Orbit Post Sitemap
To be honest, this news reminds me of the old thought that "just changing direction can turn things around." Later I realized that being impatient is a trap itself.
According to Ember monitoring, a whale's long BTC position was liquidated, then they shorted TRUMP and got liquidated again, with a total loss of $740,000. I think the key point is not how hard it is to guess the direction, but that switching sides didn't eliminate the liquidation risk; even with a lot of money, you can't withstand it.
Now I stick to two rules: first, size positions based on the loss you can afford; second, stop trading after liquidation and don't rush to recover losses.$DRAM Support Bounce Bullish Momentum Building.
Leverage: 10x Max
Trade Setup: Long
Entry: 39.50 – 40.50
SL: 35.80
TP1: 42.50
TP2: 44.00
TP3: 46.50
Price held the 36.67 low after the sharp decline from 50.42 and is now showing a clear bounce with buyers stepping in. As long as 36.67–38.50 holds, this recovery has strong probability of extending toward the next resistance levels.
Buy and Trade $DRAM Just now: Hyperliquid Strategies recorded a profit of $620 million in Q3, mainly from unrealized gains, and has applied for a license to introduce Hyperliquid perpetual contracts to U.S. traders.2006: The Eve of Bitcoin, the Unknown "Crypto War"
In 2006, the world had not yet coined the term "crypto circle."
At that time, Bitcoin had not yet been born, and Satoshi Nakamoto was still an unused pseudonym. If you turned on your computer, dialed into the internet, and ventured into the corners of the deep web, you would see a small group of people endlessly debating in a mailing list called "Cypherpunk." They cared not about candlestick charts but about privacy, freedom, and resisting censorship.
It was an era when CRT monitors flickered with green light. The market only had centralized electronic gold like e-gold, which was always at risk of being shut down. The true geeks were chewing on dry papers: Wei Dai's B-money, Nick Szabo's Bit Gold, Adam Back's Hashcash. They were trying to solve a seemingly unsolvable problem: how to prevent double-spending without banks?
No exchanges, no ICOs, no get-rich-quick myths. Only lines of obscure code and a group of idealists firmly believing "code is law." They did not know what the future held, only confidently typing every character in the dark.
That was the Cambrian night of digital currency. Silent, yet fierce.The whale who went long on $148 million worth of crude oil at 0x0cc1 has started cutting losses after a floating loss of $15.08 million. In the past 10 minutes, he stopped loss and closed $44.04 million worth of CL long positions, realizing a loss of $4.9 million. Half a month ago, he started going long on oil prices, continuously adding positions up to $148 million, but this week crude oil plummeted 14%, which stunned him. He still holds $94.79 million worth of BRENTOIL long positions, with a floating loss of $8.35 million and a liquidation price of 82.4. My judgment: this is a typical "averaging down and holding" failure scene, and the remaining part is very likely not to hold either. Do you think he will also cut the remaining BRENTOIL positions?
This does not constitute investment advice
$CL $ZBRENTOILUkraine's Central Bank Opposes Crypto Bill: Should Foreign Tokens Like USDT Also Be Regulated?
On November 5, the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) publicly opposed the current version of the cryptocurrency regulatory bill 10225-d, urging lawmakers to amend it before advancing legislation.
The central bank's main concerns are threefold:
First, foreign-issued tokens might enter the Ukrainian market without adequate regulation, potentially functioning as electronic money and affecting national monetary sovereignty.
Second, overseas token issuers might bypass regulatory requirements that domestic companies must comply with.
Third, the number of crypto trading platforms allowed would be determined by the securities regulator, which could lead to market monopolies and rent-seeking opportunities.
Interestingly, the central bank does not oppose the legalization of cryptocurrencies and supports establishing a regulatory framework referencing the EU's MiCA framework.
The core of the controversy is: the market can be open, but regulatory authority must not have loopholes.
This also indicates that the more stablecoins and crypto payments become widespread, the less willing central banks worldwide are to relinquish control over the monetary system. #美股AI板块走势分化：云服务商走强、数据中心股承压
Brothers, AI trading has entered the second half, and the market is starting to "do the math". It used to be "just touch AI and it rises," but now the divergence is extremely severe.
Why are cloud service providers strengthening? Because giants like Microsoft have proven that AI can not only make money but also control capital expenditures, with positive free cash flow. The market now prefers this "fast monetization, with reserves" light-asset model.
Why are data center stocks getting hammered? The heavy-asset model purely focused on infrastructure and computing power is being eaten away by high leverage and massive capital expenditures. For example, companies like CoreWeave face extremely high debt costs and leasing pressure; once the computing power leasing price war breaks out, profits go straight to zero. Capital is shifting from "heavy-asset infrastructure" to "light-asset software/cloud services." $BTC $SOL $SNDK On November 5th, the Democratic Party swept the midterm elections, and before the AI regulation hammer even fell, the US stock market crashed first.
The Nasdaq 100 plummeted 6.4%, Nvidia dropped 9%, and the chip index plunged 12%.
On the same day, Bitcoin was kicked down from around 80,000 to 76,000.
An asset that claims to be “decentralized, censorship-resistant, and not controlled by any government” was smashed along with the Democratic Party’s move to regulate OpenAI and Nvidia’s data centers.
Something’s off. Very off.
Bitcoin trades 24/7 with good liquidity, and leveraged products are everywhere. When AI stock long positions get margin called and funds need to deleverage, BTC becomes the easiest asset to liquidate among the entire “tech risk exposure.”
Wintermute’s data shows about $1.5 billion liquidated after Binance outflows, with 85% concentrated on longs. CoinGlass data is even more direct: over $2 billion in crypto long and short positions were liquidated on Thursday.
This isn’t because Bitcoin’s fundamentals worsened. It’s because Bitcoin just happens to be sitting at the same table as “tech trading,” and someone flipped the table.
What does the Democratic Party want? To pause super AI development, restrict data center construction, and put approval shackles on computing power expansion.
Who suffers the most? Centralized AI giants.
Nvidia, Micron, data center operators—their valuations are built on “unlimited expansion of computing capital expenditure.” Once regulation tightens, this assumption is shaken.
But what about Bitcoin?
Bitcoin doesn’t rely on data center approvals to survive. It doesn’t depend on any company’s capital expenditure plans. Its computing power is distributed worldwide and doesn’t need permission from any country’s regulators.
If “centralized AI” becomes scarce due to regulation, then logically the scarcity of a “decentralized, censorship-resistant computing power network” should rise, not fall.
Vitalik’s promoted “CROPS AI”—censorship-resistant, open source, private, secure—actually gains structural narrative support under this regulatory environment. Bittensor’s positioning has never been “stronger than OpenAI,” but rather “an alternative that no one can shut down.”
The market panicked and sold BTC and AI stocks together. But after the liquidation ends, they will return to completely different pricing logics.
BTC dropping to 76,000 isn’t because anyone seriously evaluated the “impact of AI regulation on Bitcoin fundamentals.”
It’s because one or more non-crypto hedge funds holding highly leveraged IBIT positions were liquidated, triggering a chain liquidation. It’s because long institutions quickly sold positions bought during the rebound, and “no buyers have yet stepped in.”
This is a liquidity event, not a fundamental event.
But prices created by liquidity events are precisely the most comfortable windows for contrarian positioning—provided you can distinguish between “forced selling” and “actively bearish.”
Wintermute gave two key levels:
$80,000 is the recovery threshold. If it can’t be reclaimed, short-term weakness remains.
$76,800 is the 50-week moving average and also the defense line. Breaking below here may mean the next wave of selling pressure is no longer liquidation-driven but a real trend reversal.
Currently, BTC is stabilizing near 76,000, barely above the 50-week moving average. This is not a position to blindly rush in.
The “oversell” caused by the liquidation wave needs time for the market to correct itself. And before correction, prices can go lower than you imagine.
When the market panics, it doesn’t distinguish between “AI companies” and “hedges against AI.”
It only distinguishes between “sellable” and “unsellable.”
Bitcoin was sold not because it’s in cahoots with Nvidia, but because it’s the chip on that table easiest to convert to cash.
But after liquidation ends and forced sellers exit, the asset will return to its original pricing logic.
Then the market will relearn one thing: Nvidia fears regulation, Bitcoin does not.
The current price is paying for a misclassification.
And mistakes have always been another name for opportunity—as long as you don’t get liquidated before the mistake is corrected.
$BTC $SNDK $ETH At 23:00 last night, BTC dropped from 78,279 to 75,511 in a single 1-hour candlestick, with a trading volume of $4.11 billion, consuming one-third of the daily volume. In 24 hours, $1.05 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated, 203,418 people were forced out, and bulls accounted for 88%.
It looks like a crash. But this is not a crash; it’s a liquidation scene.
First, let’s clarify who is selling.
Last night’s selling pressure came in two forms. The first is forced selling pressure—hedge funds were liquidated, and leveraged long positions were forcibly closed. This selling pressure is price-insensitive; no matter the price, the system dictates the sale. The S&P fell 4.36%, the Nasdaq dropped 5.52%, Nvidia fell 9%, and Tesla dropped 10%. Wall Street traders said, “This smells like liquidation.” Multi-strategy funds are cutting positions, and pods are being forced to close positions—this is a chain reaction on the same link.
The second is active selling pressure—spot holders voluntarily surrendering. This has not happened yet.
The evidence is straightforward: IBIT holding real coins only dropped 5.49%, while leveraged MSTR fell 10.12%, and COIN dropped 9.37%. Leveraged stocks fell twice as hard as spot holdings. What got washed out was borrowed money, not their own coins.
ETFs saw a brief net inflow of $74.6 million on November 4, ending three consecutive days of $1.16 billion outflows, but the cumulative net outflow for November remains $440 million. Meanwhile, large holders with on-chain self-custody increased their holdings to 3.03 million BTC, the fastest accumulation rate since February this year.
ETFs are selling “paper demand,” while whales are buying “real chips.” Short-term traders are running, and long-term holders are accumulating. These two groups never sit at the same table.
Despite the crash, BTC perpetual contract funding rates remain at +0.01%, with longs still paying shorts. What does this mean? The longs haven’t been fully washed out. The positions that needed to explode have done so, but the surviving leveraged longs are still holding, still paying fees, and still not giving up.
More than half of the clearing is done, but not all. The true bottom signal historically is when funding rates turn negative—when longs completely lie down and no one is willing to pay to go long. That point hasn’t arrived yet.
So the conclusion is not to "bottom fish," but to "wait."
Forced selling pressure comes fast and goes fast. The $1.05 billion liquidation was released in a few concentrated hours, leverage ratios returned to relatively healthy levels, and the market structure is actually lighter than a week ago. But the premise is: don’t use leverage to catch the liquidation before clearing is complete. Using leverage on the left side to catch liquidation is equivalent to turning yourself into the next batch to be liquidated.
Observation zone below: 73,000–68,000. The first signal of emotional recovery above: BTC retakes above 80,000, and ETFs have three consecutive days of uninterrupted net inflows. The Fear & Greed Index dropped overnight from 50 to 28—panic is precisely when chip turnover is most honest.
$1.1 billion bought a lesson:
Leverage dies in liquidation; spot survives in panic.
Those washed out were still betting on direction yesterday. Those picking up chips today are watching the structure.
The market never rewards those who bet correctly on direction, only those who survive liquidation.
$BTC $ETH $SNDK All the bad news about $CORE has been released. But the distance between "all out" and "time to buy" is as vast as an entire ledger.
b14g was drained of 97.05 million tokens, a hard fork recovered 68.14 million tokens, accounting for 70.2%, but the recovered funds have not yet been distributed to any affected users, and nearly 29 million tokens remain under pursuit. Validators have dropped from 31 to fewer than 20, with the community's latest count seeing 13. The Satoshi Plus consensus shutdown red line is 15. Bithumb officially announced the delisting of CORE on November 30. Out of 34 exchanges, only 13 still maintain trading.
On-chain fees: $1.17. DEX volume: $148.89. Price: 0.012.
Indeed, bad news is piling up. But a pile of bad news does not automatically mean "all negative factors are out."
Three hard constraints take precedence over "whether to bottom-fish" by ten thousand times.
First, Bithumb's November 30 deadline is firm. The reason for delisting is "unresolved trading warning issues," not liquidity problems. If your position is on this platform, this matter takes priority over any judgment about whether SatPay will launch.
Second, the 68.14 million recovered tokens have not reached users' hands. The hard fork recovery is a clean technical operation, but "recovery" and "return" are two different things. The team is still verifying balances and finalizing the distribution plan, with no official claim channel yet. When the market prices trust costs, it looks not at how much was recovered but when it returns to users.
Third, validators are just one short of 15. The remaining nodes are highly tied to the project team, with no neutral nodes holding dissenting opinions. This is not a valuation parameter but the physical boundary for whether this chain can continue to produce stable blocks.
So "what exactly should be done"
Is not a binary choice between "cutting losses" and "holding on." At this point, a more honest sequence is:
First handle the hard constraints, then discuss direction. Bithumb's deadline, CoinEx's withdrawal closure date, the distribution timetable for recovered funds—these matters have calendars, not K-line charts.
Then confirm exit feasibility. A daily DEX volume of $148.89 means on-chain liquidity is close to zero. CEX volume still exists, but delisting continues. Before discussing "how much it can rebound," first calculate "if you must exit now, how much can you actually get out."
Finally, wait for signals. Up to today, there has been no verifiable ecological income buyback transfer on-chain. Among the three events—nodes stabilizing, buybacks landing, new liquidity channels appearing—before any happens, "waiting" consumes not time but the residual value of exit rights.
$CORE The Triple Game Behind BTC's Deep V
🔴 Short-term Sentiment: After the Democrats took control of both chambers, the market first traded on expectations of "increased regulation," triggering sell-offs due to stablecoin constraints and SEC enforcement risks. Panic selling emerged early in the session, causing prices to plunge rapidly.
🟡 Mid-term Policy: The separation of the executive and legislative branches forms a hard constraint. The White House veto power can block Democratic bills, and both chambers will not easily approve the White House's relatively lenient agenda. Legislation checks and balances lead to a policy tug-of-war.
🟢 Long-term Pricing: The difficulty in passing bills actually delays the implementation of rules in the short term, narrowing enforcement margins and maintaining the industry's status quo. After the negative impact dulls, capital returns to risk assets, with bullish option buying and short covering jointly amplifying the rebound.
💡 Strategically, it is unwise to simply equate "tighter regulation" with a one-sided short. The direction can be maintained, but position size and stop-losses should not be stubbornly held. Going forward, closely monitor ETF net inflows, the strength of the US dollar index, and whether BTC can hold key resistance levels to determine if the deep V is a rebound or a reversal. #非农今晚揭晓，美股大跌后市场如何押注12月加息？ How to bet on December rate hikes after the US stock market plunge before the Nonfarm Payrolls announcement tonight?
On the eve of Nonfarm Payrolls, US stocks plunged sharply. How to bet on December rate hikes?
With the Nonfarm Payrolls announcement tonight and the US stock market plunging, should the market's bets on December rate hikes be recalculated? The US will release the Nonfarm Employment Report at 9:30 PM Beijing time. The market expects about 60,000 new jobs, with the unemployment rate forecast unchanged.
On November 5, US stocks fell sharply, and risk appetite was under pressure. Meanwhile, ADP employment, ISM service employment, and initial jobless claims have recently improved, leading to a reassessment of rate hike expectations and the future interest rate path. The Nonfarm data may further impact the Federal Reserve's rate expectations and the trends of US Treasuries and the dollar. In the crypto space, BTC is most directly affected by liquidity expectations, while ETH and SOL generally follow the overall market, so let's watch these three.
Before the Nonfarm data release, $BTC is down 5.7% in 24h, $ETH down 7.9%, with ETH falling more than BTC.
$SOL is down 6.3% in 24h, also falling, with all three coins moving in the same direction. Whether these declines are related to the US stock market plunge, tonight's Nonfarm data, or rate hike expectations, I won't draw that conclusion.
When the Nonfarm numbers come out, should we first look at the less fallen BTC or the more fallen ETH? Dogecoin (DOGE) Whale (Mega Whale) Classification Standards (Market Common Criteria) - 🐬 Dolphin: 1 million to 10 million DOGE - 🦈 Shark: 10 million to 100 million DOGE - 🐳 Whale: ≥100 million DOGE (can significantly influence the market) - 🦑 Super Mega Whale: ≥1 billion DOGE (institutional/exchange level) Quantity and Chip Situation According to Santiment statistics: there are about 140 wallets holding ≥100 million DOGE, these addresses collectively hold over 108 billion DOGE, with chip concentration far higher than BTC and ETH. Key Big Pitfall: The top on-chain rich list is not a single whale, but Robinhood's custody cold wallet (about 27.2 billion DOGE, nearly 17.5% of circulating supply), which contains coins from hundreds of thousands of retail investors, not one person; second is Upbit, third is Binance, both are exchange custody wallets, representing user asset custody, not private mega whales. The legendary super address that once held nearly 30% of DOGE was split by the end of 2021 and is no longer a single large holder. Characteristics (Compared to BTC/ETH Whales) 1. DOGE is a meme coin with thinner liquidity; a large private whale's big transfer or dump causes much more violent market fluctuations than BTC or ETH, easily triggering panic and chain liquidations. 2. High chip concentration: the top 10 addresses together account for the circulating supplyTo start with a reality check, opening a large long position does not mean the bulls have the answer. Core Trader 14 just opened a long on $HYPE with 10x leverage, holding 1,666 tokens, with a nominal value of about $129,200. What I see is a bet that amplifies directional risk, not a market consensus on this direction, so I won't change my cautious stance for now.
I'm not rushing to get excited for two reasons. One, a position size only shows this address's willingness to take risk; it doesn't reveal if there are other hedges. Treating a partial long as a fully bullish stance can lead to misjudgment. Two, 10x leverage compresses the room to wait: roughly, a 1% adverse price move corresponds to about a 10% loss of initial margin, excluding fees. If the price oscillates without moving up, the most stressed party is the leveraged long needing quick direction confirmation, not the onlookers.
Of course, they might be right. My bearish bias doesn't mean I have to oppose this trade. If the price can sustain above the reference price of $77.5542 and rebound after a pullback, I'll reduce my doubts about this long. But for now, there's only the opening action, no outcome yet. What I'll watch next is whether the price allows the position holder some margin for error, not how heavy the wallet's entry was. The odds for the crypto prediction question jumped from an underdog to a favorite. I'll first check the news instead of rushing to think the matter is settled. Is there really new progress in the project, or is the market too thin, allowing a small amount of funds to push the odds? Odds can reflect how the money thinks, but that doesn't mean the event has already happened. Unlike buying coins, here you also have to consider the deadline and the judgment conditions. I'm especially eager to check that transaction record—how did the price move before the news even came out?A net outflow of about $11 million brought me back to the familiar atmosphere of the previous cycle: when a new entry appears in a sector, people tend to hear "easier participation" as "there will be continuous capital inflow." This time, according to Farside Investors data, the US ZEC spot ETF recorded this net outflow on November 5 Eastern Time.
But this time it's different from before; what we have in front of us is the ETF channel's subscription and redemption data, not just the community buzz. What I care more about is: ETFs can lower the participation threshold, but they won't eliminate the cycle of a sector. The entry is improved, but capital can still flow out; the existence of a product and stable demand are two different things.
My judgment is that this serves as a reminder to the narrative of "long-term capital support with ETFs," but it is not enough to declare a bearish outlook for the entire privacy sector. If ETFs are regarded as an anti-cycle moat, then once redemptions occur, the previously elevated expectations are prone to amplify disappointment. This is my speculation, not something proven by just one day's data.
Having gone through the last cycle, I am now more willing to separate channel maturity from demand maturity. What I want to observe next is whether privacy demand can present more solid usage reasons beyond ETFs, rather than just matching a capital flow chart with the script of the entire market cycle. I've been wondering why my orders on the exchange always get cut in line by others, and today I saw a number from Hyperliquid that suddenly gave me the answer.
Its priority fees collected in one day reached $510,000, a historical high, accounting for 12.7% of total revenue, also a record high.
In plain language: someone is willing to pay more just to get ahead of me. It's not about offering a higher price than me, but being faster.
So the previous calmness of "limit orders will eventually be filled" might have been wishful thinking on my part. On the $HYPE chain, speed is now openly priced, while I was still calculating that I saved a few cents on fees.On November 6th, $ETH bulls outnumbered bears by 2.6 times, but it dropped 8.1% in 24 hours, hitting a low of 2206, with a 1-hour RSI of only 28, showing short-term weakness.
Smart money is more interesting: large net outflows of $150 million, with sell orders accounting for 56%, indicating real capital outflows. However, on the other side, smart money buying accounts for 53.4%, large accounts hold 79.8% long positions, top traders hold 68.2% long positions, with a long-short ratio of 2.15. In other words, while large orders are selling, someone is absorbing them. But smart money's long positions only account for 21.2%, indicating most are lightly positioned to bet on a rebound, not heavily invested.
Regarding contracts, open interest is $5.19 billion, down slightly by 1.9% in 24 hours, with liquidations of $14.98 million; funding rate is +0.0076%, settled every 8 hours, meaning longs are still paying shorts.
Spot ETFs also failed to provide support: the latest trading day saw net outflows of $140 million, with BlackRock's ETHA alone withdrawing $137 million, and Fidelity's FETH outflowing $3.33 million.
In summary: prices are falling, institutions are withdrawing, and large holders are absorbing. In such a divergent market, observe clearly before acting.
Recommendation is to short, focusing on chasing shorts. If a rebound opportunity arises, short even more, as there is heavy resistance around 2290. My first reaction to this kind of news is to discount the expectation that "funding will continue to relay." Attractive odds do not equal a positive expected value, especially when the judgment depends on new funds materializing.
According to SoSoValue data, on November 5th Eastern US time, the US ZEC and NEAR spot ETFs had net outflows of $10,994,100 and $773,800 respectively, totaling $11,767,900. The historical cumulative net inflow of the ZEC spot ETF still stands at $207 million. I think this is bearish for the expectation of funding relay, but it is not evidence of a trend reversal.
The reason is that net outflows weaken the funding support on that day, but one day's data is insufficient to overturn the cumulative inflows. If there are continuous outflows afterward, I will raise my alert for a weakening demand scenario; if inflows quickly resume, this fluctuation is more worthy of reevaluation. For me, it is worth spending effort to verify sustainability, but not worth drawing long-term conclusions based on single-day data. An unremarkable number: Hyperliquid's priority fee single-day revenue reached $510,000, a historical high.
Let's break down what it is. The priority fee is neither a transaction fee nor a liquidation penalty; it is the extra amount users pay to have their orders prioritized on-chain. The only explanation for its increase is that someone is in a hurry to execute trades, willing to pay an additional premium beyond the original price. So this number is more like a congestion indicator than a revenue metric.
The second number is even more worth watching: the priority fee accounts for 12.7% of Hyperliquid's total revenue, also a record high. Nearly one-eighth of the protocol's wallet income now comes from "time grabbing" itself. While increased trading volume can push up transaction fees, it cannot drive this ratio; the ratio rising together indicates that on-chain trades are crowding each other rather than exchanging smoothly.
Thinking one layer deeper. What $HYPE actually sells is not depth but millisecond-level order sequencing. Most perpetual venues compete on rates and order book depth, competing on who is cheaper; Hyperliquid adds a fee channel — the queue position. The fact that position can be sold at a record high price shows that active capital is not lacking, but the channel is.
My judgment is neutral to slightly bullish, but this is not a signal of price increase. The priority fee is essentially a friction cost; when it rises to a certain level, it will squeeze out ordinary users who are not sensitive to speed, leaving only market makers and high-frequency traders. At that point, revenue remains, but the ecosystem's breadth narrows. Venues propped up by order sniping will sooner or later have to answer: when speed is no longer scarce, what do you sell?Set the trading framework before the non-farm payrolls. This is the last key trigger before the December rate decision, with CME showing nearly a 79% probability of a 25 basis point hike in December. If employment data is stronger again, expectations will be completely locked in. The transmission chain is straightforward: strong data → US Treasury yields surge → risk assets come under pressure first.
BTC is most sensitive to interest rates, with selling pressure already accumulated around 80,000. If non-farm payrolls exceed expectations, it will likely retest the 76,000 area, so don't rush to buy.
ETH has greater elasticity; when rate hike expectations heat up, its decline is usually deeper, but ETF accumulation provides support, with 2300 as the short-term defense level.
Privacy coins like ZEC have thin liquidity and high leverage, making their volatility the most severe under macro shocks. It's not advisable to chase highs on non-farm payroll night; wait for the data to settle before making decisions.
Attitude: proactively control positions before non-farm payrolls, accept strong data by selling rather than holding hard, and wait for a rebound confirmation if data is weak. Actually, by looking at the content of the Democratic Party's foreign political propaganda framework,
one can understand why some lawmakers have made such "extremely sharp" remarks about AI infrastructure.
It's not for anything else, but for elections. Although the midterm elections are over, the new Congress will not take office until January 3, 2027.
Before that, it is still a transitional period of midterm election powers. Democratic lawmakers will not lack such remarks to consolidate support.
Don't underestimate the Democratic Party's "democratic will," otherwise they wouldn't have created over a hundred genders during their governance 😂😂😂 #美股遭大幅抛售：费城半导体指数创2020年3月以来最大单日跌幅 #IREN矿企转型AI云服务, GPU delivery progress to be revealed. The reason delivery delays do not shake the foundation of the transformation is that there is already sufficient buffer on the funding side. Over the past eight months, IREN has secured $9.3 billion in funds (customer prepayments, convertible bonds, GPU leasing, and financing), enough to cover approximately $3.5 billion in incremental capital expenditures for H2 2026. Among them, about 96% of the GPU capital expenditure under the Microsoft contract is covered by customer prepayments and GPU financing, and the prepayment ratio for newly signed five-year contracts after the quarter is as high as 90%—this means that the capital consumption of IREN's expansion is largely borne in advance by customers and financiers, rather than relying entirely on its own cash flow or equity dilution.Last night, watching the market into the latter half, my heart skipped a beat. That feeling wasn’t panic, but more like seeing the tide quietly recede a bit. Has the political wind really started to price meme coins? WLFI dropped nearly 10% yesterday, with a pitifully thin order book, almost no decent support visible, and a very steep downward slope. TRUMP was even more extreme, with a single-day drawdown of about 20%, and the rebound strength visibly weak to the naked eye; even large addresses are adding short positions. The trigger point isn’t on-chain but in Washington: House Oversight Committee Chair Garcia is expected to take office in January next year and has already warned the related families to "find lawyers first"; Warren, who is very likely to control the Senate Banking Committee, has repeatedly labeled WLFI’s trading as outright corruption. What the market is actually trading on isn’t a single piece of news but the expectation that "political protection may expire." What’s more troublesome is that the fundamental narrative is also not clean. The UAE once bought WLFI shares for $500 million, and the timing of the fund flow is too close to the subsequent US approval of advanced AI chip exports; statistics also show that the related families have made astonishing cumulative profits from tokens like TRUMP and WLFI. These details themselves don’t constitute a conviction but are enough to make holders start reassessing how much the "celebrity endorsement premium" is really worth. The transmission path, as I see it, is this: first kill the most fragile narrative end, which is the meme sector purely supported by attention; after sentiment cools, short-term risk appetite contracts, and funds prefer to stay in assets with large market caps and high consensus When I look at memes, I always want to casually check out the pools. The community is lively, and some say on-chain funds have returned. But thinking about it the other way, could it just be old money moving from other small projects? The trading volume can look impressive, but the actual money in the pool to take sell orders might not be that much. I don't dislike memes, but seeing a screen full of emojis with no one discussing the pool depth feels a bit off. I get the memes, but who’s going to take the sell orders when it’s time to sell?This is exactly the trend I warned about earlier.
Although the S&P 500 has hit a record high, the support from macro fundamentals has actually started to weaken.
In the past 17 U.S. midterm election years, a pattern has been repeatedly confirmed:
Every rebound before reaching the 200-day moving average (200 EMA) ultimately ended in a pullback.
A rebound does not mean a trend reversal, and the same goes for $BTC.
I have over 15 years of market trading experience, so this is worth continued attention.A broad passive sell-off, not one broken sector — Nasdaq -5.1%, S&P -3%, $MU -17%, $SNDK -18%. When funds urgently need cash, the easiest assets to sell are the most liquid ones — that is why $BTC fell with stocks. The AI story didn't die (AMD beat, SMCI $19.9B in a quarter), but Iran war, oil, inflation and a changed Fed outlook moved the macro. $75,000 support, $77,770 then $80,000 resistance. Passive selling or real panic? Comment 👇 #Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #Trending #OKXOrbitOrder Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After amplifying orders for both tokens, slippage for both buying and selling increased significantly, with the highest simulated slippage for $UVXY at the 100,000 scale.
$UVXY simulated slippage for 10,000 scale buy/sell is 0.22%/0.17%, and for 100,000 scale is 0.86%/0.74%. This is a cost table, not a direction; simultaneous increase in cost on both buy and sell sides indicates overall shallow depth.
$SNXX simulated slippage for 10,000 scale buy/sell is 0.08%/0.08%, and for 100,000 scale is 0.34%/0.36%. Both sides becoming more expensive suggests initial volume reduction or order splitting.This morning CoinGecko ranked #5 in hot searches, $HYPE had about $1.41 billion in 24h trading volume across the network, with a market cap of about $18.6 billion, ranking 11th. OKX spot price is currently about 77.8, down roughly 8% from the 24h open at 84.5, with a daily range of 76.3–84.6 (data as of approximately 10:10 Beijing time).
Today coincides with the unlocking node: the public schedule states nearly 10 million tokens, but the team says only about 180,000 tokens are actually distributed to core contributors. The day before, platform priority fees hit a record of about $521,000; additionally, a Hyperliquid Strategies subsidiary submitted an FCM registration intent, aiming to offer perpetual contracts to US users. While the overall market is dropping, HYPE's traffic hasn't declined, and the actual unlocking volume and compliance narrative will continue to be closely watched. $HYPE$AAOI delivered a strong Q3, recording $269.9 million in revenue and returning to GAAP profitability.
Its Q4 revenue forecast of $385–$420 million also points to strong growth expectations.
Demand for 800G and 1.6T optical products remains a major opportunity, but the sharp post earnings sell off makes me cautious.
My prediction is NO because strong business performance doesn't always translate into an immediate stock price gain.
#AAOIQ3800GOutlook Every time the US stock market crashes sharply, even plummets, it eventually recovers and reaches new highs. However, as investors, can we accept the preparation for a long-term battle? A few months of decline really isn't much.
If we encounter something like the 2000 internet bubble, with continuous steep drops for three years, cutting the value in half, would we still have the confidence to keep buying and holding? Probably not, because at that time, negative news would be everywhere, and countless people would be forced to cut losses and exit.
The financial market is that ruthless. Right now, I am mentally prepared for a long-term battle. I am very patient. I don't trade US stocks, but US stocks are the parent of Bitcoin; if US stocks perform poorly, Bitcoin will also suffer.
If US stocks continue to fall, Bitcoin will most likely follow. I will buy Bitcoin below 60,000 and definitely will not try to catch the bottom with everyone else at 75,000. If it doesn't drop below 60,000, then I will keep waiting. Low prices represent higher probability, better risk-reward ratio, and odds, meaning sufficient margin of safety. If you want to know why this round of sell-off is so fierce, save this first!
Nasdaq: -5.1%
S&P 500: -3%
$MU: -17%
$SNDK: -18%
This looks more like a broad-based passive sell-off rather than a problem in a single sector.
From financial stocks to AI infrastructure, almost all assets are falling.
Even high-quality companies like $MU, $AMZN, and $NVDA have been hit hard because when funds urgently need cash, the easiest assets to sell are often the most liquid ones.
But the fundamentals of AI have not disappeared because of this:
AMD’s earnings guidance exceeded market expectations.
SMCI’s single-quarter revenue reached $19.9 billion.
$MU and $SNDK reportedly have their production capacity booked for the next several years, with contracts including margin guarantees.
The real issue is the macro environment: the Iran war is pushing up oil prices, inflation is under renewed pressure, and market expectations for Federal Reserve policy have changed.
My view is: short-term charts may look bad, but that doesn’t mean the AI industry logic has ended.Pal $BTC Market Morning Report -11.6 Today there is quite a lot of text; if you don't want to read, just skip to the conclusion at the end. If you want to follow along with the analysis, please be patient. 1. K-line Chart 1) Daily Chart Situation (Figure 1) 1) Here we go again, drawing a good gate. Currently, the market is completely controlled by emotions and news. On Wednesday, the market believed that a Democratic victory could check Trump, so it rose, but on Thursday, due to a Democratic super AI ban, market fear intensified directly. This is somewhat like in ancient times when someone claimed to have 1 million troops after leading 10,000, causing the enemy to abandon the city immediately. However, for us, the decline is a buying opportunity at the bottom, not a reason to distrust. Because after a single-day plunge of 5%, it is often followed by short covering or an oversold rebound (for example, the top 20 largest single-day gains in history almost always closely follow the top 20 largest single-day losses). Two consecutive trading days with drops over 5% each day is an extremely rare black swan event, which has only happened twice in history. (I will write a dedicated article at noon.) 2) From the K-line perspective, this is maintaining the 75-81 range I mentioned, just that this oscillation is very unpleasant. Actually, BTC is still relatively strong compared to the US stock market; it just gave back Wednesday's gains. Currently, 81-82 is a short-term important resistance level. Below that, 749 is waiting to be plundered. Then look at positions around 732 and 71, or more accurately, the current bottom is around 70-75. Unless the US stock market continues with black swan events, dropping 5% consecutively.Today, the $3.5 trillion sell-off is facing two major obstacles behind AI suppression concerns: January and Trump's veto power.
The U.S. stock market lost over $3,500,000,000,000 today, with the Nasdaq 100 index recording its worst day since March 2020.
According to Reuters, chip manufacturers plummeted due to fears of stricter AI regulations after the Democrats took control of Congress.
The biggest decliners today include:
Nasdaq 100: −6.4%
S&P 500: −4.4%
Dow Jones: −3.4%
Chip Index: −12.3%
The cryptocurrency market lost nearly $200 billion, with liquidations exceeding $1 billion.
All three Trump family tokens hit historic lows, and the VIX fear index surged 63%.
But the Democrats' AI plan cannot advance yet:
- The Democrats will only control Congress after the new members are sworn in on January 3.
- Even then, Trump can veto any bill they pass.
- Overriding a veto requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, far exceeding the majority seats won by the Democrats.
AI concerns are not the only pressure: according to Reuters, Federal Reserve officials also hinted at further interest rate hikes.NU7 upgrade countdown. $ZEC worth $160 million in the Sprout pool, after today, even private keys won't save it.
The Zcash NU7 upgrade activates today (November 6) at 10:30 AM Beijing time, at block height 3,543,405. Block time is compressed from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, tripling the speed. But the cost is that an old path is completely cut off: version 4 transaction format is disabled, and this was the only way to spend tokens in the Sprout pool.
Before the upgrade, there are about 12,226 ZEC in the Sprout pool, valued at approximately $16 million at $1300 each. Once the upgrade activates, even with valid private keys, these coins will be unusable. ZIP 2003 leaves a "possible future recovery" option, but it clearly states: it may never be re-enabled.
ZEC rose 6% today, breaking through 1300. But NU7 is not a bullish event landing; it is a hard reset of chip structure. The frozen $16 million is unrelated to circulating supply, but it changes who dares to hold ZEC overnight after the upgrade.
#非农今晚揭晓，美股大跌后市场如何押注12月加息？ Circle's revenue exceeded expectations, but USDC circulation is shrinking. Seeing on-chain transaction volume up 49% while the seven-day circulation decreased by about 800 million looks a bit contradictory.
There's no issue with the transaction volume. A 49% growth rate indicates that USDC is indeed being frequently used in settlement and exchange scenarios, and Circle's fees come from this volume, which aligns with the revenue exceeding expectations.
Circulation is moving in the opposite direction. The seven-day decrease of about 800 million, despite such a large increase in volume, hasn't pulled the issuance side back, indicating that most of the on-chain money is turnover of existing stock, with little new money coming in. Binance's USDC on the ETH chain just resumed withdrawals, and the first batch of people to move once the channel opened were already looking to relocate funds.
Some in the community moved Binance's USDC to OKX to participate in simple earning; this kind of movement only changes where the funds are held, not the total amount, and does not help net increase on the issuance side.
The condition for both sides to align is for circulation to stop declining while transaction volume growth remains above 40%; if volume continues to shrink, the 49% figure will only reflect turnover contribution. $USDC
#CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% BTC and ETH showed a slight hourly recovery, but volume dropped nearly 50%, suggesting buying pressure remains weak.
$BTC is around $76,310, facing resistance at $76,430–$76,560. A breakout could open the way toward $76,810–$77,010, while losing $76,035 risks retesting $75,200.
$ETH is near $2,245. It needs to reclaim $2,250–$2,270 to strengthen recovery; otherwise, $2,236 and $2,206 remain key supports.
$BTC $ETH
#CircleQ3USDCVolumeUp49% $SNDK Why have AI giants plummeted so much? Let me explain, what's the current situation? The funds in a reservoir are limited. Now there are two groups needing this money: one is the U.S. government to fill the fiscal gap, and the other is AI giants frantically building data centers, also requiring cash flow. But the money in the reservoir is finite. This is something I mentioned a long time ago. Before the midterm elections, the Democrats began publicly stating that if they win, they would restrict the construction of data centers. But when exactly will the construction of data centers be allowed again? That depends on when the Federal Reserve starts cutting interest rates and injecting liquidity into this reservoir. In the short term, the funds in the reservoir probably won't flow to AI anymore, because no one can guarantee future performance. However, buying 5- or 10-year U.S. Treasury bonds yields at least 5-10%. Got it? Nonfarm Payrolls Arrive After a Sharp Drop: Will the Data Amplify Volatility or Bring Recovery?
After last night's plunge, those watching the market probably felt uneasy. U.S. tech stocks faced sell-offs, and BTC and ETH also retreated; even more frustrating, the nonfarm payrolls report hasn't come out yet tonight, and the market must face another test of interest rate expectations.
My view: There is a chance for recovery after a big drop, but we can't assume a rebound just because the drop was large once the data is released.
Let's look at the downside first. If employment and wages are clearly strong, the market will worry about rate hikes again, U.S. Treasury yields will rise accordingly, and BTC and ETH's rebound may face pressure again. For BTC, watch around 75200, and for ETH, around 2206—these are their recent 24-hour lows. If the 1-hour candlestick breaks below and fails to recover after the rebound, I will consider continued weakness as the short-term scenario and avoid buying for now.
If employment cools moderately and rate pressure eases, both coins may see recovery. But I won't chase after just one bullish candle: first observe if BTC can reclaim 77000 and ETH can reclaim 2300, then wait to see if the pullback holds. These two are key round-number levels for observation, not guaranteed support.
There is another scenario that can mislead people: if the data is too weak, U.S. Treasury yields fall, but the market starts worrying about growth, coin prices may not rise accordingly. Conversely, even if the data is strong, as long as both coins hold their lows and reclaim the observation levels, I will adjust my cautious stance.
$BTC $ETH #非农今晚揭晓，美股大跌后市场如何押注12月加息？ A company earned 1.178 billion USD in one quarter, and you might think it went crazy mining. Actually, its main business only brought in 233 million, the rest is a large portion from the valuation increase of warrants held, recorded on the books.
At the same time, another veteran did the opposite: sold all 2,520 $BTC, got 192 million USD in cash, basically cleared reserves, and said it will sell any mined coins in the future, using the money to build AI data centers.
One keeps the coins on paper turning them into profit, the other converts coins into cash and leaves. Both make sense, but it looks a bit surreal.
Meanwhile, $TRX is still slowly buying, adding another 155,000 coins.Republican coins: BTC, BNB, JUP, DOGE, XRP, TRUMP, WLFI
Democratic coins: ETH, XLM, LINK, SOL, UNI, PEPE, ZEC
Although it's just a meme, the Democrats won, ETH and SOL rose, and BTC also increased. The real losers are TRUMP and WLFI, because their value is tied to Trump's political influence, and the premium was taken away. XRP didn't crash along; it follows its own regulatory narrative. BTC relies on ETFs and interest rate expectations, while ETH and SOL seem more like oversold recoveries.
What to buy next still depends on cash flow, supply structure, and position in the sector. Just yesterday morning, it had just bounced back to 80,000, but today the US stock market slapped it back down to 76,000, and the momentum didn't hold.
BTC is around $76,222 this morning, down 5.3% in 24 hours, ETH down 7.3% back to $2,242.
Last night, the US stock market was the main battlefield: the Nasdaq plunged 5.52% into correction territory, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 12%, Nvidia dropped 9%, AMD, Micron, and Marvell fell 17%.
The trigger is still the midterm elections; after the Democrats took both chambers, the market worries that AI data center expansion will be tightened. Once that narrative loosened, the crypto market got hit along with it.
When BTC broke below 77,000, about $370 million in leveraged positions were liquidated, mostly longs.
Honestly, yesterday's surge was just shorts covering and being squeezed out; no one really took the baton, and 80,000 never held.
My plan: 75,000 is a line that has held multiple times since August. If it drops near there, I'll look in batches; if it breaks, I'll admit the mistake and exit. I won't add positions until it bounces back above 80,000.
Tonight at 21:30, the Nonfarm Payrolls report is the next test, with an expected increase of 65,000. I won't make any moves before the data comes out.
Before Nonfarm, trying to bottom-fish in this kind of drop is just handing money to the shorts. $BTC $ETH $SOL $WLFI
I will first discount the buyback announcement.
WLFI said it plans to use USD1 reserve income and other funds for token buybacks, with initial funds to be activated first, and the scale and speed to be adjusted later based on ecosystem growth and governance participation. It sounds directional, but there is currently no clear amount or pace, so the "planned buyback" cannot be directly counted as an already active buy order.
OKX spot is currently quoted at $0.04722, with a 24-hour low of $0.04355 and a high of $0.04887. It has bounced about 8% from the low during the day but is still some distance from the high. Perpetual positions are about $8.42 million, with a fee rate of 0.005%, lower than the common 0.01% benchmark; contract volume is not small, but positions are not heavy, indicating more short-term turnover.
I prefer to wait for the buyback details to be finalized before making a judgment. The announcement can support sentiment, but whether it can truly support the price depends on the money and execution.
#美股遭大幅抛售：费城半导体指数创2020年3月以来最大单日跌幅 Just yesterday morning, it had just bounced back to 80,000, but today the US stock market slapped it back down to 76,000, and the momentum didn't hold.
BTC is around $76,222 this morning, down 5.3% in 24 hours, ETH down 7.3% back to $2,242.
Last night, the US stock market was the main battlefield: the Nasdaq plunged 5.52% into correction territory, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 12%, Nvidia dropped 9%, AMD, Micron, and Marvell fell 17%.
The trigger is still the midterm elections; after the Democrats took both chambers, the market worries that AI data center expansion will be tightened. Once that narrative loosened, the crypto market got hit along with it.
When BTC broke below 77,000, about $370 million in leveraged positions were liquidated, mostly longs.
Honestly, yesterday's surge was just shorts covering and being squeezed out; no one really took the baton, and 80,000 never held.
My plan: 75,000 is a line that has held multiple times since August. If it drops near there, I'll look in batches; if it breaks, I'll admit the mistake and exit. I won't add positions until it bounces back above 80,000.
Tonight at 21:30, the Nonfarm Payrolls report is the next test, with an expected increase of 65,000. I won't make any moves before the data comes out.
Before Nonfarm, trying to bottom-fish in this kind of drop is just handing money to the shorts. $BTC $ETH $SOL $BTC $ETH $XAU
#非农今晚揭晓，美股大跌后市场如何押注12月加息？
1. The Strait of Hormuz handles about 20% of global oil transportation. If the route is blocked, oil prices will rise rapidly. Rising oil prices will push up global inflation, directly suppressing expectations for a Fed rate cut and even increasing the possibility of a rate hike. The strengthening of US Treasury real yields is bearish for interest-free risk assets like BTC.
2. Capital risk aversion reallocates
Capital will flow in layers: gold and US Treasuries are traditional safe havens; high-risk assets like US tech stocks and cryptocurrencies will be sold off first.
Many people have a misconception: war does not equal a crypto market rally. Currently, BTC is classified as a risk asset, and at the outbreak of conflict, risk appetite usually declines and capital flees.
The upcoming market will be volatile. Brothers, what are your thoughts? Yesterday, crypto concept stocks took two completely opposite paths, perfectly exposing the industry's current most awkward situation.
First, look at Core Scientific. Q3 revenue was $233 million, net profit $1.178 billion. This difference wasn’t mined; it’s the change in the fair value of warrants recorded in the profit and loss statement. The same machines, the same electricity costs, but the book profit is inflated fivefold by Wall Street’s pricing rules.
On the other hand, Keel Infrastructure, formerly Bitfarms, sold 2,520 BTC all at once, cashing out $192 million, basically clearing out reserves, and announced that future output will be sold immediately, with all proceeds invested in AI infrastructure.
The logic is straightforward: AI data centers can now get higher valuation multiples, and $BTC is the easiest asset to liquidate on the balance sheet. Selling coins doesn’t require issuing debt or new shares, making it the cheapest form of financing.
Tron Inc. is doing the opposite, still dollar-cost averaging, this time adding 155,000 TRX, bringing total reserves to 722 million. While mining companies exit, the ecosystem side is supporting, so the $TRX chip structure relies more on a single entity than $BTC.
What’s really worth watching isn’t that $1.178 billion, but who is actually selling coins for real money. The profit and loss statement can be polished, but cash flow doesn’t lie.$ETH
A security update has been released, but ETH's market hasn't responded favorably.
MetaMask stated that in the validator node incident in September, all affected nodes have exited, and there is no sign that wallets or wallet infrastructure were compromised; about 0.385 ETH in staking rewards were transferred, not users' principal. This distinction must be clear—don't confuse validator node rewards being redirected with wallets being hacked.
However, ETH is now around $2240, having dropped nearly 8% in 24 hours from $2429 to $2206. About $1.5 billion in perpetual positions remain open, and the funding rate is nearly zero. The security incident itself isn't major; clearly, there are other factors weighing on the price right now.
I will treat this as a risk background, not an independent trading reason. Let's first see if the market can absorb this drop.
#美股遭大幅抛售：费城半导体指数创2020年3月以来最大单日跌幅 A $97.02 tower, with the upper structure only 0.2% away from the upper Bollinger Band, yet the bulls treat the 1.97% daily gain as a topping ceremony — this 0.2% eccentricity is enough to cause the most beautiful facade to crack under wind vibration.
The foundation of $JITOSOL is the Solana staking architecture; the load-bearing wall of liquidity derivatives lies in the validator set and redemption mechanism, not in the whitepaper's design diagram. The short-term RSI has reached 66.4, surpassing the sell threshold of 64; the 1-hour RSI signals not an overbought frenzy but the start of seepage at construction joints. The short-term Bollinger Band price position is 87%, 1.4% above the lower band and 0.2% below the upper band, a precursor to plastic hinges forming at beam ends before node yielding. The mid-term Bollinger Band position is 51%, 3.2% above the lower band and 2.9% below the upper band; the core tube is temporarily stable, but the upper structure has entered a nonlinear response. The 24-hour gain of 1.97% is merely facade decoration; the load-bearing system has not been simultaneously reinforced. Entry at 98.38, 1.4% above the current price, is waiting for the beam to rebound to the preset sell point, not chasing load increases at the tower tip; targets at 94.55 and 94.03 represent declines of 2.5% and 3.1%, corresponding to a structural unloading at the support zone near the lower band +1.4%. The stop loss at 108.25, +11.6%, is seismic redundancy to prevent sudden foundation overload.
📉 Short:
Entry: 98.38 (current price +1.4%)
Take Profit 1: 94.55 (-2.5%)
Take Profit 2: 94.03 (-3.1%)
Stop Loss: 108.25 (+11.6%)
This trade only dismantles the excessive tension in the upper structure without touching the core tube; when the price is only 0.2% from the upper band, chasing longs is like cutting holes in the load-bearing wall.Haha, Trump’s move directly crashed his own Meme coin 😂
In the midterm elections, the Republican Party underperformed, and the Democrats took control of both the House and Senate. Trump's political prospects took a big hit, and the $TRUMP coin with the same name suffered as well.
Yesterday, TRUMP hit a low of $1.215, setting a historic low. Compared to its peak of over $70, it has dropped more than 98%! The funniest part is, BTC has started to slowly rebound, but this coin keeps plummeting.
To be clear, this coin’s hype isn’t based on technology at all; it’s purely propped up by Trump’s political heat.
Now that the Republicans lost Congress, it will be extremely difficult for him to push crypto-related policies, and the Democrats might even start investigating his family’s crypto businesses.
The story they hyped before is basically dead.
The most valuable thing for a Meme coin is consensus. Once everyone loses confidence, the drop can be brutal.
Trump still has two years in office, but those holding TRUMP probably don’t want to stick around with him anymore. #US stocks suffer heavy sell-off: Philadelphia Semiconductor Index posts largest single-day drop since March 2020
The boss has something to say
I went to bed with no positions last night, and the first thing I saw this morning was this: On November 5, US stocks experienced a heavy sell-off, with the Dow down 3.44%, the S&P 500 down 4.36% to 7353, and the Nasdaq down 5.52% to 24315, having retraced nearly 12% from the October 6 high, entering a correction zone; the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index plunged 12.25% in a single day, marking its largest drop since March 2020, and S&P 500 constituents lost about $3 trillion in market value in one day. The trigger was the midterm elections where the Democrats took control of both houses, and the new governor of Texas promised to suspend data center approvals—Goldman Sachs calculated that Texas accounts for a quarter of all data center expansion in the US.
My interpretation is: this is not an ordinary correction; it is the first time the “AI infrastructure narrative” has been directly stabbed by policy. The market’s concern is not about demand disappearing, but that the switches of approvals and power are being held down, limiting new computing power supply, and the entire high-beta chain is being devalued together. Last night I stayed out and watched AAOI and Oklo earnings reports; looking back now, that was the right move—at this level of sell-off, any leveraged long position is a life-risking bet.
BTC fell along this morning, breaking below 76000, just smashing below the 78960 support line I mentioned a few days ago. My approach: don’t catch the first down candle, wait for panic selling to subside; first see if 75000–75800 can hold $BTC $ETH $ZEC