Orbit Post Sitemap
Russia officially opens retail crypto trading, with BTC, ETH, and USDT included as tradable assets, effective November 17.
However, it is not a full liberalization and comes with clear restrictions: ordinary retail investors must first pass a risk test, with an individual annual limit of 300,000 rubles; meanwhile, cryptocurrencies cannot be used for daily payments within Russia, only allowed for investment and cross-border settlements.
Many see this as a major positive, but let's objectively break it down:
✅ Positive aspect: a new compliant incremental capital pool, representing a regional compliance breakthrough, providing another regulatory sample for global crypto oversight, which can easily boost sentiment in the short term.
⚠️ The drawbacks are also obvious: low quota limits and limited scale mean incremental funds are unlikely to offset ETF outflows and Federal Reserve liquidity trends. Moreover, this is a regional policy, not a global liberalization, so its driving force should not be overestimated.
Looking at the current market, this can only be considered a sentiment bonus, unable to reverse the current range-bound consolidation pattern.
For BTC to break out of the trend, the core factors remain U.S. Treasury bonds, interest rate hike expectations, and ETF capital flows.
The news is worth monitoring, but do not rely solely on it to bet on the market.
Do you think this news can bring sustained capital inflows?
$BTC $ETH BTC is back to 75,000, ETH is hovering at 2226, SOL is holding firm at 90. The backend is seeing more people asking about bottom-fishing again. My answer remains the same: no rush. Prices can be deceptive, but funding rates are not. A true oversold rebound is often accompanied by funding rates plunging into deep negative territory—shorts are extremely crowded, and a short squeeze provides the fuel. But now? Funding rates are mildly positive, with neither panic nor capitulation; market sentiment #After the US stock market crash, tech stocks rebound, but the Nasdaq weekly chart still falls about 3.4%
The leader has something to say
I connect this with the market situation over the past two days: On November 5, the US stock market was sold off across the board, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index dropping more than 12% in one day, hitting AI and semiconductor sectors hard; on November 6, Nvidia and AMD rebounded, the Nasdaq recovered, but the Dow still closed down, showing market divergence. The Nasdaq still fell about 3.4% for the whole week. The community bluntly says: the single-day rebound is a technical bounce, the continued weekly decline indicates a weakening trend, this is a window to reduce positions, not a turning point.
My interpretation is: rebounds after such crashes are the easiest to deceive. A big bullish candle lifts prices, retail investors think the bottom is in and chase in, but in fact, it provides liquidity for institutions to reduce positions. The real signals are: whether the rebound can hold for a week, whether ETF net inflows can turn positive, and whether the rate hike expectations brought by the non-farm payrolls can be digested. Before that, all rebounds should be treated as technical pullbacks. For the crypto market, BTC's correlation with the Nasdaq these days is very high; if the Nasdaq does not stabilize, BTC cannot be said to have reversed.
BTC current price is about 74800, with narrow fluctuations on Saturday. My approach: 75000 has changed from support to resistance, looking down to 73000; I do not chase this weekend's rebound, waiting for the US stock market to confirm direction on Monday. The advantage of being out of the market is not having to struggle with rebounds.
The above analysis is time-sensitive, please stay safe. $BTC $ETH $SNDK In this Circle earnings report, I am more focused on a less conspicuous change: how much USDC remains within its own platform ecosystem.
In Q3, the platform's USDC ending balance reached $13.9 billion, a year-over-year increase of 36%; the daily weighted share rose to 18.1%, up about 4.62 percentage points year-over-year. Compared to the 49% growth in on-chain transaction volume alone, this change is closer to the question I want to ask: after increased usage, how much customer relationship and economic benefit can Circle retain?
The stablecoin business often faces a situation where the issuer is responsible for reserves and redemption, while users mainly operate on other trading platforms or wallets, and revenue must be shared according to cooperation agreements. Increased usage on its own platform at least provides a reason to further observe changes in the business model. However, how much profit the balance increase can convert into still depends on specific income and costs.
This is also why I am more selective about stablecoin company valuations. The industry is bustling with transactions, but shareholders may not be able to share growth at the same pace; large issuance volume also cannot omit the accounting of distribution costs.
USDC being used more frequently is good news. What I want to see next is whether users continue to use Circle's products and whether this usage can bring stable, repeatable income. Achieving this part makes the growth in the earnings report more reassuring.
#CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49% I am increasingly inclined to believe that yesterday's brief surge of BTC to $80,000 does not represent a true trend reversal, but rather a short squeeze triggered by crowded short positions. The logic is actually quite interesting: when the market is generally bearish and short-seller confidence is overly concentrated, the price may suddenly explode upward, triggering massive short liquidations. Subsequently, the long sentiment, which has been dormant for a long time, is reignited, and many begin to believe the bottom has formed, even prematurely betting on a new bull market. But I think it is still too early to declare a reversal. 📉 Several warning signals: - BTC failed to establish stable support after breaking $80K, and the sustainability of the rebound still needs verification. - The US spot BTC ETF saw a net outflow of about $430 million on Thursday, indicating institutional demand remains weak. - Recently, over $1.2 billion in leveraged positions in the crypto market were liquidated, with longs accounting for the vast majority, indicating the market structure has changed after the rise. - The sell-off in tech stocks is also suppressing risk appetite for overall risk assets. Currently, BTC is hovering around $76K, with $75K being a key short-term support area to watch. My trading idea: If BTC continues to break below $76K and the rebound fails to hold, then $75K and $73K may become the next observation zones. Conversely, if the price recovers above $78K with improved spot trading volume, the bearish logic will need to be reassessed. For now, I am more cautious about this move Entering in batches, is it really safer?
Not necessarily.
Buying in batches can diversify entry timing, but it may also continuously increase your position as the price keeps falling.
There are three key conditions to really pay attention to:
1. Entry basis: Is there a clear reason for each additional position?
2. Total risk: How much could you lose at most with all positions combined?
3. Execution discipline: Are you adding positions according to the plan, or are you unwilling to exit because of losses?
Lowering the average cost does not mean reducing overall risk.
The core of entering in batches is managing the entry process, not proving your initial judgment right by continuously adding positions.
Do you prefer entering all at once or in batches?"Old Pig speaks straight! This little rebound over the weekend—who the hell dares to catch it as a reversal is just a fool!
Looking at the market, $BTC is hovering around 76,000, $ETH barely holding at 2,245, liquidity over the weekend is as thin as paper, still extremely weak!
The worst part is the macro side exploded. Non-farm payrolls actually came in at 165,000, far exceeding expectations, and the probability of a rate hike in December has shot up directly to 70% to 85%. What does this mean? High interest rates will still be pressed down, high valuation assets will still get hammered, the US stock semiconductor sector just got bloodied, and you expect the crypto market to independently bull just on this weekend's dead cat bounce? Dream on.
Looking at the capital side, the ETH spot ETF saw a net outflow of over 93 million yesterday, with BlackRock's ETHA alone pulling out over 90 million. Institutions are withdrawing, not entering. On the BTC side, the so-called “80% win rate giant whale short position reduction” dropped from 175 to 51 contracts, which looks like good news, but they still hold $3.91 million in shorts that haven't exited. This is profit-taking, not short surrender; don't mistake position reduction for a reversal signal.
Technically, it's even clearer: BTC is suppressed by EMA50, 100, and 200 overhead; ETH can't even hold EMA20 easily, volume has shrunk to this miserable state—what do you have to break through?
Old Pig puts it bluntly here: on Saturday and Sunday, any rebound should be treated as an opportunity to escape and cut losses. If you hold long positions, get out quickly during the bounce; if you're empty-handed, control your hands and don't catch the falling knife. The big cycle downward knife hasn't landed yet; whoever is greedy will die. I look at the predicted odds of Bitcoin's price fluctuations as a sentiment window, but I always want to casually check if the trading volume is active. Buying spot means holding the coins, while prediction markets bet on how the outcome will be judged at expiration, which is quite different. The odds look very confident, but it could also be that few participants are involved, and just a few orders push the price. It can tell me which side the money inside the market leans toward, but it doesn't necessarily represent the entire crypto community's view. Especially when Bitcoin is moving sideways, I'm quite curious—do those confidently quoted prices really have someone willing to take them?Buy more on the next deep dip, but mostly you won't wait that long
No US stock buying over the weekend, $BTC is just grinding back and forth within the range.
What is this price level: it's the bottom of the range now, not halfway up the mountain.
Last week, the same position went through a repair, taken over by the Asian session.
Who is placing orders here: quite a few are waiting at 65,000 and 70,000, shorts and watchers squeezed together.
If it really falls there, the sell orders would have already been withdrawn by these people themselves.
$ETH's 2150 to 2200 is the strongest quarterly line support; no need to short and catch the last leg.
The panic portion of expectations is already priced in.
Before the big trend reverses, the shakeout is just swapping out the unsteady hands.
#BTC现货ETF年内累计净流出约4.16亿美元 $BTC $ETH The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index once rose nearly 6%, AMD up 13%, Nvidia up 5%.
But zooming out to the weekly chart—the Nasdaq still fell about 3.4% this week, the memory chip index dropped 21% over the week, and the AI Winners Index fell nearly 12%.
What is this called? It's called an oversold rebound after a crash, not a trend reversal to bullish.
The unexpectedly strong non-farm payrolls were interpreted by the market as "the economy is not in recession, and downstream demand for AI still exists"—using one employment report to offset half a week's panic.
But none of the three issues that caused the crash have been resolved: the return on the trillion-dollar AI capital expenditure has yet to be verified; the new Democratic Congress has announced plans to restrict data center construction; the Nasdaq has retraced over 10% from its October high, technically entering a correction zone.
What does the weekly close in the red indicate? It means that more people bought at the high this week than those who cut losses, with a ceiling full of trapped positions; every step of the rebound is climbing through the pressure of unlocking and selling.
Anthropic is about to IPO, originally planning to raise funds at a $1.5 trillion valuation—tech stocks just crashed, can it still raise money at this price?
Its pricing is the thermometer of the AI narrative, more honest than any analyst's words.
Weekly recovery takes time; don't mistake a one-day rebound for the answer to the market.
#美股暴跌后科技股反弹，纳指周线仍跌约3.4% The most dangerous time for shorts is not during the price decline phase that brings profits, but during a sudden rebound. This time, the U.S. semiconductor sector plunged sharply, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index recording its largest single-day drop since March 2020. Many bearish traders targeted the memory segment, with SNDK ($SNDK) becoming the symbol for expressing bearish views. Short selling has a special asymmetric mechanism: price declines allow shorts to add positions and gain confidence, but once prices rise, floating losses quickly accumulate, triggering margin pressure and forced liquidation, leaving traders very little time to react. When short positions become crowded, the market is easily triggered into a short squeeze. After marginal buying enters, short covering becomes a passive behavior. This market movement is more driven by market mechanisms and does not necessarily indicate a fundamental change. Shorts who cut losses early preserve capital to wait for better opportunities, while those who stubbornly hold until their accounts are liquidated completely lose the chance to re-enter. The impact of this semiconductor risk appetite contraction is not limited to the stock market; Bitcoin ($BTC) and Ethereum ($ETH) are also affected. Highly elastic assets like SOL ($SOL) and HYPE ($HYPE) are similarly impacted. The logic of leverage and forced liquidation is very similar to stock short squeezes, and the inter-asset linkage during deleveraging phases is often hard to predict. It is still difficult to draw conclusions now. We cannot yet confirm whether this round of semiconductor correction has already cleaned out the weakest positions, nor whether there will be a rapid rebound to punish late-entry shorts. #BerkshireQ3CashOutlook These four negative factors are not independent of each other; they form a layered causal chain.
Many people treat “ETF sell-off, treasury liquidation, custody theft, quantum risk” as four parallel bad news items and calculate their impact separately. This is wrong.
Their true relationship is: each one is deeper than the last, and each layer amplifies the previous one.$APP
What evidence has AppLovin presented for the strong growth of advertising AI?
AppLovin's third-quarter revenue increased by 55% year-over-year, with free cash flow of about $1.4 billion. Compared to growth driven solely by users or traffic, cash recovery provides more direct business validation.
The key for advertising platforms is whether performance improvements can encourage clients to continuously increase their budgets while maintaining reasonable customer acquisition costs. High profits in a single quarter do not guarantee that competition, channels, and privacy regulations will remain unchanged in the long term.
I focus on whether advertisers' reinvestment and cash conversion remain stable. If revenue growth continues to be accompanied by sufficient cash, the growth is of higher quality; if profit margins rely on short-term traffic bonuses and client returns decline, the extrapolation of current profitability levels should be reduced.There is something quite counterintuitive. When people see energy prices rising, their first reaction is that inflation is coming, money is losing value, so they rush to buy some inflation-hedging assets. But what central bank officials really fear is not the price increase itself.
What they fear is that after energy becomes expensive, shipping costs rise, electricity costs rise, factory costs rise, and eventually wages have to rise as well. This whole cycle is what is called the second-round effect.
Now, the candidate for the European Central Bank president says: this cycle is not yet complete, and the expectation of energy price drops has not materialized. To translate, don’t expect rate cuts anytime soon.
So recently when I see the rebound of $BTC $ETH, I always feel the confidence is insufficient. The macro liquidity hasn’t been released yet; the gains are all driven by sentiment.Why might the original profit advantage disappear as more people use similar strategies?
A strategy that worked in the past doesn't mean its advantage will last forever.
When more traders chase the same signals, the following may occur:
* Worse entry prices;
* Increased execution costs when liquidity is insufficient;
* Multiple positions exiting simultaneously during market reversals;
* Decline in net returns after costs.
However, short-term losses don't necessarily mean the strategy is overcrowded. Changes in market conditions, random fluctuations, and execution deviations can also affect results.
To determine if a strategy is losing its edge, you can check: 1. The gap between actual execution prices and expected prices;
2. Net returns after trading costs;
3. Average profits, average losses, and maximum drawdown;
4. Whether performance consistently changes across different market phases.
A truly trustworthy strategy is not one that made money in the past, but one whose advantage can continuously withstand verification.
If a strategy's net returns keep declining, would you first adjust parameters or pause trading and re-validate?
Next article: How to tell if a Web3 project is genuinely building, rather than just continuously releasing roadmaps?$ZEC short whale count has risen to 680, setting a new record for this market cycle. Among them, 166 positions were just opened in the past day, and the price was rising at that time.
The liquidation zone around $1364, $10.7 million mentioned last time, has been completely cleared out. Currently, these short whales have a combined loss of $7.6 million, with an average entry cost of $1261.
Key levels to watch:
- Support: A $5.6 million buy wall near $1295, only 1.2% away from the current price
- Above: $8 million liquidation orders near $1450
- Below: $6.4 million near $1198
The conclusion is simple: as long as the $1295 wall holds, the record short positions remain in unrealized loss.From $67 to $373 in two months, today stuck at the 205 mark without moving 🧱
On September 24, the clearinghouse selected Quant to build a tokenized deposit network.
But the network won't launch until 2027, and the announcement didn't say banks would buy QNT.
On November 5, the news circulated again, surged to 204 then fell back to 189.
At $199, the trading volume is only $11.4 million.
I think the narrative has prematurely priced in the 2027 event; 205 can't be broken, so let's watch for a pullback first.
$QNT The European Central Bank presidential candidate Hernández de Cos publicly stated that monetary policymakers must continue to monitor the inflation risks brought by high energy prices. The statement was brief but denied a premise on which the market was betting.
The original script was: energy prices fall, inflation naturally cools down, and the central bank follows suit with rate cuts. His view is that the expectation of falling energy prices has not yet materialized, so the first page of the script is stuck.
The mechanism is that rising energy prices first push up overall inflation, then through transportation, electricity, and production costs permeate into services and wages—this is called the second-round effect. He said it has not yet appeared, not to signal safety, but to say this is still on the way. The central bank will not wait for it to appear before acting; waiting until then would be too late, so the tendency is to tighten early.
He also pointed out another line: some economies have public debt at historically high levels, fiscal deficits remain high, and once borrowing costs rise, interest payment pressure immediately amplifies. Policy space is squeezed from both ends—one end inflation, the other fiscal.
For crypto, this is not a sign that the downside is fully priced in, but that the timing of rate cuts is pushed back. The fuel for this rally is liquidity easing; if the fuel arrives late, valuations have to wait longer. $BTC carries both safe-haven and risk identities simultaneously, making the tug-of-war more obvious; $ETH pricing relies more on on-chain activity and funding conditions, making it more sensitive to interest rates.
What is worth watching is not just this statement, but the next combination of energy prices and core inflation: if energy rises but core inflation does not, there is still room to maneuver; if both rise together, that is when liquidity expectations are truly overturned.Is unlocking $17 million necessarily more stressful than unlocking $300,000?
$ENA's next unlock is about $17.03 million, accounting for 0.88% of the circulating supply.
$OPN unlocks about $451,400, accounting for 2.42% of the circulating supply.
$MAVIA unlocks about $307,700, accounting for 10.09% of the circulating supply.
ENA has the largest amount, but relative to the existing circulating supply, MAVIA corresponds to a higher proportion of newly added tokens.
To assess the impact of unlocking, three things need to be considered:
First, token ownership and release schedule:
Figure 2 of ARB shows the overall allocation structure and cumulative release plan. The funding needs of the team, investors, and DAO treasury differ, and the supply rhythm of concentrated release versus phased release also varies.
Second, market absorption capacity:
A high 24-hour trading volume does not mean the current order book can absorb sell orders of the same scale. The price impact differs greatly between selling the same batch of tokens dispersedly versus concentratedly.
Third, whether expectations have been priced in advance:
The public unlocking plan may have already influenced price trends before the actual unlock. With no formal text, the reported House Democratic proposal is still a direction of travel, not a legislative catalyst. Its focus on SEC/CFTC roles, investor protection and conflicts suggests the debate remains anchored in guardrails that can attract scrutiny as readily as support.
The 401(k) rule review widens the policy backdrop, but digital-asset details are pending. That uncertainty keeps implementation risk high.
#CLARITYActOutlook There’s a familiar feeling from the last round again: when one wallet presses the open position button, onlookers start writing the script for it. Now when I see this kind of monitoring, I tend to suppress the thought that "big players must know something" first.
This time it’s Core Trader 66 (0x5559da…3d43b) opening a short position on $NEAR with 10x leverage, nominal position about $100,000, reference price $3.754. This is a newly opened position; the outcome is not yet decided.
Compared to the last round, my focus on this kind of operation has shifted: I used to be easily attracted by the amount, now I care more about how much adverse volatility it is willing to endure. My judgment is that the value of observing this order lies in how it is managed afterward, not the act of opening a short itself.
The reason is practical: without knowing the wallet’s total assets, $100,000 can’t be directly translated as a "heavy bet"; roughly calculating with 10x leverage, if the price moves about 1% against the position, the initial margin loss is about 10%, and the actual loss is also affected by margin mode and fees. Leverage turns the judgment into a choice under time pressure; even if the direction is right, it may not withstand the process.
So I will look at subsequent position increases or decreases and whether margin is replenished together: if it continues to add positions during adverse volatility, that’s my risk observation point, not proof of confidence. Experienced players understand after seeing many longs: opening a position can express a stance, but how to handle unfavorable situations is where the real skill shows.Just saw this message, my first reaction was: so there are so many people in prediction markets who "just watch but don't participate" 🤔 Kalshi said that the midterm election market viewers are 5 times the number of traders, with millions checking election odds this week without placing bets; the page also shows a congressional election map and continuously changing predictions.
I've been in the circle for just a year, and I used to judge a platform's usefulness by trading volume. This time my judgment is that this message is somewhat positive for the "information entry" value of prediction markets, but it can't be directly taken as evidence of increased trading demand. Watching the excitement and being willing to bear the cost of wrong judgments are indeed two different things.
What I understand is that the map combined with constantly changing odds turns complex election situations into a more intuitive page, and just watching might satisfy information needs. If these people keep coming back to check later, then the platform might form a usage habit beyond trading, which is my speculation. However, more viewers do not equal more people participating in pricing, nor does it prove the odds are more accurate.
What I haven't figured out yet is how much value this spectator traffic can really accumulate. I'd like to ask experienced prediction market veterans: to judge whether it is a reliable information entry, would you prioritize looking at trading depth or the long-term deviation between odds and final results? Why?#After the sharp drop in US stocks, tech stocks rebounded, but the Nasdaq weekly chart still fell about 3.4%. The core of this week's market is: concentrated panic selling on Thursday, followed by an oversold rebound on Friday. However, the rebound is a technical pullback and is insufficient to reverse the weekly adjustment pattern. The Nasdaq has experienced four consecutive weekly declines, entering a technical correction range.
The trigger for this round of sharp decline was the US midterm election results. The market had priced in the Democrats controlling both chambers in advance, raising concerns about tighter restrictions on AI, data center energy consumption, and construction approvals, directly impacting growth expectations for the computing power chain. Coupled with previously high valuations in the AI sector and continuous large-scale bond issuance by tech giants raising financing costs, funds were concentrated in cashing out. The semiconductor sector collapsed first, dragging the Nasdaq down sharply in a single day. On Friday, the non-farm payroll data exceeded expectations, pushing up the probability of a December rate hike and US Treasury yields, but the market did not experience a second sell-off. Instead, it rebounded, essentially due to short-term selling pressure being exhausted and short covering. Chips, optical modules, and AI hardware led the gains, representing an emotional recovery after overselling rather than a trend reversal.
Here lies a contradiction: strong employment proves economic resilience, reducing hard landing fears and supporting tech earnings; but at the same time, rising rate hike expectations continue to suppress valuations of high-growth stocks in the long term. Institutional opinions are clearly divided. Some funds are using the sharp drop to buy into the long-term AI theme at lower prices, while others continue to reduce positions to avoid the dual uncertainties of regulation and interest rates. $BTC $ETH $SNDK This week, the US Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $1.282 billion. On its own, this number isn't shocking, but the story changes when you break it down.
Out of the $1.282 billion, BlackRock's IBIT alone had a net outflow of $1.209 billion, accounting for over 90%. This isn't an industry-wide run; rather, a single institution's redemption turned the whole week's figures negative. In the same week, Fidelity's FBTC had a net inflow of $93.1 million, moving in the exact opposite direction.
Mechanically, IBIT is the main channel for institutions to allocate $BTC, being the largest and earliest entrant. Its redemption doesn't necessarily mean the narrative is broken; it looks more like rebalancing or realizing profits—typical position adjustments. The real signal isn't whether people are selling, but whether the sellers and buyers are the same group. IBIT outflows and FBTC inflows indicate the money hasn't left the category, just switched products.
In terms of timing, single-week data is the easiest to misinterpret. A weekly net outflow can be a turning point or just the trace of a large redemption. To judge trends, look for continuity: if IBIT continues outflows next week, that signals a reduction; if it quickly returns positive, it's just a one-off event.
So reading the $1.282 billion as institutional retreat or $BTC peaking is jumping the gun. It's more likely that the largest player is reducing while others are absorbing. The key points to watch are whether IBIT will have a second consecutive week of outflows and whether FBTC's inflows can continue.
Worth considering: when an ETF is so large it can sway the entire industry, how much of the "market sentiment" we read is just the redemption and subscription rhythm of BlackRock alone.$BTC was still at 81k the day before yesterday, then dropped back to 76k in one day and started consolidating!!
From today's market perspective, 77k is the intraday resistance level. If it effectively breaks through the 77000 mark, the CEX cumulative short position liquidation will reach 958 million.
The midterm election results delivered positive news, causing BTC to surge to 81000 before quickly falling back. Obviously, the selling pressure above is too strong. Yesterday's non-farm payroll data was negative but did not immediately drag BTC down, indicating there is buying support below, but it only slowed the decline rather than stabilizing the bottom!!
From the four-hour chart, the bullish trend has not changed. My view: if 77000 cannot be broken in the short term over the weekend, I still expect a high short on the rebound. If the support at 75000 breaks, then I look to 68000!!!
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Today's Meme Watch: Three Uptrend Scenarios, Don't Mistake Them for the Same Hype (｡･ω･｡)
Each of today's three Memes has its own "storyline," but hype doesn't mean they're all good entry points.
$ARB: The community staking proposal passed, with 100 million ARB tokens entering the staking mechanism, removing part of the circulating supply. This logic leans toward institutional approval, not just hype. However, the price is still low and flat; it takes time for the proposal to translate into market gains. Small spot positions for a stealth entry are fine, but chasing high as a reversal is not recommended (￣▽￣)ノ
$PEPE: Justin Sun has become the largest individual holder, with over $50 million on-chain value. The celebrity effect combined with an oversold rebound means sentiment can ignite quickly. But this wave seems purely sentiment-driven, and when sentiment fades, sharp dips are likely. Treat it like a lottery ticket position, not a guaranteed win (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
$DOOD: The token of Doodles, driven up by IP consensus and capital rotation, with no fundamental catalysts seen yet. It belongs to the NFT sector rotation arbitrage, highly volatile, suitable for quick in-and-out trades, not for long-term holding as a belief (｀・ω・´)
Summary: ARB reduces circulation, PEPE rides celebrity hype, DOOD benefits from rotation—three distinct logics. I once blew up my position on early meme coins; now I treat Memes as observation samples without taking positions; main positions go to mainstream spot assets. For these, just analyze and watch the show. Handle it as you see fit (ง •_•)ง
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Trump: "Before midnight tonight, I am still the Chief Hua Detective!"
After losing the midterm elections, many called Trump the "lame duck president." Don't be naive, as long as he is still in the White House, he has 100 ways to choke the Democrats. Losing Congress only means he can't legislate at will, but he still holds executive power:
1. Ultimate shield (veto power): Democrats want to raise taxes or kill AI regulation? Trump just slaps a "VETO." Without a two-thirds majority in both houses, the bill is dead.
2. Unilateral offense (executive orders): Congress is bickering, Trump directly signs executive orders to loosen restrictions on Silicon Valley and the crypto circle, Democrats can only watch helplessly.
3. Control of national machinery (SEC/FTC): Democrats want to investigate Musk? The DOJ and SEC are Trump's people, they can completely "not cooperate," even support Musk with federal contracts.
4. Tariffs and diplomatic power: This is the president's exclusive privilege, no congressional approval needed.
What does this mean for our trading?
"Bipartisan division" has never been bad for the market. Because no one can go to extremes. Democrats can't impose harsh AI bans, and Trump can't push extreme fiscal stimulus.
Policy deadlock means don't bet on extreme regulatory crashes. What really determines the fate of US stocks and BTC is still the Fed's liquidity. Liquidity first, political noise second!
Brothers, do you think the bipartisan bickering is good or bad for tech stocks? $SNDK Last night, the US stock AI hardware sector was really strong, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rising 4.21%, $AMD surging 11.04% to close at 449.04, Micron up 5.12%, Nvidia rebounding 2.78% to close at 186.64, and the Nasdaq also up 1.09%.
I originally thought before going to bed that the crypto market might catch some of the rebound this morning, but unexpectedly, BTC is still fluctuating around 76000, completely unmoved!
This contrast is indeed a bit surprising.
In the past, when AI chip stocks rallied, the crypto market would usually ride some of the heat, but now it's clearly different. US stock funds are willing to flow back into AI hardware but have not obviously transmitted to the crypto market, indicating that the capital rotation between the two markets has already diverged.
More importantly, last night the Dow Jones still fell 0.46%, and although the Nasdaq rebounded, it has closed down for four consecutive weeks on the weekly chart, with a cumulative decline of 3.37%.
So, folks, a one-night rebound does not mean a trend reversal, and you should not blindly be bullish on crypto just because US stocks rose.
Next, the focus remains on observing the support strength around BTC 76000 and whether US stock funds can continue to flow back. #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 ETH, DOGE, and SOL have no supply cap, with inflation continuing nonstop. Even if their market caps shine in the short term, they ultimately cannot withstand the long-term continuous release of tokens, making their prices prone to gradual dilution and weakening.
RVN, Celo, and Ronin currently have modest market caps, but their total supply has a hard cap, and their scarcity continues to accumulate over time, giving them long-term potential for value appreciation.
RVN relies on distributed PoW computing power with no project team backdoors; Celo focuses on mobile-friendly inclusive stablecoin payments with a low entry barrier; Ronin sidechain offers low gas fees, suitable for high-frequency transactions in blockchain games.
SOL has an annual inflation of about 3.5%, DOGE about 3.7%, and ETH about 1%, with new tokens released every year, continuously diluting the value corresponding to each token.$AVGO
AI hardware fluctuates together, will Broadcom's custom chip logic fail?
This week, the semiconductor sector faced a concentrated sell-off, indicating that capital is raising its expectations for AI investment returns. This shock will first compress the valuation across the entire chain.
Custom chips can reduce the cost of specific workloads, but customers still adopt them based on business scale and the economics of in-house development. Customer concentration also amplifies the impact of changes in individual projects.
I focus on mass production pace, network demand, and customer budget execution. If multiple projects continue to scale up, and profits and cash flow follow, differentiation becomes more apparent; if projects are concentratedly delayed, one cannot ignore the decline in revenue visibility just because custom solutions have cost advantages.Backtested annualized return of 30%, why might live trading differ significantly?
Because the ideal assumptions in backtesting may not hold true in the real market.
Five key points need to be checked:
1. Overfitting: Is the strategy too closely fitted to historical data?
2. Execution conditions: After a signal appears, can orders really be executed as expected?
3. Trading costs: After deducting fees, slippage, and funding rates, how much net profit remains?
4. Market environment: Does the original trading edge still exist?
5. Risk metrics: Besides annualized return, how are the maximum drawdown and performance in extreme conditions?
Out-of-sample validation, reasonable cost models, and small-scale live testing all help identify strategy weaknesses but cannot guarantee future profits. I see this as a trend of refining the rules rather than a signal of a market strengthening.
Trend is the best friend, but don't mistake rule updates for positive news.
HyperEVM currently has a minimum transfer limit of 1 $USDC to HyperCore; transfers below 1 will not be credited.
I judge the trend by three criteria: looking at capital, which hasn't shown incremental growth; looking at usage, where the clear threshold can reduce operational errors; and looking at sentiment, which feels more like a localized reminder and is unlikely to support optimistic market expectations. I will continue to observe actual usage and not let headlines drive my emotions. Right now, it feels more like a phase where speculation and position washing are mixed together; it's not the time for mindless chasing of gains. Are the positions you hold driven by sentiment or by strength and weakness? Last night, I watched the numbers for SNDK for a long time: from 689 up to 2373, almost a textbook M top, followed by a waterfall decline. The bulls struggled around 1800 but were still pushed down, now resting at 843, just one step away from the starting point of the rise. This position is very delicate; it’s not only the lifeline for SNDK itself but also a small mirror reflecting capital preference.✨ My own feeling is that the market is currently trading on "who is more resistant to decline" rather than "who rises more sharply." BTC is moving sideways at a high level, ETH is relatively stable but lacks active buying, and altcoins are clearly split into two groups: those with narratives can still hold, while purely sentiment-driven ones have started to leak air. SNDK, which has retraced more than 70% from its high, is exactly the type that gets abandoned first when risk appetite contracts. What people often overlook is that this kind of individual stock collapse is rarely an isolated event; it first affects the momentum players in the same sector, then gradually transmits to the overall confidence in altcoin holdings. There is also a bullish path: if the 830 to 840 range can hold and form a double bottom, a short-term rebound to 900 to 950 is not exaggerated, and ETH along with some oversold altcoins will also catch a breather. But the cost of this path is that volume must confirm it, not just self-comfort with a small bullish candle. The risk side is more direct: if 830 is effectively broken down by a large bearish candle, the M top is fully confirmed, and panic will ensue.$SOXL is a 3x leveraged long ETF for the US semiconductor sector, what does that mean?
When memory semiconductors rise, it can increase by 3 times the memory sector's gains. It holds stocks like Nvidia, Micron, Intel, and other memory semiconductor companies. Although SK Hynix and SanDisk are not directly included in the US-listed index, their price movements are strongly correlated with SOXL. Hearing this, doesn't it feel like money is just flowing in? 🤪
Today, the US semiconductor stocks are collectively trading in a range-bound pattern. I checked on-chain data, and the top ten net capital inflows in the last 24 hours are all in US stock tokens, indicating short-term capital is flowing back, but this doesn't guarantee a big rally!!
At least from my perspective, the bearish trend hasn't reversed yet, so my personal advice: if you want to be safe, wait for a rebound and continue shorting. Recommended entry point: $60 #Berkshire's massive cash reserves, the earnings report will reveal the latest developments 3. Several scenarios for tonight's earnings forecast
1. Positive scenario: significant cash decline + large acquisition announcement / major position increase + sustained buyback efforts
Interpretation: Abel dares to act, finds high cost-performance assets, and the market will recognize his capital allocation ability.
2. Neutral scenario: slight cash decline, fewer buybacks, no major acquisitions
Interpretation: Still cautious, slowly building small positions in real estate and other niche areas, continuing a wait-and-see approach, stock price likely to fluctuate.
3. Slightly negative scenario: cash continues to hit new highs, buybacks almost halted, insurance underwriting profits decline
Interpretation: Management is very conservative about the future market, the market will worry that "money remains idle, underperforming the market in the long run," likely to face pressure.It now feels more like a post-shakeout game phase, not a mindless chase of the rally. BTC's net inflow suddenly expanded; why should altcoins be watched even more closely? The most intuitive observation from the market over the past two days is that BTC's buying demand has returned, but market sentiment hasn't followed suit. According to data from November 7, BTC had a 24-hour inflow of about 9.63 million coins and an outflow of about 8.32 million coins, resulting in a net inflow of about 1.31 million coins, which is an increase of approximately 195% and 256% compared to the previous day and the same period last week, respectively. Meanwhile, liquidation amounts dropped to about 41.65 million USD across 3,152 transactions, a nearly 80% decrease from the previous day and more than half less than a week ago. After leverage was cleared, the market indeed feels lighter, but whether this lightness is a buildup of strength or a lack of participation requires layered analysis. What concerns me more is the strength and weakness across sectors. BTC receiving net inflow first indicates that large funds are returning to the most stable anchor; ETH usually follows after BTC stabilizes, and altcoins come even later, requiring a clear rise in sentiment to sustain buying. Currently, the sentiment indicator is still at zero, meaning this wave looks more like a recovery, not a full risk-on. For trading rhythm, BTC strong, ETH following, and altcoins slow is a typical defensive warming structure. The bullish path is: leverage bubbles get squeezed out, net inflows remain positive, BTC consolidates, then ETH catches up, driving altcoin rotation, making right-side chasing comfortable. The risk is that the expanded net inflow might just be short-term turnover; if sentiment doesn't pick up, altcoins are prone to spike and then fall back; also, the cumulative net outflow of ETFs within the year is about $UNI
Uniswap represents an important experiment in decentralized financial infrastructure. Its relevance extends beyond individual token swaps because decentralized liquidity is fundamental to many blockchain applications. However, growing trading activity doesn't automatically translate into proportional token value. Fee economics, governance decisions, competition from alternative exchanges, and regulatory uncertainty remain important factors when evaluating UNI's longer-term fundamentals.As soon as the non-farm payroll data came out, the US dollar surged, but the crypto market was drained dry
Brothers, simply put, last night’s non-farm employment data can be summed up in five words: the US dollar won big!
The US added 165,000 jobs last month, while the market expected only 65,000. Employment far exceeded expectations, meaning the Federal Reserve not only can’t cut interest rates but might even raise them. The result: the US dollar soared, and US Treasury yields jumped to 4.85%.
This is a draining blow to the crypto market!
The logic is simple: when the dollar is strong, US Treasury yields are high. Since buying US Treasuries guarantees a 5% return with no risk, who would want to take big risks in crypto? All the money flows to risk-free interest, instantly draining liquidity from the crypto market.
Without new capital inflows, the market naturally cools down. Many leveraged traders, seeing the unfavorable situation, got stopped out by a sudden spike. This is because macro liquidity was drained by US Treasuries, and no one was left to take the other side.
What’s next??
Focus on three things: whether 75,000 jobs can hold, whether ETF fund flows turn positive, and the Federal Reserve decision on December 10. As long as US Treasury yields don’t fall, the crypto market will likely continue to oscillate and bottom out. Don’t rush to go all in to catch the bottom. #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Transferring the same 1 USD, why do different stablecoins carry different risks?
Because having the same price target does not mean the underlying mechanisms are the same.
When evaluating stablecoins, focus on:
* Issuance mechanism: fiat reserves, crypto asset collateral, or derivatives and hedging?
* Reserve assets: Are the asset composition, custody arrangements, and public reporting clear?
* Redemption capability: Who can redeem? What conditions must be met?
* Market liquidity: Is it easy to exchange? How large is the bid-ask spread?
* On-chain risks: Are there freezes, transfer restrictions, or upgrade permissions?
* Network risks: Is the current version officially supported? Being able to transfer does not mean you can redeem at 1 USD anytime; historically close to 1 USD does not guarantee no future depegging.
Don’t just look at the price; look at what supports the price and what might happen in extreme situations. The quality of a rebound has never depended on how much it rises, but on who is buying. Mainstream coins: the shell propped up by short covering, the skeleton absent of spot funds. BTC returned to $80,650, up 4.9% in 24 hours, reclaiming the 80,000 mark. But data from Bitfinex and Gate simultaneously point to an awkward fact: this rally is mainly driven by short liquidations, with spot funds not keeping pace. ETFs have seen net outflows exceeding $410 million for two consecutive days, and institutional buying remains absent. 81,000–82,000 is short-term resistance, 80,000 is the lifeline; a daily close below exposes 77,600 again. ETH retreated to 2,240 after hitting resistance at 2,450; the daily Fibonacci 0.786 support lies here, and if broken, the liquidation concentration zone at 2,170–2,200 will be the next stop.
In trading, remove "rebound magnitude" from your buying criteria. For mainstream coins, watch if spot buying returns; for altcoins, watch if BTC market share loosens. Until both shift, the rebound is a correction, not a reversal.
When the tide recedes, many swim naked; when liquidity stratifies, those holding the oars are few. #伯克希尔巨额现金储备，财报将披露最新动向 Dropped 8%, the long-short ratio is still 2.89
$BTC fell from 81,000 to 74,762, with 1.2 billion liquidated.
Long positions still account for 74.32%.
How this number is calculated:
The long-short ratio 2.89 is 74.32 divided by 25.68.
Despite such a big drop, this number barely moved.
Who is placing orders here:
The trapped long positions haven't exited, all are holding on hard.
On October 8, this number was only 1.5, now it has doubled.
What will happen next:
The price has already broken down, and those holding positions remain.
If 74,000 breaks again, this batch of orders will be sold off by the system in a chain.
Sell orders push the price down, and the next batch will be sold as well.
Stop loss is not admitting defeat, it's taking back the initiative.
#BTC现货ETF年内累计净流出约4.16亿美元 $BTC ⚠️ Nonfarm payrolls greatly exceeded expectations but couldn't shake gold or BTC! The market isn't really waiting for a rate hike
October nonfarm employment data significantly surpassed expectations, showing exceptional labor market resilience, directly boosting the probability of a Fed rate hike in December. The US dollar index and US Treasury yields surged accordingly. According to traditional interest rate pricing logic, assets highly sensitive to real interest rates like gold and BTC should have come under pressure and declined, but the market behaved counterintuitively: after the data release, both only briefly dipped before quickly bottoming and rebounding. The negative news did not break key support levels; instead, they rallied against the trend.
The core of this abnormal movement is that market pricing logic has already shifted in advance. This nonfarm report is essentially a "boot dropping" type of negative news; the market had already priced in expectations of weakening employment. The moment the data was released, short-seller momentum was fully exhausted, with short positions closing out quickly, causing selling pressure to dissipate and naturally supporting prices. The market generally understands that nonfarm payrolls are just a policy reference point; the real anchor determining the direction of the December rate hike is the November CPI inflation data. Before the inflation results are released, capital will not blindly bet on a unilateral rate hike. Both bulls and bears tend to observe cautiously, and safe-haven buying continues to support gold and BTC, further offsetting valuation pressure from high interest rate expectations.
From a trading perspective, do not blindly short at key support levels; the current downside support is very strong, and shorting risks being shaken out by volatility. Conservative traders can continue to wait and watch, waiting for clear signals from the CPI data and the December FOMC meeting before positioning for directional moves.
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 DEX trading volume decreased by 25.7% in one day. My first thought is the worst-case scenario: if the volume contraction is accompanied by a thinning of pool depth, the actual loss upon exit may exceed the pre-set stop loss. In this DefiLlama dataset, trading volume is also declining compared to a week ago, but top trading venues still have activity.
What concerns me more is execution risk, rather than directly interpreting the volume drop as bearish. ⚠️ Trading volume does not equal liquidity; this drop alone cannot confirm difficulty in selling. However, if the depth of the traded pool is insufficient, slippage will erode the risk budget, and triggering a stop loss does not guarantee execution at that price. This is my risk assessment, not a result that has already occurred.
Having done risk control for a long time, I am used to calculating "planned loss" and "worst possible loss" separately. A reminder for ordinary people: leave room in your single-trade risk budget for slippage and fees; do not treat the stop loss price as a breakeven line. #Berkshire's massive cash reserves, the earnings report will reveal the latest developments
Last night, the nonfarm payroll data was released, directly rewriting market expectations. New jobs added were 165,000, far exceeding the expected 65,000, and the data for the previous two months was revised upward by 84,000, with the unemployment rate falling to 4.1%.
After the data came out, the market's bet on a December rate hike quickly rose, with the probability of a rate hike approaching 80%, and interest rate futures weakening in tandem, as traders began to increase their bets on a rate hike.
But there is a contrast: the initial one-year inflation expectation for November was 4.3%, lower than the expected 4.7%. Inflation expectations are falling, but employment is unusually strong, leaving room for the Federal Reserve to continue focusing on inflation.
Another key point is that now the U.S. only needs to add about 40,000 jobs per month to match the growth of the working-age population. This balance point has dropped significantly from 150,000 in 2024. Labor supply contraction, tighter immigration, and increased retirements are the core reasons for the falling unemployment rate. Federal Reserve officials themselves do not view current employment as an inflation risk.
Strong employment drives up rate hike expectations, and low unemployment means the Federal Reserve does not need to worry excessively about a recession. This nonfarm payroll report directly tilts the December rate scale toward a rate hike
$BTC $SNDK $SOL The U.S. Department of Labor has submitted a proposed rule allowing 401(k) retirement plans to consider alternative assets to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review. Although it’s not yet certain that Americans can directly invest their retirement funds in BTC, when that day truly comes, crypto assets will see a massive influx of long-term retirement savings buying pressure. At the same time, it means that you, me, and those of us with U.S. green cards—brothers and sisters we’ve never met—will be able to diversify our investments efficiently, saving a lot of effort on asset allocation. Honestly, I’m not even a bit jealous 😭
That said, when that day arrives, I believe it won’t just be $BTC that benefits. Product structures, long-term risks, and compliance responsibilities will create numerous business opportunities distributed among asset management firms, ETF issuers, custodians, compliant trading platforms, and pension service providers. So if this policy path ultimately materializes, the biggest beneficiaries should be those crypto institutions that already have capabilities in traditional financial products.
So now, smart you, can you understand the moves of various CEXs?First, to pour some cold water, when I see this kind of update, I usually place today and yesterday side by side instead of getting excited by a single number. My judgment is: the most easily overestimated part of this news is the "change," not that there are indeed more bullish people. Having a bullish bias is one thing; whether there is new driving force is another.
According to OKEx futures trading data, the BTC long-short ratio is currently 2.98, compared to 2.96 24 hours ago, meaning for every 1 short account, there are 2.98 long accounts. I'm not rushing to get excited for two reasons: from 2.96 to 2.98 is only an increase of 0.02, and based on these two readings alone, you can't see a sudden acceleration in sentiment; also, it only counts accounts, not position sizes, so several small long positions may not outweigh one large short position. Therefore, this data set neither proves that long capital is stronger nor is it enough to prove that a reverse fluctuation is imminent.
Of course, the bullish people might also be right. If the price continues to strengthen and volume follows, I will adjust my cautious judgment and acknowledge that the optimistic sentiment has real backing. As for what ratio counts as extreme, the material doesn't provide a standard, so I won't arbitrarily classify 2.98 as a danger zone. What I want to see next is whether the price can fulfill this optimism, rather than celebrating the numerical advantage of participants.BTC at $76,200, do you still dare to bottom-fish?
BTC at 76,200, do you still dare to bottom-fish? ETFs ran $1.28 billion in a week, nonfarm payrolls blew past expectations, over $1 billion long positions buried—75k just held. The last drop, is it still a bear market appetizer?
First, look at the surface: 75k-76.5k range seems stable?
24-hour volatility is converging, weekend liquidity is low, price is moving sideways between 75,000–76,500. You open the candlestick chart, see 75k held, and think: is it stable?
In the past week, it quickly fell from 80,000–81,000, dropping 5–6% in one day on November 5, with over $1 billion leveraged longs liquidated. Now both buyers and sellers are waiting for next week’s CPI and December FOMC. Whoever moves first is likely wrong.
First thing: ETFs are running, and it’s big money running.
Since November, spot BTC ETFs have seen cumulative outflows of about $1.28 billion, with about $412 million outflow on Friday alone. BlackRock IBIT is the main force.
It’s not retail panic, it’s institutions reducing positions.
ETFs won’t tweet "I’m out," they just leave sell orders on the market. What you see is price dropping, but what you don’t see is pricing power changing hands.
ETF outflows are not noise; pricing power is shifting from those chasing the rally to those waiting for a dip.
But note: outflows are slowing, panic index cooling, selling pressure easing. This isn’t infinite ammo, but don’t mistake the rebound for a reversal.
Second thing: Nonfarm payrolls blew past expectations, rate cut dreams shattered.
October nonfarm +165,000, expected only 59,000–65,000; unemployment rate 4.1%, wages still sticky. December rate hike probability once soared to 70–80%, federal funds rate 3.75–4.00%, PCE/CPI still at 3.6–3.7%.
Real rates are high, BTC is a no-yield asset, macro is a headwind.
Good nonfarm data isn’t good for BTC; it tightens the noose on risk assets.
But on the flip side: if mid-November CPI cools or Fed signals dovishness, reversal could be quick. Now it’s not about who’s braver, but who can wait.
Third thing: 75k is a long-term holding cost zone, but don’t treat it as an iron bottom.
After a large-volume long bearish candle on November 5, 75,000–76,000 stabilized, which is also a cost concentration zone for long-term holders. Current 76,200 is in the upper-middle of the range, volume shrank over the weekend.
Daily chart broke below 20/50-day moving averages, forming lower highs and lower lows; RSI rebounded from oversold but still neutral to low; MACD death cross with shrinking histogram; 4H chart consolidating to form a bottom but hasn’t broken the downtrend line.
Support: 75,000–74,500, if broken look to 73,000–70,000.
Resistance: 77,000–78,000, then 80,000–81,000 gap, strong resistance 82,000–84,000.
75k holding is not a victory, the referee hasn’t blown the whistle; if 77–78 can’t be reclaimed, all rebounds are just corrections, not reversals.
Now it’s not a bull or bear choice, it’s garbage time before the liquidity inflection point.
Full position is painful; no position is painful; leveraged is the most painful.
BTC never traps people, it traps those chasing highs; it never mistreats the patient, it mistreats leveraged gamblers.
Bull vs. bear showdown, you decide:
On one side:
Long-term holding cost zone 75–77k provides support, scarcity post-halving unchanged, stablecoins/RWA still expanding, BTC dominance at 59%, retraced 25–30% from 2025 highs, historically this position often builds bottoms, selling pressure easing.
On the other side:
ETF outflows continue, high probability of December rate hike, Nasdaq in correction, liquidity tight, 77–78 moving averages pressure, 80–81 gap resistance, weekend news vacuum, sudden news can amplify volatility.
Trading strategy
Short-term (1–3 days):
Reduce or lightly short probe at 77,000–77,500, stop loss above 78,000; buy dips at 75,000–75,500, stop loss below 74,500. 4H close + volume breakout above 77,500–78,000 turns bullish targeting 80,000; break below 74,800 reduce longs or turn short targeting 72,000–70,000. Risk-reward at least 1:2.
Mid-term (1–4 weeks):
Build positions in batches at 74,500–76,000, total position no more than 20–30% of account, target 80,000–82,000, second target 85,000+, stop loss below 73,000. Add more when CPI cools or ETF turns net inflow; if outflows continue + rate hike lands, wait for lower levels.
Bull markets aren’t shouted into existence, they’re fueled by liquidity. The faucet isn’t open yet, what are you catching with a basin?
$BTC $ETH $SNDK Will Russia open BTC and ETH trading on December 1?
According to a report on November 7, the Moscow Exchange plans to launch BTC and ETH trading services starting December 1.
But there is an easily overlooked detail: the related regulatory rules are expected to take effect on November 17, and ordinary investors may face purchase limits and entry tests.
In other words, opening trading does not mean everyone can buy and sell without restrictions.
This is clearly different from what many understand as a "full liberalization of cryptocurrency."
What I think is truly worth watching is whether the introduction of BTC and ETH by traditional exchanges will bring new compliance capital demands.
Do you think this limited opening is a long-term positive for the crypto market, or is it more symbolic in the short term? #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 $$BTC On November 5th, Bitcoin briefly surged to around $81,000 but quickly fell back to around $75,000, with over $1.2 billion liquidated in 24 hours, mostly long positions. This indicates that after a bullish spike, leveraged longs are very easily and quickly liquidated.BTC, ETH, and SOL accounts are all biased towards longs, but the most crowded is ETH
Looking at the mainstream USDT perpetual snapshot at 01:00 UTC on November 7: $BTC long accounts account for 75.7%, 8-hour funding rate +0.0084%, OI about $7.31 billion; $ETH longs account for 79.7%, funding rate +0.0100%, OI about $5.35 billion; $SOL longs account for 78.0%, funding rate +0.0100%, OI about $840 million.
All three coins are biased towards longs, but ETH has the highest proportion of long accounts and the highest funding rate. A positive funding rate means longs pay shorts, which does not necessarily indicate a price increase; the account ratio counts the number of accounts and does not equal the actual position amount. Do not interpret "80% of accounts are long" as 80% of the funds being long.
What is truly worth cautioning is: if the price does not rise for a long time, the holding cost continues to accumulate. Once the short-term support is broken, some longs will shift from active positions to passive reductions.
I will first watch whether the ETH funding rate can fall back and whether OI contracts moderately, rather than directly switching to short. Crowding is a risk warning, not a directional signal. Are you more worried about ETH or SOL?
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 #美股暴跌后科技股反弹，纳指周线仍跌约3.4% #BTC现货ETF年内累计净流出约4.16亿美元