Orbit Post Sitemap
That cut at 6 AM, the whale was sliced clearly.
253 million long positions, 140 million directly liquidated, losing 61.41 million USD.
$ETH accounted for 135 million, just this part lost 48.47 million, $BTC only lost 550,000.
After liquidation, 113 million long positions remain, with an unrealized loss of 12.39 million, ETH liquidation price hanging at 2004, ridiculously close.
Over 1 billion liquidated across the entire network in 24 hours, ETH liquidations at 448 million, more than BTC, bulls accounted for 90%.
The A-share market is a completely different picture, commercial aerospace triggered a surge in limit-ups, coal led the rise, half-day turnover directly broke 1 trillion.
US chip stocks are also recovering, AMD up 11%, Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rebounded 4.2%, but the Dow is still in the red.
Leverage was cleared in a round, money didn’t disappear, it just moved to another place.Last night's drop wasn't rooted in the market itself, but in Washington.
According to Reuters, the Democrats took control of the midterm elections, securing both the House and the Senate.
What the market fears now is that when the new Congress takes office in January next year, crypto regulations will tighten.
BTC plunged directly to 73708 late Sunday night, ETH dropped to 2223.
Both are the lowest prices since August.
The CLARITY Act got stuck in the Senate in September.
So now it's like holding your breath again.
But one thing must be made clear: so far, no new law has been passed.
Tightening is expected, not a knife already landed.
On election day, BTC even surged past 80000.
On November 5th, it fell from 80882 to 75573 in one day, wiping out all gains.
Over the weekend, liquidations exceeded 1 billion USD in 24 hours, with longs accounting for over 900 million.
ETH alone had liquidations of 448 million, with the largest single liquidation at 48 million.
Binance showed a sign of easing.
After losing 7 billion USD to theft, today the fund inflow has turned positive.
Withdrawals are also gradually resuming.
The worst panic phase may have already passed.
The market is now hovering around 74646, grinding below 75000.
Above, 77533 is the 50-week moving average; failing to reclaim it remains bearish.
Below, 73200 is the 200-day moving average; last night’s dip to 73510 was supported around here.
If it breaks, next support is at 72000.
My view in one sentence: regulation is a slow variable, scary but not fatal #btc is currently at a critical juncture of weak consolidation and the eve of a directional choice. The price is repeatedly tugging within the narrow range of $73,500 to $76,000#SoftBank's Heavy Bet on OpenAI: Can Q2 Earnings Deliver Impressive Results? SoftBank's Q2 net profit was ¥347.3 billion, down 18% year-over-year but more than double the market expectation of ¥166 billion, making the headline figure indeed "impressive." However, a closer look reveals that this performance is almost unrelated to the heavy investment in OpenAI—the valuation of OpenAI remained flat since the end of March, causing the Vision Fund's profits to plunge 99% to ¥5.43 billion. The real support for profits came from Intel's stake, which brought about an unexpected ¥1.3 trillion book gain, an "non-AI" asset hedge.
In other words, SoftBank's cumulative $64.6 billion investment for about 13% ownership in OpenAI was a "static card" in the Q2 earnings, not a growth engine. The market's real question is: when AI valuations no longer rise unilaterally, how will SoftBank fulfill Masayoshi Son's narrative that the "AI revolution scale is 50 times that of the internet bubble"? This earnings report cannot be called "impressive"; it feels more like a passing score on a stress test—numbers pass, but the structure is questionable. This time I'm not bottom-fishing, but I won't fully exit either: keeping a defensive position, waiting for a clear rebound. The news is too crowded, I haven't finished reading the midterm election voting omissions, geopolitical pressure is mounting again, mainstream coins are diving again, $ETH dropped about 200 points in just over ten minutes. Things aren't easy nearby either, US October non-farm payrolls exceeded expectations, bets on a December rate hike are heating up; after a sharp drop in US tech stocks, there was some rebound, but the Nasdaq weekly chart still fell about 3.4%; $BTC and $ETH spot ETFs saw a net outflow of over $1.6 billion in a single week. No current price or specific position given, I won't pretend to know, guessing hard at this position is easy to get wrong. Let's start with a reality check: the biggest risk for this long position isn't necessarily getting the direction wrong, but that the market might first move against it before moving in the right direction. Core Trader 66 just opened a long HYPE position with 10x leverage, with a nominal position size of about $100,000. My bearish stance isn't because "big players are always wrong," but because the logic of taking this opening notification as bullish evidence is flawed: just because someone is willing to take on risk doesn't mean the timing is advantageous.
I'm stuck on two points. First, path risk: based on nominal position and leverage, the initial margin is roughly $10,000; if the price drops 3% first, the unrealized loss would be about $3,000, which is 30% of that margin, not including fees, and doesn't necessarily reflect the actual account loss ratio. Second, incomplete information: we can't see his other positions or exit plans, so we can't tell if this is an isolated bet. If you chase longs just based on the notification without exit conditions, followers might suffer more than the original position holder when the market moves against them.
Of course, he might be right. I won't assume the longs will lose just because of high leverage. If the price continues to hold above the reference price of $74.7309 and any pullbacks don't quickly break below it, I'll reduce my doubts about the timing of this entry. This is just my observation, not a guarantee of profit. I'll be watching whether the price can support this long position, without letting the wallet's name influence my judgment.An on-chain address spent approximately $19.62 million to purchase 8,773.52 ETH, with an average cost of $2,236.75. The trader associated with this address previously bought 7,543 ETH in March at a cost of $2,048.69. Smart money or just lucky? What makes this transaction notable is not only its scale but also the trading history linked to this address. After buying at $2,048.69 in March, the Ethereum market experienced significant volatility, yet the trader chose to add more around $2,236, demonstrating an accumulation strategy based on conviction rather than short-term speculation. On-chain analysts typically track such wallets to gauge whale sentiment. Although a single address cannot define a trend, a trader who has timed the market accurately and repeatedly buys in may influence retail perception and suggest the value range recognized by smart money. What this transaction means for ETH demand: Ethereum has faced a complex environment in recent months, with Layer 2 growth, staking dynamics, and ETF capital flows all impacting price. A $19.62 million spot purchase is sizable but not enough to move the market alone; however, it reinforces the narrative that long-term holders are willing to accumulate during pullbacks. Cost discipline: The trader’s average costs of $2,048 and $2,236 indicate a preference for buying in the low $2,000 range rather than chasing breakouts. Position size: The second purchase was larger than the first, showing increased confidence or greater capital. Timing: ThisAltcoin season index is about 38–41, far from the altcoin season standard of 75.
BTC market dominance is about 60%, with funds still favoring top assets for defense.
Excluding stablecoins, BTC's share among active risk assets may be close to 64%–66%.
In the past 90 days, only about 25%–35% of altcoins have outperformed BTC.
It is still "Bitcoin season," not a full altcoin season. @山寨阿道夫 $SKHY $SKHYNIX Large sell orders placed! Woke up and found the profits directly in my pocket, who else understands this feeling!
Last week I already said that tech stocks would collectively weaken recently, bottom fishing is not a wise choice, so prioritize short positions, set take profit and stop loss, and leave the rest to time.
How to position today? I still focus on shorting the rebounds. AI storage is really too weak now, no funds are willing to enter and push the price up, the bottom cannot be found below, and it will continue to decline.
Therefore, temporarily do not consider bottom fishing, continue to enter short positions, wait for the rebound to around 860-880 to enter with better cost performance, target at 810.
#RocketLab财报前瞻：Neutron火箭进展如何？
#美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ $SPACE Rocket Lab plans to release its Q3 earnings report after the U.S. stock market closes and hold a conference call at 5 PM Eastern Time;
I will focus on four key points:
Whether revenue meets the mid-point or above of guidance, especially the project delivery and revenue recognition pace of the space systems business.
Whether gross margin and losses improve: revenue growth does not equal improved profit quality; we need to look at gross margin, expenses, and cash flow.
Whether the backlog can convert into revenue: Q2 disclosed a backlog of $2.36 billion, but backlog does not mean immediate revenue recognition, nor is it a profit guarantee. (investors.rocketlabcorp.com)
The new timeline, costs, and cash burn of Neutron: this may impact the market's long-term valuation of the company more than a slight beat in quarterly revenue.
Neutron progress: the direction is still moving forward, but the timeline has clearly been pushed back.
My judgment: the company's fundamentals are attractive, but before the earnings report, it is not suitable to treat it as a low-risk "earnings trade." The earnings report will focus on revenue and cash flow; the real valuation watershed remains whether Neutron can turn the "2027 target" into verifiable engineering progress. #RocketLab财报前瞻：Neutron火箭进展如何？ Conclusion first: The water level of the crypto market is dropping. The total supply of stablecoins across the network is $292.98 billion, down $13.67 billion (-4.5%) from $306.65 billion a month ago, and down $4.69 billion from a week ago. $USDT alone decreased by $7.20 billion (from $184.00 billion to $176.80 billion), and $USDC decreased by $2.47 billion. The total market cap on CoinGecko is $2.47 trillion, down 5.8% in 24 hours, with $BTC accounting for 60.2%.
Where did the money go? It wasn’t eaten by coins; people are withdrawing. CoinDesk’s headline yesterday was accurate: stablecoin market cap remains steady, but the money inside is moving; bloomingbit reported on-chain payment volume jumped 45%—real usage is increasing, but new money is shrinking. According to 24/7 Wall St and Cryptonews, the market shrank by $5 to $6.7 billion in one week, the steepest drop this year.
For your wallet: when the stock shrinks, leverage is the first to be squeezed out. Today, 197 coins fell, 44 rose, with the median decline at -3.19%. During a period of falling water levels, don’t bet on direction; watch the water level first.
How much $USDT do you still hold? $ETH has pulled back for three consecutive days. Can the bulls hold this time?
Recently, Ethereum's trend has indeed been a bit torturous. The short-term selling pressure hasn't fully released, and the price once dropped to around 2050, but then rebounded and has now returned above 2130.
My view is that there is some support around 2050 for now, but it's too early to declare the bottom has appeared.
From the market perspective, after the earlier rebound, the trapped positions above and the bottom-fishing funds below are competing, and market sentiment is clearly still unstable.
Technically, there is no particularly clear reversal signal yet. The sustainability of buying pressure remains to be seen, and chasing the rally rashly in the short term is not worthwhile.
My approach going forward is simple: no rush to guess the bottom, first see if the rebound can hold, then observe if there is capital support on the pullback.
What the market fears most is not the drop itself, but being repeatedly driven by emotions before the direction is confirmed. Be patient and wait for signals before taking action! $BTC $SNDK #美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ On November 6, the U.S. Treasury took action. FinCEN ordered U.S. financial institutions to prohibit fund transfers involving MEXC, determining that from May 2021 to May 2026 it handled at least $16 billion related to sanction evasion and cybercrime.
MEXC stated that deposits, withdrawals, and trading are normal and that it is reviewing the order. But cutting off the dollar channel is not a fine; it is blocking it from the U.S. financial system. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen put it bluntly: access to the dollar system means supporting the Iranian regime.
The path was already laid out. In November 2023, Binance settled for over $4.3 billion, CEO Changpeng Zhao pleaded guilty and resigned, and accepted five years of compliance supervision.
The door is not closed because there is still business behind it. Binance partnered with Circle to expand $USDC usage, MGX invested $2 billion and settled in $USD1, and in March 2026, the Intercontinental Exchange invested in OKX at a $25 billion valuation and obtained board seats.
Pleading guilty, bringing in U.S. partners, changing market access—compliance is a series of concrete arrangements. MEXC stands at a crossroads: let compliance have the power to block some revenue, or stay outside the system. It is worth considering, when the dollar stablecoin becomes the only high-quality incremental asset, is a platform that refuses to bow out squeezed out of the mainstream, or does it have another way to survive?The weekend calm in crypto looks less like stability and more like a coiled spring. $BTC is holding near 75913, yet the four-hour long/short ratio has settled around 3.0. That combination matters: a sharp selloff failed to shake out retail buyers, who are still adding and holding. When the truck is this heavy, there is no fuel for a clean rally. Range-bound price action is the bait, not the reward. $ETH tells a similar story with a different texture. At 2238, it is pinned above the 2200 line, un#英伟达启动独立调查，管理层稳定性受关注 This is not a "short squeeze followed by a big rally" scenario, but rather a stalemate of a "bear trap shape combined with bulls not yet dead".
A true short squeeze bottom usually comes with negative funding rates, a sharp drop in long positions, and active buying volume. None of these three conditions are met right now. If the 75500 level is pierced again, it may not trigger the "last shakeout" but could be the second round of liquidation of long leverage positions that have not yet been cleared.
Before the funding rate turns negative or the price recovers above 76210 (the 1-hour long-short boundary) and holds, treating every lower wick as a "short squeeze" to buy is betting on having more patience than the market, not being smarter than the market. Open the chart and keep observing these indicators continuously.
$BTC $ETH $SOL “About 35 ETH” was swapped for ZEC. I first consider the worst-case scenario: if a single swap is misinterpreted as a signal for the privacy track, after the hype dies down, those who follow the narrative might bear the drawdown alone. According to OnchainLens monitoring, this address withdrew ETH from Tornado Cash, then sold part of the ETH via Hyperliquid and bought ZEC.
⚠️ I tend to view this as just an address behavior, not evidence of a positive signal for the privacy track. There are two layers of risk: the fund flow does not equal trading motive, we don’t know why the swap happened; a single address buying cannot prove sustained demand afterward. Filling these two blanks with optimistic assumptions easily leads to uncontrolled risk exposure.
My habit in risk control is: first write down the maximum loss possible per trade, including potential slippage, and don’t treat news as a risk budget. When encountering such address swap news, how much stop loss do you usually set per trade? Do you tighten it compared to usual?Facing the same macro uncertainty, why is gold rising while BTC struggles to gain?
This might be the most thought-provoking question in the current market.
On November 9, spot gold rose about 1.4%, returning to around $4130. Meanwhile, Bitcoin fell about 4.47% over the previous week, and the post-election rebound failed to hold.
The divergence between the two assets indicates the market is not simply buying in or withdrawing across the board.
Gold's rise has clearer macro support: falling oil prices ease inflation concerns, a weaker dollar, and the market readjusts expectations for interest rates and future monetary policy.
BTC is different; it remains highly influenced by risk appetite.
As investors begin to reassess tech stock valuations, AI capital expenditures, and economic outlooks, BTC, as a highly volatile asset, easily becomes a target for reducing risk exposure.
Another detail: a price rebound does not equal capital inflow.
True capital inflow requires improved spot trading volume, sustained net inflows into ETFs, and increasing active buying during the price rise.
So, for now, I tend to interpret the current market as:
Gold has gained some defensive allocation demand, while BTC remains in a cautious capital phase, waiting for directional confirmation.
This does not mean Bitcoin has lost value, nor that gold will keep rising indefinitely.
If gold continues to be strong and BTC’s rebound keeps shrinking in volume, the divergence in capital preference between the two assets may persist.
What the market lacks now is not a rebound, but capital willing to keep buying. BTC and ETH spot ETFs saw a combined net outflow exceeding $1.6 billion in a single week, which is not an isolated event but a clear signal of a shift in institutional capital rhythm. Bitcoin products experienced a weekly outflow of $1.28 billion, wiping out and turning negative the cumulative net inflow for this year; Ethereum products have had net outflows for six consecutive weeks, with a larger cumulative scale and a redemption intensity relative to their managed size significantly higher than Bitcoin's.
BlackRock's IBIT has dominated outflows on the Bitcoin side for several consecutive days, with most redemptions on the Ethereum side also contributed by BlackRock's funds. This appears more like a concentrated portfolio adjustment by large holders rather than retail sentiment-driven. Meanwhile, other crypto-related products showed differentiated performance, but mainstream BTC and ETH channels faced simultaneous pressure, indicating a cross-asset risk appetite contraction rather than a simple BTC/ETH rotation.
The impact on price lies in liquidity and expectations. ETF net outflows directly correspond to increased spot supply, combined with overall cautious market trading and sentiment, which tends to amplify volatility. Historical experience shows that after institutional capital phases out, if the macro environment does not further deteriorate, a recovery window often appears; however, the current consecutive weekly negative values have lasted a long time, and recovery requires clearer catalysts.
What the market needs to focus on now is whether the outflow pace is beginning to converge, whether redemptions in leading products are slowing, and whether spot absorption and on-chain data show improvement. The institutional channel's shift from "continuous net buying" to "phased net selling" has already changed the previous supply-demand narrative. #BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 #美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？
Tomorrow night at 9:30, the US October CPI will be released. The market expects an overall month-on-month increase of 0.3% and a core month-on-month increase of 0.2%, both slightly lower than the previous values, indicating that the inflation cooling scenario is halfway written.
However, last Friday's non-farm payrolls did not cooperate at all: 165,000 new jobs were added, far exceeding the expected 65,000, and the unemployment rate dropped to 4.1%, with the previous two months revised upward by a total of 84,000. With employment this hot, the Federal Reserve has much less reason to ease.
The market is now very conflicted, on one hand betting that the probability of a 25 basis point rate hike in December is close to 80%, while on the other hoping the CPI will provide a way out. This data is that way out; whether it lands solidly or misses makes a big difference.
If both numbers meet or even fall below expectations, the rate hike bets will cool down, giving gold, US stocks, and Bitcoin some breathing room; if both exceed expectations, that 80% figure will likely rise, and risk assets will have to stay on high alert.
Another detail worth noting: because last October's data is missing, the year-on-year reading cannot be published this time, so the market can only focus on the month-on-month figures for judgment, which may cause greater volatility than usual.
No rush to take sides tonight; wait for the numbers to land before making a move, keeping bullets ready for the boots to drop.
The market never rewards those who guess earliest, only those who wait most steadily.Today's two extremes were not made with money at the same price level.
09:00 One order of 82,808 contracts (the largest of the day) smashed from 56.26 down to 54.83, creating a 24h low, then pulled back to 55.97.
10:00 Using only 27,194 contracts, about one-third of the volume, it topped from 55.98 to 57.23, creating a 24h high, but didn't hold a single cent, closing at 56.90.
From 11:00 to 13:00, three orders totaling 37,446 contracts returned the entire 1.5 points. At 13:00, an order of 14,337 contracts smashed 0.88 points, with each contract at 16,000 contracts, which is 30% cheaper than the morning's price-raising orders at 22,000 contracts each. Expensive to raise, cheap to smash; all orders above 56.5 are ready to exit.
$INTC
Current price 55.68, down 1.01%, pressed half a point below MA20 at 56.22. The true pricing will only be confirmed when the US stock market opens at 22:30.
Close above 56.90 with volume (≥30,000 contracts) → pull back to 56.5~56.7, go long at 56.6, stop loss at 56.05, target 57.23, odds 1.9.
Close below 55.59 with volume (≥30,000 contracts) → rebound to 55.8~55.95, go short at 55.85, stop loss at 56.35, target 54.83, odds 2.0.
(Not investment advice, trade at your own risk) Let me first do a maintenance calculation: According to my speculation, if the upgrade requires reworking the old contracts, then developers will have to retest, and users will need to confirm whether the original operations still work. As technology advances, these hassles must be counted as costs and cannot be considered zero.
CoinDesk mentioned that two competing Ethereum proposals both aim to avoid gas adjustments in the Glamsterdam plan from breaking existing contracts. They take different approaches, with differences involving what the contract sees and the fees users pay. I think this issue is especially important for applications relying on old contracts, not just a debate within the tech community.
My trade-off is compatibility first: if the old contracts can be preserved, then the maintenance burden and the cost for users to readapt can hopefully be reduced. But user fees also need to be considered separately; compatibility does not mean cheap. I will wait for the specific plan before making a judgment, leaning conservative and steady. If it were you, would you prioritize stability and preserving old contracts, or be willing to accept some compatibility risk for gas adjustments? The London gold market may be undergoing a deeper change beyond just faster trading: the ownership of gold is beginning to move from bank ledgers onto the blockchain.
In the traditional unallocated gold model, customers often hold claims against the bank's gold rather than a specific batch of physical gold that belongs to them. While trading is convenient, the asset still relies on the bank's credit behind the scenes.
Gold tokenization attempts to change this relationship: tokens can circulate as quickly as unallocated gold, while corresponding to specific physical gold, making the holder's rights to the asset clearer and reducing reliance on the credit of the clearing bank.
This also explains why the UK FCA focuses its regulation on three issues:
What rights do the tokens represent?
Who custodians the physical gold?
Can the tokens be used as collateral?
These questions determine whether on-chain tokens truly represent real asset rights or are merely a different form of trading certificate.
However, the real test lies ahead: can gold tokens issued by different banks freely circulate across institutions?
If not, each bank remains a closed system, and gold is just repackaged digitally. Only by achieving cross-institution circulation can tokenization truly change the infrastructure of the London gold market.$BTC live broadcast of digital “gold” turning into digital “glass”
If you see $BTC break below 75000 at this moment, congratulations, you are not witnessing history, but the collective funeral of leveraged gamblers' PDD
Let's get to the point: who really crashed the market?
It's not the market makers, nor Satoshi Nakamoto appearing, but the US tech stocks that fell first. The Nasdaq plunged more than 5 points in a single day, marking the worst record since April last year. AI concept stocks were bloodied, and Bitcoin, as a high-leverage shadow asset of the Nasdaq, repeated its old problem of falling with the index but not rising. The daily correlation between BTC and Nasdaq 100 once hit 46%. We think we bought decentralized digital currency, but if you think about it a bit, it kind of makes sense.
US nonfarm payroll data exceeded expectations (added 165,000 jobs vs. expected 65,000), directly pushing the Fed's December rate hike probability from 66.9% to 76.8%. Once liquidity expectations tightened, risk assets agreed to jump off the cliff together. Bitcoin's "digital gold" safe-haven narrative? In this round of decline, it shattered more thoroughly than your phone screen smashed when you liquidate.
Next observation range: 73000 to 74000. If this level can't hold either, analysts have started calling for 69000. As for when we can say "stabilized"? It has to first stand back above 80000. Those rushing in to bottom-fish now are not value investors; they are catching flying knives and performing barehanded blade grabs.
75000 is really not a bottom, nor a top; it's just a number. The real bottom is the number when your account hits zero at liquidation. One more old saying: control your position size, control your leverage!
This article does not constitute investment advice. What it does constitute is: don't open long positions below the 50-week moving average, please, genius traders
#美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ Two months ago, a whale sold $2358 worth of $ETH, and 3 hours ago bought back 10,000 coins at $2149.25 😌
Address 0xFD1…6FEe3 bought $21.49 million worth of ETH through Cowswap three hours ago, becoming its largest on-chain asset
On 08.21 this year, when the coin price rebounded, he decisively sold 9,890 ETH at $2358, about $23.09 million. Although he missed the $2800 rally, he avoided the subsequent violent drop
Wallet address 0xFD1043098584CBc763f4D2460aEcB94dD4B6FEe3Will it rise again this time?$AI16Z
Autonomous AI agents managing on-chain activity make for an eye-catching story, but the evidence is in usage. The ai16z ecosystem is tied to an open-source agent framework. Developer adoption of that framework would be a better gauge than token-price enthusiasm around the AI theme.Fidelity compares Solana and US stock exchanges in terms of transaction count in one chart, and the 15% figure is easily misinterpreted. On November 6, Fidelity Digital Assets wrote: As of September 23, 2026, Solana decentralized spot exchanges average about 95.92 million transactions per week, roughly 15% of the combined approximately 657 million weekly transactions of five US exchanges including Nasdaq and NYSE; in 2022, this ratio was only 0.30%, with one week briefly surpassing NYSE in transaction count.
Do not confuse transaction count with trading volume. Fidelity itself notes that these numbers do not consider the size of each transaction; many on-chain transactions are small crypto trades, which are not comparable to large stock orders. Many US stock trades do not even go through public exchanges. Critics might misread the 15% as trading volume catching up with traditional markets; a safer interpretation is that activity frequency has increased, but it should not be used to price spot markets.
Consider this as a snapshot of activity. Fees and actual cash trading volume do not keep pace with transaction count; the 15% is just a phase comparison. Snapshot taken around 14:10 Beijing time, Binance SOL about $86.52, down approximately 3.0% in 24 hours.
$SOL
#SOL #Solana #cryptocurrencyContinue to firmly accumulate BTC and favored cryptocurrency assets
Currently, gradually increasing the proportion of personal funds allocated to the crypto sector, mainly for three reasons worth considering.
First, the market may have already entered a new cycle.
From historical trends, Bitcoin bear markets usually last about a year. The previous peak was around $120,000, and the current cycle's lowest point is $57,000, with the adjustment period already exceeding one year. It has also been about 15 months since the bear market started. From a cyclical perspective, the market may be at the tail end of the bear market, gradually transitioning into a new bull market.
Second, BTC itself has limited upside potential, but related assets have higher elasticity.
The gains in each Bitcoin bull market have been decreasing, from hundreds of times in the early stages to less than 8 times in the last cycle. If this cycle only achieves 3 to 4 times growth, simply holding BTC may no longer meet the expectations of some investors.
Therefore, assets like MSTR and ASST, which are highly correlated with BTC and more volatile, may become options to amplify bull market gains. Of course, they also imply higher downside risk and are not simply fixed multiple relationships.
Third, it is currently difficult to find investment opportunities more attractive than BTC.
In recent times, global funds have mainly concentrated on AI and semiconductor stocks, but the valuations of related assets are already high, making it increasingly difficult for ordinary investors to continue participating. Negative news keeps coming one after another, where exactly is the bottom???
The Democrats just took control of Congress, and their first move is aimed at the crypto world!!!
On November 9, the Democrats sent letters to four entities: Binance, Tether, the WLFI project team, and the issuer of the TRUMP coin, demanding voluntary submission of investigation records by January 4, 2027!
First, the November 6 non-farm payroll report stunned the market: 165,000 new jobs added, more than double the expected 65,000! The unemployment rate dropped to 4.1%, and average hourly earnings rose 0.4% month-over-month and 3.1% year-over-year, all exceeding expectations. With data this strong, traders immediately reversed their bets, switching from expecting rate cuts to betting on a rate hike in December.
Today, Blumenauer’s demand letter explicitly named Binance, Tether, World Liberty Financial, and the TRUMP coin issuer. The deadline for materials is January 4, 2027; the new Congress is sworn in on January 3, so the deadline is exactly the next day. Once he becomes chair of the investigative committee and gains subpoena power, that day marks the start of the countdown.
$BTC support is at 73,000; if it breaks, look for 70,000. Resistance is in the 78,000–80,000 range; if it can’t hold above, it will continue to fall.
The real bottom depends on three things: cleaning out long leverage, institutional inflows from ETF approvals, and a dovish turn at the December FOMC meeting. The bottom quietly forms when the criticism is at its loudest!
#美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ About 30% of the currently announced circulating supply, I paused when I saw this here. MapleStory Universe plans to destroy about 95.7 million NXPC tokens in the Recycle Vault all at once by December 2026; the announcement also mentioned suspending new contribution reward tokens for at least 52 weeks. The beginning of this story is that the project is preparing to first adjust the token supply.
I think this is positive news on the supply side, but it is not yet evidence that the game ecosystem is improving. The burn deals with the existing stock, and the suspension of new rewards restricts the increment; both actions tighten supply but do not answer why players are willing to stay. This is also the pitfall I most easily fall into when reading such announcements: directly equating less token issuance with increased demand.
My speculation is that if subsequent player demand does not keep up, then tightening supply may not sustain long-term sentiment. What do you think the outcome of this story will be: will supply adjustments bring a turnaround, or will it still rely on the game experience to break the deadlock?In the midterm elections, the Democratic Party took control of both chambers, but the "CLARITY Act" failed to advance in the Senate, causing the industry to lose its biggest institutional catalyst. In terms of power structure: Warren is expected to lead the Senate Banking Committee, and Waters' influence is rising in the House Financial Services Committee; both are long-term critics of crypto. Galaxy predicts the new Congress will focus on scrutinizing crypto businesses related to the Trump family (World Liberty Financial, USD1). At the same time, a balanced perspective should be given: the SEC/CFTC can still continue to issue rules under their existing authority. $BTC $USUAL
Usual issues a stablecoin backed by tokenized treasuries and shares ownership with its community through the token. Distribution of value is the pitch. The test is whether stablecoin supply and real usage keep growing without leaning on incentive campaigns, which can flatter early numbers.Glad to see $XAU rebound, rising from 4045 to above 4100
During a large-scale market decline, XAU instead rebounded against the market, possibly due to safe-haven demand driving it higher
However, personally, I prefer to reduce positions on gold during high rebounds; I have already reduced positions twice before, not because I am bearish on gold's long-term trend
But because the Federal Reserve may continue to raise interest rates in the short term! Non-farm employment and other data exceeded expectations, increasing the probability of war with Iran, energy prices rising, inflation rising, and turning into persistent endogenous inflation
Some institutions predict gold could rise to around 4700 by 2027, but the actual range might be "quite large" to improve capital efficiency 🤔 Also, to guard against another short-term decline and prepare for a possible downtrend in the crypto market 🤔, I have bought some mainstream crypto spot assets
Be aware of the risks!I heard you guys have been targeting me nonstop, huh! It's really tough.
Big bro Maji made headlines again today! He got liquidated again on Hyperliquid!
A long position of 540 $ETH got completely liquidated in a sharp drop, leaving his account with just over $16,000. But he didn’t give up and immediately went to Papertrade to open another 100x long ETH position.
I checked his on-chain account; on the other side, he’s holding a 25x full margin long of 690 ETH, with a position size over $1.4 million.
Currently, the unrealized profit is just over $8,000, with a liquidation price at 2097 and current price at 2143, leaving only about a $40 buffer.
If this candle dips just a bit more, this position will get liquidated again.
Big bro Maji’s ability to make a comeback is his own skill, and he has unlimited bullets to keep going, but ordinary people are different, with very low tolerance for mistakes!
This high leverage game is called faith when you’re winning, and a lesson when you’re losing! Better to truly love life and stay away from high leverage.
#美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ I've always been puzzled by something: everyone says ZEC block times have sped up, from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, and now they want to push it down to 20 seconds. So, should we think it's more valuable now?
At first, I thought so too. But then I realized that what's faster is the confirmation time, not how many transactions it can hold. The developers themselves wrote that the total daily private transaction capacity remains unchanged, and the 21 million coin cap also stays the same. It means the chain runs more frequently, but each round still carries the same amount of load.
So, if you ask me whether I'd buy $ZEC because of this, the answer is: it makes me more willing to try using it for a transfer, but it’s not a reason to buy. Faster is good, but faster doesn’t mean more valuable.This market really tortures people, stabbing up and down all night, it's like a meat grinder.
BTC is barely climbing back near 75,800 now, after being smashed down to 73,333 in the early morning; ETH also dipped to 2,060, blowing up a lot of people. The fear and greed index dropped to 26, all blood-stained chips.
Why such a brutal crash?
Still those two old problems. First, the non-farm payroll data was too strong, December rate hike expectations are fully priced in, and US Treasury yields are tightly suppressed. Second, ETFs are fleeing wildly; last week BTC ETFs had a net outflow of 1.28 billion, marking the largest weekly outflow in half a year, with BlackRock alone pulling out a lot.
Leverage has been mostly washed out.
In the past 24 hours, 1.49 billion was liquidated, 86% of which were long positions. A giant whale had a 250 million long position forcibly liquidated by 140 million, with a real loss close to 50 million. But a good sign is that funding rates have dropped to extremely low levels, and liquidation volume has plummeted by 70% compared to the past two days. The short momentum is exhausted, chasing shorts now has very low cost-effectiveness.
What to do now?
Absolutely don't catch a falling knife, and don't stubbornly chase shorts at the bottom.
BTC: Keep an eye on the 73,300-74,800 defense zone. If a long lower shadow candle closes intraday and it can hold without breaking in the next two days, or volume picks up to reclaim 76,184, then it can be considered a right-side stabilization.
ETH: Hold the 2,200 line; if it can't reclaim 2,300 above, it remains weak.
CPI and PPI data are coming out this week, macro sentiment can change anytime. This is the bottoming out before dawn, hold your spot positions, control your contract trades, and wait for right-side confirmation before acting.#RocketLab financial report ahead: How is the progress of the Neutron rocket? Financial district bombed, why is the market unmoved?
A missile hit Riyadh's KAFD, where landmark buildings of Goldman Sachs, Brookfield, and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund are located. In the past, if the core financial district in the Middle East was bombed, gold and Bitcoin would have surged. But this time, the market barely moved.
It's not that the market is numb; it has switched ledgers. This round, the war is not priced as a "safe-haven event" but is instead framed as an "inflation event." The transmission chain is straightforward: Middle East turmoil → oil price premium → sticky inflation → Fed reluctant to ease → rising rate hike expectations. The end of rising oil prices is rate hikes, and on the other end of rate hikes, gold and Bitcoin both get hit.
So the logic of the financial district being attacked and safe-haven assets falling instead of rising is self-consistent. The market is calculating not "where the war is happening," but "where interest rates will go after the war." Saudi Arabia's multi-trillion-dollar economic diversification plan is disrupted, but traders are focused on the 2-year US Treasury yield — that line pushing up explains more about what money fears than missiles do.
In short: this is an inflation ledger, not a safe-haven ledger.
#美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ Within the same sector, prioritize observing the top two with the best liquidity rather than chasing the coldest rebound coins.
Holding heavily before unlocking is equivalent to handing pricing power over to market selling pressure.
If BTC falls below the key support again, the altcoin recovery will be quickly interrupted.
Before ETH/BTC stabilizes, it is difficult for altcoins as a whole to sustain a continuous trend.Zcash developers are simplifying the "waiting for confirmations" issue. The latest draft proposal suggests reducing the target block interval from 25 seconds down to 20 seconds, to be included in the next round of community voting and NU7.1 upgrade discussions. It's only 5 seconds less, but for a privacy-focused payment chain, these 5 seconds directly impact user experience.
Let's clarify the timeline first. The NU7 upgrade went live last Friday, reducing the target block interval from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, tripling block production speed; it also introduced a network sustainability mechanism where part of the transaction fees flow back into future mining rewards, with the 21 million $ZEC cap unchanged. So this is not just a parameter tweak; it's a combined action of speeding up and changing the source of funds.
The rationale for the new proposal is very specific: shortening the interval can reduce initial confirmation wait times, improving offline payments, exchange deposits, and cross-chain swaps. These three scenarios share a common bottleneck at the first confirmation—offline payments can't wait, slow deposit arrivals get complaints, and cross-chain swaps fear delays even more.
The boundaries are also clearly defined: shortening the block interval does not increase the total daily privacy transaction capacity, nor does it change the issuance plan. In other words, this chain is getting faster, not bigger. Speed solves waiting; capacity solves throughput—don't confuse the two.
Worth pondering: reducing block time from 75 seconds to 20 seconds—does this really bring more genuine payments, or just make speculative transfers faster?Last week (11/2–11/6), Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $1.282 billion, with IBIT alone accounting for $1.209 billion (about 94%), GBTC only $61.01 million; meanwhile, Fidelity's FBTC actually had a net inflow of $93.12 million. It is not a "collective institutional retreat," but rather a redemption by a single giant that drove the overall statistics. At the same time, ETH ETFs have had net outflows for 6 consecutive weeks (last week $365 million). $BTC $OKB #美国10月CPI前瞻：12月加息预期会否改变？ $BTC $ETH
Sharing good news, firmly bullish
1. Supply locked: total permanently fixed at 21 million, fully circulating.
2. Institutional endorsement: ICE invested in OKX at a $25 billion valuation; Circle, Ripple, Standard Chartered, and others also invested; audited by Deloitte.
3. On-chain utility: the only Gas token on X Layer; Exchange OS requires staking OKB; integrated with Pump.fun, TVL and trading volume are growing.The $1.05 billion short position is the number I care about most in this midday update. Abraxas Capital still holds this short position after cumulative profits, which indeed makes people a bit uneasy. But what I want to compare more is: those who look at positions VS those who look at the full ledger.
If you only look at positions, the intuition is "big money is still betting on a decline"; if you look at the full ledger, you have to ask whether there are corresponding long positions or other hedges. Since the material doesn't explain these, I won't directly take it as ironclad evidence of a one-sided bearish view. My judgment is: this news impacts short-term sentiment more than it proves the subsequent direction. If the short position is part of a portfolio hedge, interpreting the market based on it might actually misread their intent.
I stand on the side of "look at the ledger first"; a large number does not equal complete information. Would you take this short position as a bearish signal, or wait for more position information before judging?【On-Chain Trading Update｜xyz:SP500】
Monitored address 0x0742 opened a short position:
▪ Execution price: $7,386.09
▪ Transaction amount this time: $221,582.81
▪ Leverage: 50x
Note: This address has earned over $992,000 in the past 30 days, with a return rate of +324.13% At 6 AM this morning, a whale holding about $253 million in long positions was liquidated for approximately $140 million.
According to Ember monitoring, this morning's drop liquidated about $140 million of his long positions: approximately 63,000 ETH (about $135 million) were liquidated, resulting in a loss of about $48.47 million; about 60.8 BTC (about $4.56 million) were liquidated, resulting in a loss of about $550,000. The account still holds about $113 million in BTC and ETH long positions, with unrealized losses of about $12.39 million, totaling a loss of about $61.41 million. The liquidation prices for the remaining positions are approximately BTC 72197 and ETH 2004. At the time of writing, BTC≈74781, ETH≈2136.
I will focus on one point: the remaining approximately $113 million in long positions have not been closed yet, and the current price is not far from the liquidation lines at BTC 72197 and ETH 2004.
Do you think he will continue to hold the approximately $113 million long positions, or reduce positions during the rebound?
I will continue to write about what happens next, stay tuned so you don't miss it
$ETH $BTC Anthropic's IPO valuation is still under discussion, but suppliers have already made new large commitments.
The latest report shows that the company has secured a gas power generation equipment deal worth about $3.4 billion, involving approximately 1.7 GW of generation capacity. This refers to equipment supply commitments; there is still follow-up work to complete before all these devices are delivered and stable power supply is ensured.
This news adds another layer of understanding to the valuation debate: while investors argue over the offering price, the company must prepare in advance for future computing power demands. Some equipment cannot wait until all customer orders are finalized before being ordered; ordering early also means bearing funding and delivery risks sooner.
This is also the hardest part of valuing AI companies. Revenue grows rapidly, but to support the next growth phase, how much money needs to be spent upfront and how far in advance will affect shareholder returns.
I acknowledge the necessity of resolving power supply issues in advance. But from the subscriber's perspective, they also want to know how these commitments will be paid for, when the equipment will be put into use, and if demand falls short of expectations, how much room the company has to adjust.
Whether the IPO price can be a bit cheaper is only part of the discussion. What must be continuously faced after listing is the gap between the speed of revenue realization and the speed of expenditure realization.
AI demand is worth looking forward to, but when equipment orders are already in the billions of dollars, the market's demand for more detailed explanations is completely reasonable.
#Anthropic仍计划11月IPO，投资者下调估值预期 🔷 CryptoX-ray #37: $RSR - 41.4 million will be burned. That's 0.066%
Market cap ≈$99.7 million, TVL ≈$45.95 million. Part of the fees goes to buyback and burning of RSR, but 41.4 million is a drop in the bucket, and they will be burned only on November 27.
Staking is the first loss: slashing up to the entire amount. In September: Burn Gauge 80.44%, High Burn 86.27%.
Verdict: mechanisms exist, flows are not proven. Entry ≈$0.0015, cancellation below $0.0012, target $0.003.
Do you believe in RSR or is it just cosmetic? 👇In the perpetual DEX sector, HYPE, ASTER, APX, and others have fast-growing trading volumes, but valuation and unlocking risks coexist.
Solana's ecosystem is highly active, with Jupiter leading in 7-day DEX trading volume.
Samsung Wallet's integration of Solana USDC is a positive catalyst for stablecoin use cases. Nebius enters Q3 with a demanding benchmark: Q2 group revenue rose 454% year over year to $582M, while AI cloud supplied most of that base. That makes the November 12 report a test of whether expanding GPU and data-center investment is translating into durable demand, not just rapid capacity buildout. The source does not yet establish the answer.
#NebiusQ3AICloudGrowth In the past 24 hours, the entire market liquidated $855.69 million, with 140,000 people liquidated, and long positions accounting for 90.2% of the losses. The price has fallen below Glassnode's short-term holder cost line of 75,700, indicating that those who entered in the past two months are collectively at a floating loss, and the selling pressure has not yet been fully released. $BTC