Orbit Post Sitemap
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？
On Friday, the memory sector showed clear divergence: Micron closed up 2.46%, SK Hynix's Korean stock rose 4.42%; SanDisk fell 1.82%, Western Digital dropped 2.97%. The trigger was SK Hynix's withdrawal of Solidigm's US IPO, which the market immediately interpreted as a reduction in NAND expansion funding, temporarily easing concerns about oversupply.
Micron benefited because it is a major NAND player, with expected reduced supply-side pressure and more stable prices. Western Digital was hit despite its previous earnings beating expectations; the market worries about the sustainability of price increases and rising capital expenditures. SanDisk lacks independent catalysts and can only follow the sector trend; if it can't keep up, it falls behind.
Keep an eye on the earnings calendar: SK Hynix will release Q3 results on Wednesday, October 28, with institutions already revising operating profit expectations above 76 trillion KRW; Micron's last report was at the end of September, with the next one pending, so no short-term catalyst; Western Digital just reported, with the next wave expected in January next year.
Directionally, memory is not a broad rally but selective. If SK Hynix's numbers explode, Micron is likely to follow.#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到
Before judging altcoins weakening, don't rush to check the macro calendar; first see if the chip distribution and sentiment have loosened.
Tokens like RAVE and LAB have taught us lessons: with the same big KOL speaking out, RAVE weakened continuously after being called out by ZachXBT, while LAB didn't react as much, indicating that looking at KOL alone is insufficient; you need to combine chip distribution, unlocking release volume, and order book support.
HYPE follows a different logic, relying more on capital inflow and macro sentiment. After Hayes publicly shorted and sold, the price dropped from over $70 to over $50; the resonance of KOL statements and capital flow is more effective.
So the order of altcoin weakening signals is: whether chips are dispersed and loosened, whether unlocking selling pressure is approaching, whether big KOL attitudes have shifted, and whether sentiment is ebbing. Traditional macro factors have limited impact on tokens but sudden attacks can't be ignored.
In short: watch chips, watch releases, watch KOLs, watch sentiment; don't treat a single signal as gospel, and be mindful of risks. #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ CORE: The position is right, the story fits, but the foundation is risky! The only play under Zhang Sufen's system
CORE's current coin price is low enough, and the BTCFi sector narrative has ample room for imagination. On the surface, it perfectly matches Zhang Sufen's aesthetic of low-price accumulation, but it lacks the "state-owned capital-backed safety net" that Zhang values most. The project team's nodes are continuously retreating, and the launch of SatPay is indefinitely delayed. The fundamentals face ongoing deterioration risks, so it absolutely cannot be treated as a long-term core holding. This is the core premise.
Within Zhang Sufen's risk control system, the only compliant play for CORE is: small position speculation, not heavy investment and passive holding. Referring to her strict position control approach for single assets, CORE can only serve as a high-odds small ticket in the portfolio, with single-ticket positions kept extremely low. Most of the principal must never be bet on it.
At the same time, hard observation indicators and stop-loss boundaries must be set: continuously track the number of independent validators, BTC staking scale, and SatPay progress. Once nodes continue to flee, proving fundamentals are further collapsing, one must decisively exit and not keep averaging down and holding hard as with state-backed low-price stocks.
The essence of Zhang Sufen's strategy is to wait for valuation repair under the premise that the main entity will not disappear. CORE can speculate on the valuation elasticity brought by the BTCFi trend, but it has no floor. The upside is huge returns, but the downside carries zeroing risk. Distinguishing between "themes suitable for small position speculation" and "core holdings suitable for long-term holding" is the key to this strategy."Why Zhang Sufen would never use CORE as a base position? Understanding these 3 risk zones can save you 100,000 in losses"
Many people see CORE's deep price drop and small market cap and want to use Zhang Sufen's contrarian strategy to heavily invest as a base position. In fact, this goes against her core risk control logic. Zhang Sufen's primary condition for setting a base position is that the asset has a bottom-line guarantee. She bets on market overreaction, not project failure. CORE has three major risk zones that completely break her stock selection criteria.
First, there is no rigid backstop entity. Zhang Sufen prefers small-cap state-owned stocks with real businesses and regulatory constraints. Even if performance is poor, the operating entity won't abandon the business lightly. Core DAO lacks such a backstop; the official nodes of the project team are continuously withdrawing, signaling the operator is actively reducing investment. Second, the fundamentals have the potential to continuously deteriorate. Unpopular A-shares only have temporarily poor performance and won't actively shut down core operations; CORE's independent validators are decreasing, SatPay is repeatedly delayed, and partner Mobilum has weak qualifications. The originally envisioned fee buyback flywheel is far from realization. The risk is not just short-term sentiment.
Third, a base position requires certainty, but CORE is a high-risk, high-reward bet. Base positions need stability, suitable for holding long-term while waiting for recovery; CORE has huge upside potential but no downside support. If there is an on-chain security issue, assets could face catastrophic drawdowns, making it unsuitable as a base position. Zhang Sufen's contrarian investment is not just about low price; the core is that the entity won't disappear. This is the fundamental reason she would never use CORE as a base position.Zhang Sufen only looks at 'state-owned capital backing'? Then she definitely wouldn't buy CORE, and here's why
Many people oversimplify Zhang Sufen's strategy, thinking it's just about bottom-fishing low-priced small-cap stocks. In fact, state-owned capital backing is a very critical safety boundary in her strategy. Targets with state-owned background have real companies and regulatory constraints; even if performance is poor, the entity is unlikely to be wiped out directly, providing a safety cushion for contrarian investors to wait for valuation recovery. Price drops are more due to market sentiment suppression, not the project itself actively abandoning operations.
Although CORE is low-priced and small-cap, seemingly a good target for contrarian bets, it completely breaks the fundamental safety bottom line of Zhang Sufen's stock selection. CORE lacks a rigid entity like state-owned capital backing it. The official verification nodes of the project continue to withdraw, indicating the project team is reducing investment and actively shrinking the ecosystem. Besides, SatPay keeps delaying, the partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and the originally planned fee buyback flywheel has yet to materialize. The fundamentals are not just temporarily neglected by the market but face risks of continuous deterioration and gradual decay of the on-chain ecosystem.
Zhang Sufen's contrarian investment bets on market overreaction, not project death. CORE has a potential hundredfold upside from the BTCFi track but no bottom-line protection on the downside. Once nodes keep disappearing, the security of the entire chain will be impacted. Even though the coin price has dropped a lot, according to Zhang Sufen's risk control standards, she would not choose to enter and position in a target without rigid backing and with an operator continuously retreating.Applying the stock-picking logic of Zhang Sufen, the 'Contrarian King' of A-shares, directly to CORE results in a harsh outcome
Zhang Sufen's contrarian strategy focuses on uncovering unpopular, low-priced stocks at the bottom of the A-share market, favoring small-cap stocks with real business entities and state-owned backgrounds. Even if these stocks have long been depressed, the operating entities of the companies will not disappear out of thin air. There is a chance for valuation recovery driven by policy or industry catalysts, and the companies themselves have a bottom line to fall back on. This is the fundamental premise that makes this strategy viable.
On the surface, CORE appears to fit the "low-priced unpopular" contrarian stock-picking framework: low token price, small market cap, and the BTCFi sector yet to explode. Many investors blindly apply this logic by buying more as the price falls and holding long-term, but they overlook the fundamental differences between the two.
A-shares listed companies are regulated real business entities, whereas Core DAO has no physical backing. The current phenomenon of the project team’s official nodes actively withdrawing indicates that the project team itself is scaling back investment. This is not simply a case of market mispricing; there is a risk of continuous fundamental deterioration: the number of independent validators is steadily declining, SatPay keeps being delayed, the partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and the expected revenue buyback flywheel has yet to materialize.
Zhang Sufen’s strategy can endure prolonged price declines, but it cannot accommodate risks like a "soft exit" of the project. If core indicators continue to weaken and one blindly applies the A-share contrarian lurking approach, the result will be very harsh. Contrarian investing does not mean buying just because the price is low; the premise of low price is that the fundamentals will not continue to collapse. Zhang Sufen's 'low-price niche' strategy turns out to be 'unsuitable' when applied to CORE?
The core of A-share bull investor Zhang Sufen's strategy: low-priced small caps + a main entity with strong credit backing (state-owned assets) + long-term bottom consolidation, gradually accumulating and holding for the long term, waiting for policy or industry dividends to bring valuation recovery. The state-owned assets act as a safety firewall, ensuring the company won't easily disappear, go bankrupt, or delist. This is the fundamental basis for the strategy's validity.
On the surface, CORE seems to perfectly fit the characteristics of "low price, small market cap, niche sector." Many people directly apply this contrarian bottom-fishing approach to enter, but they overlook the most critical underlying differences, which is the root cause of the unsuitability:
Zhang Sufen buys state-owned enterprise targets whose main entities will not voluntarily give up operations; however, Core DAO currently has official project-verified nodes actively withdrawing, indicating the project side is shrinking its business, lacking the rigid backing of state-owned assets.
Zhang Sufen's low-priced stocks only reflect a drop in share price, while the company continues normal operations; but CORE's biggest risk is not the cheap token price, but the continuous decrease of network validator nodes and the long-delayed SatPay launch, with fundamentals potentially deteriorating continuously, not simply a "niche good asset mistakenly punished by the market."
Of course, there are similarities: if the BTCFi sector later catches a favorable trend, node withdrawals stop, and ecosystem indicators stabilize, small-cap targets will also have huge valuation elasticity. But lacking a rigid main entity backing means Zhang Sufen's "buy more as it falls and hold long-term" approach would carry much higher risk when applied to CORE $QNT The competition for pure quantum computing targets is highly concentrated between IonQ (IONQ) and Quantinuum. Both follow the ion trap technology route, but their commercialization pace differs: IonQ currently leads in revenue scale and manufacturability, with quarterly revenues reaching tens of millions of dollars in 2026; Quantinuum, on the other hand, is at the forefront of the industry in two-qubit gate fidelity (99.92%, IonQ at 99.99%, both far exceeding peers).IRYS is acting a bit crazy this time. The current price is about 0.02843, down approximately 24.69% in 24h, with a 24h high of 0.04062 and low of 0.0258, and a trading volume around 12.47 million USDT. Looking at the broader market, BTC is around 79,981, down only -0.66% in 24h, ETH about 2,310.69, down -1.47%, basically moving sideways. In the same sector, DOOD has risen about 41%, CHIP about +15%. While one side is crashing, some are pumping — this kind of disconnect is quite typical in crypto.
Personally, I think these independent moves in small coins are the easiest to misread. The market hasn’t moved much, but this coin crashes first; many people's first reaction is "Is it oversold?" or "Will it rebound?" But what should be focused on more is liquidity and volatility themselves. A trading volume of 12.47 million USDT is neither very big nor very small; when emotions run high, prices can easily slip in thin order books, and the drop can be irrational.
So don’t treat "small coin independent moves" as trend signals; they are more likely just local funds stirring things up. The market moves sideways, and it does its own thing, which doesn’t mean the whole market will follow. If you’re panicking, don’t act yet; if you don’t understand, just watch and don’t rush to assign a direction. Volatility and liquidity risks are there, and chasing emotions is the easiest way to lose. Just my personal opinion, not investment advice.Bitcoin at $79,949, dropped below $80,000 over the weekend, down 3.33% in seven days, landing at the 10th percentile of the 30-day range. But what really changed this period was the direction of positions. In the October 19th issue, I wrote about Ethereum
All 8 of the largest liquidation pools were above the current price, forming a short squeeze chart. Today, 6 out of 8 are below. First, a definition: liquidation magnets refer to price levels where a large amount of leveraged positions will be forcibly liquidated; the intensity is a relative index of nominal scale at the same position, not the amount of liquidations that have already occurred. Below is a seven-layer analysis: Ethereum's ladder, the Saturday washout, the leaving leverage is not Bitcoin's, shorts are pressing, reserves turning into inflows, front-end rush, calendar. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC $ETH Don't underestimate CORE, don't mythologize CORE
The most rational way to view CORE is neither to blindly short and completely dismiss it, nor to mythologize it as the only answer in the BTCFi sector.
Don't underestimate it: The Satoshi Plus consensus enables BTC participation in staking mining, capturing the core narrative direction of BTCFi. Trillions in Bitcoin assets represent huge idle liquidity, and once the sector's momentum arrives, small-cap targets have extremely strong valuation elasticity, which is CORE's inherent odds advantage.
At the same time, don't mythologize CORE: grand visions do not equal deliverability. The project lacks primary VC locked tokens as a floor, official nodes are continuously withdrawing, and network security risks remain unresolved; the revenue-hopeful SatPay has been delayed multiple times, partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and the expected fee buyback flywheel has yet to materialize.
It is neither a guaranteed winning floor asset nor a worthless vapor project. It is a high-odds, uncertain win-rate BTCFi sector speculative asset.
The key to investment decisions is not simply bullish or bearish, but to continuously track core indicators: the number of independent validators, changes in BTC staking volume, and SatPay implementation progress. When the momentum hits, the elasticity is huge; if fundamentals continue to deteriorate, the valuation will keep collapsing. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
Growth is real, but the driving forces are shifting, and vulnerabilities are also moving.
Bernstein expects Q3 revenue to increase by 13% quarter-over-quarter to about $1.5 billion, driven by expansion in nominal stock trading volume, options, and event contracts. However, the crypto segment is unstable: crypto revenue plummeted 47% in Q1, with retail speculative enthusiasm dropping 48% simultaneously. Instead, event contracts have taken the lead, generating $156 million in revenue in Q2 alone. Bernstein projects they will contribute $1.7 billion by 2028, surpassing the crypto business's $1.6 billion. Tokenized stock cumulative trading volume has also exceeded $15 billion, with 200,000 holders across more than 120 countries.
But structural concerns remain. Net interest income still accounts for more than one-third of total revenue and is highly sensitive to interest rates; trading revenue essentially depends on volatility, so when the market calms down, growth will stall.
Old Mo says: Robinhood is not "de-cyclicizing"; it is shifting the cycle from one asset class to another. Whether growth can continue depends on whether event contracts and tokenization can take over the volatility baton when crypto recedes, not on whether the user count is still rising. $BTC $ETH $ZEC 这份10月议息前瞻给出的市场定价是：维持利率不变概率92.8%，12月加息概率74.8%。两项预期并不矛盾：本次按兵不动，不等于年底收紧压力消失。前瞻的核心判断，是行情焦点可能从利率结果转向会后表态。 📊 三个币种，弱势程度不同 ZEC：1228.05U，-1.64%。跌幅处于三者中间，仅凭这组报价，还不足以判断它是否具备独立走势。 HYPE：77.706U，-1.00%。跌幅最小，但前瞻描述其冲高后回落震荡，说明相对抗跌与上冲承压可以同时存在。 CORE：0.01718U，-2.10%。三者中跌幅最大，也是前瞻判断走势偏弱的标的，后续更值得观察弱势是否延续。 💡 我的看法。 前瞻将大盘概括为窄幅观望，但窄幅不等于事件风险低。如果利率结果符合预期，而讲话改变了年底政策预期，价格仍可能快速来回波动。 我更关注会后三者的强弱排序能否保持：HYPE若冲高后依然站不稳，较小跌幅就不能直接当作转强信号；CORE若继续落后，也不能仅凭跌得多判断会补涨。ZEC则可作为三者之间的对照，观察分化是在扩大，还是逐步收敛。 你会更重视本次利率结果，还是讲话对12月预期的影响？ #本周将公布10月FOMCBrothers and sisters
ETH has hit a new low again, now at 2304, down 1.5%, much worse than BTC. The most heartbreaking thing is that the ETH spot ETF has seen net outflows for four consecutive weeks, with nearly $1.1 billion running off in October.
You might say ETH has no value, but the on-chain data looks good—staking accounts for 35% of circulating supply, and 170,000 tokens were withdrawn from exchanges in a single day. Yet the funds just won’t buy it; they’re all flowing to BTC instead.
The ETH/BTC ratio has slid from 0.0319 to 0.0289, which is the market voting with its feet. I think ETH will struggle to recover in the short term; 2300 is the bulls’ last cover, and if Wednesday’s FOMC leans hawkish, 2300 will likely break.
For those holding ETH, be mentally prepared. Don’t add to your position, don’t hold through the dip, wait until it really bottoms out before making a move.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ $BTC $ETH $ZEC Brothers, here's a contradictory set of data. Bitcoin dropped below 80,000, so logically the ETF should be redeemed, right? But last week BTC ETF actually reversed to a net inflow of 440 million USD, while the previous week was a net outflow of 220 million, a complete turnaround.
But look at Sunday alone, there was a net outflow of 169 million USD. What does this mean? Institutions are picking up in batches during the dip, but not buying every day—buying wave after wave on the dips, showing a lot of patience.
BlackRock IBIT is the only big buyer; Fidelity and Grayscale are still seeing outflows. Funds are concentrating into the top ETFs, and small ETFs are increasingly being ignored.
I think this indicates that long-term institutions have started building positions below 80,000, but they won’t push the price up in the short term—institutions buy for long-term holding, not to pump the price for you. Don’t chase just because institutions are buying; they can hold for a year, can you hold for a week?
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ $BTC $ETH $ZEC BTC current price is about $79,936, down 0.49% in 24 hours. The 80,000 level was a defense line last week but has now become a ceiling. Risk appetite contracted before the FOMC meeting, ETFs turned to outflows in the second half of the week, and oil prices are supported by geopolitical risks. Before the price breaks below the 100-day moving average at about 75,600, bottom-fishers will still be stubborn, but the trading volume has already been honest. ETH current price is about $2,320, down 1.36% in 24 hours. The 2,300 to 2,400 range is the recent observation zone, and the price is currently hugging the lower boundary. Leveraged liquidations, ETF outflows, and upgrade delays are piling up. The rebound can’t even reach 2,350; accounts chasing longs are still holding on, but the buying pressure is not coming. XRP current price is around $1.29 to $1.30. The key is not the price but the chips: 1.26 is the most critical watershed right now. If it holds, it may consolidate between 1.30 and 1.43; if it doesn’t, the next support is at 1.11, with an extreme case at 0.98. Wallets holding tens of millions of XRP are decreasing, while exchange balances are increasing. Big holders are withdrawing, retail investors are taking over. Under this structure, waiting for “long sideways leads to a rise” might actually bring something else. Summary: BTC’s 80,000 level has broken and not recovered, ETH’s 2,300 is right underfoot, and XRP’s big holders have moved before the direction. Those being shaken out are the ones who mistake “no big drop” for “someone is supporting.” $ZEC
ZEC's position here is quite interesting. The current price is 1227, up less than 1% in 24 hours, fluctuating between 1177 and 1268 all day, with hardly anyone moving it. But the filing documents are not simple—Tuttle submitted two more 2x leveraged long ZEC ETFs on October 21. Counting back, the ZEC ETF launched at the end of August has already ranked third in capital inflows among all altcoin ETFs, only behind XRP and SOL.
A privacy coin without many new stories, yet ETF applications are queuing up to get in. This round, institutions are not after narratives, but chips.
I haven't gotten on board myself, but I've moved ZEC from the "just watch" list to the "keep an eye on" list. Privacy coins like this never give a heads-up when they start to rise.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 A rebound is not a reversal, and the flows prove it. Short-horizon money is tentatively returning to crypto, but the medium-term exit is still running. That divergence, not the green candles, is the story. On a four-hour view, $BTC drew $39.36 million in net spot inflows and $127 million in net futures inflows. Zoom out to 24 hours and the picture inverts: $34.95 million net spot outflows and $118 million net futures outflows. Over 30 days, futures outflows have widened to $7.82 billion. Money i这组48小时清算痛点数据里，BTC下方多头痛点距离报价仅0.62%，对应清算资金1亿U。三种币都有上下两侧的集中清算区域，但距离和金额并不完全对称。 BTC：统计时价格80020.5U。下方多头痛点79525.26U，距离-0.62%，对应1亿U；上方空头痛点81149.85U，距离+1.41%，对应9646.42万U。两侧金额接近，下方却明显更近。 ETH：统计时价格2308.41U。下方多头痛点2279.32U，距离-1.26%，对应3112.8万U；上方空头痛点2346.64U，距离+1.66%，对应2532.17万U。下方不仅更近，对应金额也更大。 SOL：统计时价格100.49U。下方多头痛点99.49U，距离-0.99%，对应548.95万U；上方空头痛点102.97U，距离+2.47%，对应373.71万U。它的上下距离差异同样值得留意。 💡 我的看法。 判断这组数据，不能只看哪边清算金额大，还要结合触发所需的价格变化。按所列数值，三者都是下方多头痛点更近、对应金额更大；所谓“两边都有筹码”，并不等于两边风险均衡。 BTC值得优先观察的是距离，SOL则体现出更明显的上下Today I watched Buffett's speech. Buffett mainly focuses on long-term value investing. The distinction between speculation and investment is not so clear-cut. Long-term positions can be traded short-term, and short-term positions can be bought as a prelude to long-term holdings. Everything must follow the profit effect or the so-called intrinsic value itself. Market fluctuations have never been a risk; regardless of ups and downs, the real risk has always been ourselves—whether we make trades within expectations or impulsive trades outside expectations. Our first step in the market should not be to pursue profit but to improve our cognition. Profit and loss share the same source; money earned by luck will eventually be lost by luck. Therefore, our first step should be to make the quality control of each trade increasingly strict, so we can review where the problems in the portfolio lie and the cognition we possess. Wealth is the result. At the same time, we can use the fundamental theory that profit and loss share the same source to improve cognition and operations. For example, after I make a big profit, I tend to trade emotionally, meaning that after rationally completing a trade, I often lose money due to irrational trades. The emergence of the profit effect inevitably accompanies the appearance of the loss effect. At this time, we can choose, or rather force, to go flat to avoid this loss effect. Thus, you endure two profit effects; the new profit effect will bring a new loss effect, meaning that going flat might cause you to miss the market. You need to solve the new loss effect. In this process, your trading cognition correspondingly improves, but profits usually depend on the risk you take. Infinitely reducing risk means infinitely reducing your profit Obviously, what Anthropic says is true.
Its profit margin is too low, the growth rate of revenue is too slow, and the revenue itself is too small.
Currently, the ROI of global AI large models is extremely unsatisfactory, so AI infrastructure stocks worldwide are plummeting, entering a bear market, which is a footnote to this.
This might be the last frenzy of AI. Although AI will exist, it is still far from profitability.
Earlier, we saw Facebook $META preparing to issue stocks to raise 60 billion, and companies like Nvidia have promised to buy part of their shares.
Just like their previous cycle of investments, it’s still the same game—how high can you fly stepping on your own feet?
However, Facebook (Meta)’s stock price has risen from 80 in 2022 to over 700 now, which is truly impressive.Switzerland Approves BBIT, US Finalizes Stablecoin Final Rule: Two More Bricks Added to the Slow Bull
Saying something not so "exciting," but I think very important.
In Europe: On October 20, Swiss FINMA approved the Bitcoin Fund ETF (BBIT), under Swiss legal framework, directly holding coins (not futures), retail-oriented, with assets segregated from the management company. It is expected to be listed on the SIX exchange in November, ticker BBIT. The official statement is "Switzerland's first and currently Europe's only spot BTC ETF"[web_doc 29][web_doc 35]. Previously, Europe only had ETPs, which are essentially debt instruments with issuer risk; this time it is a fund.
In the US: On October 21, OCC released the final implementation rules for the GENIUS Act, effective January 18, 2027, together with the Act itself. Key points: a 5% always-available liquidity floor, no single counterparty exceeding 40% of reserves, redemption must be completed within two business days; however, no safe harbor was provided for "interest-paying" existing stablecoin projects, such as Coinbase's 3.75% and PayPal's 4% rewards, which will require case-by-case review[web_doc 32][web_doc 38]. Both money channels are shrinking: ETF flows and stablecoins
I'm watching two faucets for liquidity: ETFs and stablecoins. Both have been dripping this week.
First, ETFs, according to Farside's data (10/19–10/23, five trading days): a net inflow of $301.2 million for the week, ending two consecutive weeks of net outflows[web_doc 39]. But breaking it down, from Monday to Wednesday, $1.075 billion flowed in, then on Thursday $636 million + Friday $138 million were withdrawn totaling $774 million, a 72% pullback[web_doc 39]. The $636 million outflow on the 22nd was the largest single-day redemption since June, with IBIT+FBTC accounting for nearly three-quarters[web_doc 6].
Next, stablecoins, which are more covert: DefiLlama snapshot on October 25 shows total USD stablecoin supply at $302.598 billion, down $2.055 billion from October 18 and down $3.204 billion from September 25[web_doc 39].
What does this mean? Stablecoins are the "ammunition stockpile" on the market; shrinking indicates funds are exiting rather than just waiting. Not to mention ETH ETF had another $221 million outflow that week, marking the fourth consecutive week of net outflows[web_doc 39].
There are exceptions: the Fear & Greed Index is at 50 (neutral), whereas a week ago it was 59, indicating "greed".Someone is betting 68 million on 90,000, but the options market is still buying insurance
The drama at this options table is more exciting than the spot market.
On Derive, on October 20, a wallet bought 800 BTC call options expiring on November 6 with a strike price of 90,000 in one go, with a notional principal of about 68 million USD — the timing is right after the US midterm elections [web_doc 37]. The implied probability of "breaking 100,000 before Christmas" calculated on the same platform rose from 9.7% a week ago to 12%; meanwhile, the probability of "falling below 70,000 before Christmas" dropped from 15.6% to 11% [web_doc 37].
Sounds impressive? Flip over to Deribit and the picture changes: the front-end 25-delta skew is still negative, puts are more expensive than calls [web_doc 37]. Coinglass liquidated 254 million USD in the past 24 hours, with 99,714 liquidations, longs accounting for 63.8% (162 million vs 92 million) [web_doc 11].
Translation: retail investors are betting on 90,000 after the election, while institutions are still buying downside insurance.
Who do I believe? I don’t side with either. Negative skew means "smart money" isn’t following the trend; this 68 million looks more like a one-sided bet, not a consensus. Before options expire, prices will be pulled toward the "max pain" point, so don’t mistake others’ bets for your own direction. $BTC "80,000 is the institutional iron bottom"? I'll give you three cracks
The most dangerous word in a bull market is "iron bottom."
The popular saying now is: ETF holders' average cost is about 81,500, the listed companies' treasury average is about 82,000, so institutions won't cut losses below the cost line, and 80,000 is supported by someone[web_doc 31]. Sounds solid, let me knock three times for you:
Crack one: The cost line is a break-even position, not a buying position. A group of people near the break-even price want to run when it rises a bit, fear when it falls below, and stop-loss orders cluster. It amplifies volatility, it does not absorb volatility.
Crack two: The biggest buyer stopped buying. Strategy holds 848,517 coins, but last week only bought 267, while simultaneously repurchasing $190 million of its own 12% coupon-like preferred stock STRC[web_doc 31]. The focus shifted from "buying coins" to "managing debt," and that is the signal. Its average holding price is about 75,400; if the coin price really drops to that range, mNAV will be pressed below 1x, issuing new shares to buy coins would dilute old shareholders—during the 64,000 wave in August, it already sold over 1,600 interest-paying coins[web_doc 31].
Crack three: Low volatility may mean the market is thinning. Deribit's DVOL once dropped to around 37, a five-year low[web_doc 31]. Many interpret this as "matured," I interpret it as "after the order book was washed out, no one is taking over." Historically, after low volatility periods, several#Google Cloud business grows 82%, how is the AI investment return? Oil at 110, BTC can't act tough
An undervalued transmission chain, let me break it down for you:
Oil price → Inflation → Federal Reserve -> US dollar interest rates → Bitcoin valuation.
At the close on October 26, WTI November contract was $101.41/barrel, up 3.51% for the day; Brent December was $109.86, up 3.72%[web_doc 30]. Trump said "oil prices will drop soon," but the market didn't buy it[web_doc 30].
At the same time, US inflation in September was still around 3.7%, the University of Michigan's one-year inflation expectation rose from 4.6% to 4.7%, and the long-term expectation rose from 3.4% to 3.5%, all the highest since May; the final consumer confidence index was only 48[web_doc 15].
This set of data effectively ties the Fed's hands. Once inflation expectations become unanchored, Powell/Washington would rather tighten more than risk credibility by easing.
So now when I hear "digital gold hedges inflation," I want to laugh. In the short term, BTC follows real interest rates, not the CPI number. If you really want to hedge an oil shortage with crypto, you need to measure with a ruler longer than three years. $BTC Federal Reserve: No change this time is nonsense, December is the real deal
At 2 AM Beijing time on October 29, the FOMC will announce its decision.
Conclusion first: CME prices the probability of holding rates at 3.75%–4.00% in October at 90.6%, with only a 9.4% chance of a 25bp hike[web_doc 9][web_doc 15]. The September hike was the first since 2023, unanimously approved by all 12 votes, raising the range to 3.75%–4.00%[web_doc 26].
The real action is in December: CME estimates a 67.5% chance of a rate hike, 25.8% chance of no change, and 6.7% chance of a 50bp hike[web_doc 9]; Reuters' October 20 survey is even more decisive—100 economists, all 100 believe there will be a hike in December[web_doc 26]. Last month, it was less than half.
Why do I care so much? Bitcoin doesn’t yield interest. USD deposits give you just over 4%, what does BTC give you? Volatility. The higher the interest rates go, the more expensive the opportunity cost becomes.
Don’t just watch that one line on rates early Wednesday morning, watch what Powell says: no economic forecast this time, the statement will likely be very short; the market wants to hear his wording on whether "the September hike was a one-off or the start of a series"[web_doc 15]. If he’s hawkish, 80k won’t hold; if ambiguous, we can breathe a little. $BTC 80,000 mark, silently hit over the weekend
First, let's get the price right: at 03:45 Beijing time this morning, BTC was $80,039, down 0.47% in 24 hours, with a daily range of 79,390–80,825; down 2.49% over 7 days, total market cap 1.61 trillion, accounting for 60.03%[web_doc 24]. Looking at the daily close: on October 25, it closed at 80,024, down 0.95% for the day, with a low of 79,767[web_doc 1].
What really unsettles me is not the drop, but that the ETF was still bleeding over the weekend. According to Lookonchain's on-chain data, on October 26 (Sunday) Eastern Time, the spot BTC ETF had a net redemption of 2,123 BTC in one day, about $169 million; among them, IBIT alone redeemed 1,358 BTC, accounting for 64%[web_doc 34].
But ETFs only trade during US stock market hours, so the redemption orders on Sunday were placed before the market closed on Friday. In plain terms: institutions in the US don't want to hold even a second longer over the weekend.
My own response is simple: 80,000 is a psychological level, not a technical one. Don't "bottom fish" here, nor "confirm a breakdown to short" here. Wait for the US stock market to open on Monday to see if the 2,123 BTC redemption is an isolated case. $BTC The most vulnerable link has never been BTC itself, but the positions propped up by "bull market faith." Have you noticed that the loudest voices during the drop disappear first? Last night, I came across something quite interesting: a blogger who previously insisted that the bull market hadn't arrived and that it was just a consolidation phase. As a result, a bunch of bullish followers unfollowed him, and some even notified him in the comments that they had unfollowed. When BTC dropped back near 80,000, he asked, "Are you all okay?" and then pointed out a detail: STRC was still above 99; although it dipped to 98.99 pre-market, it recovered. Last month, when BTC approached 80,000, STRC was only around 95 to 97. This comparison is the key. In the same price range, STRC's position has risen, which means what? It means some funds are not chasing price sentiment but are expressing their exposure to crypto assets through a more stable vehicle. On the surface, it looks like BTC is tugging back and forth near 80,000 and the chat groups are lively, but the real support is hidden in details like "no new lows in price, but related assets lifting their bottoms first." Capital preference is shifting from chasing high volatility to leaning more toward "holdable" assets. This change is more worth watching than the candlestick patterns themselves. The bullish path is also clear: if the 70,000 area truly acts as support converted from the previous top, then this retracement looks more like a shakeout than a trend reversal. Leading indicators like STRC holding firm will give spot market sentiment some confidence, and the catch-up rally of ETH and several major altcoins may follow. But risks also📊 This wave of capital flow indicates: what's withdrawing is leverage, not spot panic selling, so don't scare yourself.
BTC: 30-day contracts net outflow of 7.71 billion, short-term inflows have basically stopped. ETH is weaker, with 30-day contract outflows of 8.46 billion, the most obvious position contraction, and the hourly chart can't lift its head. SOL has a highlight: spot net inflow of 8.86 million in 24 hours, some buying at low levels; but contracts still outflow 24.01 million, leverage doesn't return, the rebound lacks strength. ZEC spot and contracts both outflow, 30-day contracts down 1.04 billion, early enthusiasm fading, trading heat is just turnover.
🌍 No support from news: Fed silent period, oil prices above 116 adding inflation pressure, the market must tough it out until Thursday when FOMC, GDP, and PCE reports come out.
🧭 My view: BTC is grinding below 80000, short-term replenishment looks more like short covering and rebound grabbing, not trend buying. Only if it stands back above 80000 and contract outflows stop first can we believe the rebound has follow-through; if it can't hold and breaks previous lows, it will look for lower levels. Before the reports, treat rebounds as opportunities to reduce positions, don't chase. ETH is the weakest, bottom fishing should be cautious; SOL only watch if spot support remains, leverage money won't return and it won't go far.In this 24-hour liquidation statistics set, all CORE liquidations listed come from long positions; for ZEC and HYPE, there were more short liquidations over 24 hours, but in the last hour, pressure shifted to longs. Looking only at the total amount for the whole day can easily overlook such directional changes. Below is a comparison by time window, with amounts in ten thousand U, parentheses showing longs and shorts respectively. 📊 CORE: Liquidations concentrated on longs 1 hour: 1413.23 (1413.23, 0) 4 hours: 1413.41 (1413.41, 0) 12 hours: 1662.97 (1662.97, 0) 24 hours: 1761.73 (1761.73, 0) The most notable aspect is not just the large scale, but that the amount in the last hour is close to the 4-hour total, indicating that the long liquidations listed are highly concentrated in a short time frame. 📊 ZEC: More shorts liquidated over the day, short-term longs under pressure 1 hour: 7.38 (6.26, 1.11) 4 hours: 24.82 (19.99, 4.83) 12 hours: 310.69 (87.15, 223.54) 24 hours: 616.59 (267.17, 349.42) Both 12-hour and 24-hour periods show more short liquidations, but 1-hour and 4-hour periods are dominated by longs, so the full-day structure cannot be directly applied to the recent market rhythm. 📊 HYPE: Similar cycle switching 1 hour: 9.88 (9.88, 0) 4 hours: 18.77 (18.76, 0.01) #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ Although Middle East crude oil transportation has resumed, oil prices remain high for four main reasons:
1. Geopolitical risk premium has not disappeared: The shipping lanes are only temporarily open; risks of attacks in the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz persist, causing insurance fees and detour shipping costs to rise sharply, with the market continuously factoring in conflict premiums.
2. OPEC+ continues production cuts to support supply: Oil-producing countries insist on production cuts and control, and will not quickly increase output just because shipping has resumed; overall supply remains tight.
3. Global inventories are low, providing weak buffers: Continuous inventory drawdowns have left crude oil and refined product stocks below the five-year average, so any further disruption can quickly push prices up.
4. Futures trading reflects expectations, not just current flows: Trading funds worry about repeated tensions and further facility attacks; combined with the approaching winter peak oil demand season, demand expectations strengthen, supporting oil prices. Surface funds are quietly entering the market, yet the price seems to have hit the pause button. Isn't this scene a bit disjointed? BTC, ETH, and SOL are all grinding in place, but the money flows each have their own paths. I've been watching these three lines for a long time, and the more I look, the more it feels like what the market is trading and the surface activity don't quite match. Let's start with BTC. The net inflow during the day is about 258 coins, with large orders as the main driver, but the price is fluctuating around 80,000 without upward momentum. This combination actually reveals a lot: big money is accumulating, but there's no short-term intention to push the price up. In other words, the buying is for accumulation, not chasing a rally. The derivatives side is even more worth watching; after a long sideways period, positions tend to pile up, and once the funding rate turns positive, the longs become crowded, causing swings that look much more intense than spot. The bullish path is for chips to slowly transfer to strong hands, waiting for a trigger point; the risk is that if the price doesn't move, leverage moves first, and the squeeze usually starts from the weakest side. ETH has a net inflow of about 4,274 coins, with a healthy structure and large orders keeping pace, but its weakness is a lack of independence, still being led by BTC's rhythm. This means ETH is more of a follower now, not the engine. For it to truly have its own market, BTC needs to stabilize and funding rates must not get out of control; otherwise, altcoin sentiment will be hard to ignite. SOL is the most eye-catching, with a net inflow of 45,800 coins, the strongest accumulation, and continuous large order increases, showing clear elasticity advantages. But there's an easily overlooked point here: the potential selling pressure from unlocks is still present, and strong accumulation doesn't necessarily mean upward momentum #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 The October FOMC chose to keep rates unchanged this time, representing a "hawkish pause," in line with mainstream market expectations. The Federal Reserve has not closed the door on rate hikes, emphasizing that inflation has not fallen as expected and leaving open the possibility of another hike in December. The U.S. economy remains resilient, with employment and inflation data still posing upside risks, making a near-term rate cut unlikely. After the decision, the dollar and U.S. Treasury yields tend to strengthen, putting pressure on gold and non-U.S. currencies. Going forward, focus will be on CPI and employment data, with market volatility continuing to revolve around the December rate hike expectations.The Federal Reserve's rate decision meeting is entering the countdown, and everyone is holding their breath 👀
Whether to raise rates still seems up for discussion, but the market has already bet in advance: inflation stickiness hasn't disappeared, oil prices are fluctuating, and the probability of another rate hike before the end of the year is not low 📈
Over the weekend, $BTC staged a "fake drop": it briefly fell below 80,000 during the day, hitting a low near 79,200. Just as the bears were about to celebrate, buyers quickly stepped in to support, pushing the price back to the 80,300-80,600 range. The breakdown didn't continue, which actually indicates strong support below 80,000 and feels more like a shakeout 😄
$ETH remains weak, having lost 2,400 early on and grinding at the bottom between 2,330-2,380, clearly lagging behind BTC. 2,300 is a key short-term defense line; if it breaks again, 2,250-2,200 may come into view 🙄️
The focus remains on Powell's wording and the Fed's hints about the future interest rate path. On rate decision night, volatility could come suddenly, so buckle up and watch the show 🚀#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ $DOOD
I scanned tonight's entire site's contract gain and loss rankings, and the top one is a name I almost didn't recognize: DOOD, up 44% in 24 hours.
The token of Doodles. Yesterday's opening price was 0.00142, peaked at 0.00267, nearly doubled, now retreated to 0.00206. What made me stop were two other numbers: funding rate -0.34%, shorts are paying longs; total open interest is only 3.36 million USD, but the 24-hour turnover exceeded 200 million.
The trading volume is seventy to eighty times the open interest, no one is really holding positions at this price level, it's all passing money. No matter how much this market rises, I won't profit; money I don't understand loses fastest.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 $BTC
Jamie Dimon said Bitcoin could have an annualized return of 10% over the next decade. I read this news three times to make sure I wasn't mistaken about the person.
The person who has been criticizing Bitcoin for over ten years is now helping Morgan configure portfolios for clients. My first reaction wasn't excitement, but calculation—if the money from his clients really enters the market, he probably won't want the whole world to buy at the top. In the same week, Morgan Stanley's ETF wallet only bought 80 BTC, worth over $60,000, with a historical total of just 6.45 million. Institutions are really buying, but they keep their heads down; their volume and position sizes are inversely related.
BTC is now just above 80,000, with a low of 79,300 last night. The bigger the official shouting to go long, the less they buy. I learned this rule the hard way. This time, I won't follow the noise; I'll watch where the money moves.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 $RE
This altcoin's decline has only just begun; now is the best time to short it.
When re was listed, it coincided with the start of a bull market, combined with re's design of unlocking tokens every six months. A series of favorable factors meant this altcoin didn't drop much after listing. But now the market style has changed. The U.S. stock market's four-year-long bull run since 2022 has officially ended, and the market has turned bearish. Re coincides with a December unlock of 40 million tokens that will hit the market hard. After this unlock, every June and December will see 126 million tokens unlocked annually, totaling 750 million tokens unlocked over three years. Meanwhile, after three years, competing tokens to re may have already issued dozens of alternatives.
With the bear market starting, combined with 800 million tokens unlocking, phased massive unlocks, competition crisis, and the altcoin's inherent characteristics of unlimited issuance and unbacked printing, a series of adverse factors are destined to drive re toward zero. It is expected that after the December unlock, re will fall to 0.15, and after the 126 million tokens unlock next June, it will drop to 0.07. At this critical bull-bear transition point, shorting is the best way to make money.3. One short position in three! Large holders' long-term short position layout, relying on funding fees to buffer floating losses
Latest monitoring of this large holder's perpetual contract positions shows simultaneous short bets on BTC, ETH, and SOL, all with low leverage, with very considerable funding fee income.
📊 Complete position breakdown
✅ BTC short position｜5X full position
Position: -2603.29 BTC, position value 210 million U
Opening price: 76331.0 U
Unrealized loss: -9.6373 million U
Funding fee income: +3.1389 million U
Margin: 41.6698 million U, liquidation price: 143401.53
✅ ETH short position｜5X full position
Position: -106,400 ETH, position value 250 million U
Opening price: 2322.74 U
Unrealized profit: +1.4303 million U
Funding fee income: +4.2794 million U
Margin: 49.1452 million U, liquidation price: 3847.13
✅ SOL short position｜7X full position
Position: -719,900 SOL, position value 72.3791 million U
Opening price: 94.3199 U
Unrealized loss: -4.4815 million U
Funding fee income: +3.8246 million U
Margin: 10.3399 million U, liquidation price: 324.25 A $2.09 billion unrealized gain is like a pot of oil just starting to smoke, sizzling as it hits the cutting board before the quarterly report—this isn’t profit, it’s timing.
This company, with Bitcoin as its ballast, holds about 848,000 bitcoins, essentially moving the entire premium ingredient supply chain into a cold storage. Before the quarterly report is even out, the $2.09 billion fair value aroma wafts out—smells strong indeed, but the real test of skill is: do you keep adding to this broth, or skim off the oil first?
Buying back about $176 million in preferred stock, to me, is like skimming off the thick oil on the soup’s surface. It’s not for show, but to prevent the seasoning of financing costs from becoming too salty. Preferred stock is the backup broth in the kitchen—useful in emergencies, but too much will overpower the main dish’s flavor; Bitcoin is the main dish, large in quantity and cooked with strong heat, so side dishes and seasonings need to be restrained. If you treat leveraged contracts like super spicy chili peppers, a big handful can indeed invigorate, but when the spice burns through your gut, the stove won’t call a timeout for you.
This pot of capital allocation fears two problems most: first, seasoning the dish before the main course is cooked; second, diluting the broth when it’s already rich. Currently, with unrealized gains rebounding, if the financing strategy keeps expanding, it’s like throwing ghost peppers into the chili oil pot—aromatic but with a strong afterburn. Conversely, buying back preferred stock first and fixing the financing structure is like scraping off the burnt edges of the pot, so the next dish won’t taste bitter.
The US stock token targets are like pre-made dishes on the side stove—smelling good, but their doneness depends on the mood of the US stock market and Bitcoin. No matter how lively the Amazon token target is, it’s just a flavored broth borrowing aroma, not the main dish on the table; if the main dish is undercooked, the more fragrant the side dishes, the more anxious it feels.
My stove only recognizes one principle: the main dish must hold the table, only then can chili peppers be called flavor; if the main dish is weak, buying back preferred stock is just pouring water on the burnt edges of the pot. #strategyq3btcgainsShort-term bullish rebound expected, but set stop-loss levels
The BTC positions of the top 1000 Hyperliquid accounts are quite striking: shorts about $1.02 billion, longs about $668 million, short/long ratio about 1.53; ETH is nearly balanced, longs about $928 million, shorts about $873 million. My judgment is: in the short term, bulls are more likely to start covering the gap rather than shorts blindly adding positions.
The reason is simple. BTC large holders leaning short are already quite crowded; for shorts to add more, the price needs to cooperate by falling; but ETH has not deteriorated in sync, indicating risk appetite has not completely collapsed. At the time of writing, BTC is about 80,336, ETH about 2,328. If BTC can hold near 80,000, the cost-effectiveness of shorts continuing to chase will decrease, and some profit-taking shorts will turn into covering buy orders. At this point, bulls filling part of the $668 million vs. $1.02 billion gap is smoother than shorts pressing down another round.
But this is not a dead bull scenario. If BTC effectively breaks below 80,000 and ETH follows down, shorts adding positions will dominate. So my bet is: first cover, then watch 80,000 to determine direction.
$BTC $ETH
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 The gamble on the options desk: Everyone is buying insurance
This is a signal that's easy to overlook. On Deribit, the monthly options expiring on October 30th have a scale of about $11.2 billion, with the max pain point at 76,000; the batch on the 23rd is $1.23 billion, with a pain point at 82,000[web_doc 57]. Looking at BVIV, the proportion of Bitcoin options open interest to total derivatives open interest has risen from about 50% at the start of the year to nearly 60%, with IBIT options alone around $35 billion[web_doc 16].
More importantly, the skew is still negative, with short-term puts more expensive than calls[web_doc 18][web_doc 52]. To translate: some verbally bet on 90,000, but in reality, everyone is buying downside protection.
I quite like this state. The real top often happens when everyone is too lazy to buy insurance and call options are ridiculously expensive. That’s not the case now. $BTC Gold price falling below 4000 is not a failure of safe haven, but like a piece being taken off the chessboard. It’s the first breach since mid-July, with about a four percentage point pullback within the week. On the surface, it looks like Middle East uncertainties couldn’t withstand the selling pressure, but in reality, three lines are being pressed simultaneously: oil prices pushing inflation expectations, forced re-evaluation of interest rate paths, and rising volatility triggering liquidity demand. The safe haven was originally guarding the king’s wing, but once real interest rates rise, the opportunity cost of holding gold feels like heavy pieces pressing the line; no fortress, however thick, can withstand continuous piece exchanges. The Middle East news seems more like a lure, attracting front-running selling pressure; the real main line is cash demand—some sell gold not because they are bearish on it, but to replenish other positions. This is sacrificing a piece to open a channel, but if the sacrifice doesn’t gain the initiative, it’s a gift.
The linkage of the US stock token XTSLA is not about mirroring intraday moves, but about synchronized contraction of risk budgets. Tokenized US stocks are a flank channel; high-beta assets are deleveraged first when volatility rises. Gold and US stock tokens are pulled by the same cash demand, seemingly two battlefields but actually sharing one rear defense line. Whether short-term selling pressure can ease depends on two things: whether cash demand recedes, and whether safe haven buying can build a defensible fortress below 4000. If the rebound fails to recover lost ground, bears get an open line; if after breaking down it quickly recovers, that move is a bear trap sacrifice. Grandmasters don’t count pieces before the endgame but calculate forced moves; position management is the same. Chasing shorts on a breakdown is a rookie miscalculation; waiting for rebound and volume confirmation is the midgame order. Don’t sacrifice pieces lightly unless it leads to a winning endgame after exchanges.
The decisive move in this game isn’t in Middle East headlines but in the exchange rate between cash and interest rates; gold falling below 4000 is just the first step, the real checkmate comes from forced sacrifices after liquidity withdrawal. #goldfallsbelow$4000Regulatory authorities are actually quietly loosening restrictions
This topic isn't very popular, but I care about it: The SEC's "Regulation on Crypto Asset Supervision" (Reg CA) public comment period just ended on October 20. The core is two tiers of financing exemptions — simplified disclosure for cumulative amounts not exceeding $5 million over 4 years, and only financial reports plus routine filings required for amounts not exceeding $75 million within 12 months, also with a "safe harbor" clause, meaning tokens meeting the conditions are not considered investment contracts[web_doc 4][web_doc 7].
California has jumped out to oppose, fearing that the federal government will override the state's screening authority[web_doc 4]. Bitwise and Hyperliquid also submitted letters asking the SEC to clarify airdrops and secondary market trading[web_doc 14].
There was almost no short-term price reaction, I admit that. But this is about clearer rules, not a token issuance frenzy. I prefer to see it as a fundamental support for "bear market bottoms being a bit shallower in the future" — compliance costs are reduced, so more money stays at the table long-term. $BTC Seller stopped buying; this matter is bigger than the news itself
Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) latest disclosure: As of October 25, it holds 848,500 BTC, plus $5.1 billion in assets, and did not buy a single coin last week [web_doc 58][web_doc 63]. Its cost structure for those 848,517 coins has been spread out, with an average price of around seventy thousand, and it is still profitable now [web_doc 39].
Don't underestimate "not buying." This company is recognized by the market as a long bull with unlimited bullets; when it stops, the narrative loses one of the most stable automatic buyers. Meanwhile, Strive was very aggressive, disclosing on October 26 that it spent about $510 million last week to buy 6,182 coins at $82,732 each, bringing its total holdings close to 43,000 coins [web_doc 44].
My interpretation: institutions haven't fled; they're just changing seats. Treasury companies collectively still hold 1,167,800 coins, accounting for 5.8% of the circulating market value [web_doc 44]. This level is both a floor and a ceiling—when the financing environment tightens, whoever sells first will be closely watched by the market. $BTC $BTC ETF money comes in fast and goes out even faster
Breaking down last week's funds is quite disheartening:
October 20 (Monday) net inflow of 526.6 million, 21st 23.16 million, totaling about 1.08 billion over three consecutive days[web_doc 70]
On the 22nd, a single-day net outflow of 635.49 million abruptly stopped[web_doc 70]
On a weekly basis, according to SoSoValue, BTC ETF net inflow was about 443 million USD, which can be seen as stopping the bleeding[web_doc 26]
But ETH ETF has had outflows for the fourth consecutive week, with 225 million leaving last week, and over 1.2 billion outflow in October[web_doc 26]
What does this indicate? The money coming in isn’t "buy and hold" capital; it’s fast money chasing short-term rebounds. Coinbase premium index has been negative for 33 consecutive days, latest at -0.1259%[web_doc 54]—the domestic spot buying in the US is really weak.
As a spot trader, seeing this "inflow one day, outflow two days" rhythm, I only do one thing: don’t chase.The $ETH leverage ledger looks a bit off. Short positions have piled up to $5.7 billion, while longs only have $1.1 billion, a difference of more than five times. This is no longer just a bearish issue; it's that one side is too crowded. The price might still grind lower, but if it really rallies, these shorts won't even have time to run—the short squeeze fuse is already lit, it's not impossible.
Honestly, I can't predict the direction either, but I just feel this one-sided structure is very fragile. The market won't make everyone comfortable.
The sentiment on $ZEC is similar, shorts are also clustered. I'm watching both sides, no rush.Oil prices are the real hidden BOSS
Brent was still fluctuating between $109–114/barrel yesterday, and WTI didn't break 110 either[web_doc 55][web_doc 25]. The situation in the Middle East hasn't calmed down for a day, so oil prices just won't drop.
The logic chain is actually very short: expensive oil → inflation won't come down → the Fed dares not ease, might even raise rates again → money gets more expensive → assets like Bitcoin with no cash flow get disliked. Bitcoin has retraced about 37% from its all-time high of 126,000 last December to just over 80,000 now[web_doc 28].
I used to think "BTC is digital gold," but now I feel it's more like a high-beta tech stock in the short term. When oil rises, it cries; when the Nasdaq falls, it cries too. If you really want to use it to hedge inflation, the time frame has to be extended to years; looking at daily charts will make you question life. $BTC The barometer plunged from 1015 hPa to 992 hPa within forty-eight hours—this is not an ordinary airflow disturbance; it’s a frontal collision between a warm, moist air mass and dry, cold air near the $80,000 altitude line. From October 19 to 21, about $1.075 billion worth of warm, moist airflow poured over the Bitcoin spot fund from the southeastern coast, pushing the pressure to a short-term high; then, over the next two days, $774 million of dry, cold air counterattacked from the northwest, causing a sharp pressure drop as gust fronts swept across the entire market. The weekly ledger still shows a net warm advection of $301 million, with BlackRock’s flagship product alone intercepting $566 million of localized heavy precipitation—but don’t be fooled by the mild weekly total reading; the short-term pressure gradient is the real variable determining the perceived intensity.
Bitcoin briefly fell below $80,000 and simultaneously lost the 50-day moving average, equivalent to the main pressure ridge line at the observation station being severed. This isn’t a typhoon making landfall; it’s the typhoon’s peripheral circulation repeatedly sweeping the coastline: rain bands pass in bursts, the wind speed gauge needle swings left and right, and visibility fluctuates. Even if weekly inflows remain positive, they can’t change the fact that short-term vertical wind shear is intensifying—the configuration of the upper-level jet stream and the low-level warm ridge is already misaligned, and the two consecutive days of negative zones on the echo map signal cold air probing the base.
Further south, the tokenized US stock targets also show linked shear. Capital flows like moisture transport belts in a monsoon trough, sometimes surging up from the southern branch trough, sometimes cut off by the northern branch trough, with path swings far exceeding seasonal averages. Sounding data shows near-surface humidity is still acceptable, but the mid-level dry layer is thickening, meaning fresh buying, even if it moves north again, is easily wedged and rapidly evaporated by dry, cold air.
What really needs monitoring is whether the warm, moist transport belt can rebuild early next week—if precipitation echoes continue to form near the 50-day moving average, the pressure ridge line may be restored; if the shear line continues to push south, short-term strong convection will repeatedly trigger. The currently observed weekly net inflow of $301 million is just a thin warm cover; the cold pool underneath has not been completely cleared. No one can control the storm, but the barometer doesn’t lie; every swing of the needle records the troop strength comparison between the cold and warm sides. #btcetfflowswings