Orbit Post Sitemap
On Friday, the $BTC spot ETF saw an outflow of $643 million in a single day, the largest since June 25. The number itself isn't surprising; what's surprising is the day it happened — the first trading day after Binance was hacked.
Let's put the data back into context. $643 million is a single-day figure, with June 25 as a reference point. But it's "one day," not "one week." A single-day outflow amplifies sentiment, not trend. What really matters is whether it continues into early next week: if it doesn't, it's a one-off event; if it does, it means funds are changing direction.
Now, let's look at the mechanism. ETF outflows aren't retail investors hitting the sell button; they involve share redemptions: institutions submit redemptions, the fund sells the corresponding spot assets to market makers, who then dump them back into the market. This process is slow, has thresholds, and is constrained by business days, so this volume represents allocation decisions, not panic selling.
The timing makes it more significant. The security incident hit "custody trust," and the ETF outflow hit "position size." Two events collided on the same day, effectively asking the market two questions simultaneously: where do you keep your coins, and do you still want this much? Under this pressure, $ETH and $SOL have no independent narrative and can only contract along with risk appetite.
Don't treat this day as a turning point, nor as noise. It's more like the first reading of a stress test. Next, we need to distinguish whether funds are "relocating" or "exiting" — which look almost identical on the surface but have completely opposite implications.
This is the most worthwhile area to focus on right now. The current trend of ZEC is actually quite interesting. Unlike BTC, which surged rapidly upwards, it is slowly consolidating at a relatively low range, as if patiently accumulating energy. From the candlestick chart, although there is some pressure from moving averages above, the support below is solid, and the price volatility is narrowing, which is usually the calm before a breakout. The MACD indicator is entangled near the zero line, indicating a balance of power between bulls and bears. The main force may be quietly accumulating, waiting for the right moment to make a move.
In the face of this "grinding" market, we must not be impatient to chase highs or sell lows. I think the best strategy is to be a patient observer, waiting for it to break through key resistance levels or to pull back to strong support without breaking before taking action. If it can break through the upper pressure line with volume, that is a very clear entry signal; if it continues to pull back, as long as it does not break the previous low, we can build positions in batches at low levels, which makes the cost safer and the mindset more peaceful.
If you really find a suitable entry point, remember to always set a stop loss. Protecting our principal is the top priority. We can set the target at the next obvious resistance level or estimate a reasonable profit space based on wave theory. This low-level positioning strategy may require a bit more patience, but once the market starts, the risk-reward ratio is often very attractive. I hope everyone can stay calm and steadily seize this potential upward opportunity to get richer together! ✨$ZEC $BTC $ETH Abandon illusions! Above $ZEC is all a "Wall of Sighs"; whoever tries to bottom-fish will just be the bag holder!
Brothers, don’t think the market has bottomed just because the price twitches a bit. ZEC’s current movement is purely the main force "reversing to pick up people," tricking stubborn bulls to get on board.
Look at the current market: price around 1267, I placed a short at the high of 1273.38 and have already secured a steady 1.43% profit. Although the gain isn’t huge, I’m holding this trend very firmly.
Why? Just open your eyes and look at the order book depth above: from 1267.30 to 1267.44, there’s a dense wall of sell orders, with the largest single order pressing nearly 10 coins. As soon as bulls dare to poke their heads up, they get smashed instantly by large orders. Meanwhile, the buy side below is sparse and can’t absorb this continuous selling pressure.
From the candlestick trend, this is a classic "stair-step decline," with each high lower than the last, the moving averages tightly pressing down, and every slight rebound is a volume-less bull trap—a typical downtrend continuation pattern.
So, don’t catch a falling knife. We hold our shorts firmly this round; until the trend reverses, any pullback is just an opportunity for us to enter! $BTC $ETH #非农来袭，12月加息会否生变？ Everyone thought stolen funds couldn't be recovered? This time, the FBI's announcement might have been misread. Does anyone really think this $600 million is just "another hacking incident"? My first reaction to this news wasn't panic, but rather something subtle. On October 31, the FBI publicly confirmed that over $600 million stolen on Binance points to North Korea's TraderTraitor group, the same gang that took $1.5 billion from Bybit last year, and even specifically called on THORChain nodes, DeFi protocols, and exchanges to block all hacker addresses. This timing is crucial—the market did not experience a panic sell-off when the news broke; BTC and ETH reacted relatively calmly, and altcoins were even quieter. What does this indicate? It means the "North Korean hacker" narrative has been traded too many times, and the emotional impact is diminishing. But I don't quite agree with simply categorizing this as "bad news fully priced in." From the perspective of capital preference, the real point to watch is another layer: when law enforcement starts publicly naming cross-chain nodes and DeFi frontends, the way risk appetite is priced will quietly change. Previously, it was assumed stolen funds would be laundered through mixers and cross-chain transfers with low chances of recovery, so the market treated it as a sunk cost; now, the FBI is placing the responsibility for interception on infrastructure like THORChain, effectively injecting "compliance friction" into what was originally a neutral cross-chain narrative. For BTC, this is a slight positive for its safe-haven attribute; for ETH and the DeFi sector, the short-term effect is emotional suppression, especially for those relying on anonymous flows More important than the election to watch is this week's unlock schedule!
During election week, everyone's eyes are on the ballot box, but I'm focused on another chart. From November 2 to 8, a total of about $275 million worth of 12 tokens will be unlocked, all hitting the market right after a heavy blow this week.
The largest amount is BTW, unlocking about $114 million this afternoon; the most severe ratio is MMT, unlocking about 252 million tokens on November 4, equivalent to 294.38% of its current circulating supply, with chips nearly quadrupling overnight; KITE will unlock about $75.6 million tomorrow, accounting for 17.42% of its circulating supply.
The rest: ENA has two batches totaling about $25.4 million this week, AVAX's weekend batch accounts for only 0.3% of circulating supply, negligible. This is just the first week of November; a larger one-year unlock is queued for the end of the month.
Also to clarify: unlocking does not mean immediate dumping; the portion allocated to the ecosystem is usually spent gradually; the real focus is on the shares allocated to the team and early investors.
My view: when looking at unlocks, don't look at the amount first, look at the ratio. A large amount just means a loud noise, a large ratio means a heavy supply. Plus, the unlock recipients—the portion given to the team and early investors—have costs only a fraction of the current price, so cashing out doesn't need a reason.
This week, for these tokens, first check the unlock time and ratio before deciding whether to act.
$MMT $KITE $ENA #TokenUnlock The moment the sternum was split down the middle, what I saw was not a healthy heart, but a pump pushed to its limit by positive inotropic drugs—the cardiac output was dazzlingly high, but the myocardium's own contractile reserve had never been stress-tested.
Last season's revenue rose 93% year-over-year, with the US commercial side soaring nearly 1.5 times, followed by an upward revision of the full-year guidance. On the monitor, this is a beautiful curve: fast heart rate, large stroke volume, low peripheral vascular resistance, and auscultation full of murmurs. But high-powered circulation never equals myocardial health. We must distinguish whether this is truly enhanced contractility or the drugs propping you up—one-off orders, policy-driven procurement, and emotionally driven pricing all count as exogenous adrenaline. The real stress test is the moment the drugs are withdrawn.
What I want to see is the angiogram, not the pretty waveform on the ECG. Is perfusion uniform in the order book? Have major clients renewed enough to form collateral circulation? Gross margin is myocardial perfusion pressure—when it drops, the first to die are the most distal capillaries. If only one of the two coronary arteries supplying the government and commercial sides is perfusing, and the other is chronically stenosed, this heart cannot endure a long run. Even worse is an anastomotic leak: revenue looks intact on stage, but the true story is in the postoperative drainage bag.
Valuation is preload. The fuller it is, the closer you get to the descending limb of that curve—adding one more drop of volume actually reduces the blood ejected. Interest rate is afterload; when afterload rises, wedge pressure follows, and pulmonary edema is just a step away. The current pricing discounts the ideal postoperative recovery curve prematurely onto today's monitor. The thing I dread most during surgery is masking an anastomotic leak by increasing vasopressors—covering the gap with narrative will come back to haunt you on discharge day.
This earnings report, I only wait for one number: stroke volume. Not how fast it beats, but how much it truly pumps out each contraction—whether order conversion rate, retention structure, and free cash flow can align in phase. Troponin doesn't lie: if any one of these falls outside the reference range, the so-called high growth signals myocardial ischemia, not an athlete's sinus bradycardia. In the 24 hours post-op, I don't listen to how loud the monitor alarms are, only the color of the drainage and urine output—book profit is blood pressure, cash flow is urine output.
If this time there is only heart rate without stroke volume, it's not sinus tachycardia in recovery, but the last phase of compensation before decompensation. #palantirq3valuationFat test, the Kanye-associated address that keeps going long on ETH is suspected of increasing its position. After the Binance hack news was disclosed on October 30, this address sold off 1,390 ETH in batches to reduce liquidation risk, at an average price of about $2,275.6, worth approximately $3.163 million, with a loss of about $317,000. After withdrawals were reopened, this address withdrew another 2,074 ETH from Binance, worth about $4.7 million..#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC $ETH THORChain has reportedly paused some swaps, slowing down the hacker's fund transfers. Could this technical glitch mark a turning point in cooling down the BTC incident risk? 1. News. According to public reports, THORChain suspended some swap services due to block reorganization issues, and the market believes this may slow the transfer speed of Binance hacker funds. Meanwhile, after Binance resumed withdrawals, the net outflow scale rose to about $5.8 billion. BTC is priced at $78,355.7, up 0.48% in 24 hours but still down 2.58% over the past week, with a low of $76,265.2 on the 20th. 2. Fund impact. The latest single-day net inflow for BTC ETFs is $34.7 million, with a 5-day net inflow of $413.8 million and a 10-day net inflow of $176.9 million. The US Dollar Index is at 101.92, up 0.04% intraday; gold is up 0.42%; the fear and greed index has rebounded to 37. Funds have not fully fled, but the latest ETF subscription momentum has clearly weakened. 3. BTC implications. Blocking swap channels can only delay fund transfers, not automatically solve the problem; the real positive is more assets being tracked, frozen, or recovered. If on-chain recovery efforts continue, exchange credit risk will decrease; if attackers find alternative routes, the event premium may rise again. The BTC rebound currently still prices in risk mitigation. 4. Observation indicators. I will focus on four indicators next: first, whether THORChain's pause affects other cross-chain liquidity; second, whether hacker addresses show new transfer paths; third, Binance's net flow#Palantir财报前瞻：高增长能否支撑高估值 OKXOrbitTopics
Brushing off the century-old dust settled on parchment, the current uproar around $NVDA is, under my trowel and brush, nothing more than a nineteenth-century pottery shard unearthed anew.
As I sit before a desk cluttered with archives from a bygone era, watching the frenzy chasing the computing power overlord today, the atmosphere hits me like the stratigraphic layers of the 1840s British "Railway Mania." Back then, gentlemen and commoners alike scrambled to sell their belongings to subscribe to every railway share, even those existing only on blueprints; today, the fervent crowd not only rushes to buy this new era's casting shovel but also, through the geometric amplification of decentralized media, transforms an ordinary financial report into a "Delphic oracle" deciding the fate of the entire market's bull and bear cycles.
Stratigraphy of history never lies; the composition of frenzy deposits has remained unchanged for centuries. In 1845, the British Parliament approved over two thousand miles of railway lines, and newspapers repeatedly declared the end of the carriage era, promising eternal prosperity through rails; yet when the crisis hit in 1847, all that remained on the surface were equity certificates that had plummeted 85%, alongside mountains of abandoned railbeds.
I believe the current market is precisely replicating this geological sedimentation process. The public no longer scrutinizes the underlying real computing power depreciation rates or terminal cash flows; they only need a totem, a golden idol sustaining the entire on-chain liquidity mirage.
From the bubble specimens unearthed over time, when a shovel seller's quarterly profit is treated as the Holy Grail of human technological civilization, even endowed by derivatives markets with divine authority to determine global asset liquidity, it often means the cultural layer's prosperity has reached the mechanical structure's limit. Stress in the strata is rising sharply; at the slightest disturbance, faults will instantly rupture.
Personally, I maintain absolute cold-bloodedness in my strategy, adhering strictly to discipline and risk limits during field excavations. I would never buy those clay tablets destined to weather away at historical peak prices during the temple's most flourishing incense-burning and the priests' drum-beating oracle proclamations.
There is nothing new under the sun; the only lesson humanity has learned from history is that it has never truly learned any lesson.
Fervent believers think they are witnessing the birth of a miracle, but in my eyes, they are merely using their excited flesh and blood to cast a doomed materialistic relic for the archaeologists of the next era.🏛️📜#Mục tiêu huy động vốn của OpenAI giảm, rủi ro tín dụng của Anthropic được quan tâm #非农来袭，12月加息会否生变？
The market has already priced in a "December rate hike," reflecting a crowded long dollar / short growth expectation.
- If the nonfarm payrolls slightly exceed expectations: it will likely be a "buy the rumor, sell the fact" scenario, with the positive outlook realized.
- If the nonfarm payrolls significantly beat expectations: it will trigger a new round of trend-driven hawkish repricing.
- If the nonfarm payrolls weaken significantly: it will represent a strong negative surprise, causing a sell-off in dollar longs and US Treasury shorts.
A common trading pitfall: don’t focus only on new jobs added; the month-over-month wage growth is a hidden trigger. Even if new jobs are average, a jump in hourly wages will still be interpreted by the market as a wage inflation risk, raising rate hike expectations.
Brief conclusion
The nonfarm payrolls won’t directly lock in the outcome but will significantly shift the odds:
- ✅ Strong nonfarm + wage rebound → December rate hike almost certain
- ✅ Weak nonfarm, rising unemployment, wage decline → rate hike expectations cool off, likely no move
- ✅ Neutral nonfarm → suspense remains for CPI
The Fed’s current stance: it prefers to keep the option of "one more hike" open and won’t easily rule it out.
Risk warning
Macro expectations change rapidly; interest rate futures probabilities only reflect current market pricing and do not constitute any trading advice; volatility is extremely high around data releases, and leveraged positions are prone to liquidation.#PalantirQ3Valuation Brothers, today let's focus on the long and short game situation of these three coins 👇
$CT: The rebound looks more like a bull trap
CT has already broken the key level, long positions are floating with losses close to 1.55 million USD, and there is a large amount of historical trapped positions. The cost to pull the price up again is not low.
At present, the rebound looks more like a bull trap, so blind bottom-fishing is not recommended.
$TRUTH: Small-cap coin, be cautious with shorting
Currently, long positions have floating profits, short positions have floating losses of about 158,000 USD, and overall fuel is not sufficient.
But TRUTH has a relatively small market cap, making it easier to pump the price. The possibility of further rallies to attract shorts to enter cannot be ruled out, so be cautious with shorting for now.
$TRUMP: Bears hold the advantage
Short positions have profits of about 1.55 million USD, long positions have floating losses of about 350,000 USD, and trapped positions are relatively few.
You can consider lightly buying at appropriate low points, but be sure to set stop losses. Heavy positions for speculation are not recommended.
Summary:
CT is not suitable for blind bottom-fishing, be careful of shorts getting squeezed on TRUTH, and TRUMP can cautiously look for low entry opportunities.
Altcoins are really tough to trade both long and short right now; controlling position size is more important than anything else Predicting whether Bitcoin can break through, when I hear "everyone thinks it will," I first want to ask: Are we all looking at the same screenshot? In regular trading, when many people chase to buy, it can indeed push the price; however, popular odds in prediction markets don't necessarily cause the event to happen. I use odds as a reference, but when several groups keep circulating the same piece of news, that hardly counts as cross-validation. If you remove those posts that cite each other, who is left with new evidence?Changing the trading target doesn't necessarily mean changing the risk. When I read this news, what popped into my mind wasn't "recovered," but rather: after exiting a trade, is the risk actually removed, or has it just been concentrated somewhere else?
According to Odaily citing HyperBot data, Brother Maji Huang Licheng has fully closed his previous long position of 11,000 HYPE tokens with 10x leverage, incurring a loss of about $31,600; he then continuously increased his long position on Ethereum with 25x leverage, raising the position to 5,200 ETH. Currently, the overall position has slightly turned profitable, with an unrealized gain of $158,000 and a return on investment of 32.56%.
My judgment is that this looks more like a re-concentration of risk rather than diversification. Leaving HYPE and increasing ETH means the target changed, but the direction remains long; from these two positions, there is no indication of offsetting volatility by taking opposite directions.
Another aspect is leverage. At 25x leverage, returns are amplified, but price movements against the position will erode margin faster. The current unrealized gain reflects the present state but cannot protect the position against the next volatility. When I look at such quick updates, I tend to put "how much was earned" aside and focus more on the risk exposure.
If you could only add one piece of data to this whale activity update, would you prefer to see the liquidation price, margin size, or other holdings? Which one would most change your judgment? Based on the USD spot daily chart (UTC settlement), $BTC opened October at $83,556 and closed at $77,424, down 7.34%. Last October, it fell 3.96%. For two consecutive years, "Uptober" did not come. A 7.34% drop itself is not large. In June this year, under the same criteria, $BTC fell 20.46% in a single month. What makes this time uncomfortable is not the magnitude, but the timing: many people are used to expecting a rise in October. This month was not a continuous decline. On October 2, the intraday high reached $87,249, the highest point of the month. For more than three weeks afterward, the daily closing price hovered above $80,000. The real wound came at the end of the month: on October 29, it dropped 4.27% in one day, and the next day the intraday low touched $76,141, the lowest of the month. The background was also not easy. In the early morning of October 29 Beijing time, the Federal Reserve kept the interest rate at 3.75% to 4%, with a vote of 10 to 2; the two dissenting votes advocated raising the rate by another 25 basis points. The statement said inflation is "still elevated." On the previous trading day, the US 10-year Treasury yield closed at 5.05%. With money this expensive, risk assets must first answer one question: why are they worth holding? What should be watched more is $ETH. In the same month, it fell from $2,684 to $2,253, a drop of 16.07%, nearly 9 percentage points deeper than $BTC$INTC Although I also bought a bit of Intel, my view is more extreme because I think this AI wave is about to collapse. The reason is simple: if you throw a few stones into a river, you can see the ripples, right? These leading big tech companies have poured in hundreds of billions of dollars, and then you tell me they produced a short drama called Red Fruit. Who can hold on to that?#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？
Tomorrow is the official voting day for the U.S. midterm elections, with all 435 House seats up for grabs and 35 Senate seats contested. Currently, the Republicans control the Senate 53 to 47, and their advantage in the House is very slim.
There are three key points to watch:
Congressional control
Cost of living, inflation, and immigration are the main issues in this election. A Pew survey in October showed that 55% of American adults believe the Democrats will take the House, but the Senate is expected to be roughly split 50-50.
If a divided Congress emerges, Trump's future tax cuts, budget, and immigration policies may face more resistance, and investigations and hearings will increase.
Political influence of the crypto industry
Statistics show that corporate political spending in this election reached $737.3 million, with the crypto industry accounting for about $233 million. Crypto companies are clearly not just seeking short-term policy benefits but are also positioning themselves for future influence in Congress.
Iran situation and energy markets
Reports indicate that the U.S. and Israeli militaries have prepared plans to resume strikes on Iran, possibly after the election. However, the White House has clearly stated there will be no attacks on Iran before November 3, and subsequent actions remain uncertain.
My view is that the impact of this election will not be limited to U.S. politics. If control of Congress changes, fiscal policy, crypto regulation, and foreign policy could all be readjusted.
For U.S. stocks, in the short term, policy uncertainty should be monitored, while in the medium term, attention should be paid to whether Congress can pass new fiscal and industrial policies. The Iran situation is an additional variable that requires caution regarding oil prices and inflation. The deadline for this round of virtual asset service provider (VASP) license applications in Brazil was October 30. The result was quite different from market expectations: previously, the industry estimated that 150 to 200 institutions would submit applications, but in reality, only about 40 formally submitted. Let's clarify the difference between this "40" and other numbers you might see. You may see reports saying "68" or even "63," which is not contradictory, just different statistical criteria. The 40 refers to those who formally submitted complete applications. The 68 is the total number of institutions "in the process" tracked by financial infrastructure company Cainvest. This includes not only formal applicants but also banks that already hold central bank licenses and have submitted regulatory notifications (which may follow a simplified process), as well as cases where documents are related but the companies themselves have not publicly confirmed. So, 40 have submitted, 68 are counted in this pool. According to the rules, institutions that have submitted applications can continue to operate legally during the central bank's review. Those who have not submitted must exit the Brazilian market within 30 days. Another key date: from November 6, Brazilian banks and payment institutions will no longer be able to conduct business with unauthorized virtual asset service providers. The expectation was one to two hundred applicants, but only forty submitted, which is quite a realistic gap. Compliance costs and thresholds are there, and many small and medium institutions may have given up after some consideration. When banks cut off connections with unlicensed institutions on November 6, the market landscape in Brazil will further concentrate on compliant players who have obtained licenses. Currently, everyone is waiting for the central bank's review results.#Palantir Financial Report Review: Can High Growth Support a High Valuation The midterm elections are approaching. Will the mainstream continue to rise or experience a waterfall decline?
With the midterm elections imminent, the Democrats are highly likely to take the House of Representatives. Fiscal policy, tariffs, and AI regulation are the core points of contention.
The election results will impact the future of U.S. crypto regulatory policies, fiscal policy, and market confidence.
If policy expectations lean positive, $BTC $ETH will see a strong rebound. If the market worries about policy uncertainty, funds will seek safety, causing the mainstream to experience a waterfall drop!
Sudden surges and dumps are likely around the election period, so don’t rush to take a position in the short term!
$SNDK #非农来袭，12月加息会否生变？
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？
#加密行业协同守护资产安全 #Pratinjau Laporan Keuangan Palantir: Apakah Pertumbuhan Tinggi Bisa Mendukung Penilaian Tinggi In October 2008, a person using the pseudonym "Satoshi Nakamoto" published the Bitcoin whitepaper. On January 3, 2009, the Bitcoin genesis block was mined, marking the official birth of cryptocurrency. Its original intention was a response to the fragile banking system at the time.
NFT: Sprouted in 2014, exploded in 2021
The concept of NFT first appeared in 2014, initially just a niche experiment within the tech community. In 2017, projects like CryptoPunks and CryptoKitties began bringing it into the public eye. But its true peak in popularity was from 2021 to 2022, with Beeple’s record-breaking auction and the viral success of the "Bored Ape" series making NFT a global cultural phenomenon.
The demise of altcoins: a structural "liquidation"
You feel that many previously famous altcoins are disappearing, and this is not an illusion. Data shows that more than half of the tokens created since mid-2021 have "died," ceasing active trading. In 2025 alone, about 11.6 million tokens went to zero, accounting for 86.3% of all failures in the past five years. Historically, 71.9% of projects that once entered the top 100 by market cap have actually died.
The pattern of demise can be summarized into several clear modes:
Distorted financing models: The ICO (Initial Coin Offering) bubble of 2017-2018 spawned many speculative projects, later cracked down by regulators. After founders turned to venture capital (VC), the 2021-2022 VC bubble spawned a batch of "overvalued, low-quality" projects. When the market cooled and VCs faced exit pressure, these tokens lacking real support were the first to fall.
Narrative before product: Many projects painted grand narratives like Web3 and GameFi before the technology was mature. When users repeatedly found promises unfulfilled and trust was exhausted, "no newcomers came in," and projects lost their foundational value.
Backlash of "open access": Extremely low token issuance thresholds led to a flood of speculative "meme coins" and experimental projects with almost no R&D support, which often disappeared after just a few transactions.
Therefore, the demise of altcoins is not accidental but a structural "liquidation" process driven by a financing bubble, narrative exhaustion, and low entry barriers.
The "US-led" dominant digital currencies
The so-called "US-led" digital currencies are not an official classification but refer to projects issued or led by companies registered and operating in the United States. At the policy level (such as proposals suggesting capital gains tax exemption for "US-made" cryptocurrencies), this has strategic significance.
Some projects with important market positions under this framework include:
XRP (Ripple): Led by the US company Ripple Labs, focusing on cross-border payments.
Solana (SOL): Founded by the US company Solana Labs, representing high-performance public blockchains.
USD Coin (USDC): A compliant stablecoin jointly issued by US companies Circle and Coinbase.
Avalanche (AVAX), Stellar (XLM), Chainlink (LINK), and others are also commonly included as active projects in this category.
Bitcoin and Ethereum, as decentralized networks, have core developers and ecosystems closely linked to the US but are generally not simply classified as "US-led projects."
💔 The fading narrative of "decentralization"
You keenly sense that the term "decentralization" is rarely seriously discussed anymore, and this observation is accurate. Its fading stems from the huge gap between ideals and structural realities.
A key fact is: the whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto never actually uses the word "decentralization." It repeatedly emphasizes "Distributed," aiming to "remove the need for a trusted third party."
However, the operational reality shows a high degree of structural concentration:
Infrastructure layer: Bitcoin mining hash power has long been controlled 60-70% by the top few mining pools.
Trading and custody layer: The vast majority of users’ asset flows still go through centralized exchanges (CEX).
Governance layer: Many DeFi protocols appear as DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) on the surface, but upgrade rights and pause rights are often held by core teams or multisig wallets.
Power transfer rather than dissipation: Power has shifted from banks and governments to VCs, foundations, mining pools, exchanges, and stablecoin issuers, reconcentrating in new places.
The market ultimately votes with its feet: most people choose a more centralized but more convenient path. Decentralization has shifted from a core organizational principle to more of a marketing term rather than the true operational axis.
🤫 Binance hack "silence": when a crisis no longer spreads
You noticed that the Binance hack (involving about $6.3 billion) was met with "no noise" in public opinion, which precisely reveals the current structural characteristics of the industry. The market reaction was calm because the crisis was structurally "isolated":
Loss fully absorbed: Binance used over $6.34 billion of its own funds to cover 100% of the loss, with user assets unaffected.
Selling pressure is "two-way": The stolen funds were from hot wallets, not cold wallet main storage. Meanwhile, Binance bought large amounts of scarce tokens on the market to replenish reserves, creating strong buy pressure that hedged potential hacker sell-offs.
Lack of panic transmission chain: Unlike the panic of "exchange collapse" during the FTX crash, withdrawal functions quickly resumed this time, and a large portion of stolen assets were frozen, cutting off the "Binance collapse → market panic" transmission chain.
When a leading player in an industry has the ability and willingness to internalize systemic risk with its own capital, a crisis that should be "historic" is downgraded in public perception to an operational event that needs to be "handled," rather than an industry faith crisis that needs to be "discussed." Is this good or bad news?870,000 living people's resumes were sold overseas, exchanging for 7.46 million — the settlement method was virtual currency.
In the first case, Wang and 10 others resold citizens' personal information, paying fees in virtual currency, involving over 1.98 million yuan. The second case was even more severe: Lin Feng and 20 others illegally obtained and sold over 870,000 job applicants' information overseas, with illegal gains also settled in virtual currency, involving over 7.46 million yuan.
870,000 entries represent the names, phone numbers, and work experience of 870,000 living people. Sold overseas, exchanged for 7.46 million.
Why does this industry love using stablecoins? Cross-border, instant, no intermediary banks, almost zero friction. $USDT transfers are so cheap they can be used like cash, which is exactly why it was chosen. But "no intermediary banks" does not mean "no chain" — every on-chain transfer's address, time, and amount are permanently public; judicial evidence collection seeks relationship graphs, not isolated points.
My judgment: law enforcement focus is shifting from "arresting people" to "cutting off settlements." The real risk is not in large amounts but in those "helping friends transfer a bit" small orders, which eventually all connect to the same graph.
Therefore, wallets should be layered: large cold storage, daily small amounts, exchange deposits each separate, same for $BTC and $ETH. Not to hide, but to avoid joint liability.
A question remains: when the settlement method itself becomes the main evidence line, should the first upgrade be technology or risk awareness of "helping friends transfer a bit"?After lunch, I checked the ETF fund situation. Today, ETF net inflow: BTC took about 80%, ETH only a bit over 20%.
Does this mean no one wants ETH? No. ETH also had a net inflow of 29.39 million today, the positive number is real, just overshadowed by BTC's 105 million in scale.
The cumulative data shows the same pattern: BTC accumulated 58.5 billion, ETH accumulated 13.4 billion, still roughly an 80/20 split. This is not a coincidence but an old habit of the funds.
The market also matches this: BTC is consolidating around 78,184, ETH stands near 2,284, SOL is pressured below 94.4. Today, two positives and one negative, no clear one-sided move.
Positions are quieter: the three major mainstream coins all eased off within 0.2% in one hour. The total network position is 137.18 billion, up only 0.21%. Trading volume surged to 103.8 billion, up 48.97%, volume is entering but positions are not following.
Liquidations are not calm: 135 million in one day across the network, up 74.55%, with BTC and ETH accounting for more than half. Those chasing highs are paying their tuition first.
So my view is simple: the 80/20 split is not a conclusion but a division of labor. BTC takes the incremental inflow, ETH holds the base positions, and SOL needs to see if it can reclaim 94.4.
Tonight at 11 PM there is ISM manufacturing data expected between 54.5 and 54.7. Before the result, I won’t add positions, just maintain this ratio and wait for it to change.
Only when the ratio flips to 50/50 will it be a signal for ETH to take over. Until then, don’t cheer for it to surpass BTC.$BTC, $ETH Midterm elections are approaching, how to operate in the short term?
Tomorrow's US midterm elections are the biggest uncertainty bomb right now, directly determining the degree of crypto regulation looseness or strictness in the next two years. Everyone must be clear about this.
If the Democrats take control of Congress, crypto regulation will tighten, SEC investigations and restrictions will increase, the CLARITY Act will basically have no chance of advancing, which is a real negative for both Bitcoin and Ethereum; if the Republicans firmly control power, industry policy expectations will be relaxed, and funds will dare to go long.
The market has already started to play the expectations in advance. This morning's BTC and ETH rebound is essentially funds betting on the election result in advance, not a trend reversal. Historically, when such news is realized, good news leads to profit-taking and price drops, bad news accelerates the decline. Do not blindly chase highs and get trapped at the news peak.
Our direction is very clear: continue to short on rebounds. Short Bitcoin in the 78,500-79,000 range, enter Ethereum at 2,300-2,320.
Before the election results come out, keep positions light, do not go all in. Treat all rallies as bull traps, do not guess the result, just follow the market levels to execute the plan.
The next article by Beichen will explain why he is more optimistic about a Republican victory!
#美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ 2:30 PM, the most sleepy time. Just glanced at the market, almost made me laugh out loud. The main market is sleeping, but a few altcoins are performing a big revival. The main players' eating habits are really shameless. Don't get itchy just by looking at the red and green bars.
First, look at $HYPE, current price 86.4. This one is consolidating at a high level. The funniest thing is the 4-hour long-short ratio, which dropped sharply from 2.17 to 1.45 like a roller coaster. The price barely fell, but retail investors were scared and frantically cutting losses. However, looking closely, the funding rate occasionally turns negative, indicating the bulls lack confidence. Chasing here has a very low risk-reward ratio.
Next, look at $ZEC, current price 1266. The bears had a great time recently, but now the bulls are howling to bottom-fish again. The long-short ratio climbed hard from 0.48 back to 0.83. It's a typical fence-sitting market, with wicks going up and down washing out both sides. Both sides want to profit, but in the end, both often get slapped in the face.
The sneakiest is $UNI, current price 7.1. The 4-hour long-short ratio directly pulled up to 2.36. Above 7.4 is all previous trapped positions. Retail investors are still crazily adding positions below. Isn't this obviously a bull trap set by the main players? Once the main market shows a little resistance, the long positions will definitely be crushed like dry grass.
My view: The afternoon is just a low-volume oscillation, altcoins fighting their own battles, emotions extremely torn. Control your hands, don't be fooled by the main players' fake moves.
Among these three coins, who do you think will dive first to wash out positions? Whose positions are you holding now?
#非农来袭，12月加息会否生变？ $BTC
5833 BTC. This afternoon, a listed company called Next Technology said it will handle this batch of coins, either selling them or using them as collateral. At the current price of 78163, that's about 456 million USD.
Last week, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net outflow of 203 million, with Fidelity's FBTC alone withdrawing 166 million. This kind of selling pressure at the listed company level has been continuous for months.
But the market hasn't collapsed. BTC is now at 78163, up 0.35% in 24 hours, with a daily low of 77600, a perpetual funding rate of +0.0069%, open interest at 2.63 billion USD, and 33,700 BTC; the bulls haven't been scared off.
While coins are being sold, leverage hasn't given up. I've encountered this kind of stalemate a few times; the outcome is usually a sideways grind until one side can't take it anymore. My inclination is not to chase shorts or rush to buy at this level, but to let it choose its own direction.
#非农来袭，12月加息会否生变？ Is a 99.7% drop still not enough? CORE's “slow knife to cut losses”: Why it is said to be heading towards zero
As of November 2, CORE was priced at about $0.0136, down more than 99.7% from its all-time high, with a market cap of only about $13 to $14 million, having fallen into the small-cap high-risk zone.
It’s not without a narrative. CORE focuses on BTCFi, once attracting funds with “Bitcoin PoS layer + EVM compatibility + buyback and burn.” But the problem is: the narrative remains, but the funds have left.
The crash began in March 2026 when the ecosystem protocol Colend triggered a liquidation cascade, plunging over 50% in a single day. Since then, TVL has been sluggish, there have been no hit applications, tokens continue unlocking, and rebounds have repeatedly been crushed by sell pressure. More critically, in September it was revealed that validators received excess tokens, multiple exchanges suspended deposits and withdrawals, further damaging trust.
Currently, CORE’s liquidity is thin, and even a small sell-off can push it to new lows. It may not hit zero immediately, but it is already in a “semi-zombie” state.
Do the altcoins in your hands carry similar risks? Let’s discuss in the comments.#苹果新CEO迎来iPhone18首份成绩单 Why are so many people optimistic that Apple's earnings report will exceed expectations? Last quarter's beat was already somewhat exhausted, barely maintaining growth beyond expectations thanks to tax refunds. This time it's clearly different:
First, costs have risen; the sharp increase in storage prices has driven up Apple's costs and reduced profit margins, and although the new generation 18 products have increased prices, they were only on sale for about 10 days within the reporting period.
Second, Apple itself forecasts a growth rate of 9-11%, which is somewhat below the market's 13% estimate, but I believe Apple's forecast is closer to reality.
Third, the truth is held by a few!When it comes to insider information from project teams in prediction markets, I usually start with a question mark. You can still discuss price trends in coin trading, but here you're betting on whether specific events will happen; even how an announcement is worded can affect the judgment. When the odds change, I can't tell if new information has come in or if the market is too thin and being pushed by capital. Doing business requires verifying the goods; in the crypto world, even the source of the information is skipped? When asked for the source, they say it's inconvenient to disclose, so I have to bear the cost of this information myself.Capital Flow: ETF's "Monthly Outflow" and Futures' "Hedging Pricing"
① ETF: Net outflow of 643 million in October
On October 30, the US spot Bitcoin ETF had a single-day net outflow of 233.7 million, with FBTC experiencing a cumulative inflow of 440.8 million. On a monthly scale, the ETF net outflow for October was approximately $515 million, marking the fifth negative monthly result since 2026.
The only marginal bright spot was on October 31, when panic selling was concentrated, the ETF had a single-day net inflow of $135 million, being "almost the only buyer" at that time. However, a single day's inflow was far from enough to offset the month's outflow.
② Futures Backwardation: An Overlooked "Hedging Signal"
Bitcoin futures contracts expiring on November 2 and 3 were priced below the spot market, creating a backwardation. This situation is uncommon in Bitcoin and usually occurs when more traders seek short-term hedging rather than expecting leveraged long positions. Combined with Deribit's overall flat futures curve and the absence of extra premiums on leveraged positions, the market currently lacks the intrinsic momentum to push prices upward through leveraged funds. $BTC $ETH $SOL #美国中期选举在即，哪些结果值得关注？ #Apple's new CEO receives the first report card for iPhone 18 1. Will AAPL beat expectations this quarter (after market close on November 2)?
Conclusion: There is a 60%–70% chance that revenue/EPS will slightly beat expectations, but the "beat magnitude" is limited; the real risk lies in the "next quarter guidance" and gross margin.
Consensus: Revenue about $113.4 billion, EPS about $1.99–2.00
Goldman Sachs estimate: Revenue $113.598 billion, EPS $2.01 (slightly above consensus)
Drivers: iPhone 18 Pro price increase + premiumization (revenue up about 15% YoY), services business up about 10% YoY
Headwinds: DRAM/NAND price increases, staggered release causing shipments down about 4% YoY, currency headwinds
Objective judgment (confidence ≈90%):
This quarter's financials: slight beat (EPS higher by $0.01–0.03)
Post-earnings stock price: not necessarily up—the market will focus on December quarter guidance and gross margin; if guidance is conservative, it’s easy to have "good results but valuation cut"
Current stock price around 344, PE 39x, already priced in the "AI + safe-haven asset" narrative, upside space eaten by high valuation
Trading perspective: Don’t treat "beat expectations" as an unconditional buy signal. Short term is more like a "expectation realization + guidance setting direction" game; high leverage directional bets have low cost-effectiveness.
Tag #苹果新CEO迎来iPhone18首份成绩单 $BTC 011.2 Bitcoin live trading chat｜Stuck at the 78,000 level, bulls and bears are about to choose a direction
Just finished checking the market, today BTC has been stuck around $78,300 for almost a whole day, with a slight 0.8% rise in 24 hours, and the fluctuation range is less than $1,000. The support at 77,500 and resistance at 78,450 are very close, giving a strong sense of an extreme low-volume battle before the storm.
Here are a few of today's most direct impressions:
1. Volume suddenly exploded: Today's trading volume surged to 4.6 times the 30-day average. In a usually sluggish market, such a large volume spike indicates that whether it breaks above 80,000 or drops below 77,000, the upcoming trend will be very decisive and straightforward, without dragging on.
2. Sentiment is quietly warming up: The Fear and Greed Index was below 30 yesterday and climbed to 34 today. Although still in the "fear zone," it’s much more relaxed than the previous extreme pessimism. The panic selling triggered by the Binance hack has basically been absorbed.
3. The macro environment is a bit conflicted: On one hand, PCE data is cooling down, and the Fed’s rate hike probability has been cut in half, providing bottom support for risk assets; on the other hand, the Nasdaq crashed 2.86% yesterday, and the 10-year US Treasury yield remains high at 4.98%. The high interest rate environment hasn’t eased, so Bitcoin has no incremental funds to push it up in one go.$LINK 在约11.3美元附近继续跑输，而 Chainlink 刚宣布与 HKGX 合作，把智能合约接到实物黄金交易上，并推进24/7定价、机构管理与合规整合。基础设施在加速落地，代币价格却纹丝不动——这种“叙事向前、资金向后”的错位，才是当前最值得盯住的信号。 先看大盘锚点。$BTC 约77,850美元，24小时窄幅震荡，此前失守又收回78,000关口，能否重新站稳是短线焦点。$ETH 约2,260美元，表现相对稳健，2,250上方仍有支撑，但向上突破的动能不足。两者都处于“守得住、攻不上”的状态，说明市场并不缺仓位，缺的是新增资金的确认。 真正刺眼的是 $LINK。三个标的里它承压最明显，一旦有效跌破11.0，短线压力会进一步放大。这里的关键不在于合作消息好不好，而在于一个更冷的问题：RWA 与预言机赛道的机构级基建已经跑在前面，资金却迟迟没有跟上。基础设施铺得快，不等于持币者马上能看到回流——这正是当前市场最容易低估的时间差。 我的判断是：这轮 RWA 叙事的定价方式正在从“听故事”切换到“看流水”。合作公告只能维持情绪，真正能确认多头逻辑的是链上使用量、机构接入后的实际结算需The main decline over the past two days: concentrated earnings reports disproving the high return expectations of AI + crowded AI tech stocks seeing profit-taking, with U.S. Treasury yields, month-end liquidity, and cooling AI financing in the primary market acting as catalysts, leading the Nasdaq / semiconductors to lead the decline
AI bubble faces a risk event!
$OPENAI A nominal position of $333,100—I wouldn't directly read that as "big money bearish." Within the framework of macro and liquidity, trading size should be viewed separately from actual capital used; otherwise, it's easy to mistake a tactical position for an overall shift in risk appetite.
This monitoring shows that Core Trader 75 opened a new $ETH short with 25x leverage. What concerns me more is: roughly calculating initial margin by dividing nominal value by leverage, it's about $13,300, and the actual capital used depends on margin mode and other conditions. The nominal exposure is significant, but it doesn't tell me how much actual capital this wallet has staked.
My speculation is, if macro liquidity expectations tighten and more funds continuously reduce risk exposure, then this short position might become a piece of the puzzle indicating cooling risk appetite; if only this wallet is short, then short-term bets or even hedging other assets are still plausible explanations. A single direction does not equal a complete stance.
So I tend to treat it as an observation clue rather than evidence of macro bearishness. I am also attracted by big headlines, but what I want to see next is whether short exposure continues to increase and whether overall capital behavior aligns, rather than completing a macro narrative based on one wallet.#MarketOverview Analyzing the general direction of mainstream assets this week for everyone, for reference only.
Last week, $ETH Ethereum spot ETF saw a net outflow as high as $432 million. Among them, BlackRock institutions remain the main force. In the previous two weeks, Fidelity and Grayscale were still buying, but on the 30th, they switched from buying to selling, indicating that institutions are also withdrawing. The market dropped sharply that day, with Thursday and Friday seeing heavy declines, so a weekend recovery and rise in the market is understandable.
Bearish outlook continues this week?
The market is weak, and institutions and whales are mostly on the sidelines. Part of this is due to the upcoming US election, and part is because the recent Binance hack incident continues to unfold. Although Binance promptly resolved the withdrawal issues, this event has made many whales realize that exchanges also carry risks. Therefore, without short-term positive news, the market will remain weak.
Thus, for swing trading, follow the market trend. You can wait for a pullback to 2280-2260 to lightly go long, with a target to double your position before exiting.
Intraday focus is on strong support around Ethereum 2250. If it continues to break down, be ready to change your strategy promptly.
$BTC
#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化
#非农来袭，12月加息会否生变？ BTC squeezed shorts in the early session, watching volume at 78,500 first (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
At Monday's open, BTC gave the bears a "morning raid" 💥. At 7 AM Beijing time, the hourly chart rose from 77,779 to 78,387; around 9 AM it touched 78,587, now fluctuating near 78,400. OKEx spot is up 0.61% in 24 hours, not a big move, but sentiment has warmed a bit (￣▽￣)~*
The liquidation data paints a vivid picture: Liqwall reports about $22.8 million in BTC liquidations in the past 24 hours, with shorts accounting for $17 million, or 75%; the most concentrated period was from 7 to 8 AM, with $5.9 million liquidated. Bears got squeezed right after clocking in (｡•́︿•̀｡)
ETH followed up to 2,276; OKEx ETH funding rate remains slightly negative at +0.00136%, BTC holds at +0.00525%. LiqFlow shows around $45.8 million in short liquidations near 79,600 on Hyperliquid, acting like a "liquidation magnet" 🧲
My view: Volume was low and grinding over the weekend for two days. Bears got squeezed a bit at the weekly open, but volume wasn’t large. Whether 78,500 can hold depends on volume after the US stock market opens tonight. If volume expands and holds, the upper liquidation zone may continue to absorb price; if volume lags, a spike and pullback wouldn’t be surprising (๑•́ ₃ •̀๑)
The above is a summary of public information; personal views are for reference only and do not constitute any investment advice. The market carries risks; invest cautiously～✨
$BTC $ETH #OpenAI financing target lowered, Anthropic credit risk under scrutiny
OpenAI cut its financing target by 10 billion, from 30 billion down to 20 billion, and its valuation shrank from 1.4 trillion to 1.25 trillion. Simply put, investors are no longer rushing in; an industry insider said, "There is absolutely no one scrambling to subscribe." Some prefer to wait for Anthropic's IPO pricing before deciding, as both companies are competing for the same pool of money.
Anthropic is also not out of the woods. Blackstone disclosed to investors that Anthropic is very unlikely to receive an investment-grade rating after going public, with a higher chance of a BB "junk" rating. The critical issue is that without an investment-grade rating, major investors like insurance and pension funds won't come in, and borrowing costs will rise. Over the next decade or so, it plans to invest over 800 billion in computing power; if financing becomes more expensive, the numbers just won't add up.
So while both companies seem lively, the money bags underneath are tightening. The story of AI burning through cash has investors starting to seriously do the math.On October 29, Binance lost $6.3 billion in assets. A few days later, a publicly traded US company gave its response: no fuss, just directly moved the coins.
The board of Next Technology Holding approved the sale or pledge of its 5,833 $BTC holdings. Note the wording—not "sell," but "sell or pledge." The CEO is authorized to dispose of them in batches through exchanges, OTC, or collateral financing. These three routes lead to three outcomes: selling means exiting the market, OTC means finding a buyer without crashing the price, and pledging means exchanging coins for cash while the coins remain on someone else's account.
Why act now? The company states it plainly: to reduce risk and increase liquidity. To translate, "I no longer consider it safe to keep 5,833 coins on exchanges." The real damage from the $6.3 billion theft is not the money itself, but what it proved—that even the largest exchanges are not safes.
How this batch moves is more important than whether it sells or not. If all 5,833 coins flood the spot market, $BTC will take a short-term hit; if moved via OTC or pledge, the market impact is almost unnoticeable, but $ETH, $BNB, and other exchange sentiment-driven assets will react first. Disposing in batches means the pressure is continuous, not one-time.
What’s worth considering: when a publicly traded company writes "custody risk" into a board resolution, it’s no longer just an insider’s worry but a financial decision to explain to shareholders. Once this step is taken, more will follow.Calculate it: the total DEX trading volume across the network in the past 24 hours was about $1.072 billion less than the previous day. According to DefiLlama data, the current volume is approximately $5.386 billion, a 16.6% decrease day-over-day; the key point in this news is not the absolute scale, which is still quite large, but that trading demand is cooling down.
① A 16.6% day-over-day decline means the trading volume is 83.4% of the previous day. Looking at this change alone, I would hold back on the judgment that "on-chain activity is strengthening," but a decrease in transactions does not equal net capital outflow, so these should not be conflated.
② Compared to a week ago, the trading volume is also down by 10.2%. Both comparison metrics are trending downward, indicating that current activity is indeed relatively weak, but this data alone is insufficient to confirm a sustained downward trend.
③ Uniswap V4, Kalshi, and Uniswap V3 account for approximately $750 million, $708 million, and $508 million respectively, totaling about 36.5% of the entire network. Leading platforms hold a significant share; I am more interested in the increases or decreases on each platform rather than directly applying the overall network contraction to every platform.
My judgment is: this signals a cooling sentiment in on-chain trading, not a definitive conclusion that the entire sector is deteriorating. If the day-over-day and week-over-week declines continue to weaken in sync, then I would be more concerned about sustained demand contraction. When you usually assess on-chain activity heat or coldness, do you focus more on daily trading volume, weekly changes, or the share of leading platforms? Please also share your reasoning.🚨Leading coins resist decline, altcoins bleed! ETFs plunge by 1 billion, how much longer can this "leverage game" hold?
To truly judge market recovery, you can't just look at the leaders surging; you must also observe the degree of fragmentation among top assets. On November 2, the market showed a split pattern of "leaders resisting decline, altcoins bleeding."
$BTC ($78,160, +0.28%): Holding above 80,000, but spot ETFs saw a net outflow of 643 million, while derivatives open interest expanded to 28 billion. The rebound relies entirely on leverage support, with spot buying severely absent.
$ETH ($2,283, +0.79%): Appears to outperform BTC, but the reality is brutal! Spot ETFs have had 23 consecutive days of outflows breaking records, with over 1 billion lost in October. Price strength is extremely disconnected from massive capital flight.
$SOL ($94.33, -0.43%): The only one closing down against the trend. Spot ETFs have had 5 consecutive days of inflows totaling 71.4 million, but the 100 level remains unbroken, showing clear weakness.
Comparing these shows capital is extremely "picky"—money hasn't disappeared, it just prioritizes clustering around BTC, sidelining ETH and altcoins. SOL's decline against the trend confirms that the most elastic sectors are the first to be drained. The key to recovery isn't how much the leaders rise, but whether capital can spill over. Whether funds return before the November 6 employment data is the core test of the market's quality!
#闪迪业绩超预期并宣布拆股，股价跌逾13% Conclusion first: Among the top 8 gainers in OKX's 24-hour increase list today, 7 have no corresponding spot trading pairs on OKX. The only crypto with spot trading, $SOPH, happens to have the thinnest liquidity.
Verified parts: $XIAOMI corresponds to Xiaomi (1810.HK), up +6.9% today, from 26.48 to 28.32 HKD; $CSOPSKHYNIX2L is SK Hynix 2x, and SK Hynix is up +5.2% today. The underlying stocks are being bought, indicating spot-anchored market activity.
$SOPH is the opposite: 24-hour perpetual contract volume is 18.07 million USD, spot only 1.63 million; OKX alone accounts for 86% of its global volume; perpetual open interest is only 1.25 million USD; funding rates have been negative for 10 consecutive periods, currently -0.035%/4h, with the lowest at -0.236% — the price is rising, but shorts are paying. It’s down -53.3% over 30 days, with a market cap of only 9.02 million USD, 98.4% below its all-time high. Without spot buyers supporting the price, the rise is mostly a short squeeze.
During the same period, crypto perpetuals saw 79 up and 118 down, with a median of -0.82%, BTC +0.67%. Today's excitement is mostly not in the coins themselves.$ETH $BTC $SOL The market showed a contrast today: last Friday, US tech stocks plunged, with Nasdaq down 2.86% and S&P 500 down 1.82%, but the crypto market steadied on Monday. CoinDesk Asia morning report shows $BTC around $78,600, rising for the third consecutive day; Finnhub's latest data shows $BTC around $78,510, up about 0.86% in 24 hours, $ETH about $2,303, up about 1.55%, $SOL about $95.16, down about 0.47%. The leader was not the large-cap coins but $ZEC, up about 3% to nearly $1,280; $BNB around $713, TRX each up about 1%, $SOL almost unchanged.
Why is this happening? First, the worst phase of the Binance incident has temporarily passed; after withdrawals resumed, net outflow was about $3.64 billion, about 2.1% of its disclosed asset management scale, without evolving into a sustained run; second, last Friday's drop was more due to US stock AI spending and earnings sentiment, the crypto market had already fallen earlier, and over the weekend between $77,000 and $78,000 there was no sustained panic selling; third, funds first flowed back to the most liquid assets, rotation has not yet spread. The logic is a "stop the bleeding first, then differentiate" repair, not a trend reversal. $BTC holding above $77,000 indicates short-term selling pressure was absorbed; but $ETH just returned above $2,300, $SOL still hovering near $95, indicating funds are still selective, not fully entering the market Starting November, BTC hovered around 78,000, with a cumulative pullback of about 8.7% over the past 30 days. This week, political, macroeconomic, and technological pressures all came at once, and none of these events were mere formalities. Monday 11.2 After market｜Apple Q4 earnings + ISM Manufacturing PMI (Impact: ⭐⭐⭐⭐) The first report card from new CEO Tim Cook's successor. Revenue is expected to be about $113.4 billion, but gross margin is forecasted to slip from 50% to 47.5%, with storage chip costs eroding profits. The options market priced a 3.47% single-day volatility, higher than the historical average. If Apple can't hold up, the Nasdaq will shake, and BTC will wobble along. Tuesday 11.3｜U.S. Midterm Elections (Impact: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐) All 435 House seats and 35 Senate seats are up for election. Republicans hold 53 Senate seats; Democrats need a net gain of 4 seats to flip control. The crypto industry is watching legislative windows on stablecoins, trading platforms, and prediction markets, but historical data also speaks: BTC has bottomed after the last three midterms. Some districts may take days to count votes, and the uncertainty itself is a source of volatility. Tuesday 11.3 After market｜AMD Q3 earnings (Impact: ⭐⭐⭐⭐) Last Friday, AMD plunged nearly 11% due to Intel's weak PC outlook, facing pressure going into this report. Revenue guidance is about $13 billion; MI450/Helios shipments only just started at the end of Q3, with real AI accelerator growth expected in Q4 and 2027. If this earnings report can't even "paint a rosy picture," the AI narrative will need to be repriced. TuesdayThe Binance bank run has ended, and the data is out.
A net outflow of $3.64 billion, accounting for 2.10% of custodial assets.
He Yi said three days ago that the "net loss was over 2%," which no one believed at the time. Now it has been precisely verified.
But the real story lies in another set of numbers:
In the past 24 hours, Binance's BTC balance decreased by 19,289 coins. In the same period, Coinbase increased by 984 coins, Kraken increased by 1,422 coins.
Outflow of 19,289, top exchanges only absorbed 2,406.
Where did the remaining 17,000 BTC, about $1.3 billion, go?
To self-custody.
Users are not switching exchanges; they are leaving exchanges.
Binance's funds have been replenished, but the habit of "keeping coins on exchanges" has been permanently changed for some people.
When the next bull market comes, will these coins return?#Circle财报在即，稳定币增长能否兑现收益？
Circle will release its earnings before the market opens on November 4 Eastern Time. The market expects revenue of about $786 million and earnings per share around $0.37. But the real focus isn't these numbers; it's the large stablecoin market—whether it's actually profitable.
Circle mainly relies on the interest from reserves backing USDC. In Q2, USDC circulation reached 73.3 billion, up 19% year-over-year, and on-chain transaction volume exploded by 151%, yet revenue only increased by 7%. The market is expanding fast, but the money isn't keeping pace. Profit-wise, Q1 already showed the problem of "revenue growth without profit growth," with operating expenses soaring 76%.
An even bigger risk is that interest rates have peaked. Circle earns from the interest spread, so if rates drop, reserve yields will decline, shrinking this income.
Therefore, the core of this earnings report boils down to one thing: whether distribution costs can be controlled and profit margins sustained. A large market doesn't equal profitability; when it comes to realizing returns, Circle hasn't fully proven itself yet. #苹果新CEO迎来iPhone18首份成绩单
Positive news
Better-than-expected momentum: EPS has exceeded expectations for 8 consecutive quarters, last quarter revenue +16%, iPhone +22%.
Price increase offsets costs: iPhone raised prices during the quarter, partially offsetting memory costs.
Stable services: high-margin business continues double-digit growth
Risks
Memory price increase pressures gross margin: excluding one-time gains like tariff refunds, actual gross margin may decline.
Inventory doubled to 11.1 billion: could be for new product stockpiling or a demand signal.
High valuation: market cap near 5 trillion, up 27.5% this year, despite last quarter's better-than-expected results, shares still fell 7.4%, indicating low market tolerance.
iPad weakness: down 5.9% last quarter
The real highlight: December quarter guidance
This quarter only includes 9 days of iPhone 18 Pro series sales; foldable iPhone Duo ($1999, on sale October 23) will be counted next quarter.
Standard and Air models delayed to March quarter, causing year-over-year distortion; BofA warns market models may be inaccurate.
Goldman Sachs expects next quarter revenue of 151.2 billion, slightly below consensus of 152.2 billion.
This is new CEO John Ternus's first outlook, and the tone is very important