Orbit Post Sitemap
Why is CORE currently in a "fundamental repair period"? Three signals reveal the truth
After consecutive incidents of underlying reward vulnerabilities and the large-scale theft of b14g coins, many opinions believe that CORE has entered a passive fundamental repair window, but repair does not equal reversal; three major signals need to be objectively identified.
Signal 1: Major vulnerability has completed a technical closed loop. Regarding the theft of 97.05 million CORE from b14g, the project team successfully recovered about 70% of the stolen tokens through a hard fork and completed contract patches to prevent similar vulnerabilities from recurring. The BTC staked underlying assets remain secure, and the most extreme systemic risk has been temporarily eliminated.
Signal 2: Risk has shifted from an "unknown black box" to a "known risk." From the concentration of validator nodes, hard fork intervention in the ledger, the scale of ghost chips, to Bithumb's delisting schedule, most negative factors have been fully exposed and priced by the market, reducing uncertainty.
Signal 3: The BTCFi sector narrative foundation still exists. The product framework based on Bitcoin staking has not completely failed. If transparency in the treasury and governance solutions improves later, there is theoretically still a possibility to re-attract funds.
However, it is important to clearly recognize: the repair period is merely a bottoming phase after all negative factors have been exhausted. Core hidden risks have not been eradicated; remaining stolen chips, decentralization trust fractures, and competitive diversion pressures still exist long-term. Repair is a necessary condition to stop the decline, but by no means a sufficient condition for an uptrend.Warren possibly taking control of the Senate Banking Committee is the detail I care about most in Galaxy's assessment. Let's consider the worst-case scenario: if both chambers change hands, supervision might tighten, but legislation could get stuck.
My judgment is that expectations propped up by policy fulfillment are more fragile: first, the legislative waiting period is hard to estimate; second, regulation can still proceed legally, so no movement in bills doesn't mean rules remain unchanged.
My risk control habit is to first write a list of losses I can bear per trade, not loosening boundaries based on news. During such policy uncertainty periods, how much stop loss do people generally set for themselves per trade?About 160 million ALLO, with the window roughly around November 11.
Tokenomist still marks the next unlock on this day, targeting Early Backers and Core Contributors. According to the official proportions, these two categories together account for 48.55% of the 1 billion cap, with a full 12-month lockup followed by a one-time release of 33% each, totaling about 160 million, approximately 16% of the cap. Some trackers include small linear releases during the same period, so their figures might be slightly higher.
The official rules are stated but no fixed calendar date: lock for 12 months, release 33% at the milestone, then linear release over the remaining 24 months. November 11 is calculated by pushing one year from the mainnet/token listing on November 11, 2025; this is an estimate, not an official announcement. The window is about 3 days away.
Unlocking does not mean immediate selling.
Why it matters: this is a relatively large cliff supply calendar compared to the cap; first, see if there is an actual on-chain release.
Confidence level: Medium | Estimated calendar (Tokenomist + official tokenomics; the foundation has not announced specific dates). Are you more concerned about whether the tokens will be transferred on-chain at the milestone, or just the countdown on the tracker? $ALLO $11.39 million, 7x leverage, fully invested in a single long position on $BTC. Entry at $75,880, liquidation at $62,047. What’s worth noting in these numbers isn’t the size of the position, but the distance between entry and liquidation.
7x leverage means most of this over ten million is borrowed, not his own money. This level of leverage on-chain is considered "daring but with a way out," unlike 25x or 50x where the liquidation price is right next to the entry price—just a small move and it’s gone. So this position isn’t currently considered dangerous.
Now look at this person. Cumulative profit of $821,600, with $755,400 earned in the last 30 days. The recent month’s profit accounts for the vast majority of total profit, indicating that he is very close to achieving real results; for a long time before, the account was flat. This doesn’t mean he’s not skilled, but the label "cumulative profit of $821,600" carries more weight than it seems.
A 7x long position with a liquidation price near $62,000 essentially bets that this correction won’t drop back to $62,000. This is different from "I’m bullish on $BTC." The former is risk budgeting, the latter is a directional view. The most common mistake in copy trading is mixing these two up—if you get the direction right, you add more, but you don’t die from a wrong call, you die from volatility.
So the judgment is: the safety margin of this position comes from leverage restraint, not from support at a certain price level. If it really drops to $62,000, that distance isn’t wide in extreme market conditions.
One last point to consider: what you see on-chain is always the positions others want you to see.Historically, the proportion of altcoins falling below the 200-day moving average at the end of June has reached 84%, now at 70%. Some have started shouting "extreme oversold, reversal is coming." But note: it was only 10% at the beginning of October, then surged to 70% in one month. The decline is sharp, not prolonged. After a sharp drop, there may be a rebound, but that does not mean a trend reversal. If you want to bet on a rebound, you can. But don't mistake a rebound for a reversal, and don't turn a rebound into a belief.Polygon is currently discussing a "balance rewrite" hard fork: directly removing approximately 70.49 million POL (about $6.5 million) stolen in the Polymarket and Binance incidents on October 29 from the attackers' addresses.
Confirmed: The proposal was released on November 4 in the form of a PIP, involving 5 addresses that have been blacklisted by block-producing nodes—23.86 million from the Polymarket incident (entry point was a third-party service provider), 46.63 million from Binance hot wallets, and 6.19 million USDT from the same batch has been frozen by Tether. The blacklist only freezes funds without returning them; the attacker is still attempting to test with 219,000 POL in fees and is suspected to have contacted validators. The mechanism is to zero out the balances of the 5 addresses at the activation block and credit the equivalent amount to the recovery addresses of the two companies, keeping the total supply unchanged, accounting for about 0.66% of the circulating supply.
Pending: A governance call on November 5 demonstrated the proposal, but no voting results yet; even if passed, it will require about two weeks of development and testnet rehearsals. The real controversy in the community is not the $6.5 million but the precedent— the last time this was done was Ethereum in 2016, and the chain that did not follow later became Ethereum Classic.
A reminder: The official side has no "migration" or "claim"; any such notices are phishing attempts.
Sources: crypto.news, CryptoTicker, CoinStats, CoinGeckoCan $DIS streaming profits support the entire group?
Disney is scheduled to release its annual and Q4 earnings on November 17. Streaming price increases can improve revenue per household but may also drive cancellations. Theme park attendance and per-guest spending still impact the group's cash flow. If subscription profitability improves in tandem with park performance, the upside is more credible. If profits are mainly driven by reduced content spending, retention will become the next test.Is the storage industry still viable?
The hottest topic among foreigners over the weekend!
Taking Micron as an example, its forward PE is only 3.6x, while Walmart's is as high as 45x. Which one is really worth investing in?
The bulls' logic: If Micron can earn hundreds of billions of dollars in profit in the next two to three years, why should it still be valued based on past storage cycles? The storage cycles back then fundamentally did not have structural demand growth like AI! Now with the explosion in demand for HBM, DRAM, and NAND, AI is reshaping the entire supply and demand relationship of the storage industry.
Micron has exceeded earnings expectations for eight consecutive quarters, and UBS analysts have proposed buybacks exceeding hundreds of billions of dollars in forward scenarios. The bears' logic: Even if Micron earns hundreds of billions of dollars in profit in the future, the cyclical nature of the storage industry cannot be ignored. The reason is simple: memory prices will inevitably crash, and gross margins will collapse accordingly. The storage cycles over the past decades repeatedly prove that even if fundamentals continuously exceed expectations, they cannot change the cyclical fluctuations of the storage industry. Now neither bulls nor bears can convince each other.US spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen net outflows for two consecutive days, with $411.9 million leaving on Friday alone, of which BlackRock accounted for $403 million. Strategy's coin buying speed has also dropped from 20,000 coins per week at the beginning of the year to just two or three hundred. Institutions are pulling back, while retail investors are asking, "Can we catch the dip?" It's not that institutions are always right, but when you are going against a monthly outflow of $1.28 billion, at least you know who you are standing opposite to.
#BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 ETH current price is 2,234, with a 52-week range from 1,507 to 3,657. It has dropped nearly 40% from its peak and is down 24.8% year-to-date. Technical analysis signals a "strong sell." But the question has never been "Is ETH still good?" It's "What is your cost basis, how large is your position, and how much more can you endure?" Instead of asking if you can buy when it falls, first ask yourself: if it drops another 10% tomorrow, can you still sleep at night? Regarding Moderna's financial report, beyond seeing how much profit was made, I am more interested in whether the money has actually been collected.
The net profit for Q3 was $162 million, a turnaround that deserves recognition. However, the company also mentioned that most of the payments from product sales during the quarter had not been collected by the end of the quarter. Accounts receivable at the end of September were about $1.367 billion, a significant increase compared to the end of last year. There is a period between revenue recognition and cash receipt that needs to be continuously monitored.
This does not necessarily mean there is a problem with customer payments. Concentrated sales, differences in shipping and settlement times can all cause this phenomenon. After seeing the impressive profit figures, the next step is best to also follow up on the cash collections.
The company’s operating activities still had a net outflow of about $2.715 billion in the first three quarters, which also includes factors such as litigation and seasonal working capital. Breaking down these expenses is necessary to judge how subsequent cash consumption will change.
I acknowledge this improvement, but I do not want to overlook that the entire business is still adjusting just because of a single quarter’s turnaround. Especially for R&D-focused companies with long investment cycles, how long the improvement in the income statement can last requires coordination between sales and expenses.
If accounts receivable gradually recover and operating cash flow improves accordingly, the basis for this rebound will be more solid. The revenue already confirmed in the financial report ultimately needs to turn into money the company can continue to use, and I will be watching this step very closely.
#ModernaQ3扭亏为盈，上调全年营收增长预期 In the past 24 hours, the crypto derivatives market exploded by $1.27 billion, with longs liquidated over $1.1 billion. It's not that retail investors don't want to hold on, but leverage doesn't allow it. BTC slid from above 80,000 to 76,000, and every rebound was pushed back by ETF outflows: since November, BTC ETF net outflows have reached $1.28 billion, with BlackRock's IBIT running $400 million in one day. Institutions are withdrawing, and you're catching. Ask yourself: are you catching an opportunity or a flying knife? Recent news related to Bitcoin:
1. ETFs are seeing outflows. On Friday, despite the US stock market rising, the Bitcoin ETF still had outflows of over 400 million, and buying hasn't returned.
2. Interest rate hike expectations. Non-farm payrolls were too strong, and the probability of a rate hike in December is now 76.5%.
3. Altcoin money is retreating; statistics show that about 70% of altcoins on Binance have fallen below their 200-day moving average. The total stablecoin supply is $291.6 billion, down by $5.8 billion in one week.
4. Bitcoin is already close to the Strategy's cost price. Its average holding price is about $75,451, now only two or three hundred dollars higher. On Wednesday, MSCI will decide whether to keep it in the index.ETF net outflow of $1.647 billion in one week — does that mean the entire crypto space lost $1.647 billion? This calculation cannot be equated directly.
According to Farside's daily aggregation, from November 2 to 6, the US spot BTC ETF had a net outflow of about $1.282 billion, and ETH about $365 million.
This is not a trivial matter: the net demand through the ETF channel is indeed weakening. But "net outflow in this channel" and "all institutions are fleeing" are not the same conclusion.
ETF is just one of the holding tools. The subscription and redemption data of fund shares do not cover all institutional position changes, nor do they represent the total capital flow of the entire market.
My judgment: this set of data is worth being cautious about, but it is not enough to conclude the market trend. The more useful questions going forward are: whether the outflow continues, which funds are concentrated in the outflow, and whether demand from other channels has compensated.
Rather than rushing to call bull or bear, I want to know: who is reducing, who is taking over, and for how long.
Analyzed according to Buffett's framework, this does not constitute investment advice.$BTC retail long sentiment is at its highest in nearly five months, which is bad news for the bulls.
Looking at the long-short dimension over two consecutive weeks, this is the highest retail long position in 8 months. The last time was at the end of January when BTC was at 90,000, and it later dropped below 60,000.
I'm thinking about whether this time the main force will shake out these bulls by moving up, down, or a combination of both. What do you think? BTC has been consolidating all day, and something noteworthy is happening around $76,000.
On the afternoon of November 8, the latest BTC quote was $75,927, down 0.33% in 24 hours.
The highest was $76,250, the lowest $75,571.
In the past 24 hours, the difference between the high and low points was less than $700.
Compared to the intense fluctuations of previous days, the market is clearly much calmer today.
But I think what’s really worth paying attention to is not why BTC isn’t rising, but why, after the previous sharp decline, it hasn’t continued to fall for now.
One possibility is that short-term selling pressure has eased, and buyers and sellers are rebalancing.
Another possibility is that the market lacks new driving factors, and funds are temporarily choosing to wait and see.
These two situations have completely different implications for the subsequent trend.
If BTC can break through $76,250 and maintain strength after the breakout, a short-term rebound may continue further.
But if it falls below $75,570, especially if it loses $75,000 again, the downside risk needs to be reassessed.
Currently, I tend to believe the market is in a directional choice phase rather than having confirmed a bottom.
BTC has fallen from above $80,000 in the past few days, and market sentiment has clearly changed.
But whether the price can strengthen again ultimately needs actual buying power to prove it.
Do you think BTC is bottoming around $75,000 now, or waiting for the next round of decline? $BTC There's a funny number — Perp DEX traded 438 million transactions last month, an 8.4% month-on-month increase, promoted as an "11-month high."
Looking closely, October last year had 521 million transactions. This new high is compared to the past year; compared to itself a year ago, it's still 15.9% lower.
It's like realizing at the end of the month that your salary increased by 300 yuan compared to last month, feeling happy, then pulling out last year's bill for the same month and finding you earned 2,000 yuan more back then.
Also, the transaction count is very straightforward — wash trades, grid trades, opening and closing positions all count as one transaction each. The increase in transaction count might just mean people are more eager to trade, not necessarily that more money is coming in. Whether $HYPE has real demand still needs to be seen next month.Is 2240 the bottom for Ethereum $ETH?
If it was ten days ago, I was very sure,
but now I have some doubts.
First, Ethereum's highest point this round was 2800,
according to the pattern of every bull market cycle,
a 20% retracement means
2800 x 0.8 = 2240,
which happens to be the current level.
This is a key proof that the price can't fall further now,
a 20% retracement is not a coincidence, it's a consensus level in the market. Perp DEX activity is back, but no one has reached last year's level.
In October, the total number of decentralized exchange trades for perpetual contracts across the market was 438 million, an 8.4% month-on-month increase, marking the highest single month in the past 11 months. It sounds like a recovery. But looking over a year, the same metric for October 2025 was 521 million trades, 15.9% higher than now.
Putting these two numbers together changes the nature of the story. The month-on-month increase indicates the network is repairing—wallets can connect, and order placement is smooth; the year-on-year decrease shows a significant portion of last year's momentum hasn't returned. We are climbing out of a pit, not hitting new highs.
Perp DEX revenue is almost entirely tied to trade volume. Unlike spot markets that profit from asset size, it earns fees on each open and close trade. With trade volume up 8.4%, protocol revenue rises accordingly; stuck just above 400 million, the story of buybacks and dividends can only be half told. This is also why $HYPE, $DYDX, and $GMX are more sensitive to trade volume than price—if the price rises but no one trades, they earn nothing.
The 15.9% gap, at a monthly growth rate just over 8%, requires two to three months without issues to close. Any congestion or mainstream coin pullback in the meantime could push trade volume back down.
Worth considering: what market conditions produced those 521 million trades last October? If that was excessive trading at a sentiment peak, then 438 million might be the norm, and the so-called recovery is actually a false premise.The market situation is a bit subtle, with a contrast between capital flow and the external environment!
The weekend data looks quite interesting. Let's first look at BTC: in the past 24 hours, there was a net capital inflow of 595.75 BTC. Although this is a drop of more than 50% compared to the inflow scale of the previous day, it represents a 428.18% increase compared to seven days ago, indicating that the capital foundation is still there.
During the same period, the liquidation amount was only $4.355 million, with a total of 605 liquidation orders. Compared to both the previous day and a week ago, this is a significant reduction, indicating that the current market leverage pressure is light, with no intense liquidation drag.
However, signals from the external environment are more cautious.
Morgan Stanley reviewed the recent sharp drop in the US stock market and mentioned that the scale of leveraged ETF sales reached $57 billion that day, the highest level since 2007.
The single-day leverage ratio decline of hedge funds ranked fifth since 2010. Since June, these funds have been continuously reducing exposure. Currently, they are underweight in the AI sector, although AI positions still account for 32% of their absolute exposure. Retail investors are also selling off simultaneously, and the correlation between assets is rising.
In simple terms, BTC has short-term capital support and contract risks have been relatively cleanly released, but the institutional deleveraging sentiment in the US stock market has not yet dissipated.
Cross-market linkage risks cannot be ignored. Once external volatility spreads, the crypto market can easily be influenced. We are currently in a tug-of-war phase with internal stability but external concerns. Sisters, not going shopping in broad daylight, I opened my account to count money again.
Looking at $ZEC's 1184% profit, and then at the half-dead rebound on the chart, I feel sorry for the bulls.
From the high of 1388, it plunged all the way down to 1235, and now the bulls are desperately trying to barely pull the price back to 1264.
Switching to the 15-minute chart, the MA5, MA10, and MA20 moving averages are all tangled into a mess around 1260, with no clear direction.
Focus on the MACD below, barely squeezing out a weak golden cross below the zero line, the red bars (0.49) are as tiny as grains of rice, soft and weak, not even able to break above zero.
This is clearly just a breath after a big drop, a classic "dead cat bounce" bull trap—whoever chases it gets trapped!
Look at my short position opened at the high of 1656, holding tight until now, steadily taking 1184% profit.
This position was taken all the way down from the peak, what big storms haven’t I seen?
No matter how it spikes up and down, the big trend is down, and I’m firmly holding this position.
In terms of operation, don’t chase shorts at this position now.
Let’s patiently wait for it to spike up; if it can rebound to the resistance zone of 1270-1280, decisively add to the short!
Today I must have a good meal, ordering a super spicy hot pot, with full houttuynia.
$BTC $ETH #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 SanDisk sells more to data centers, Micron busy spending money on production lines
SanDisk's quarterly data center revenue increased 61% quarter-over-quarter, with edge business up 7%. $SNDK contract quoted at 834.6 USDT, down 0.3% in the past 24 hours. Although data center revenue is growing fast, its absolute income is still lower than that of edge business. The company said it allocated more supply to data center customers, a detail more useful than just looking at growth rates: when total supply is limited, who gets more and who can accept higher prices determines which product line the incremental volume ultimately falls on.
Micron $MU contract quoted at 693.27 USDT, up 0.4% in the past 24 hours. Recently disclosed fiscal quarter net capital expenditure was 10.77 billion USD, exceeding one-third of the full year's 27.37 billion USD. Equipment must be purchased first, factories built first, and shipment volume will increase later. Profits look good, but the cash left on hand must deduct the money spent upfront for the next round of supply. This scale of investment also exposes the production capacity that needs to be absorbed in the future. There is a time lag between production line investment and orders turning into revenue.
$SKHYNIX contract quoted at 875.1 USDT, up 0.6% in the past 24 hours. Hynix's quarterly revenue increased 32% quarter-over-quarter, operating profit up 38%, with profit growing faster than revenue. Selling more high-priced products, along with price increases on core products, will widen the gap between these two lines. My understanding is that the most valuable part of this report to analyze is the product mix: selling the same additional amount of memory, whether it is ordinary products or high-value server products, can make a big difference to profit. #After the US stock market crash, tech stocks rebound, but the Nasdaq weekly chart still falls about 3.4%
US semiconductor stocks surged then fell back; how will Korean, Hong Kong, and A-shares respond tomorrow?
On Thursday, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index was bloodied down 12%, the Nasdaq dropped 5.52% in a single day, and Nvidia evaporated 9% overnight. Friday looked like a rebound, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index closing up 4.2%, AMD up 11%, but intraday it once surged over 6 points only to give back more than half by the close. This is not a reversal; someone is running during the rebound. No sweet news came after the close: concerns about AI regulation after the midterm elections remain, and funds are still rotating from AI hardware to other sectors.
For the opening of Korean, Hong Kong, and A-shares tomorrow, I think:
Korean stocks will suffer the most. Samsung and SK Hynix are tightly linked to US chip stocks and already crashed once on Thursday. But the fundamentals are not bad; semiconductor exports in October surged 259% year-on-year, supported by both price and volume. Don't chase shorts, but don't rush to catch the bottom either; wait until foreign selling pressure eases.
Hong Kong stocks have their own rhythm. Southbound funds net sold 3.2 billion HKD this week overall, but SMIC and Hua Hong were net bought 1.16 billion and 921 million HKD respectively. Money is flowing into semiconductors, not a full-scale attack. If the Hang Seng Tech opens lower, watch if SMIC can hold; if it holds, there will be short-term recovery; if not, it will continue to grind.
A-shares are most sentiment-driven. Overseas AI valuation cuts and limited northbound participation mean semiconductors will likely face pressure at the open. But domestic substitution and rising wafer foundry prices are underlying anchors. Don't panic if it opens low; focus on whether there is buying volume after 10:30. Without volume, any rebound is fake.Everyone is focused on the 6.3 billion transferred in 19 minutes, but the real problem is that the person stayed in the system for several weeks before taking action.
On the stablecoin side, the issuer can freeze about 2.85 billion USD within a few hours; on the Bitcoin side, 18,270 BTC are split across 19 addresses, not a single coin can be frozen. Elliptic's latest reading shows the stolen funds have been converted into about 2,300 BTC, approximately 175 million USD, accelerating from 1,650 BTC the day before, and there are still about 3.13 billion USD available in related addresses.
The freeze race is won by the sprinter, but the residency time wins the whole game. The signature service has been used as an ATM once; next time, the competition won't be about who announces faster, but who can shut down the internal access before the money moves. I won't change this judgment for now.I don't touch high leverage; when news comes, you have to guess the direction, which is too stressful. I just hold and don't move, but holding for a long time means you also have to pay attention to how the research you usually follow is produced.
According to PANews quoting Crypto.news, as crypto data company Blockworks shifts to AI products and prioritizes product development, at least 7 employees, including research and product staff, have recently announced their resignations. Former researcher Jake Koch-Gallup expressed regret and believes that independent research still holds value in the AI era.
From my perspective, this matter currently seems more like noise regarding the long-term value of coins, but it is a signal about changes in information sources. Employee departures cannot directly imply the industry is deteriorating, nor can all voluntary resignations be simply attributed to AI replacing jobs; the current information does not support such a strong conclusion.
Holding spot positions long-term, the fear is that the basis for judgment gradually narrows. My speculation is that if independent research supply decreases and everyone relies on similar AI summaries, it may seem like you have read a lot, but in reality, you might only be hearing the same interpretation. Making products convenient and having sufficiently diverse viewpoints are two different things.
This news is not enough for me to change my long-term judgment, nor is it worth using leverage to bet on the success or failure of this transformation; volatility may not wait for facts to become clear. For friends holding long-term, when you look at AI-curated research, do you deliberately seek out an independent viewpoint to cross-check?$FIL
Decentralized storage has a compelling proposition, but the economics deserve closer attention. Filecoin aims to create a marketplace for data storage through a distributed network of providers. The important distinction is between available storage capacity and actual customer demand. Network growth becomes more meaningful when real data-storage requirements generate recurring usage rather than capacity expansion alone.The days are getting tougher for offshore exchanges in the crypto world, especially for smaller exchanges, which are facing even greater difficulties. During this bear market, many exchanges have proactively chosen to shut down due to huge compliance costs, shrinking crypto traffic, fewer new users, and declining trading fees.
Meanwhile, fixed costs still exist, and it’s no longer a profitable business. Exchanges like bitmex and coinex have both closed. As remaining users, we still have to keep our coins on major exchanges; I currently keep mine on Binance and Okx.
Even if theft occurs, there is still a possibility of compensation. Recently, Binance was hacked, but in the end, they compensated us users. Offshore exchanges also have to face AI attacks and nation-level social engineering attacks, so survival is not easy.
In any industry, in the end, it’s the survival of the fittest and the winner takes all. The previous intense competition among domestic group-buying platforms only resulted in Meituan surviving; the e-commerce platform battle only left Taobao, JD.com, and Pinduoduo.
Now, after the exchange wars in the crypto world, only Binance, Okx, and Coinbase remain. This also indicates that the industry is beginning to mature, and the opportunities for us as investors are shrinking.
I just hope the crypto world can give me another four-year cycle of bull and bear markets so I can grow my principal a bit more. Right now, I still feel some anxiety. Today's drama centers on the question, "Is this wallet his?"
Crypto trader Ansem responded to ZachXBT's accusations. The accusations have two parts: promoting a token and being connected to the involved wallet. His response was brief—the wallet in question does not belong to him.
What’s truly interesting is the addition from community user Naeven. He said that on-chain data cannot prove that the wallet belongs to Ansem. The address labeled as Ansem’s main wallet, AVAZ...NXYm, has transaction records pointing to another user, Dez, and is linked to this user’s Friend.tech account.
This exposes an old issue with on-chain analysis: address ownership depends on labels, and labels depend on who tags first and who shouts loudest. If two addresses have transferred funds between each other or appeared together in some interaction, they are easily combined as the same person. This is probability, not a conclusion. It can serve as a clue, but there are several steps before it can be used to definitively identify someone.
Back to the matter at hand. The accusations are currently not supported by on-chain data, but conversely, the party’s statement "it’s not mine" also does not prove innocence; it merely shifts the burden of proof back to the accuser.
What’s worth considering is that on-chain data can prove transfers but cannot prove intent. We see how money moves, but what we guess about people’s intentions is always much more ambiguous.Geopolitical risks suddenly reignited, with loud explosions reported in the Saudi capital, rapidly intensifying risk aversion sentiment, and the crypto market was not spared. More importantly, funds are "running together": U.S. Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $1.28 billion this week, marking the largest weekly outflow since late June; Ethereum ETFs have experienced outflows for six consecutive weeks, and Solana ETFs have also had net outflows for five straight weeks. From rotating outflows to simultaneous outflows, selling pressure has spread from individual assets to the entire spot channel.
$BTC: Around $75,770. This week, ETFs had a net outflow of $1.28 billion, with BlackRock's IBIT alone accounting for $403 million on Friday, wiping out the year's cumulative net inflows at one point. $75,000 is the current key defense line, with $76,000–$77,500 being the first recovery range above.
$ETH: Around $2,235. ETFs have had outflows for six consecutive weeks, with net outflows in the past seven days. $2,250 has been lost, and the 200-day moving average at $2,160 is the next meaningful reference point; oversold but not yet reversed.
$SOL: Around $89.75, closely hugging the 200-day moving average. ETFs have had outflows for five consecutive weeks, with $88–$90 as the short-term key range; breaking below opens downside space.
In short: Geopolitical risks are heating up, ETF funds have shifted from "rotating outflows" to "running together," and the three coins are under synchronized pressure. The market is not waiting for a rebound but for when the funds will stop their comprehensive defense.
For record-keeping purposes only, not investment advice.
#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 Within just 12 minutes, $676 million flowed from Sky into Aave. These whales chase interest rates faster than traders seek investment opportunities.
At the time of transfer, the USDC rate offered by $AAVE was 5.82%, while $SKY only offered 3.80%. However, the influx of funds caused Aave's rate to drop to 2.38%.
That's right, large sums of money are loyal to no one. They flow to where returns are higher, and once profits decline, they look for other investment opportunities.🔥 The storage sector has basically experienced a disaster this week 😥
$SNDK dropped from around 1170 at the beginning of the week to 835, hitting a low of 794 during the week, with a total decline of nearly 29%
Keep in mind, this was one of the most favored storage leaders in the market before
Thursday's concentrated sell-off was especially extreme; after the Democrats won the midterm elections, the market began to worry that US data center construction would face stricter regulations, and the AI industry chain collectively suffered valuation cuts
SanDisk, Micron, and Hynix were all not spared
Although the sector rebounded on Friday, the previous drop was too large, and the recovery remains limited
I believe this crash needs to be distinguished into two things:
1. Market concerns about AI investment returns and future expansion speed are indeed rising
2. A few days of sharp decline cannot directly prove that NAND demand has fundamentally reversed
This level of decline has already broken the previous strong structure; let's wait for prices to stabilize again before making further judgments $BTC 在75800附近反复拉锯，而不少在77000追进去的多头已经明显感到吃力😄。真正值得警惕的不是一次回调，而是同一个位置被反复测试却始终无法突破——此前跌近76000后出现过一波快速反弹，如今这波动能已被完全吞掉，价格重心重新下移。这说明该区域的买盘承接正在被消耗，缺乏大资金托底的情况下，向上修复的难度只会越来越大。 我的判断从一开始就没变：$BTC 不站上72000、$ETH 不站上2100，就不构成值得动手的买点。注意这里的逻辑不是看空到某个价位，而是把72000和2100当作“趋势确认线”——在价格没有重新夺回这些关键位置之前，任何反弹都只能定义为弱势中的技术性回抽，而不是底部反转。$ETH 同步疲软，也印证了这不是单一币种的问题，而是风险偏好整体收缩。 宏观层面正在给这轮弱势加码。非农数据表现负面，市场对12月加息的押注概率已升至80%以上；同时民主党对科技股的限制性动作，进一步压制了风险资产的估值弹性。三座大山同时压顶，流动性预期和风险偏好双双向坏，这种组合下指望$BTC 靠自身买盘逆势走高，概率极低。这也是我敢明确表态“涨不上去”的核心依据：不是情绪看空，而是资金As of 4 PM yesterday, addresses related to the major exchange hack transferred out about 44 million tokens, worth approximately 51 million USD at the time, mostly swapped into another major mainstream coin
This does not mean that all holders are selling, nor does it mean the market is dumping this coin
This is the stolen batch being laundered, not insiders selling
In the same monitoring report, the related addresses still held about 148 million tokens, worth about 173 million USD
What can be confirmed is that hackers are swapping assets, not that everyone is selling
$XRP 半夜看盘最怕的不是跌，是突然发现自己仓位的"睡后风险"比想象中大。 你有没有过那种买完就后悔、盯着屏幕发呆的瞬间？ 我第一次被朋友拉进币圈群，看大家天天聊 $BTC，就跟着买了一点点。结果当晚翻来覆去睡不着，后来换到 $ETH，手续费又让我对着屏幕愣了半天。有次半夜下错价格，第二天醒来只想拿枕头捂脸。再后来试 $SOL，涨得猛跌得也猛，泡面凉了都忘了吃。现在我只留一小笔闲钱在里面，不追趋势，也不信那些晒收益的截图。 这些经历让我重新理解了一件事：现在这个阶段，比起猜方向，更该先看清自己扛不扛得住。BTC 现货 ETF 年内累计净流出约 4.16 亿美元，美股暴跌后科技股反弹但纳指周线仍跌约 3.4%，美军再度打击伊朗、霍尔木兹海峡重开仍存分歧。这些信号叠在一起，说明风险偏好并没有真正修复，只是被短线情绪反复拉扯。 偏多的逻辑在于：科技股反弹说明部分资金愿意接回风险资产，BTC 作为高 beta 品种，情绪修复时弹性会先体现，ETH 和山寨也会跟着有脉冲式回暖。但风险在于，ETF 净流出代表配置型资金还在撤，地缘消息又让避险情绪随时回来，这种环境下追涨最容易买在分歧转派发的节点。 所以我First, look at the two lines: The red line represents the liquidation intensity of long positions below, which has dropped steadily from 15 million on the left to zero around 75083. This means that the long positions below 75000 have been almost completely cleaned out after bottoming out over the past two days. The green line represents the liquidation intensity of short positions above, which has climbed steadily from 75083 and has now accumulated to 100 million. In other words, there is a large pile of short positions above 75000, and the higher it goes, the greater the liquidation pressure.
Next, look at the bars: The two densest clusters of 100x high leverage orange bars are near 75066 with 12.8 million below the current price, and near 76834 with 15.2 million, the highest bar on the chart, above the current price. The 50x yellow bars show 8.2 million near 74442 and 5.4 million near 77666.
Conclusion: The current price is 75680, right in the middle. There is a bunch of 100x long positions below at 75066, but the red line has already dropped to zero, indicating those longs have basically been liquidated. The 15.2 million orange bar at 76834 above is the short position wall that the upcoming rebound will face.
This chart indicates that short-term selling pressure from long positions has eased, but the short positions above remain heavy. A rebound to around 76800 will encounter short liquidation; if it breaks through, it will trigger a short squeeze upward. However, if 75000 breaks again, there will be little long position capital left to wash out below, and the price will drop quickly. $BTC #BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 $BTC $ETH BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元——机构资金这一周明显在减仓，而不是在抄底。 据crypto.news援引Farside Investors的数据，美国比特币和以太坊现货ETF在11月2日至6日合计净流出约16.5亿美元。其中比特币ETF单周净流出约12.8亿美元，为今年6月底以来最差的一周；以太坊ETF净流出约3.65亿美元，已经连续第六周录得净流出。The Block对SoSoValue数据的统计同样指向这一量级。 结构比总数更刺眼。贝莱德IBIT一周流出约12.1亿美元，几乎包办了比特币这边的抛压；周五当天IBIT就流出4.03亿美元，约占当日比特币ETF总流出的88%。同一周，富达FBTC反而录得约9310万美元净流入，说明这更像资金在不同发行人之间重新分配，而不只是“全市场一起跑”。以太坊这边，贝莱德ETHA一周流出约3.459亿美元，同样是主力。 节奏上，全周只有周三是正流入：比特币ETF净流入7460万美元，以太坊ETF净流入5300万美元。周四、周五两天，两类产品合计又流出约10.4亿One group is buying, two groups are selling.
Ethereum has been falling for four weeks.
Someone has been buying continuously, each time at a higher price.
In June, he bought at 1626. The batch added this week was at 2245. It’s 38% more expensive, but he still bought.
Another new address 0x4AB7 withdrew 9,777 coins from Binance in one week, about 22.5 million. When coins are transferred to one’s own wallet, it usually means no intention to sell immediately.
This week, a total of 42 million like this was moved in.
In the same week, US Ethereum funds sold 365 million. BlackRock alone sold 346 million.
The buying is nine times less, ridiculous.
The amount bought in a week is not enough to cover one day’s selling by the funds.
The futures market is also in this direction. In these eight days, big players have been betting on a drop, while retail investors bet on a rise.
On November 5, tech stocks were falling, and Ethereum dropped all the way to 2206. It wasn’t this group that pushed it down.
They were betting on the drop; when it fell to 2206, they profited. After making money, they stopped and conveniently bought a batch.
The next day it bounced to 2254, only a 2% rebound, no momentum. They judged it could still fall and continued betting on the drop.
There is only this one group buying. But there are two groups pushing it down.
So, the price definitely can’t hold.
This week the low touched 2206, 2200 is right underfoot.
If it breaks below 2200, the next support is 1963.
When will the drop end?
Mainly depends on the day BlackRock stops selling.If you are a disciplined technical naked K-line trader, it is absolutely impossible to be stuck halfway holding semiconductor stocks.
When you trade contracts, altcoins run fast because you know you are gambling. If you change the contract name to semiconductor, do you really think you are investing? What's the difference if you cover the name?
This shows that technical analysis and chartists are not useless.
And how any technique is used depends on the person, not on what kind of knife you hold.
For example, SNDK and Hynix.
Recently, SNDK has a clear resistance level at 1400, which has been tested 3 times in the last 10 days and was firmly suppressed each time. As a naked K-line trader, you should just think about shorting quickly, rather than stubbornly holding long positions that are useless.
As for Hynix, on Thursday, when it quickly broke below 990, it was clearly a place where long positions needed to stop loss.
If you are wrong, you have to learn to admit it; otherwise, if you are wrong once out of 101 times and still hold the position, you are doomed!!#BTC and ETH spot ETF weekly net outflow exceeds $1.6 billion $
Weekend sideways trading, the direction is still downward.
$BTC is now at 75,900, fluctuating narrowly between 74,900 and 76,400 over the weekend, with no clear direction. Last Friday it dropped 5.5% in one day, the weekly chart has shown three consecutive bearish candles (October 19, 26, and November 2 all closed lower), and this week is also bearish so far, with no rebound signals.
There are quite a few data releases next week: Tuesday at 9:30 PM CPI (expected year-over-year 3.7%), Thursday initial jobless claims, Friday PPI; also SoftBank earnings on Tuesday afternoon.
My view: short-term bearish bias. The weekly bearish streak hasn't stopped, sideways trading just means it can't fall further, not that it will rise; CPI is the turning point next week—if it exceeds expectations, rate hike expectations won't ease and pressure continues; only if it is below expectations will there be a decent rebound. First, watch if the 75,000 level can hold. 近期走出教科书级别的多头挤压行情，杠杆多头被集中清扫。比特币（$BTC）24小时清算总额约2.8亿，占全市场25.25%，其中多头清算2.5亿，空头仅3063万。以太坊（$ETH）走势一致，清算规模 1.8 亿，占总额 15.97%，多头 1.5 亿，空头 3205 万。SOL（$SOL）排在第三，清算 3768 万，占比 3.36%，多头 3394 万，空头仅 374 万。 三大主流币种的结构高度相似，多头杠杆被大量洗掉，空头仓位基本没有明显变动，这属于典型的被动去杠杆，并不是多空双方都坚定押注某一个方向。 这次回调有一个值得留意的特点，就是资金轮动。比特币、以太坊回落的时候，山寨币反而小幅上涨，说明资金并没有撤离整个加密赛道，只是在不同风险等级资产之间切换。如果是整体性出逃，大多币种会同步下跌，空头清算规模也会明显抬升。 对交易者来说，心理层面的冲击可能比账面亏损持续更久。在高点附近进场的投资者遭遇清算之后，剩下的买家会变得谨慎，就算现货资金还算平稳，短期做多信心修复起来也很慢。 大规模清算会把市场里过高的杠杆清除，历史上这种情况往往会打下更健康的市场基础，但这不代表行情现货 ETF 这一周净流出超过 16 亿美元，两个市场一起退钱。这不是散户的情绪，是机构的赎回单。 看清这条管道的作用：2024 年 1 月它开通之后，机构第一次有了不碰私钥、直接在券商账户里买进比特币的路子，从那以后 ETF 的日度资金流就是盘面上最实时的定价信号。现在它连续往外走，价格只能横——7.59 万这一线横了快一周，恐惧贪婪读数掉到 30 出头，没人愿意在这个位置加仓。 反直觉的地方在这儿：多数人盯价格，我看谁在付钱。2025 年高位进来的那批，平均成本压在 8.4 万美元一线，现价比他们的成本低一大截，摆在面前的只有两条路：割在反弹里，或者拿着等周期。所以每次上冲都有人卖。 历史对照摆明白：2025 年 11 月到 2026 年 2 月，现货通道四个月累计撤出约 63 亿美元，价格一路磨到 6.6 万才重新有人接；今年 3 月单周回流 13.2 亿美元，是那四个月里第一次转正，可整季算下来还是净流出——一次回流不等于资金回来了。这次不一样的地方是：退出的是被动指数资金，不是恐慌盘，走得慢，但每一步都砸在盘口上，所以这轮不是崩，是磨。 指望政策转向来救场的，趁早把这个念头收When people see "Congress changing hands, legislative gridlock," they mostly think it’s bearish for the entire industry. Galaxy Research’s midterm election assessment warns: if the Democrats win both chambers of the U.S. Congress, the crypto industry may face stricter oversight; research lead Alex Thorn expects little substantive progress on key digital asset legislation.
On the flip side, what I think we should be more wary of is not just the cooling sentiment, but the possibility that industry barriers might be raised. This is my speculation: if legislation remains unclear for a long time, companies that need to operate under multiple sets of rules will have to continuously bear compliance judgment costs, which small teams may not be able to afford.
Another reason is that the SEC, CFTC, and banking regulators can still refine rules under existing laws. If rules continue to advance, larger institutions may have more resources to adapt, and the market could become more concentrated. I will be watching who the rules ultimately shift the costs onto, rather than just counting how many bills pass.South Korea plans to stipulate that the largest shareholder of an exchange can hold at most 15% to 20% of the shares. At first glance, it seems like putting shackles on the boss, but in fact, it's locking down the license — the entry process is changing from declaration to a permit system, and existing platforms will have to endure a 1 to 2 year transition period.
Interestingly, in the same draft, the tax on crypto asset income is postponed by two years. Tightening on one side, loosening on the other, no one loses out, it just pushes the timeline back.
The KRW premium for $BTC and $ETH will probably suffer for a while, and $XRP, a favorite among Korean retail investors, is even more affected. Watching others change the rules through the screen, we can only wait for the permit list to come out before saying anything.A government draft bill not yet submitted may decide the future ownership of several Korean exchanges: a single shareholder can hold a maximum of 15% to 20%, existing platforms only have a 1 to 2 year transition period, and it may also be limited to voting rights only. The draft is coordinated by the Financial Services Commission, aiming to be proposed within November.
This is not just adding a compliance procedure; it is changing control. The equity of leading platforms is already concentrated, so the cap means they can only split shares, bring in new shareholders, or separate voting rights from dividend rights. The negotiation window of 1 to 2 years is not wide.
At the same time, the admission system changes from a filing system to a licensing system. The era of opening business just by filing is over; regulatory approval is required to operate. The implication of the licensing system is that the list is limited, and whoever is on the list has a license premium. Stablecoin issuance tends to be centered on bank-led consortia, with the issuance rights retained by banks.
There are two more points: no-fault compensation is set for hackers and system accidents, so incidents cannot be excused by "we are also victims," meaning security costs will truly increase; violating actual holding obligations can directly be grounds for suspension of business, which is harsher than fines.
The pace is even more intriguing. On November 5, Korean Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance Lee Hyeong-il stated that he will negotiate with the National Assembly to postpone the originally scheduled crypto asset income tax next year by two years. Tightening on one hand, deferring on the other. The Korean won premium for $BTC and $ETH will not disappear because of one law, and retail-heavy assets like $XRP are even more easily driven by sentiment.
What really needs attention is not the articles, but who remains on the licensing list.Order Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
$AKE large sell cost increased, small sell cost almost unchanged. Simulated slippage for 100,000 scale sell rose from 0.62% to 0.70%. 10,000 sell still about 0.11%. Order size reduced or split until cost returns to an acceptable range.
$PONS after enlarging orders, slippage on both buy and sell sides increased significantly. Simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage 0.13%/0.13%, 100,000 is 0.81%/0.61%. This is a cost table, not direction; simultaneous increase on both buy and sell sides indicates overall shallow depth.$TTWO Before the earnings report, which major new release should we focus on?
Take-Two has scheduled the quarterly earnings announcement for November 9. I am more concerned about the composition of the booking guidance and the release schedule, because development costs occur upfront, and cash recovery depends on product delivery. If the guidance is supported by multiple products, the risk of delay in a single project is lower. If the incremental revenue heavily depends on the same window, sensitivity to the timeline needs to be increased.Elon Musk expects SpaceX's annualized revenue to exceed $100 billion by the end of the year. As the on-chain mapped asset, SPCX has only risen slightly by 0.1% so far; the hype has not yet translated into buying pressure. I judge the news to be somewhat positive, but the market has not confirmed it yet. The short-term one-hour upward trend conflicts with the four-hour downward trend, and the price has fallen 10.01% from the four-hour high, indicating the rebound is still corrective in nature. The buy-sell ratio is 1.02, slightly favoring buyers. The funding rate is zero, and open interest is 381,000, showing both bulls and bears are reluctant to increase positions, with clear divergence. Strategically, one can lightly try going long at 134.83 with a stop loss at 133.97 and a target of 136.42; if the price rises to 136.18 but is resisted and falls back, then reverse to a short position with a stop loss at 137.05 and a target of 134.72, keeping single position size under 10%.
— This is only a personal opinion and does not constitute investment advice. Wishing you successful trading. —
$SPCX#马斯克预计SpaceX年底年化营收突破1000亿美元
#马斯克预计SpaceX年底年化营收突破1000亿美元
$SPCX This week $TRUMP has really had a rough time😮💨
As the Republican Party lost control of both chambers of Congress in the US midterm elections, TRUMP also faced a sharp sell-off, with its price dropping from around $1.71 at the start of the week to $1.18, a weekly decline of over 30%!
During this period, it hit a low near $1.11, setting a new all-time low.
This actually aligns quite well with TRUMP's asset characteristics:
Its price largely depends on Donald Trump's political influence, market attention, and the willingness of speculative funds to participate.
The midterm election results mean that policy advancement over the next two years may face more obstacles, which is obviously not good news for a token reliant on political narratives.
Even more awkwardly, TRUMP has dropped over 98% from its historical peak to date...
Currently, I still don't have a positive outlook on its short-term performance: the heat around political narratives is cooling down, market liquidity is tight, and simply trying to buy the dip because it has fallen a lot is not very attractive.
#波动雷达：币种异动观察 ZEC at $1260, upgrade successful, so why are you still losing money?
NU7 upgrade implemented, block time cut from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, 12,000 ZEC permanently locked — all the positives have been realized, yet the price dropped from 1300 back to 1260. Just now, it fell 4% in 24 hours, bulls liquidated over one million. Is this a classic "buy the rumor, sell the fact" harvest, or has the upgrade dividend not yet been priced in?
First, look at the surface: positive news delivered, price fell.
On November 5, NU7 officially activated, block time shortened to 25 seconds, Sprout pool retired locking about 12,200 ZEC, directly reducing supply. Price surged to 1300+ before the upgrade, then dropped back to 1260 after.
First thing: you weren’t cut by the upgrade itself, but by "buying the expectation and selling the fact."
Before NU7 upgrade, the market hyped it for over a month, pushing price from lows to 1300+. Once the upgrade landed, profit-taking was collective, bulls liquidated over a million, price retreated to 1260.
Is this the end of good news? No, this is short-term traders exiting and long-term holders entering.
Think about it: block time changed from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, confirmation speed tripled; 60% of transaction fees go into reserves, block rewards supplemented from 2031 — this equips ZEC with a "long-term security budget." The upgrade is not the end, but the beginning. But short-term players only care about "whether to sell the moment the news breaks," so what you see is a dump.
Second thing: 12,200 ZEC permanently locked, have you done the math?
Sprout privacy pool officially retired, about 12,200 ZEC permanently locked, worth approximately $15-16 million.
Circulating supply about 16.95-17.03 million, total supply 21 million. 12,200 is not a huge amount, but it’s "permanently gone," not "temporarily locked."
Add NU7’s reserve mechanism — 60% of transaction fees go into reserves, supplementing future block rewards. ZEC is shifting from "pure inflation" to a "sustainable security budget," a Bitcoin-level economic model design.
You’re still focused on the 4% drop, while others are calculating the supply curve for the next 5 years.
Third thing: technicals tell you 1260 is a midpoint, neither bottom nor top.
Daily RSI around 50-51, neutral. Price pulled back from highs, forming lower highs, testing support.
Strong support: 1235-1240 → 1210-1216 → 1120-1140
Resistance: 1280-1290 → 1340-1360 → 1380-1400
50-day moving average pressing from above, short-term bearish consolidation
Hold 1235 with volume rebound, target 1287+; break below 1210, look down to 1150-1120.
Bull vs. bear, you decide
On one side:
NU7 upgrade implemented, confirmation speed tripled, long-term economic model improved
12,200 ZEC permanently locked, real supply shock
Privacy demand remains, stricter regulation makes privacy more valuable
Significant annual gains, mid-term narrative intact
On the other side:
Post-upgrade profit-taking, short-term selling pressure not digested
ETF net outflows recently, cautious capital flow
BTC oscillating between 75,000-76,000, market fear & greed index 28-44
Privacy coin regulatory uncertainty still looming
Development fund governance disputes, community divided
Trading strategy
Short-term players:
Light long positions at 1235-1245, stop loss below 1210, target 1280-1290, then 1340. If rebound hits resistance at 1285-1300, light short positions can be tried, stop loss above 1310, target 1260-1240.
Swing traders:
Wait for pullback to 1120-1200 range to build long positions in batches, stop loss below 1100, target 1400+. Premise: BTC stabilizes, ETF funds return. If BTC remains weak, wait for lower levels.
Long-term believers:
Privacy narrative intact, NU7 is a long-term positive. But don’t blindly buy at 1260, wait for pullback below 1200 to dollar-cost average. By end of 2026, target 1400-1600, betting on privacy demand + upgrade dividends + ETF inflows. Exit if it breaks below 1120 to observe.
ZEC now is like ETH before its upgrade —
Everyone focuses on "the moment the news lands," but the real big move happens after digestion. $BTC $ETH $ZEC South Korea plans to reduce major shareholders' holdings in exchanges to 15%–20%. With this sharp cut, the industry landscape will have to be reshuffled.
The Financial Services Commission is pushing for the draft "Basic Digital Asset Act" to be proposed this month, aiming to change cryptocurrency exchange regulation from a registration system to a licensing system. It is considering setting a major shareholder holding cap at 15%–20%, with existing platforms possibly granted a 1–2 year transition period. This means South Korea is shifting from "registration filing" to "licensed operation," marking a regulatory framework change in one of the world's most active trading markets.
The licensing system raises the entry threshold, compressing the space for exchanges to rely on major shareholders' capital injections and financial maneuvers. The equity structure, mergers and acquisitions, and expansion pace of leading platforms like Upbit will need to be rearranged; the transition period indicates there won't be an immediate blanket clearance, with the main impact focused on valuation and compliance costs. Scenario one: if the cap is set at 15%, the pressure to rearrange equity is greater; scenario two: if set at 20% with attached rectification conditions, the transition pace becomes more critical. Are you more concerned about the final cap on holdings or whether the transition period includes rectification conditions?
Source: Wu Shuo