Orbit Post Sitemap
Strategy's average cost is around $75,451 — and $BTC is holding just above it for a fifth day. Whales bought the dip while ETFs were selling. When the biggest holders defend a level, I pay attention. My prediction: $75,000 is the floor for this cycle's correction. From here, the next leg is up. Not financial advice — DYOR.#NebiusAI云业务高速增长迎来财报检验 Q3 earnings revealed, Nebius delivered a report card of “astonishing growth, with equally astonishing costs.” Revenue reached $146.1 million, up 355% year-over-year, but below the market expectation of $150.6 million; adjusted net loss was $100.4 million, expanding 153% compared to the same period last year. The stock price dropped over 7% on the day, reflecting the market’s straightforward logic: growth is accelerating, but the burn rate is even faster.
My view is: the core contradiction in this earnings report is not the revenue miss, but the high-stakes gamble implied by the $5 billion capital expenditure. Q3 quarterly capex soared from $172 million last year to $955.5 million, with the full-year guidance raised from $2 billion to $5 billion. Management is not blindly expanding—80% of the investment is directed toward GPU deployment, and they clearly stated that large-scale procurement only occurs after securing orders. Meta’s $3 billion five-year contract and Microsoft’s long-term agreement indeed anchor demand for capacity. But the risk lies in timing mismatch: computing power deployment takes time, while equity dilution and debt costs are immediate. The company also announced a 25 million share ATM offering and plans to finance debt with asset-backed securities during the same period. This means investors will face the dual pressure of expanding losses and share dilution over the coming quarters.$NBIS Tether's XAUT gold reserves increased by 59%, reflecting that safe-haven funds are still expanding. This contrasts with the recent trend of ZEC: although the privacy narrative remains active, funds clearly favor hard assets more. I hold a neutral to cautious short-term view on ZEC; trend recovery requires first stabilizing key levels. The current quote is 1258.59, down slightly 0.5% in 24 hours, with volatility narrowing between 1235.32 and 1293.93. The trading volume of 66.582 million indicates moderate participation. The hourly chart shows a downward shift in momentum, falling 8.02% from the high, while the four-hour chart remains in an upward structure, 10.86% above the low. Multi-timeframe divergence suggests short-term pressure but no break in the medium term. The order book's top 10 bids total 3822 versus 1693 asks, with a buy/sell ratio of 2.26 indicating buyer dominance. However, the funding rate of -0.0064% and coin-margined positions of 138,000 together imply bearish sentiment persists, making rebounds prone to selling pressure. Strategically, one can lightly go long at 1246.8 with a stop loss at 1231.5 and a target of 1278.6, aiming to capture the four-hour trend continuation; if volume breaks below 1231.5, then reverse to target 1218.4. Position size should be controlled within 20%, with single-trade loss not exceeding 1.5% of total capital.
— This is only a personal opinion and does not constitute investment advice. Wishing you successful trading. —
$ZEC #Berkshire repurchased $9.6 billion in Q3, cash reserves hit a record high
#Tether's XAUT gold reserves increased by 59%
$ZEC #Tether旗下XAUT黄金储备增长59%
📻 【Orbit Radio: The money printers are all hoarding gold, this signal is clear enough】
🔴 Today's Big News
Wow, the issuer of USDT, Tether, has made a major move: the reserves of its gold token XAUT have surged by 59%! 📈
Brothers, don’t just focus on the daily chart of Bitcoin, let’s dig into the hardcore logic behind this. What did Tether build its fortune on? US Treasuries. But now they are frantically moving real gold into the vault, clearly even the “money printers” feel that just holding dollars isn’t secure enough, so they need to quickly add some hard currency for protection. 🛡️
📌 Veteran traders’ radar is ringing:
1️⃣ Rising risk aversion: Giants secretly hoarding gold indicates extremely high macro uncertainty. More money is flowing into safe havens, so there’s less liquidity willing to chase high-risk assets, which explains why the market has felt half-dead recently.
2️⃣ RWA sector shines: Bringing physical gold on-chain, Tether is setting an example. The grand narrative of RWA (Real World Assets) isn’t just hype; it’s driven by real gold and silver. This sector definitely has a promising long-term outlook.
💡 Practical tips:
Don’t get excited and chase those coins just riding the RWA hype. Pump-and-dump manipulators love to use good news to shake out weak hands. Spot traders should slowly accumulate tokens backed by real assets, and contract traders must remember to reduce leverage and set strict stop losses!
$XAUT The market now prices a 76.5% chance of a Fed hike in December. That is the headwind hanging over $BTC. But hikes get priced in — and then the market moves on. With CPI on Tuesday, the story can change in one print. My call: a soft CPI kills the hike fear and $BTC runs to $80,000. A hot one delays it. Not financial advice — DYOR.$BTC Yesterday I said the range would grind until Monday's open, and it came true. Locked in the 48 hours over the weekend between 75,368 and 76,217, with a fluctuation of 629 points, volume shrank to one-eighth of the crash day, current price 75,897, right in the middle of the band.
But positions didn't rest: total holdings climbed from 3.79 billion to 3.83 billion, standing back above pre-crash levels. Fee rate +0.0035%, perpetual contract discount — leverage maxed out, sentiment not heated.
Two small probes over the weekend, touching 76,160 on the upside and dipping to 75,633 on the downside, both sides swept, liquidation ratio long to short 57 to 39. Small coins ignited alternately outside, $JCT 5.8x in five hours — risk appetite not dead, just not residing in the main market.
Tonight's open is the first real candlestick. The main bet is on a volume breakout of the range: with 3.83 billion positions on the table, whichever side stops out first feeds the other. Above 76,217 targets 77,000 to 78,300; break below 75,368 retests 74,800, if that doesn't hold then 73,000.
Watch the first hour after open for confirmation: price breaking with volume increase is a true breakout, price breaking with volume decrease is a shakeout; CME gap and tonight's ETF flows, all three aligned to follow; don't bet in the middle of the band.#RocketLab财报前瞻：Neutron火箭进展如何？ 🤔Stablecoins decreased by about $5.18 billion in one week, liquidity is worth watching
Rather than guessing market sentiment, I prefer to see if money has stayed on the scene: the total supply of stablecoins decreased by about $5.18 billion in one week.
$BTC is around $75,810, down 0.25% in 24 hours. OI 24h +2.0%, rate +0.0072%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). This set of data seems to remind us: contract participation is rising, but the rate is mildly positive, indicating bulls are present, but it’s not yet extremely crowded.
Looking at $XRP: current price about $1.16, down 0.13% intraday. OI 24h -3.6%, rate +0.0054%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). Price is nearly flat but positions are falling back, the market is still adjusting direction, and the positive rate should not be interpreted as confirmed buying.
An increase in BTC contract OI does not mean spot funds are flowing back; the decline in XRP positions also indicates position adjustments.
If stablecoin supply continues to shrink, the rebound may lack momentum; will you treat it as a leading signal or just temporary noise?
#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与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 The Nasdaq rebounded on Friday, closing up 1.1%, with chip stocks also strengthening, but it still fell 3.4% for the week, marking four consecutive weekly declines. The current rally looks more like a technical correction after a deep drop, and it's too early to declare the risk has been eliminated.
The crypto market is reacting slowly: BTC is around $75,906, ETH about $2,241, and DOGE approximately $0.0717. The first two are consolidating in a narrow range, while DOGE has still dropped over 4% this week, showing insufficient buying interest.
Next, focus on one thing: whether funds are willing to re-enter risk assets next week. The stabilization of the US stock market is just a prelude; the key is whether the crypto market can pick up volume and take over. In terms of operations, do not chase sudden rallies; first observe trading volume and buying support.
This is a personal market record and does not constitute investment advice. $BTC 在76,000美元附近徘徊，日线同时亮出两个极端读数：KDJ的J值砸到10.78，RSI(6)只剩34。这是超卖，但不是反转。真正值得盯的，是价格与资金流之间那道越拉越大的裂口。 先看技术面给的喘息空间。超卖意味着短线有技术性修复的条件，可MACD仍压在零轴下方，DIF低于DEA，日线级别的下行结构一根都没被推翻。换句话说，反弹是许可，转向是奢望。75,000美元因此成了第一道防线，一旦失守，视线就得下移到72,500至73,500美元区间；向上则必须先收复78,000至80,000美元，站稳82,000美元以上，趋势才算真正松动。 再看资金面，这才是最刺眼的地方。美国现货BTC ETF近期持续净流出，11月6日单日净流出约4.12亿美元；长期持有者仍在释放筹码，交易所净流入同步抬升。这三件事指向同一个结论：现货买盘不足以吸收当前抛压。而宏观并不帮忙——纳斯达克连跌四周，美联储政策预期偏紧，美国中期选举后监管不确定性上升，风险资产短线继续承受流动性压力。 但这里有个容易被忽略的反向信号：从58,000美元修复到87,000美元的过程，已经证明下方存在相当强的承接力。当前更像周ETF has spoken first: institutional funds in BTC are cooling down.
This week, BTC and ETH spot ETFs saw a combined net outflow of $1.65 billion. More striking is BlackRock's IBIT: redeemed for five consecutive trading days, with a cumulative outflow of $1.04 billion. The flagship product of the world's largest asset manager is continuously "bleeding," strongly indicating institutions are reducing exposure.
Looking at the longer term:
· Since 2026, BTC ETF funds have turned to a net outflow of $502 million;
· Institutions have redeemed more BTC through ETFs than they have invested;
· BTC's gains this year have basically been wiped out.
Price declines can be attributed to sentiment, but the sustained ETF outflows represent real money decisions. This does not necessarily mean everyone is bearish, but it directly reflects the stance of some institutions. A slight exception is Fidelity's ETF, which still saw inflows this week, indicating that funds are not all pulling out, but more like BlackRock's clients are taking profits.
For the market, ETF flows remain the most important institutional thermometer to watch. Institutions are closing up shop; a rebound will require new money to step in.
$BTC $ETH #美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温 The order books are lying, and the weekend is why. With $BTC at 75,723 and $ETH at 2,233, the visible depth looks like a battlefield, but thin weekend liquidity turns most of it into theatre. Bids are outnumbered roughly 31 to 69 on Bitcoin and 32 to 68 on Ether, sell orders more than double buy orders. That imbalance is real. The walls are not. Consider the $24.95 million bid sitting at 75,000 on Bitcoin. It reads like a floor. It behaves like bait. A genuine buyer of that size does not advertiRevenue is still rising, but growth rate has dropped from 144% to 47%
This set of numbers is worth a close look: Anthropic's Q3 revenue grew 47% quarter-over-quarter, compared to 144% last quarter. Growth continues but the pace has clearly slowed.
$TAO is currently around $222.44, down 1.17% in 24 hours; more noteworthy is the 24-hour trading volume of about $40.7 million. Trading activity is decent, but the price is still falling, indicating that attention does not equal buying dominance.
$RENDER is around $1.54, down 1.25% in 24 hours. The 24-hour trading volume is about $15.53 million; Binance perpetual open interest is about $8.2 million, down 2.7% in 24 hours, with a fee rate of +0.005%. This data seems to suggest that contract positions are shrinking first, and if spot cannot catch up, relying solely on thematic hype will struggle to sustain a continuous rebound.
TAO traded about $40.7 million, down 1.17% intraday; RENDER traded about $15.53 million, with a weak price as well.
The market is shifting from talking about growth to questioning growth quality. Do you think the AI sector should focus more on revenue growth rate or unit computing cost?
#Anthropic仍计划11月IPO，投资者下调估值预期 #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% Daily chart says bearish. Weekly chart says something else. $BTC is on track for a fifth straight losing week — that has only happened twice since 2017. A weekly close above $78,232 ends the streak. My call: the daily pain is real, but the weekly trend is stretched, not broken. Reversal odds rise from here. Not financial advice — DYOR.#美国10月非农超预期，12月加息押注升温
$BTC and gold's recent performance suggests a bit of "negative news fatigue." With such strong October non-farm payroll data, logically, as rate hike expectations heat up, the dollar and U.S. Treasuries should strengthen, and these two assets should definitely take a hit. But once the data came out, they only dipped slightly before quickly recovering, with key support levels not even breaking.
This doesn't mean traditional fundamentals have failed; rather, the expectations had already been priced in well in advance. The non-farm data feels more like bad news fully priced in—once the data landed, shorts rushed to cover, and selling pressure immediately eased. Now, all funds are waiting for the November CPI; before the inflation data is released, no one dares to stubbornly bet on rate hikes. The safe-haven buying is firmly holding the bottom.
In this kind of market, never chase shorts at key support levels. The obvious buying support below means blindly shorting risks getting stopped out amid the back-and-forth swings. The safest move now is to hold your hands, check if your positions and stop losses are set correctly, and wait for clear direction from the CPI and the policy meeting before entering.
Everyone is waiting for the wind to blow. Are you currently sitting out watching, or do you have positions?
#美股暴跌后科技股反弹，纳指周线仍跌约3.4%
#BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 #BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 上周美国现货比特币 ETF 净流出约 12.8 亿美元，创下 6 月底以来最差单周；现货以太坊 ETF 净流出约 3.65 亿美元，已连续第六周净流出。自 9 月下旬以来，ETH ETF 累计失血约 20 亿美元。更关键的是，BTC ETF 今年累计资金流已经从正转负，2026 年累计净流出约 9.14 亿美元。 ETF 流出会直接变成现货卖压：基金赎回后，授权参与人需要卖出底层 BTC/ETH 来兑付现金，或者以实物申赎方式把币抛向市场。 所以这组数据不是“情绪噪音”，而是真实的边际资金撤退。为什么会集中流出 这轮流出不是单一原因，而是几件事叠加： 美股科技股暴跌传导：民主党中期选举后，市场重新定价 AI 监管和数据中心能耗风险，纳指单日跌 5.5%，费城半导体指数跌超 12%。 加密没有走出独立行情，而是和高贝塔科技股一起被抛售。 宏观利率压力未消：非农数据超预期后，12 月加息预期升温，美债收益率和美元偏强，这对高估值、高波动资产都不友好。 安全事件冲击信任：币安遭遇约 63 亿美元黑客攻击，虽然交易所快速补资并恢复提现，但#Anthropic still plans an IPO in November, investors lower valuation expectations BTC spot ETF net outflow of about $416 million year-to-date "BTC spot ETF net outflow of $1.28 billion over five days, 75,000 is the last support"
From November 2 to 6, over five trading days, BTC spot ETF had net outflows on four days, totaling -$1.28 billion. On November 6 alone, the outflow was $412 million, with BlackRock IBIT accounting for $403 million.
But don't panic. Since listing, the cumulative net inflow is still 557.7 billion, and the outflows in these days are less than 3% of the total holdings. This looks more like marginal withdrawal of funds rather than a collective sell-off.
Current price is 75,666, down slightly 0.27% in 24 hours. The price did not fall along with the outflows, indicating there are still buyers supporting the spot side.
Judgment: 75,000 is a key level. Holding above it means outflows are just turnover; if it truly breaks below and coincides with ETF net outflows for two consecutive weeks, that indicates institutions are systematically reducing positions.
Invalidation condition: falling below 73,000 and ETF net outflows for three consecutive days, the judgment is invalid.
Check your preset stop-loss price for your BTC holdings.
Data: Farside Investors, closing on November 6.
$BTC $ETH $SOL News of two oil tankers hitting mines should not be directly equated with the Strait being closed
Reports of oil tankers hitting mines and catching fire appeared early Sunday morning, but the status of the channel and details of the incident still require official ongoing confirmation.
$ETH is around $2,234.31, down 0.63% in 24 hours. OI down 0.1% in 24h, fee rate +0.0055%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). This set of data seems more like a reminder: price has fallen but open interest is almost flat, temporarily more like waiting for direction rather than new leverage clearly entering.
Looking at $ZEC: current price about $1,260.58, down 3.88% intraday. OI down 5.9% in 24h, fee rate +0.0265%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). Price has fallen while positions shrink, fee rate remains relatively high, long position cost pressure is not low, deleveraging may not be over yet.
Compared to daily price fluctuations, I care more about whether the capital evidence of $ETH and $ZEC is aligned; currently it is insufficient to make a combined judgment.
The biggest risk in trading geopolitical events is treating unconfirmed news as established facts. Would you first look at maritime notices or first look at oil price reactions?
#美军扩大对伊朗封锁，霍尔木兹重开仍存分歧 #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% #SoftBank's Heavy Bet on OpenAI: Can the Q2 Earnings Report Deliver Impressive Results?
The earnings report looks very impressive on paper, but this brilliance heavily depends on the fair value revaluation of OpenAI, not operating cash flow profits, meaning the paper wealth carries significant valuation volatility risk.
SoftBank's earnings logic differs from ordinary companies: the core focus is on NAV (Net Asset Value) and Vision Fund investment fair value changes, rather than traditional revenue and profit.
1. Q2 Earnings Report Key Highlights
1. Massive Unrealized Gains Driven by OpenAI Equity Appreciation
In this quarter, OpenAI's valuation was raised, and SoftBank recognized approximately $14.6 billion (about ¥2.2 trillion) in fair value gains on its OpenAI investment on the books, which was the core source of Vision Fund's earnings this quarter, directly boosting the group's net profit and significantly raising NAV.
OpenAI was initially recorded at a $500 billion valuation, which serves as the pricing benchmark for SoftBank's investment gains.
2. Strong Performance Numbers
Q2 quarterly net profit hit a new high for the period, with Vision Fund earnings surging year-over-year; Arm also contributed positively, with AI as the main growth driver.
3. NAV Hits Record High
NAV is SoftBank's most critical metric; this quarter saw a significant NAV increase. Masayoshi Son repeatedly emphasized maintaining the LTV risk control red line externally, signaling financial stability.
Benefits: As long as OpenAI's valuation continues to rise, SoftBank's earnings report will remain attractive; simultaneously, by linking with OpenAI and the Stargate project, SoftBank is positioning itself in the AI infrastructure track, maximizing strategic narrative.Buffett's company just spent $9.6 billion on buybacks right after releasing its earnings report.
Berkshire's Q3 earnings report came out on November 7: $9.6 billion repurchased in one quarter, more than double the amount in Q2, totaling $14.4 billion in the first nine months of this year.
But its profit-making ability is declining: operating profit was $12.7 billion, down 5.8% year-over-year; insurance underwriting profit was cut in half by 43%; net profit was $22.1 billion, down 28%.
Fortunately, it still has $377.4 billion in cash on hand, with $5.4 billion repurchased in September alone, and about $2 billion more added in the first four weeks of October.
The stock price rose first: BRK.B closed at $570.89 on Friday, up about 13% in a month, and on November 4 it hit a record closing high of $579.09.
I see this as a signal: the new CEO Abel prefers to buy back shares at a high price rather than chase the AI stock bubble.
Waiting and watching without chasing, the real first reaction after the earnings report will be when the U.S. stock market opens tonight; only breaking above $586.30 will confirm a new high, while falling below $559.61 means this rally will pause.
Do you think Berkshire's $9.6 billion buyback is bottom-fishing itself or just because it has nowhere else to spend?
$BRKB
#BerkshireOn the radar echo, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index's deep red bar exceeding 12% looks like a downburst slashing through the data center's high-pressure ridge, pushing the visibility of the U.S. tech sector to less than a hundred meters on November 5. When we observe the weather, we never just look at the daily temperature but rather the pressure field: the AI computing power and chip stocks leading the decline essentially represent a cold front passing through, with regulatory cloud cover thickening, doubts about returns on heavy capital expenditures, and a simultaneous dip in the tech sector's high-altitude jet stream. Some tech hedge funds have expanded losses, and institutional risk reduction is like increasing wind shear—first cutting leverage, then positions. On November 6, Nvidia and AMD rebounded, lifting the Nasdaq, while the Dow Jones still closed lower, indicating this is not a warm ridge in full control but a local echo after a shortwave trough. Low-level humidity is insufficient, so the sustainability of the rebound and the probability of precipitation still depend on trading volume, credit spreads, and capital flows. $xORCL's linkage with tokenized U.S. tech stocks is like the phase difference between coastal observation stations and inland radar: the parent tech stock pressure is unstable, so token prices will experience gusts first, with amplified volatility when liquidity is thin; if the Nasdaq jet stream still leans north, Oracle-related tokens can only be considered intermittent clear skies, not stable high pressure. Three meteorological factors must be observed: whether the regulatory cloud over data centers continues to thicken, whether the return on heavy capital expenditures forms a sustained updraft, and whether the tech valuation jet stream falls back from the overbought zone; hedge fund position reductions signal increased wind shear, which tends to cut rebounds into short showers. $xORCL's linkage is not an independent weather system; it follows the temperature advection of tech stocks. If the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index cannot recover half of its 12% drop, the tokenized asset's rebound will resemble a phantom wave on a sea breeze front. The current tech sector is in a brief sunny interval after a cold front passage, with large stratocumulus clouds still queued on the radar. Any reading that mistakes local echoes for a high-pressure ridge control will be overturned by the next round of wind shear. #techstocksreboundwatch Term Structure Radar
The scale of the first positive spread for $ETH is very small. The near-buy far-sell quote spread is +0.36%, with the first pair scale around $105; at a scale of 10,000, this only covers about 1%. Capacity is limited, so the term signal is more for display.- 75 枚 BTC 提进 Ledger 冷钱包，真正值得看的不是金额，是那个 405 天。 你手里的币，真的属于你吗？ 昨晚 20:55，一位持有者把攒了 405 天的 1.75 BTC 从交易所提进冷钱包，约 13.3 万美元。提币快照价 76,062 美元，和他从 12.2 万高点一路摊下来的成本 76,048 几乎一模一样。这个巧合很浪漫，但市场情绪层面更有意思：这是一个在浮亏区间里坚持定投、最后选择自托管的人。 我第一反应不是羡慕仓位，而是想到现在的情绪结构。价格从高位回落这么久，社交平台上晒收益的声音少了，晒冷钱包、晒 UTXO、晒助记词备份的人反而多了。这其实是叙事疲劳的典型表现：大家不再热衷讨论下一个百倍故事，开始讨论"怎么把币拿住"。FOMO 退潮之后，留下的是防御性动作。 偏多的一面在于，这类行为会减少交易所可流通筹码，也让持有者在下跌中更难被短时波动洗出去。情绪从追涨切到囤积，往往出现在阶段性悲观后段。但风险也明显：自托管解决了平台信用问题，却把私钥丢失、地址填错、钓鱼签名全揽到自己身上，一次操作失误就不可逆。而且冷钱包锁仓不等于价格支撑，宏观风险偏好一收缩，该跌🔥The casino opens again tonight
The low point of the last bear market was 15,443 points in November 2022. If we take this as the starting point of the most recent bull market wave count:
Wave 1: 15,443 → 73,865 Increase: 58,422 378.31%
Wave 2: 73,865 → 48,888 Decrease: 24,977 33.81%
Wave 3: 48,888 → 110,000 Increase: 61,112 125%
Wave 4: 110,000 → 74,457 Decrease: 35,543 32.31%
Wave 5: 74,457 → 126,208 Increase: 51,751 69.5%
If we assume the current ABC corrective wave is complete, there are a few scenarios:
1. The rise from 57,758 to 87,385 is the first wave of an upward trend. This would create two additional waves that cannot be classified, which I personally would exclude.
2. Currently, we are still in a large cycle corrective wave. This recent decline is the B wave correction from 126,208 downwards. Where the B wave ends is unclear.
However, a distinct pattern has appeared here: a broadening wedge.
Pattern characteristics: higher highs, lower lows, expanding volatility range, which is a "death signal" indicating market sentiment is out of control.
This pattern has already formed two highs and two lows. Is it possible it will continue to complete this pattern? I remain cautious, so I drew many trend lines in Chart 2.
Wherever you think the bottom is, the rise will start from there The upgrade has landed, so why are the bills so high?
I've been staring at that 0.0301% ZEC bill for two days. The news about the upgrade activation has cooled off, but the bulls are still paying this price. Every day when I open my eyes, I check it first, and the more I look, the more I want to ask 😮
ZEC's NU7 upgrade is block-based, not time-based. On the morning of November 6th, it reached block number 3,543,405 and switched over instantly. Block production time was reduced from 75 seconds to 25 seconds. 60% of the fees are first removed from circulation and starting February 2031, they will be returned as miner rewards. Coins in the old pools cannot be moved after activation.
But in these two days since the upgrade landed, ZEC's bill is still the most expensive among the four coins, at 0.0301%, more than 4 times that of BTC. In 24 hours, 4.83 million liquidations occurred, with longs accounting for 76.6%, paying the highest price and taking the most hits. Even more absurd is the difference by exchange: for the same ZEC bill, some exchanges charge 0.2011%, while others subsidize at -0.0089%. Depending on which exchange the bulls open positions at, it's a completely different world 😅
What about BTC, ETH, and SOL? The long costs are 0.0069%, 0.0063%, and 0.0092% respectively, all close to the floor. In 24-hour liquidation orders, BTC longs account for 82.2%, ETH longs 77.0%, and SOL only 2.63 million, the lowest among the four coins. The bulls aren't doing much better than ZEC 🤔
The upgrade is an upgrade, the price rise is a price rise; don't confuse the former for the latter. The chain is faster, but that doesn't mean you can make money on the books. This sentence has been stuck on my screen for two days and hasn't been torn off yet.The most awkward thing isn't that they both turned red together, but that the one that fell harder had even more active trading. ONE and DEGEN were both pushing up the day before, but this round they both turned red. ONE is currently priced at 0.001782, down 21.15% in 24 hours, already 27.85% below its high, with a trading volume of about 4.47 million; DEGEN is currently priced at 0.000817, down 16.15%, 17.01% below its high, with a trading volume of only about 370,000, roughly 12.1 times less. The overall market neither helped nor dragged, so it doesn't seem like they were pulled down together.
Some might say that only thick trading volume can be smashed this cleanly. I take the opposite view: ONE, which looked stronger last round, was actually just easier to exit. Thick trading volume means there are buyers and sellers; when sentiment flips, retreat is smoother and doesn't automatically become a shield. DEGEN fell less, but I don't think it suddenly became more resilient; it's probably just not as easy to be dumped all at once.
Which signal is more worth watching next: will ONE stop falling first, or will DEGEN follow with a further drop? #OKX星球话题来啦 $ONE $DEGEN The blockade has expanded from the sea to the land routes, and the risk is not only in the Strait of Hormuz
The new development in the situation is not just "the strait is tense again," but that the US has announced extending restrictions to land routes and the Caspian Sea direction.
$BTC is around $75,810, 24h -0.25%; OI 24h +2.0%, funding rate +0.0072%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). Contract participation is rising, but the funding rate is mildly positive, indicating bulls are present but it’s not yet extremely crowded.
$SOL is currently near $89.14, 24h -1.11%; more notably, OI 24h -4.8%, funding rate +0.0062%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). Price and open interest are falling together, risk appetite is contracting, and spot follow-through still needs observation.
BTC’s OI is increasing while SOL’s OI is decreasing, so there is no unified risk-off move within risk assets.
If subsequent actions are only sanction escalations without further shipping disruptions, the market may first price in risk premiums. Are you more focused on military actions or actual shipping?
#美军扩大对伊朗封锁，霍尔木兹重开仍存分歧 #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% $ZEC has been trading sideways within the range of 1048–1695 for two and a half months since early September.
Currently, as the entire crypto space faces increasingly strict political scrutiny and regulatory oversight, the privacy sector is gaining more public attention. This time, with the price near the previous high close to 1700 pulling back along with $BTC and $ETH, it is a moment for the market to test ZEC's depth and resilience. Fortunately, ZEC has held firm above the 1000 mark, indicating that ZEC is not a pump-and-dump air coin but a cryptocurrency with depth and resilience that can withstand market and trader scrutiny.
Looking ahead, it remains to be seen if ZEC can continue to hold above the 1000 level during the BTC and ETH pullback bottom. If it can maintain this level steadily, after the pullback ends, ZEC is expected to have another major rally!!!
#ZEC刷新历史新高，NU7升级预期受关注 This rebound is a technical correction driven by short covering; the structure of the downtrend has not been broken.
Technical aspect: The key defense line remains overhead. The S&P 500's 200-day moving average (around 7323–7325 points) is the "last line of defense" in this sell-off. The index stopped falling here, but the rebound failed to hold in the 7600–7620 resistance zone and then retreated. The Nasdaq 100 has retraced nearly 15% from its high and is in a severe oversold area, requiring short-term repair, but this "does not mean the market will immediately turn bullish." Technically, the price remains below the main moving averages, which is a typical rebound pattern within a downtrend rather than a bottom reversal.
The nature of the rebound determines that it won't go far. Moomoo strategists clearly judge that the current rebound "looks more like buying the dip and short covering rather than a fundamental shift in market sentiment." Previously, hedge fund short positions approached a five-year high; after election uncertainty was removed, shorts concentrated on closing positions, fueling this rebound. The characteristic of short covering is that it comes quickly and lacks sustainability. Once the fuel runs out and new negative catalysts appear, a secondary bottom test is very likely.
The most critical signal is that institutions have not entered the market. Goldman Sachs trading desk observed a rare "buying vacuum": long-term institutions sharply reduced risk before the election and are unwilling to re-enter even with a sharp market drop; hedge funds continue to reduce tech stock holdings; retail investors have been net sellers continuously. The VIX remains above 28, credit spreads are widening, and the true bottom signals—comprehensive panic selling, credit market stabilization, and volatility decline—have yet to appear. $SNDK A wallet plugin had an incident, and $5.6 million was moved. Many people's first reaction was a bear market signal, but looking closely, this time it wasn't the market that moved, it was the login method.
Consensys's Web3Auth had a service vulnerability affecting Keplr wallets created using Google or Apple one-click login. The private keys are generated and restored through this process, and once the vulnerability appeared, the private keys no longer belonged solely to the users. On-chain, 12 recovery addresses can be seen, totaling about $5.6 million, including 2.49 million ATOM, approximately $3.3 million. The funds have been transferred to secure addresses, but that was an after-the-fact action.
What’s worth noting is the structure. In self-custody wallets, the private key is tied to the mnemonic phrase, and if the service provider has issues, at worst you can't connect to the node; one-click login hands over private key generation rights to the OAuth process, trading convenience for a single point of failure, shifting the risk from "you losing it yourself" to "the service provider making a coding mistake."
Josh Lee estimates about 20% of Google and Apple login accounts are affected, but only a small portion were actually exploited. The materials also mention the existence of an "original attacker," with some wallets stolen before recovery.
Conclusion: The selling pressure on $ATOM comes from stolen addresses liquidating, not from fundamental changes, but don’t expect it to strengthen on its own in the short term. 周末流动性稀薄，加密市场连一丝买盘托举都找不到，弱势震荡成了唯一主线。真正值得警惕的不是跌幅本身，而是风险偏好正在被美股科技与AI板块同步抽走——当外部引擎熄火，$BTC 的日线结构已明显偏向下行，价格在75,000至76,000美元区间反复拉锯，75,000一旦失守，73,000附近将成为下一个必须盯住的防线。这不是普通回调，而是资金与情绪双重退潮下的结构性走弱。 更少人注意到的是，这轮疲软并非单点溃败，而是三条线索同时收紧：现货ETF持续净流出、多头杠杆仓位被接连清算、周末流动性缺口放大波动。三者叠加，意味着短期很难出现有力反弹，任何反抽都更像修复而非反转。$ETH 的处境同样微妙，2,200上方支撑力度不足，此前那段上行结构已被破坏，回升动能明显不足，2,000关口因此进入视野。当主流资产的多头结构接连松动，市场缺的不是勇气，而是确认信号。 我的判断是：当前最被低估的变量不是价格点位，而是资金回流的时间差。ETF流出与杠杆清算往往同步发生，却不会同步结束，前者代表配置盘的态度，后者代表投机盘的出清。只有看到流出放缓、清算降温、成交量在周末后恢复正常，趋势才算真正站稳。在此之前，急IBIT outflow of 403 million, while FBTC sees a net inflow of 42.8 million
Don't treat ETFs as a single entity; on November 6, different issuers had different directions.
Using $BTC as a reference, price around $75,810, 24h -0.25%; OI 24h +2.0%, fee rate +0.0072%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). Contract participation is rising, but the fee rate is mildly positive, indicating bulls are present but not yet extremely crowded.
$XRP around $1.16, 24h -0.13%; OI 24h -3.6%, fee rate +0.0054%/8h (CoinGecko perpetual summary). Price is nearly flat but positions are declining; the market is still adjusting direction, so a positive fee rate should not be interpreted as confirmed buying.
In comparison, $BTC acts as a benchmark asset, while $XRP has greater volatility elasticity; when risk appetite shifts, strength and weakness can switch quickly.
The large outflow from IBIT alongside inflow into FBTC looks more like capital reallocation between products. Do you focus on total flow or issuer-specific breakdown?
#BTC与ETH现货ETF单周净流出超16亿美元 #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% 过去很长一段时间，市场对 $UNI 最大的质疑就是：它只是一个治理代币，交易手续费全部归流动性提供者，代币本身几乎无法捕获协议价值。 这个逻辑在费用开关（Fee Switch / UNIfication）落地后发生了变化。 核心变化是什么？ 协议开始截取部分手续费
部分交易手续费进入协议收入，不再全部给 LP。 收入用于回购并销毁 UNI
协议收入进入 TokenJar 等机制后，用于在二级市场回购 $UNI 并永久销毁，形成通缩预期。 估值逻辑开始改变
过去 $UNI 主要靠 DeFi 叙事和治理权定价；现在市场开始把它往“有现金流支撑的资产”方向去看，类似用收入、回购销毁比例去评估。 目前实际落地情况 多链 v4 协议费已经开启，协议收入有明显提升。 已有公开数据可以查到回购销毁记录（不是纯口头承诺）。 Uniswap v4 的 Hooks 机制 + 许可池（Permissioned Pools）在推进，理论上为后续 RWA、代币化资产交易打开了空间。 Robinhood Chain 等外部流量接入后，阶段性推高了交易量和协议收入。 但依然存在的现实问题 费用开关的比例和持续性仍受Will this time be different?
As of November 6, compared to the close on election day:
S&P 500: -2.54%
Nasdaq 100: -4.22%
Philadelphia Semiconductor: -11.42%
But the historical data is very interesting:
The S&P 500 has risen in all 19 midterm election 6-month periods;
The Nasdaq 100 has risen in all 10 periods (from late October to late April the following year);
The Philadelphia Semiconductor has also risen in all 8 post-election 6-month periods, with an average increase of about 23%.
However, after the 2018 election, the S&P once fell 14.68%, the Nasdaq 100 fell 15.59%, but still ended up with gains after six months.
History does not guarantee repetition, but could this be another opportunity?
$SOXL
$SOXS
$NVDA Whale 0xC374 has purchased another 308,517 $UNI (approximately 2.13 million USD).
This wallet continues to accumulate UNI regularly, with the most recent purchase occurring about 10 hours ago.
• New purchase: 308,517 UNI (approximately 2.13 million USD), equivalent to about 6.9 USD per UNI.
• Over the past 45 days, this wallet has bought a total of 1.32 million UNI (approximately 11.05 million USD).
• The average purchase price is about 8.37 USD per unit.
I noticed they have been consistently increasing their holdings for 45 consecutive days, even when Binance hackers pushed UNI’s price down to 5.65 USD. This leads me to believe this “whale” is more focused on long-term investment rather than short-term trading. Their average buy-in price is higher than the current price, so this wallet is likely at a loss, but they are still continuing to buy—which is quite bold. I think if UNI’s price doesn’t rebound, they will probably keep accumulating. I’m just watching for now and not planning to enter the market yet.
Do people think this whale is dollar-cost averaging or holding onto a losing asset for the long term?Silver has already plummeted more than 60%. Is the super bull market really still ongoing? I don't think so!
I really appreciate Patrick Karim's long-term chart, especially agreeing with one of his statements: Being optimistic about the ultimate goal doesn't mean the process will be quick!
His judgment is that silver may need about two more years to break through the monthly historical high of $95 again. But my judgment might be even more pessimistic than his! I drew a long-term monthly chart of silver myself. At the beginning of the year, the price once surged above $110, but now it has fallen to around $52, a retracement of over 50%!
From a technical structure perspective, I tend to believe silver has already entered a mid-term bear market, rather than just a normal bull market correction. Historically, silver bull markets often rise crazily, and bear markets fall just as brutally. Currently, the 50-month moving average is about $38.6. If subsequent rebounds cannot change the downward structure, I do not rule out the possibility of continued repeated oscillations over the next few years, gradually approaching the long-term moving average.
Of course, I do not deny that silver may re-enter a major bull market in the future, even breaking through historical highs. But being bullish in the long term and bearish in the mid term has never been contradictory judgments! A truly mature investor not only dares to imagine the future upside but also has the courage to face the possibly long and brutal bear market before reaching the end.
Direction is certainly important, but time is also an investment cost! $XAG Defensive positioning is back in fashion, and the market's three largest bellwethers are telling three different stories. $BTC is holding near $75,800, a level that looks less like conviction and more like hesitation while traders wait for a directional signal. Chasing strength here offers little reward; the more telling action is happening beneath the surface. $ETH is where the pressure is concentrated. Spot ETF outflows have turned aggressive, with BlackRock leading the retreat and Fidelity moI think the recent drop in the US stock market still needs to be viewed from both the sentiment and fundamental aspects.
Personally, I feel it's more of a sentiment issue. Some companies' stock prices have indeed fallen quite a bit, but if you look closely, the companies' fundamentals haven't really changed much.
A big drop in stock price doesn't mean the company's actual value has dropped that much. I think these two aspects still need to be considered separately.
$NBIS #软银重金押注OpenAI，Q2财报能否交出亮眼成绩？ SoftBank Earnings Preview: The Short-, Mid-, and Long-Term Bets on OpenAI
SoftBank will release its fiscal 2026 Q2 earnings on November 10, with market focus on the Vision Fund's asset valuation and financing status. Its massive cumulative $64.6 billion bet on OpenAI will be the core variable for this quarter's performance.
In the short term, this earnings report will directly reflect how OpenAI's latest fair valuation impacts the Vision Fund's book gains and losses. SoftBank's last $10 billion additional investment was completed on October 1, holding about 13% equity. The interest pressure from large bond issuances is also worth noting. If OpenAI's valuation remains high, it will significantly boost the group's net assets, but any valuation correction will cause fluctuations in unrealized losses on the books.
From a mid-term perspective, returns depend on the speed of OpenAI's commercialization. The current intensifying competition in the large model industry, enterprise payments, and computing power costs will directly affect its intrinsic value. SoftBank can leverage equity to deeply bind the AI ecosystem and create synergies with assets like Arm, but sustained high capital expenditures and industry competition will increase investment risks.
In the long term, this investment is SoftBank's strategic chip betting on the era of general artificial intelligence. If OpenAI ultimately succeeds in deploying general AI, SoftBank will gain extremely substantial returns. However, over the long cycle, uncertainties such as technology roadmap iterations and tightening regulatory policies exist, making this a high-risk, high-reward long-term bet. Brothers and sisters, Pharaoh was analyzing capital flow data today and almost spit out his coffee: BTC spot ETF has seen a cumulative net outflow of about $416 million this year! Pharaoh shook his head straight: Where is the promised “institutional bull market”? This isn’t a boost, it’s clearly carrying a water pump!
The chain behind is straighter than rebar:
Non-farm payrolls explode ➡️ December rate cut expectations are firmly suppressed ➡️ Dollar and US Treasury yields surge ➡️ Wall Street calculates no bargains, withdraws first out of respect ➡️ ETF redemptions choke off new liquidity in crypto ➡️ BTC struggles to breathe around 75,700, the rebound looks more like a window to reduce positions rather than a reversal signal!
Brothers, ETFs aren’t buying, tech stocks are still adjusting, BTC now is like having its oxygen tube pulled out, the rebound is very weak. Don’t rush to catch the falling knife now, wait until the panic selling is truly cleared!
Practical strategy
Counter-rally sniper: wait for the rebound to the 76,800 - 77,200 resistance zone, then short after a 15-minute candle with a long upper shadow! Stop loss strictly at 77,900, target first at 75,300/74,300. Do not chase shorts if it doesn’t break 75,000.
Follow me, wealth won’t lose its way! $BTC $ETH $SNDK #BTC现货ETF年内累计净流出约4.16亿美元 WLD Iris Token Issuance and Mobile Mining (like CORE): Same Work, Different Skin, Same Core
In a nutshell: One uses eyeball iris as a threshold, the other uses phone idling as a threshold. Essentially, both "exchange users' unique identity proofs for free token distribution," telling the same utopian dream and hitting the same fatal flaw.
Their “dream”: Everyone gets tokens at zero cost, early participants get original chips, then wait for exchange listing and consensus to cash out wealth.
Just upgraded packaging rhetoric: formerly called computing power mining, now called Proof of Personhood (PoP).
I. Same underlying scheme (commonalities)
1. Using the story of “fair distribution” to attract ordinary people to join for free
CORE mobile mining: Promotes no pre-mining, fair computing power for all, phone idling can produce tokens, ordinary people can get original chips;
WLD iris token issuance: Promotes one share per person, AI era’s universal basic income (UBI), one person can only scan iris once, preventing bots from mass farming tokens, claiming fair distribution to all humanity.
The core is: using “fairness” narrative to cheaply gather massive users, build community hype, and hype up for future exchange listing.
2. Not real computing power mining, but centralized reward distribution by project team
Real Bitcoin mining: relies on cryptographic computing power competition, rules fixed on-chain, project team cannot arbitrarily change output;
CORE mobile mining: no real computing power, just an app backend counter, project team can adjust output, release cycles, and lock-up rules anytime;
WLD iris token claiming: iris scan is only identity verification, how many tokens, how often to claim, when to stop issuing—all controlled by project team rules, not automatic on-chain output.
Reward distribution power is held by the project team, not a cryptographically rigid contract.
3. Same token structure: early zero-cost tokens, concentrated sell-off after listing
Whether CORE mined by idling or WLD claimed by iris scan, users get tokens at almost zero cost.
At peak hype and exchange listing is the biggest cash-out window:
Early participants, grassroots promoters, institutional investors sell off in concentration.
Hype is for absorbing buyers; when hype fades, selling pressure continues, price keeps weakening—this is the root cause of WLD’s long-term slump.
4. Relying on new user growth to maintain valuation imagination
Mobile mining accelerates computing power by inviting friends;
WLD relies on deploying Orb devices and grassroots iris scans to continuously add real users.
Valuation imagination is entirely tied to “user number growth,” not real protocol revenue or essential applications.
Once new user growth slows, the story collapses, valuation crashes.
5. Shared security weakness: identity verification ≠ underlying asset security
CORE face + phone verification only controls mining eligibility; wallet private keys, contracts, exchange theft risks remain unprotected;
WLD iris scan only proves you are a real person; underlying signature still uses old elliptic curves, not quantum-resistant, equally vulnerable to theft and contract bugs.
Identity verification is just an entry ticket, not an asset security lock.
6. Dream endings are highly similar: narrative fades, confidence collapses, continuous decline
Users initially fantasize: early original coins will become mainstream currency;
Reality path: hype peaks → massive zero-cost tokens flee → ecosystem underperforms → repeated delays and rule changes → consensus slowly dissipates, coin price discounted long-term, many trapped at high prices.
II. Superficial differences (just packaging upgrades)
- Mobile mining: threshold is phone and app idling, recognition by phone number + face;
- WLD iris token issuance: threshold is dedicated Orb spherical hardware, recognition by iris biometrics, claiming to specifically counter AI bots.
- Narrative version: mobile mining targets Bitcoin decentralization; WLD targets AI era digital identity and global universal income.
But upgraded verification methods do not change the underlying model of centralized distribution, zero-cost tokens, and monetization through hype.
III. The biggest fatal flaw of this “dream”
Biometrics (iris, face) and phone idling cannot solve two ultimate problems:
1. Tokens lack rigid demand: users come only to claim tokens and wait for price rise, not real ecosystem users;
2. Project team has excessive authority: distribution pace, release, issuance switches can all be manually adjusted, exactly the same pain point as CORE you previously fell into—promises are easy to make, trust is hard to sustain.
Comparing to STRK’s path makes the difference clear: STRK’s value foundation is underlying cryptography, ZK-STARK post-quantum technology, and public chain infrastructure, not collecting biometric info or recruiting people to issue tokens.The more volatile the K-line, the deeper the trap (￣▽￣)
K-lines are drawn for people to see, but the real truth lies in the chips. Some coins' bearish candles can't even fit on the chart.
$ONE has already revealed the truth — cross-shard vulnerabilities led to the issuance of trillions of tokens, the seven-year-old mainnet was directly "shut down," and it migrated to Ethereum to focus on AI video. Coupled with the old debt of a $100 million cross-chain bridge hack, its market cap is now only in the tens of millions. This is not a correction; it's the liquidation of the endgame, and liquidity disappears just like that (╥﹏╥)
$AKE follows the "small pond fishing for big fish" strategy. Out of a total supply of 100 billion, only 22.8% is released, with the remaining 77 billion hanging overhead like a dam. A 50% daily pump is not a takeoff, it's bait; with high control and low circulation, it falls faster than it rises, and retail investors rushing in are mostly catching the last baton (￣▽￣)"
The problem with $PIEVERSE is that the story was told too early. New coins rely on hype to hold the scene, but the order book is so thin it breaks with a poke. When the narrative dies down and early low-price chips unlock in concentration, it’s not about how much you lose, but that you can’t even find buyers (｡•́︿•̀｡)
No matter how beautiful the chart looks, it can’t save the chip structure. For these three types of coins, beginners avoiding them is already a win ✧(≖ ◡ ≖✿)现在这个阶段更像博弈市，不是追涨市，也不是干净的洗筹尾声。 你有没有发现，越多人盯着"独立行情"这四个字，盘面反而越容易先给一次假动作？ 我这两天看衍生品的感觉很明显：BTC 想讲独立叙事，但全球股市偏弱时，它很难完全脱钩。不是不可能，是节奏会变得很拧巴。价格往上抬时，追多的人变多，持仓跟着变厚，资金费率也容易偏热，这种结构最怕的不是利空，是横一下、再插一根针，把高杠杆先洗掉。所以我更愿意把现在定义成博弈段：多头想证明自己，空头在等股市给理由，中间的人最容易被来回扫。 原文提到小资金别去碰股票轮动，我认同这个风险感。股市的板块轮动有周期，节奏错了资金就卡住；放到币圈，小仓位如果去追已经情绪化的热点，也容易变成退出通道。真正值得看的不是"有没有涨"，而是上涨时持仓有没有同步变重、费率有没有变贵、回调时成交量是放大还是缩掉。这几个信号比单看 K 线更能说明这段行情脆不脆。 AKE 这类标的我也想说一句：上线前涨几千个点，上线后是另一套定价逻辑。日线涨几天不算什么，关键是它从什么位置掉下来、上方套牢盘有多厚、反弹时有没有持续承接。底部不是靠感觉喊出来的，是靠一次次回踩不破、持仓结构慢慢变稳磨DOGE has addressed its technical debt, so don’t rush to jump ahead for it
DOGE’s handling of technical debt has merits, but the praise that "it completely fixed transaction malleability in 2015, even earlier than BTC" needs to be cut in half first.
In 2015, Dogecoin Core 1.10 introduced BIP66, which was activated in 2016, enforcing strict DER rules to constrain signature encoding; BTC had already implemented similar rules in 2015. It did not change the signature algorithm nor completely close all malleability entry points.
Malleability allows transactions to change their TXID before confirmation, while the transfer content remains unchanged. If a platform only recognizes the original ID, it might mistakenly judge a withdrawal as failed and pay again. Mt.Gox once listed this as a cause of incidents, but subsequent investigations do not support attributing all losses to this vulnerability; wallet management, reconciliation failures, and long-term theft are also unavoidable factors.
My evaluation of DOGE is: maintenance actions are taken, but don’t add myths. Deploying upstream fixes shows that a small team can keep up with critical patches; claiming partial fixes as comprehensive leadership is like changing a door lock and then declaring control over the entire street’s security.
What truly deserves recognition is not "being earlier than BTC," but that patches are accepted and upgrades are done. This account for $DOGE should be recorded as serious maintenance, which is more impressive than claiming an early championship. #DailyOrbit There’s another group behind the scenes holding onto the Fear and Greed Index at 26, with the words "Extreme Fear," shouting to buy the dip. Every time, I pour cold water on that: sentiment indicators are just sentiment, not a bottom.
Fear can drop from extreme fear to even more extreme fear. During the 2022 bear market, this indicator stayed in single digits for a long time—those with memory remember. What really needs attention are two structural things: first, the perpetual funding rate, which is still mildly positive, nowhere near the deep negative values that indicate "shorts are so crowded they can’t move"; second, liquidations—$BTC only saw a few million dollars liquidated network-wide in a day, extremely dry, indicating deleveraging hasn’t been fully cleared.
The fuel isn’t full, so how can the fire be lit? For an oversold rebound to happen, we need to first see the funding rate turn deeply negative, liquidations expand, and then volume pick up—none of these can be missing. Right now, none of these conditions are met.
So don’t rush. Are you buying the dip just because of those four words, or are you waiting to decide based on the funding rate and liquidations?A signal covered up by the crypto market but particularly worth pondering: The financial district KAFD in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, was hit by a missile yesterday. This is the landmark building housing Goldman Sachs, Brookfield, and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund. Saudi Arabia's multi-trillion-dollar economic diversification plan has been disrupted again.
In the past, when the core financial district in the Middle East was bombed, the first reaction would be risk-averse funds flowing into gold and $BTC. But look, the market barely moved. Why?
Because this time, the war is not being priced as a "risk event" but as an "inflation event." The logic is straightforward: Middle East turmoil → oil price premium → sticky inflation → the Fed is even less likely to ease → rate hike expectations rise. The end of oil price increases is rate hikes, and the other end of rate hikes is gold and Bitcoin getting hit together.
So the financial district being bombed and the market not reacting is not market numbness; it’s that the market understands better than you: this is an inflation issue, not a risk issue. Don’t believe it? Just pull up the 2-year US Treasury yield and take a look.Conclusion first: Vitalik says ETH should be priced as a "store of value," not based on "burning." But on-chain data tells a different story: ETH burns only 0.027% of its circulating supply annually (33,000 coins, $73 million), while the US spot ETH ETF has seen a net outflow of $365 million in one week, continuing for six consecutive weeks—the weekly outflow is nearly 5 times the amount burned on-chain in a year.
Burn account: Since the Merge, about 2.02 million ETH have been burned cumulatively; in the past 30 days, only $6.23 million, and $22,400 in 24 hours.
Funds account: ETH current price is 2233, down 1.36% in 7 days, down 10.2% in 30 days, 54.9% below the peak of 4946. ETF has had six consecutive weeks of outflows, nearly $100 million in a single day on November 6, with BlackRock's ETHA as the main seller; meanwhile, whales bought $42 million ETH off-exchange during the same period.
For your wallet: Don’t use "burning" as a reason to buy, nor "ETF outflows" as a sell signal. What you should watch is perpetuals—on OKX, ETH perpetuals traded $1.378 billion in 24 hours, 30 times the spot volume of $46.08 million. When leveraged positions price the market, slow money from ETFs can’t move it.
What do you think is the next variable for ETH: ETF inflows returning, or perpetuals deleveraging first? $ETH 📒Notes on the "Safety Cushion" of Three Short Positions
Three full-position short orders on BTC, ETH, and SOL with 5X, 5X, and 7X leverage respectively, having a nominal value of about 420 million U. The current unrealized profit is approximately 9.97 million U, with accumulated funding fees around 12.53 million U, so the on-paper safety cushion is indeed getting thicker💵. The opening/liquidation prices are: BTC 76390.2/131182.12, ETH 2322.72/3896.76, SOL 94.3346/280.99. The liquidation lines still seem far away, leaving a decent margin for error.
However, low leverage is not a free pass⚠️. In full-position mode, if major coins keep rebounding, unrealized profits may be given back, and funding fees could be gradually eaten away by price fluctuations. What really needs attention is not how much is earned today, but whether the rebound is sustainable, if the margin balance is sufficient, and whether the three positions might interact to amplify risk🧐.
Funding fees are cash flow, not risk hedges; passive gains can be the result of a market phase but cannot replace risk control. The better the ledger looks, the more you need to keep an exit strategy🛡️.Oil.
After the ETF data was completed, the selling pressure this week was heavier than what the early tables showed.
On November 6, the total net outflow of the US BTC spot ETF was about $412 million; from November 2 to 6, the total net outflow for the week was about $1.282 billion. On Friday, IBIT alone saw an outflow of about $403 million. Some statistics had not yet recorded this fund, so it was indeed easy to underestimate the pressure when seeing the preliminary numbers.
This is also why it’s important to pay attention to data update times. The market moves fast, and table backfilling can also change judgments. Holding incomplete data and concluding that institutions have mostly sold out can easily be caught off guard by updated numbers later.
The most pressing question now is: with such large continuous redemptions, what kind of new buying is needed to absorb them? Retail sentiment can turn positive overnight, but the funds that can continuously absorb selling pressure are usually not so easy to identify.
We won’t draw long-term conclusions about BTC just because of a week of outflows, but short-term analysis must acknowledge this part of the supply and demand change. If outflows slow down next and prices can gradually hold the lows, that would be an improvement worth further verification.
Compare with the position list, check the stop-loss positions of existing orders, and avoid risks caused by sudden data disturbances.#
$BTC $ETH $SOL $CRCL has dropped again these past few days, and after the drop, there’s been no sound.
Last Wednesday night when I wrote about it, it was at 74.80, a long wick swept through the crowd, and I said it gave no direction.
Now it has given one. From Thursday to Friday, it kept pressing down, and early Friday morning there was a long lower shadow wick that pierced down to 65.82, then pulled back to around 67.
Counting from 78.00 last Wednesday night, it has dropped as much as 15.6%. When I last wrote about it, I was still saying 71.13 was the low point, but now even 67 is holding.
Then for two whole days, nothing happened. From Saturday to Sunday, it hovered between 67 and 67.8, with candlesticks so small they were almost invisible. Now it’s just past 2 a.m. Monday, at 67.69.
Counting from 65.82, it has only recovered 2.8%.
The most frustrating thing is this silence: when it’s dropping, you have emotions; after the drop, there’s no sound at all. You don’t know if it’s forming a bottom or accumulating for the next move.
I thought 71.13 was the bottom, but I can’t say 65.82 is the bottom either.
Did you catch it at 65.8, or like me, are you already afraid to say "bottom"?
#CircleQ3营收超预期，USDC链上交易量增长49%