loss upon exit may exceed the pre-set stop loss. In this DefiLlama dataset, trading volume is also declining compared to a week ago, but top trading venues still have activity.
What concerns me more is execution risk, rather than directly interpreting the volume drop as bearish. ⚠️ Trading volume does not equal liquidity; this drop alone cannot confirm difficulty in selling. However, if the depth of the traded pool is insufficient, slippage will erode the risk budget, and triggering a stop loss does not guarantee execution at that price. This is my risk assessment, not a result that has already occurred.
Having done risk control for a long time, I am used to calculating "planned loss" and "worst possible loss" separately. A reminder for ordinary people: leave room in your single-trade risk budget for slippage and fees; do not treat the stop loss price as a breakeven line. #Berkshire's massive cash reserves, the earnings report will reveal the latest developments
Last night, the nonfarm payroll data was released, directly rewriting market expectations. New jobs added were 165,000, far exceeding the expected 65,000, and the data for the previous two months was revised upward by 84,000, with the unemployment rate falling to 4.1%.
After the data came out, the market's bet on a December rate hike quickly rose, with the probability of a rate hike approaching 80%, and interest rate futures weakening in tandem, as traders began to increase their bets on a rate hike.
But there is a contrast: the initial one-year inflation expectation for November was 4.3%, lower than the expected 4.7%. Inflation expectations are falling, but employment is unusually strong, leaving room for the Federal Reserve to continue focusing on inflation.
Another key point is that now the U.S. only needs to add about 40,000 jobs per month to match the growth of the working-age population. This balance point has dropped significantly from 150,000 in 2024. Labor supply contraction, tighter immigration, and increased retirements are the core reasons for the falling unemployment rate. Federal Reserve officials themselves do not view current employment as an inflation risk.
Strong employment drives up rate hike expectations, and low unemployment means the Federal Reserve does not need to worry excessively about a recession. This nonfarm payroll report directly tilts the December rate scale toward a rate hike
$BTC $SNDK $SOL The U.S. Department of Labor has submitted a proposed rule allowing 401(k) retirement plans to consider alternative assets to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review. Although it’s not yet certain that Americans can directly invest their retirement funds in BTC, when that day truly comes, crypto assets will see a massive influx of long-term retirement savings buying pressure. At the same time, it means that you, me, and those of us with U.S. green cards—brothers and sisters we’ve never met—will be able to diversify our investments efficiently, saving a lot of effort on asset allocation. Honestly, I’m not even a bit jealous 😭
That said, when that day arrives, I believe it won’t just be $BTC that benefits. Product structures, long-term risks, and compliance responsibilities will create numerous business opportunities distributed among asset management firms, ETF issuers, custodians, compliant trading platforms, and pension service providers. So if this policy path ultimately materializes, the biggest beneficiaries should be those crypto institutions that already have capabilities in traditional financial products.
So now, smart you, can you understand the moves of various CEXs?First, to pour some cold water, when I see this kind of update, I usually place today and yesterday side by side instead of getting excited by a single number. My judgment is: the most easily overestimated part of this news is the "change," not that there are indeed more bullish people. Having a bullish bias is one thing; whether there is new driving force is another.
According to OKEx futures trading data, the BTC long-short ratio is currently 2.98, compared to 2.96 24 hours ago, meaning for every 1 short account, there are 2.98 long accounts. I'm not rushing to get excited for two reasons: from 2.96 to 2.98 is only an increase of 0.02, and based on these two readings alone, you can't see a sudden acceleration in sentiment; also, it only counts accounts, not position sizes, so several small long positions may not outweigh one large short position. Therefore, this data set neither proves that long capital is stronger nor is it enough to prove that a reverse fluctuation is imminent.
Of course, the bullish people might also be right. If the price continues to strengthen and volume follows, I will adjust my cautious judgment and acknowledge that the optimistic sentiment has real backing. As for what ratio counts as extreme, the material doesn't provide a standard, so I won't arbitrarily classify 2.98 as a danger zone. What I want to see next is whether the price can fulfill this optimism, rather than celebrating the numerical advantage of participants.BTC at $76,200, do you still dare to bottom-fish?
BTC at 76,200, do you still dare to bottom-fish? ETFs ran $1.28 billion in a week, nonfarm payrolls blew past expectations, over $1 billion long positions buried—75k just held. The last drop, is it still a bear market appetizer?
First, look at the surface: 75k-76.5k range seems stable?
24-hour volatility is converging, weekend liquidity is low, price is moving sideways between 75,000–76,500. You open the candlestick chart, see 75k held, and think: is it stable?
In the past week, it quickly fell from 80,000–81,000, dropping 5–6% in one day on November 5, with over $1 billion leveraged longs liquidated. Now both buyers and sellers are waiting for next week’s CPI and December FOMC. Whoever moves first is likely wrong.
First thing: ETFs are running, and it’s big money running.
Since November, spot BTC ETFs have seen cumulative outflows of about $1.28 billion, with about $412 million outflow on Friday alone. BlackRock IBIT is the main force.
It’s not retail panic, it’s institutions reducing positions.
ETFs won’t tweet "I’m out," they just leave sell orders on the market. What you see is price dropping, but what you don’t see is pricing power changing hands.
ETF outflows are not noise; pricing power is shifting from those chasing the rally to those waiting for a dip.
But note: outflows are slowing, panic index cooling, selling pressure easing. This isn’t infinite ammo, but don’t mistake the rebound for a reversal.
Second thing: Nonfarm payrolls blew past expectations, rate cut dreams shattered.
October nonfarm +165,000, expected only 59,000–65,000; unemployment rate 4.1%, wages still sticky. December rate hike probability once soared to 70–80%, federal funds rate 3.75–4.00%, PCE/CPI still at 3.6–3.7%.
Real rates are high, BTC is a no-yield asset, macro is a headwind.
Good nonfarm data isn’t good for BTC; it tightens the noose on risk assets.
But on the flip side: if mid-November CPI cools or Fed signals dovishness, reversal could be quick. Now it’s not about who’s braver, but who can wait.
Third thing: 75k is a long-term holding cost zone, but don’t treat it as an iron bottom.
After a large-volume long bearish candle on November 5, 75,000–76,000 stabilized, which is also a cost concentration zone for long-term holders. Current 76,200 is in the upper-middle of the range, volume shrank over the weekend.
Daily chart broke below 20/50-day moving averages, forming lower highs and lower lows; RSI rebounded from oversold but still neutral to low; MACD death cross with shrinking histogram; 4H chart consolidating to form a bottom but hasn’t broken the downtrend line.
Support: 75,000–74,500, if broken look to 73,000–70,000.
Resistance: 77,000–78,000, then 80,000–81,000 gap, strong resistance 82,000–84,000.
75k holding is not a victory, the referee hasn’t blown the whistle; if 77–78 can’t be reclaimed, all rebounds are just corrections, not reversals.
Now it’s not a bull or bear choice, it’s garbage time before the liquidity inflection point.
Full position is painful; no position is painful; leveraged is the most painful.
BTC never traps people, it traps those chasing highs; it never mistreats the patient, it mistreats leveraged gamblers.
Bull vs. bear showdown, you decide:
On one side:
Long-term holding cost zone 75–77k provides support, scarcity post-halving unchanged, stablecoins/RWA still expanding, BTC dominance at 59%, retraced 25–30% from 2025 highs, historically this position often builds bottoms, selling pressure easing.
On the other side:
ETF outflows continue, high probability of December rate hike, Nasdaq in correction, liquidity tight, 77–78 moving averages pressure, 80–81 gap resistance, weekend news vacuum, sudden news can amplify volatility.
Trading strategy
Short-term (1–3 days):
Reduce or lightly short probe at 77,000–77,500, stop loss above 78,000; buy dips at 75,000–75,500, stop loss below 74,500. 4H close + volume breakout above 77,500–78,000 turns bullish targeting 80,000; break below 74,800 reduce longs or turn short targeting 72,000–70,000. Risk-reward at least 1:2.
Mid-term (1–4 weeks):
Build positions in batches at 74,500–76,000, total position no more than 20–30% of account, target 80,000–82,000, second target 85,000+, stop loss below 73,000. Add more when CPI cools or ETF turns net inflow; if outflows continue + rate hike lands, wait for lower levels.
Bull markets aren’t shouted into existence, they’re fueled by liquidity. The faucet isn’t open yet, what are you catching with a basin?
$BTC $ETH $SNDK Will Russia open BTC and ETH trading on December 1?
According to a report on November 7, the Moscow Exchange plans to launch BTC and ETH trading services starting December 1.
But there is an easily overlooked detail: the related regulatory rules are expected to take effect on November 17, and ordinary investors may face purchase limits and entry tests.
In other words, opening trading does not mean everyone can buy and sell without restrictions.
This is clearly different from what many understand as a "full liberalization of cryptocurrency."
What I think is truly worth watching is whether the introduction of BTC and ETH by traditional exchanges will bring new compliance capital demands.
Do you think this limited opening is a long-term positive for the crypto market, or is it more symbolic in the short term? #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 $$BTC On November 5th, Bitcoin briefly surged to around $81,000 but quickly fell back to around $75,000, with over $1.2 billion liquidated in 24 hours, mostly long positions. This indicates that after a bullish spike, leveraged longs are very easily and quickly liquidated.BTC, ETH, and SOL accounts are all biased towards longs, but the most crowded is ETH
Looking at the mainstream USDT perpetual snapshot at 01:00 UTC on November 7: $BTC long accounts account for 75.7%, 8-hour funding rate +0.0084%, OI about $7.31 billion; $ETH longs account for 79.7%, funding rate +0.0100%, OI about $5.35 billion; $SOL longs account for 78.0%, funding rate +0.0100%, OI about $840 million.
All three coins are biased towards longs, but ETH has the highest proportion of long accounts and the highest funding rate. A positive funding rate means longs pay shorts, which does not necessarily indicate a price increase; the account ratio counts the number of accounts and does not equal the actual position amount. Do not interpret "80% of accounts are long" as 80% of the funds being long.
What is truly worth cautioning is: if the price does not rise for a long time, the holding cost continues to accumulate. Once the short-term support is broken, some longs will shift from active positions to passive reductions.
I will first watch whether the ETH funding rate can fall back and whether OI contracts moderately, rather than directly switching to short. Crowding is a risk warning, not a directional signal. Are you more worried about ETH or SOL?
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 #美股暴跌后科技股反弹，纳指周线仍跌约3.4% #BTC现货ETF年内累计净流出约4.16亿美元 I found that many people like to believe in so-called insider information, or borderline insider info.
For example, if they know which project has been sold off, they think it will definitely pump and rush in.
But actually, even if it’s sold, it doesn’t start immediately.
Sometimes it takes days, sometimes months, sometimes years.
Remember, all words and everyone else are just the market makers' opposing side.$AMAT
Equipment stocks fell, is Applied Materials facing demand disappearance or budget postponement?
On November 5, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index plunged sharply, and the forward investment expectations in the equipment chain were subsequently scrutinized. The market first compresses valuations, which does not mean that customer orders have declined by the same magnitude.
Applied Materials needs to be viewed separately for advanced logic, storage, and other process investments. The expansion pace of different customers may offset each other or may weaken simultaneously.
If subsequent orders and service revenues remain resilient, I would interpret the impact more as a change in risk premium; if customers cut equipment budgets and delay acceptance, pressure on profitability will begin to take over, and valuation adjustments may not yet be over.This rebound is not accompanied by a significant increase in volume, indicating insufficient buying power at higher prices. After the flash crash near $81,000 earlier, bullish confidence was damaged, and the short-term trend leans more towards range consolidation. If the trading volume cannot expand, it will be difficult for the price to directly break through the resistance above. Not chasing $IONQ at ~$32 after a ~29% run off Thursday's $24.98 low.
Q3 revenue $173.8M, +336% YoY, vs ~$142M expected.
FY26 guide raised to $505-515M from $450-460M.
RPO doubled to $1.2B.
I think the numbers are real, but adj. EBITDA was still -$133.6M.
And ~$83.5M came from the SkyWater deal, not pure quantum.
Just watching.
Holds $30 I stay interested.
Loses $28 and the pop fades.
Guide raise re-rates it, or quantum hype cools again?
$IONQ $NVDA
#USStocks #QuantumNon-farm payroll data is one of the most influential indicators in macroeconomics, directly shaping the Federal Reserve's policy path. In the current environment, the labor market is unexpectedly strong, implying that inflationary pressures may persist, giving the Fed more justification to raise interest rates by 25 basis points at the December meeting. Historical data shows that Bitcoin's median volatility in the first hour after the non-farm payroll release is about 0.44%, approximately 1.6 times that of normal periods, with a 57% probability of rising in direction, but it often comes under pressure during rate hike cycles or hawkish data. Today's strong data should theoretically suppress risk appetite and be bearish for the crypto market.
So, why is there almost no reaction in the market? The core reason is that "the bearish news has already been priced in." Last night (November 5), Bitcoin plunged from above about $80,000 to around $75,000 to $76,000, a single-day drop of over 5%, with over $1 billion liquidated across the network, the vast majority being long positions. The main cause of this decline was not the non-farm payroll data itself, but the sell-off in U.S. stocks, especially Nasdaq tech and AI-related stocks. The chip and AI sectors plummeted due to earnings expectations, regulatory concerns, and post-election policy uncertainty, with Nasdaq dropping more than 5% in a single day. The risk asset contagion effect immediately transmitted to the crypto market. The correlation between Bitcoin and tech stocks has significantly increased in the current cycle; it is more like a "high-beta Nasdaq substitute" rather than an independent digital gold.The rise and fall of L1 largely depends on BTC's mood
A regression analysis breaks down the 4-week returns of ETH, AVAX, SOL, BNB, and TRX. Bitcoin's Beta alone explains 21%–65%, and adding on-chain metrics like protocol revenue and active addresses only contributes an additional 0–9 percentage points.
Holders need to recognize one thing: the "fundamental narrative" you buy is mostly just a shadow of $BTC in the short term. No matter how detailed the project teams talk about revenue or TVL, it doesn't change this coefficient.
Ethereum is the best example. During the week of the Dencun upgrade, TTM protocol revenue was $3.3 billion, dropping to $1.3 billion by August 2025, a 60% decrease, yet the market cap rose from $460 billion to $540 billion. Revenue fell while market cap rose—not because demand collapsed, but because Blob fees and the Gas limit increase were already suppressing the unit price of L1 block space.Berkshire Hathaway's Q2 2026 financial report, as of June 30, shows that Berkshire holds approximately $359.2 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and U.S. short-term Treasury bonds.
What does this mean? It is equivalent to owning an extremely large reserve of funds.
There are several main reasons:
1. Market valuations are high.
Buffett has always emphasized a margin of safety. When the stock prices of quality companies are significantly above their intrinsic value, he prefers to hold cash rather than invest just for the sake of investing.
2. Continuously adjusting stock positions.
In recent times, Berkshire has been a net seller of stocks, steadily increasing its cash reserves. This has led the market to speculate whether Buffett believes there are not enough attractive investment opportunities at the time.
3. Waiting for better investment opportunities.
Cash for Berkshire is not just a defensive tool but also future purchasing power. Once the market undergoes a significant correction or quality assets become undervalued, it has ample funds to deploy.
II. Does this mean a financial crisis is coming?
Not necessarily!
Holding a huge amount of cash does not mean Buffett knows in advance that a financial crisis is imminent.
More accurately, it is a balance between investment risk and opportunity cost.
Moreover, in 2026, Berkshire has already started to change its strategy. In Q2, the company became a net buyer of stocks again and repurchased its own shares, indicating that management has not completely stopped investing. #伯克希尔巨额现金储备，财报将披露最新动向 Today's analyzed coins: ONE, AIN
$ONE rose 54% in 24 hours, with a volume close to $29.63 million, an open interest of about 1.88 million, and a funding rate of -0.083%. The price is up while the funding rate turns negative, indicating shorts are paying to hold positions, suggesting a possible short squeeze; however, it's only 4.8% below the previous high. The surge with volume but stagnant price warns of a potential double whammy. The key is whether it can hold above the previous high with volume; if it can't, don't chase.
$AIN: Alpha surged 33% in a single day, peaked at 0.2346, currently at 0.1441, a pullback of nearly 39%; trading volume is 984,000, liquidity 880,000. The support is shallow and volatility high, chasing the rise risks getting trapped, bottom-fishing risks catching a falling knife. Until a clear bottom is confirmed, beware of further decline; small-cap coins can be heavily manipulated with little capital.
Once the previous high is broken and AIN confirms a bottom, which one do you think looks better?Many people think that crashing to 74,000 is a one-time risk release, and after the crash, the price can stabilize and rebound. In the current environment, this idea is not very realistic. Macro pressure still exists, the market itself is filled with panic, and the funds willing to actively step in to buy are very cautious. $BTC $ETH $SNDK Although the slow decline is exhausting, the selling pressure is dispersed, and liquidations are triggered sporadically, making it difficult to start large-scale chain liquidations. Even if it slowly approaches 74,000, the buying side still has time to test and absorb. As long as there is no avalanche-style deleveraging, once a turning point appears later, the market has a chance to pull back. But if it accelerates downward with volume, the nature is completely different. This kind of decline starts with selling pressure and speed. When the price reaches the consensus support around 74,000, a large number of long stop losses and forced liquidations are piled up here. Once triggered, chain liquidations will start: the price drops, longs are forcibly liquidated, the system automatically sells at market price, new selling pressure continues to push the market down, triggering more stop losses and forced liquidations. The more it falls, the more it explodes; the more it explodes, the more it sells; panic continues to spread, forming a downward spiral. The current absorption is already weak, and to stop directly at this position requires a huge amount of buying to enter instantly, which is a very low probability event. The liquidation system can easily sweep through this area. "A sharp drop means all bad news is out" only applies to washouts with sufficient liquidity, optimistic sentiment, and good absorption at the bottom. Under the current macro suppression and market panic, a volume waterfall plunge is not a clearance of bad news but the opening of a stampede switch. There is still room for maneuver in a slow decline, but once a volume waterfall starts running, the speed of liquidation is simply unstoppable.The biggest threat to Bitcoin's future may not be regulation or financial institutions selling off, but quantum computing. $BTC
Bitcoin Core developer Cory Fields proposed the "Quantum Mine" scheme, hoping to increase the cost of quantum theft by requiring attackers to stake an equivalent amount of BTC as collateral.
At the same time, Blockstream is evaluating lattice-based signature schemes and tends to adopt Falcon-1024 to address future quantum threats.
What does this mean? $BTC
At least Bitcoin developers have not chosen to pretend they don't see it.
Many people always think quantum computing is still a distant real threat, but technological development never notifies you in advance when it arrives.
I rather believe that Bitcoin's true competitiveness should not only be its fixed supply of 21 million coins but also its adaptability to new technological threats. $BTC
Of course, these schemes are still in the research and evaluation stage and should not be understood as quantum security issues having been resolved.
If Bitcoin cannot even cope with future technological challenges, then what is the meaning of so-called digital gold?
Do you think quantum computing will ultimately destroy BTC, or will it drive Bitcoin to complete a major security upgrade? #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 #ModernaQ3扭亏为盈，上调全年营收增长预期 #Oklo推进核电项目建设，商业化进展受关注 SoftBank’s fiscal 2026 Q2 report on Nov 10 will test whether its expanding AI exposure is translating into a more resilient financial profile. With cumulative OpenAI investment at $64.6B, Vision Fund gains and losses, asset valuations, and financing matter together: strong marks alone may not settle the durability question.
#SoftBankQ2AIReturns Tesla and SpaceX together lost about $456 billion in market value over two days, a staggering figure. For those exposed to both companies simultaneously, the harder part is that they may have caused the portfolio to lose its buffer at the same time.
Automotive, aerospace, and related tech businesses sound very different, but the market pricing may still include common factors: trust in Musk, optimism about long-term growth, and how much premium investors are willing to pay for long-term plans. Once these expectations adjust, companies with different businesses may also face pressure together.
What I think is worth checking this time is how many companies you actually bought and how much of your position depends on the execution ability and market appeal of the same person.
Of course, the orders, cash burn, and financing arrangements of the two companies still need to be analyzed separately. The stock price falling together cannot replace judgment on specific businesses; but if the portfolio treats them as unrelated assets, the risk estimate may be too optimistic.
Especially after the previous rise, it’s easy to feel that holdings are diversified across different industries, each with different growth logic. Only during a sharp drop do you realize that the shared expectations everyone depends on are bigger than imagined.
I won’t use the two-day market value change to predict the companies’ outcomes, but I will reassess concentration because of it. Liking a company, recognizing the founder, and controlling portfolio risk are all decisions that need to be made separately.
#特斯拉与SpaceX两日市值蒸发约4560亿美元 Nonfarm payrolls far exceed expectations! 165,000 jobs added, rate hike expectations instantly surge, is the crypto market about to get hit again?
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 $BTC
As soon as last night's data came out, the market was stunned. Everyone thought employment was cooling down, but October nonfarm payrolls hit 165,000, unemployment rate dropped from 4.2% to 4.1%, and wages didn't soften. The Fed was immediately pushed, and the probability of a rate hike in December took off.
Simply put, US employment is still too strong, and money won't loosen up anytime soon.
When the dollar strengthens and US Treasury yields rise, risk assets have to bow down first.
$BTC has been consolidating these days, and with this macroeconomic blow, short-term pressure is almost certain.
My personal judgment:
This big beat on nonfarm payrolls will indeed pour cold water on the crypto market in the short term, especially for those with high leverage.
But don't be scared away. The current strong employment data is more lagging data; what really determines the future direction is whether inflation can truly come down and how tough the Fed's stance really is. The crypto market has been repeatedly slapped by macro factors several times recently; every time there's a big beat on expectations, it first drops sharply, then slowly digests it.
My strategy is: first guard against a pullback in the short term, don't chase highs, and wait until the market has mostly digested the "rate hike expectations"; that might actually be a better opportunity to buy the dip.
After all, what really determines the mid-to-long-term price of crypto is liquidity and risk appetite, not a single nonfarm payroll report.
When the data comes out, stay calm first, and remember not to be led by sensational headlines. Employment data is so strong that the market can't even smile.
US nonfarm payrolls in October increased by 165,000, far exceeding the expected 65,000, with the unemployment rate dropping to 4.1%. The probability of a rate hike in December has risen to nearly 80%.
Looking at the crypto space, the big brother is around $76,177, the slightly delayed aristocrat is about $2,249, and SOL is around $90. Although the three brothers have slightly rebounded, their weekly performance remains weak, especially SOL, which has dropped about 6.5% in the past five trading days.
The most awkward situation now is: the stronger the employment, the greater the pressure to raise rates, making it harder for risk assets to catch a breath.
I'm not in a hurry to bottom-fish for now; I'll first watch how the dollar and US bonds move. A rebound does not equal a reversal, don't let a single green candlestick trick you into getting on board.
Personal trading record sharing, not investment advice.
$BTC $ETH $SOL
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 $ASML
AI investment is being reassessed, how should we view ASML's orders?
This week, European semiconductors were also affected by concerns over AI investment, with ASML pulling back on November 5. The sensitive point for equipment stocks is whether customers can fulfill their multi-year capital expenditures as originally planned.
Demand for advanced processes and short-term project progress are two different matters. Customers may agree with the technology roadmap but delay factory construction due to power, permits, or financing.
I focus on new orders, cancellations or deferrals, and the pace of delivery turning into revenue. If orders remain stable and deliveries continue as planned, short-term emotional shocks are easier to absorb; if project delays spread, one cannot ignore mid-term cash flow risks based solely on long-term technological barriers.