Orbit Post Sitemap
Four Major Dimensions Supporting the Possible Collapse of the Bitcoin Myth
I. Scientific Basis (Cryptography, Quantum Information Science)
1. Bitcoin signatures use the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). Under the condition that a fault-tolerant quantum computer runs Shor's algorithm, the private key can be derived from the public key. This is a rigorous mathematical cryptographic conclusion, not a conjecture. BTC in addresses with exposed public keys is at risk of theft.
2. Bitcoin does not have a built-in, seamless, quantum-resistant signature scheme. Upgrading the entire network protocol requires consensus among miners, nodes, exchanges, and whales, which is a highly challenging governance task; assets in many dormant old addresses or with lost private keys cannot be migrated to a new quantum-resistant signature system.
3. AI is accelerating the development of quantum error correction, quantum circuits, and cryptanalysis algorithms, compressing the time window for "quantum cracking feasibility."
Key point: It is not that it can be cracked now, but that this underlying cryptographic system has a scientific boundary that can be breached.
II. Mathematical Basis
1. Bitcoin's total supply of 21 million coins and halving model are artificially defined mathematical rules set by code, not natural laws. "Scarcity" is scarcity defined by code, not an immutable mathematical axiom; once consensus collapses, this numerical cap loses value.
2. The mathematical essence of value pricing: coin price = capital absorption ÷ circulating supply. When continuous unlocking, whale concentration selling, and capital outflows occur, supply exceeds absorption, and prices will continue to decline; there is no natural mathematical floor supporting the price.
3. The mathematical law of network effects: network value rises with user growth but can also decline with participant loss; network effects are not a unidirectional, perpetually increasing function. Once exits exceed new entries, network value continuously shrinks.
III. Philosophical Basis
1. Entropy increase and cyclical philosophy: all self-organized human consensus and credit systems tend to age, differentiate, and dissipate. Historically, all credit bubbles detached from physical backing have ended. Consensus is a subjective human belief, which changes across generations and can be replaced by new things; consensus does not have eternal attributes.
2. Replacement evolution philosophy: the norm of technological evolution is that more adaptive and safer solutions replace old ones. If a new generation of value coins with quantum resistance, privacy, and higher efficiency (such as post-quantum routes like STRK) emerges, logically there is a possibility of value center shift; first-mover advantage does not equal permanent advantage.
3. Subjective theory of value: Bitcoin itself does not produce goods, services, or cash flow; its value comes entirely from collective human subjective recognition. Once group cognition changes, its value foundation will be shaken. It has no intrinsic inherent value; value is granted by consensus.
IV. Monetary Theory Basis
1. The three classic functions of money: unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value.
- Bitcoin's volatility is extremely high, making it difficult to serve as a stable unit of account;
- Transfer costs, confirmation speed, and compliance thresholds limit daily circulation;
- The premise of store of value is long-term stable credit consensus, but it lacks sovereign, tax, or physical asset backing.
2. Modern monetary credit logic: mainstream fiat relies on state taxation and sovereign enforced circulation. Bitcoin is a private spontaneous credit asset, not debt money; it has no lender of last resort and no crisis backstop mechanism. In the event of a bank run panic, no entity will intervene to stabilize.
3. Monetary competition theory: the currency market has always been competitive. Historically, countless once-popular currencies and precious metal substitutes have exited the mainstream stage due to technology, regulation, and credit reasons; digital assets are no exception.#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？
The October FOMC is very likely to "hold steady," but don't rush to interpret this as a dovish turn. Current data puts the Federal Reserve in a dilemma: nonfarm payrolls increased by only 29,000, unemployment rose to 4.2%, showing signs of cooling in employment; however, CPI remains at 3.7%, and core inflation is sticky. Rushing to raise rates again risks crushing employment and long-term yields, while pausing risks inflation expectations becoming unanchored.
The real uncertainties focus on four areas: first, whether core PCE and wage growth can continue to cool; second, if Middle East tensions and oil prices flare up again, the inflation narrative could quickly resume; third, if long-term U.S. Treasury yields tighten on their own, the Fed will have more room to wait and see; fourth, if data heats up again before December, the "pause" could turn into a "late rate hike."
Therefore, October looks more like a hawkish pause: watching the situation first, with the possibility of a follow-up move in December. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #HOODQ3TradingGrowth robinhood chain, robinhood's blockchain where users trade stock tokens, saw dex volume drop 30% to $6.35b in the week from October 6-12. But defi TVL increased to $1.058b from September 30 to October 12, and Morpho, a lending protocol, holds $486.8m in open loans there. So lending is now a major application, not just trading. In that week, borrowers paid about $417k in interest and liquidation bonuses on Morpho, but Morpho recorded revenueFour Major Dimensions Supporting the Possible Collapse of the Bitcoin Myth
I. Scientific Basis (Cryptography, Quantum Information Science)
1. Bitcoin signatures use the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). Under the condition that a fault-tolerant quantum computer runs Shor's algorithm, the private key can be derived from the public key. This is a rigorous mathematical cryptographic conclusion, not a conjecture. BTC in addresses with exposed public keys is at risk of theft.
2. Bitcoin does not have a built-in, seamless, quantum-resistant signature scheme. Upgrading the entire network protocol requires consensus among miners, nodes, exchanges, and whales, which is a highly challenging governance task; assets in many dormant old addresses or with lost private keys cannot be migrated to a new quantum-resistant signature system.
3. AI is accelerating the development of quantum error correction, quantum circuits, and cryptanalysis algorithms, compressing the time window for "quantum cracking feasibility."
Key point: It is not that it can be cracked now, but that this underlying cryptographic system has a scientific boundary that can be breached.
II. Mathematical Basis
1. Bitcoin's total supply of 21 million coins and halving model are artificially defined mathematical rules set by code, not natural laws. "Scarcity" is scarcity defined by code, not an immutable mathematical axiom; once consensus collapses, this numerical cap loses value.
2. The mathematical essence of value pricing: coin price = capital absorption ÷ circulating supply. When continuous unlocking, whale concentration selling, and capital outflows occur, supply exceeds absorption, and prices will continue to decline; there is no natural mathematical floor supporting the price.
3. The mathematical law of network effects: network value rises with user growth but can also decline with participant loss; network effects are not a unidirectional, perpetually increasing function. Once exits exceed new entries, network value continuously shrinks.
III. Philosophical Basis
1. Entropy increase and cyclical philosophy: all self-organized human consensus and credit systems tend to age, differentiate, and dissipate. Historically, all credit bubbles detached from physical backing have ended. Consensus is a subjective human belief, which changes across generations and can be replaced by new things; consensus does not have eternal attributes.
2. Replacement evolution philosophy: the norm of technological evolution is that more adaptive and safer solutions replace old ones. If a new generation of value coins with quantum resistance, privacy, and higher efficiency (such as post-quantum routes like STRK) emerges, logically there is a possibility of value center shift; first-mover advantage does not equal permanent advantage.
3. Subjective theory of value: Bitcoin itself does not produce goods, services, or cash flow; its value comes entirely from collective human subjective recognition. Once group cognition changes, its value foundation will be shaken. It has no intrinsic inherent value; value is granted by consensus.
IV. Monetary Theory Basis
1. The three classic functions of money: unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value.
- Bitcoin's volatility is extremely high, making it difficult to serve as a stable unit of account;
- Transfer costs, confirmation speed, and compliance thresholds limit daily circulation;
- The premise of store of value is long-term stable credit consensus, but it lacks sovereign, tax, or physical asset backing.
2. Modern monetary credit logic: mainstream fiat relies on state taxation and sovereign enforced circulation. Bitcoin is a private spontaneous credit asset, not debt money; it has no lender of last resort and no crisis backstop mechanism. In the event of a bank run panic, no entity will intervene to stabilize.
3. Monetary competition theory: the currency market has always been competitive. Historically, countless once-popular currencies and precious metal substitutes have exited the mainstream stage due to technology, regulation, and credit reasons; digital assets are no exception.As long as they can't kill me, I will keep holding onto $BTC $ETH
Just had a long discussion with a brother about why this round of sell-off happened? Neither of us could convince the other, viewpoints clashed, welcome to discuss.
My view leans more towards detaching from the macroeconomic side, purely a sell-off to liquidate longs, killing off leveraged long positions, lightening the load to continue moving north.
Because the macro interest rate hike expectations were actually anticipated long ago, this is definitely not the reason for this sudden sell-off. War is even less of a factor, basically no impact on the market.
The only factor is US Treasuries, but their yields have recently been falling, so funds should be flowing out of bonds somewhat, which logically is bullish for crypto and $BTC, so this can also be ruled out.
So I still blindly remain bullish on crypto, I am a loyal believer!
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ This FOMC meeting landed in the early morning of the 29th Beijing time. The rate was just raised to 3.75%-4.00% in September. The mainstream market expectation is to hold steady this time, with almost no chance of a rate cut.
Focus on two points: whether the statement retains room for future rate hikes, and how Powell guides for December.
The probability of a hawkish pause is the highest; if the wording softens, it is positive for Nasdaq tech; if it signals more hikes in December, high-valuation sectors will be under pressure.
There is no dot plot this time, so information is limited. A single decision should not change long-term investment plans, only serve as tracking reference, and does not constitute investment advice. #SK Hynix Q3 Earnings Report Approaching, Can HBM4 Boost Profitability? In the Q3 report, HBM4 is not the main driver of this quarter's profits and is unlikely to directly and significantly lift Q3 earnings; it is the "valuation and main growth line from Q4 onwards." Q3 profits mainly rely on HBM3E long-term contracts + server DRAM price increases.
1. Why HBM4's boost to Q3 is limited
1. Ramp-up pace: Q3 is early-stage small batch delivery, shipment volume is not large
HBM4 only started mass supply in Q2, and Q3 is still in the customer validation and capacity ramp-up phase, not a large-scale volume release period; many orders and certifications are delayed by NVIDIA's new chip schedule, resulting in shipment volumes below earlier optimistic expectations. HBM3E remains the fundamental base for HBM revenue and profit.
✅ Core of Q3 profitability: HBM3E long-term contracts + server DRAM price increases
⚠️ HBM4: Limited contribution in Q3, it is a "growth signal" of validation progress, not a profit engine for this quarter;
📌 Market watershed: Look at the earnings report for HBM4 shipment guidance, yield rates, and next year's order volume to decide whether to revise Q4 profits upward or downward. $NEAR vs $SOL : Smart Money Reveals Two Different Risks
Both assets are heavily shorted, but the difference is profitability.
SOL bears remain firmly in control, while longs face significant losses. This suggests continued selling pressure.
NEAR tells a different story. Despite falling nearly 9%, its massive short exposure is underwater.
My view: SOL remains structurally weaker, while NEAR offers greater short-squeeze potential if buyers regain control. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
I am not optimistic about the sustainability of Robinhood's trading business growth. The core contradiction is: the largest growth comes from event contracts, which are the most vulnerable to regulation, and capital inflows have already slowed down.
Event contracts are being regarded as gambling rather than derivatives by multiple states. Ohio requires compliance by October 16; the Sixth Circuit Court allows state gambling laws to apply to sports contracts; the Ninth Circuit Court's stance exposes Robinhood to criminal liability risks; platforms have already exited in Connecticut. The spread of state-level enforcement will narrow accessible markets, and Rothera's vertical integration is also restricted by exchanges.
The capital base is loosening simultaneously: net deposits in July were only about $4 billion; BTIG tracks about $12 billion in Q3, far below approximately $19 billion in the same period last year; the annualized growth rate of net deposits in August dropped to 14%, half of Q2's 28%. Crypto revenue in Q2 fell 38% year-over-year, shrinking its share from 27.2% at the beginning of 2025 to 12.6%.
The event contract surge also includes seasonal effects driven by the World Cup; sports contracts "are seasonal and bounded." When the hottest category faces regulatory risks and the most basic deposit growth simultaneously show red flags, high growth in trading revenue is unlikely to become the norm and looks more like a one-time pulse.Order Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After magnifying orders for ORDER and CT, slippage for both buying and selling increased significantly, with ORDER's simulated slippage at the 100,000 scale being the highest.
$IRYS large buy cost decreased, small buy cost remained almost unchanged. Simulated slippage for a 100,000 scale buy dropped from 1.26% to 0.96%. A 10,000 buy still hovers around 0.25%. Depth is improving, and the same order size is now cheaper.
$ORDER simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage is 0.19%/0.19%, and 100,000 scale is 0.73%/0.72%. Both sides became more expensive; consider reducing volume or splitting orders first.
$CT simulated 10,000 scale buy/sell slippage is 0.11%/0.09%, and 100,000 scale is 0.56%/0.51%. A sign of thin depth is simultaneous increase on both sides. Why does money only flow to $BTC within the same ETF channel? 🤔
$ETH saw a net outflow of $1.08 billion in October ETFs, almost wiping out all the inflows from September, while BTC ETFs repeatedly attracted funds during the same period. On the surface, it looks like a "choose one of two" situation for capital, but breaking it down, ETH loses out due to three structural shortcomings.
First, the product design inherently carries a "discount." 🧩 BTC ETFs serve as a clean beta tool for institutions; however, ETH spot ETFs do not include native staking yields long-term. Within a risk-return framework, both expose crypto beta, but holding ETH ETFs yields no on-chain returns, naturally compressing institutional allocation willingness.
Second, the exchange rate is "voting" with the funds. 📉 ETH/BTC has dropped from 0.03294 in September to around 0.029, a decline of about 11%, even touching 0.02883 on October 18. When the rate consistently runs below 0.030, institutions see not "ETH getting cheaper," but rather "relative strength worsening," leading them to marginally cut exposure where conviction is weakest first.
Third, ETH's buying structure is too "narrow." 🎯 BTC has two relatively independent demand lines: ETFs and corporate treasuries; #10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ - HBM shipment volume, HBM's share in DRAM revenue, HBM yield guidance
- Shipment progress of 1c DRAM and 321-layer NAND
- Whether capital expenditure has been raised beyond the plan, management's comments on HBM supply and demand next year
- Free cash flow, subsequent dividend/buyback plans
- Renewal of long-term customer contracts, new order status
One-sentence trading perspective
Q4 earnings are very likely to be impressive in numbers, but "exceeding expectations is difficult, missing expectations easily kills valuation"; it is an AI growth premium within cyclical stocks, not a pure growth stock. HBM's high profit margin is a temporary dividend, not permanent.The selloff that pushed $BTC below $81,000 and $ETH to $2,350 this morning was less a verdict on crypto than a mechanical purge of crowded leverage. In a single hour, roughly $180 million in futures positions were liquidated across the network, and $170 million of that was longs. That asymmetry tells the story: the market did not collapse because sellers arrived in force, it fell because buyers had already arrived in force and left themselves no room to be wrong. Thin morning liquidity amplified#SKhynixQ3HBM4Earnings
#AIMemoryDemand
Markets expect roughly ₩77T in Q3 operating profit, driven by AI memory demand, rising DRAM/NAND prices, and HBM growth.
But the real test is forward guidance: HBM4 ramp-up, memory pricing sustainability, and 2027 demand visibility.
📈 Beat + stronger guidance = potential upside.
⚠️ Strong results but weaker outlook = sell-the-news risk.
My take: The earnings bar is already high. Watch guidance—not just the headline profit.
$SKHY $SKHYNIX $SNDK "After enduring for seven hours, it finally decided to go down — the sideways consolidation was not in vain."
$PEPE dropped from 0.000004667 steadily down to 0.000004294, a 7.99% decline, which magnified 50 times to +399.61%. This position had been consolidating sideways for over seven hours (303→309→283→272, back and forth grinding), at 21:11 it was still at 0.000004413, +272%; now it broke through the previous low of 0.0000043 in one go, adding 127 more points of unrealized profit. This indicates that the 0.0000044 equilibrium point was finally broken by the sellers, and the main downtrend continued. The lows keep moving lower, the rebound volume shrinks, and the bears have regained control.
My view: The sideways consolidation weeded out the impatient, and also thickened my cushion — from 5.76% back to 8.69%. But even at 50x leverage, 8.69% is still just a needle’s distance away. The strategy is simple: push for breakeven, lock in some profits, and treat the base position like a lottery ticket. 0.0000043 has been broken, looking at 0.0000042; resistance above is now 0.0000044, and 0.000004667 is the stop-loss point. No short covering, no chasing the dip — chasing right after a breakout is the worst, it just hands over your head to the pullback. $BTC $ETH
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ Recently, I’ve been pondering the points gameplay of the "Divine Calculator" event and found a pretty obvious pricing mismatch. For the same event’s "No" side, predict.fun shows a 46% probability, but hardly anyone is playing points in the event, and you can buy "No" for 0.11. That means you’re taking odds based on a real probability of over 40% to gamble for nearly 9 times the points return. On the leaderboard, this is basically a free gain. The key isn’t really about predicting rise or fall, but about spotting this kind of gap between pricing and popularity. There are quite a few such mispricings in unpopular events; the less people play, the easier it is to find bargains. It’s safer to get a good grasp of the rules before making a move. $USDT$BTC approached the $80,000 mark again last night, marking countless tests of this level in a short period. Last week, it peaked at $84,890 but failed to hold, then dropped consecutively — this pattern of "rising then falling" is bringing a key question to the forefront: Is $80,000 a bottom, or just a pause before the next decline? 🔍 Most people simply see $80,000 as a round number, but its real significance lies in its dual nature: a psychological threshold combined with a cost concentration zone for ETF holders. This means there is short-term support logic at this level, but it is far from an "iron bottom." What is truly concerning is the shift in market narrative — last week's high of $84,890 did not translate into a valid breakout, indicating heavy selling pressure above, and every bullish attempt is draining momentum. Structurally, $83,000 is the prerequisite to judge whether $80,000 can hold. Until the price reclaims $83,000, any judgment that "$80,000 is secure" is premature. Conversely, if $80,000 is decisively broken, rushing to buy the dip is also unwise — the support strength near $78,000 is the next signal point to verify. This is not pessimism but a shift of decision-making basis from emotion to price structure itself. Zooming out, the macro environment before the U.S. midterm elections is likely to continue this back-and-forth oscillation pattern. Capital is reluctant to make large directional bets amid uncertainty, so $BTC is more prone to repeatedly test within a range rather than break out."Oil is strong, gold is weak, BTC is walking a tightrope"
The daily and 4H trends of USOIL are both favorable, and the momentum for going long on oil is indeed impressive (๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧. Historically, when commodities and crypto "clash," I tend to respect the commodity direction first: oil rising and gold falling often indicate sticky inflation, tight liquidity, and rising US Treasury yields (￣▽￣). But BTC is very resilient this time, repeatedly holding the 80,000–81,000 level, like doing squats amid bad news. However, no defense line is limitless; once broken, sentiment could cascade downwards, so staying vigilant is not just a slogan (´･･`).
On the flip side: so many negative factors haven't broken through, indicating strong holding power. If oil prices fall back, US Treasuries weaken, and inflation cools down, BTC might rally to new highs, and 100,000 is not a dream (ง •̀•́)ง. Next, keep an eye on oil, bonds, inflation, and the 80,000 level. The above is just an observation, not investment advice.
$BTC $ETH $BZ
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？
#中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强
#BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ "Bearish Script Timeline"
October 26, 08:00: The second weekly candle closes below 83,000, confirming a false breakout
Following days: Retrace to the bull market support zone (just above 70,000 to 75,000), sweep the September 15 low, then rebound
October 29, 02:00: Federal Reserve meeting; if no rate hike but PCE is relatively hot that day, long-term yields may rebound, with the 10-year US Treasury returning near 5.3%
November 3: US midterm elections
Mid-November: Stock market decline drives BTC lower, long-term yields peak, forming Q4 lows
There is also a timing reference: local highs in July, August, September, and October all appeared around the 21st, except August extended to September 3. Based on this, the current peak falls between October 21 and November 3. However, with only four samples, this is for reference only.
The only condition to invalidate the entire script is if the weekly candle on October 26 closes back above 83,000. 🔥 220,000 liquidations! $200 million cleared in 15 minutes, BTC spike to 79773, ZEC inflow of $42 million yet bears hold tight
— This is not a bear market, this is a targeted slaughter of leverage.
At 22:15, BTC had a massive 15-minute bearish candle, dropping from 80700 straight through 80000, hitting a low of 79773; ETH simultaneously pierced 2350. Over $200 million in positions were liquidated within 15 minutes. In the past 24 hours, total network liquidations rose to $812 million, with 225,000 traders wiped out, longs contributing $668 million.
No single macro negative event triggered this; it was several blows at once: US spot Bitcoin ETF saw a net outflow of $635 million in one day, the largest in nearly four months; Brent crude surged to $116, reigniting inflation expectations; BTC daily closed below the 50-day moving average for the first time since August. Weekend liquidity was thin, so once a level broke, it turned into a stampede.
But ZEC’s trump card is far more complex than the overall market.
Grayscale ETF had a weekly outflow of $93.6 million, and whales sold 15,000 coins at high levels—these are the obvious bearish narratives. On the other hand: Zcash investment products saw a net inflow of $42 million last week, with $20.52 million flowing in on Friday alone. Funds are buying while prices fall; futures open interest dropped 12.45% over the same period, with short positions accounting for over 90% of top traders’ exposure. This is not simple dumping; it’s a typical structure where leveraged longs are being cleaned out while spot funds are absorbing. The U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) recorded a net outflow of $635.49 million on October 22, sharply reversing the previous day's net inflow of $528.4 million. The scale of this capital withdrawal is striking, but what is more noteworthy is the timing: Bitcoin's price has not yet fallen to the level historically associated with the most intense selling by ETF holders. DWF Labs' latest research identifies this critical price point, suggesting that the recent outflows may reflect caution or profit-taking rather than panic. Investors withdrawing funds before the usual critical point indicates a more proactive risk management strategy or signals a shift in market sentiment before a deeper correction. Why timing matters ETF fund flows have become a key indicator of institutional sentiment in the crypto market. Historically, large outflows tend to concentrate in price ranges where holders are most sensitive to losses. The October 22 withdrawal occurred above this range, implying investors did not wait for a triggering event to reduce risk. Proactive risk reduction: Investors may be locking in profits or reducing exposure ahead of expected volatility. Sentiment shift: A switch from strong inflows to significant outflows within 24 hours highlights the fragility of current market confidence. Liquidity dynamics: Large-scale ETF redemptions can amplify price volatility, especially when order books are thin. DWF Labs' research adds a quantitative dimension to the discussion, providing a framework to understand when ETF-driven selling pressure might intensify. If the market approaches this level, the risk of a feedback loop triggering more redemptions and price declines will increase. Regarding the crypto marketA single token wiped out nearly half a year of gains for one trader this week, and the episode says less about $IRYS than about how leverage behaves when a thin order book meets a large venue's liquidation engine. The account in question lost 90,000u after price ran vertically, defying the usual playbook of a pullback and retest. Only around 0.4 did the move stall, after large positions across exchanges had been cleared out. Price now chops sideways, and the trader's verdict is blunt: the exchan$SOL
99.57.
The triple-digit threshold for SOL disappeared just like that tonight, with a 24-hour low of 98.62, down 4.9%. Coincidentally, on the same day, there was an article praising Solana's network activity and stablecoin usage as stronger than XRP, but the price was dropping when it was published.
Looking closer, the SOL perpetual funding rate is now negative, shorts are paying fees, and there’s no one left to chase longs. The open interest still holds $310 million; how these long positions are handled after the breakdown is more worth watching than the news itself.
I’m not guessing the bottom. For round numbers like 100, the first break usually sees some fluctuation, but that fluctuation is for you to exit, not to go all in.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ 预测低于预期#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ Whether it can boost profits is not the main point; the key is whether the 2028 profit target can be sustained and if there is still strong demand.One overlooked risk in crypto is correlation.
You might own several different tokens and believe you're diversified, yet all of them may depend on the same ecosystem, narrative, or source of market liquidity.
When that shared driver weakens, multiple holdings can suffer together.
Diversification is about understanding different sources of risk—not simply collecting more tickers.$BTC
Fidelity analysts are back saying Bitcoin could go from 100,000 to 200,000 faster than expected. I thought that made some sense last week, but tonight, watching the 80,000 whole number level get smashed through, all that's left is irony.
Just pulled the numbers: OKX current price 79,664, 24-hour low 79,220, Binance low 79,178, both sides have solidly broken 80,000. In the past hour, the whole network liquidated $291 million, mostly longs.
What's interesting is the other side. Some stats say whales have increased holdings by 243,000 coins since July, selling stopped long ago. One side is accumulating addresses, the other side the price is breaking down, I can't believe both data points at the same time, for now I trust the market more—the buyers can accumulate slowly, but the liquidated can't wait.
I'm watching empty-handed. At this position, itching hands are the original sin.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ Bitcoin has fallen below 80,000 again, and now not only the stock market but also the crypto space is entering a state of widespread panic.
To conclude, I believe we are still in the early stage of a bull market; this is just a correction typical of the early bull phase.
Since August, I have maintained a bullish mindset.
According to on-chain data from CryptoQuant, the total holdings of Bitcoin whales have increased to 3.03 million coins.
The last time this number was reached was on November 21 last year.
Moreover, the 30-day accumulation rate is the fastest since February this year.
Although BTC ETF net inflows and outflows have been unstable, the volume on October 19 was not insignificant.
Currently, retail investors' attention is at its lowest; they feel weak and pessimistic.
However, this month there have been several tests of the 80,000 threshold, and each time near 80,000, the price has been pulled back.
1. Low retail attention, low search volume, and low sentiment.
2. Whale holdings have returned to last year's highs.
3. There is a large amount of turnover near 80,000.
4. ETF holdings and trading volume are high.
At present, I still believe this is not a bear market.
(Personal opinion for reference only) This does not constitute a trading recommendation.“$CORE Has Entered the Decentralized Era” = The Era of Official Nodes Retreating, I Give This Translation Full Marks
The official narrative packages the continuous withdrawal of official validator nodes as a symbolic step into the decentralized era. But the on-chain reality is completely the opposite: the original goal was to expand to 31 independent validators, yet official nodes keep going offline, active validators have shrunk to fewer than 20, and consensus has contracted into a small, tightly aligned circle with the project team—hardly mature decentralization.
True decentralization means diverse nodes, independent viewpoints, and checks and balances among multiple parties. Core’s current state looks more like the project team actively shedding node operation costs and avoiding responsibility for chain failures, leaving the block production burden to a small number of remaining validators, while treasury chips and code upgrade permissions remain firmly in the team’s hands.
Issues like the 8.31 vulnerability, 69 million ghost token sell pressure, SatPay delays, and failed revenue buybacks remain unresolved. The promotion is a glamorous decentralization narrative, but in essence, it’s low-cost contraction and a soft exit.
To clarify asset boundaries again: staking BTC relies on Bitcoin’s CLTV timelock, with private keys self-held, so principal is unaffected by chain governance. One sentence translation exposes the packaging: verbally it’s the decentralized era, but in reality, it’s the era of official nodes retreating. 但说实话，这轮下跌跟"美联储前跌完"关系不大。核心原因是周四美股科技股暴跌，纳指创6月以来最大单日跌幅，比特币跟着被带下来。现在BTC跟纳指联动太紧，AI融资压力、ETF资金流出，这些才是真正在砸盘。 周四ETF一天流出6.35亿美元，是6月以来最大单日流出。$BTC $ETH $SNDK 过去24小时全网爆仓超17.9万人，4.66亿美元，多单占了七成。 山寨币杠杆还没清干净，ETH期权看跌偏斜持续走高，说明市场还没缓过来。 80000到81000这个区间现在是关键。守住的话，短线可以轻仓试多，止损放79500，目标看82500。如果80000有效跌破，下面就是77600的"全市场平均成本"区域。 那就不急着抄底，等企稳信号。 周末流动性薄，插针风险大，仓位一定要控住。周一美股开盘前，别重仓赌方向。#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #AI需求支撑存储市场，芯片股行情反复 #中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强 Core ecosystem promotional translation: Banks = in talks, Government = no trace, Minting rights = nonexistent, Stablecoins = pie in the sky
The four hot market narratives, when unpacked, reveal their true nature. The so-called bank integration mentioned in promotions is merely early-stage negotiations; licensing approval is extremely difficult, and no formal business cooperation has been established; government and treasury involvement is completely without substantive clues, purely speculative, and far from realization.
The repeatedly mentioned decentralization of minting rights is a false concept. CORE's total supply of 2.1 billion is fixed in advance; there is no minting right to arbitrarily create new coins. Validators only participate in block reward distribution, and code modification rights remain in the hands of the project team. The highly anticipated ecosystem stablecoin, like SatPay, has been repeatedly delayed and remains only in roadmap planning without public testing or launch.
Adding to old problems: the 8.31 vulnerability left 69 million ghost tokens, reserve addresses frequently transferring out; official nodes continue to withdraw, with fewer than 20 active validators, undermining decentralization promises; Q3 revenue buybacks have been delayed indefinitely due to lack of on-chain revenue support.
Staking BTC relies on Bitcoin's CLTV timelock, with private keys self-held, so principal is unaffected. A bunch of grand stories, but once the packaging is stripped away, most remain at the negotiation, conceptual, or PPT stage. Some people really speak without feeling the pain themselves. They say that crypto K-line charts are ineffective, and macro information is invalid. First of all, I completely agree with these views, and I think it's not just crypto, but also the US stock market.
Can you say that the recent tech stock sell-off in the US market is reasonable? The problem is AI is still developing rapidly and has a huge demand for storage chips.
Similarly, in the crypto world, take mainstream $BTC, $ETH, and $ZEC as examples; they indeed largely detach from the aforementioned K-line charts and information.
But the problem is, if they detach from these in the long term, what difference does this market have from a casino? It just becomes a game of betting on big or small, so what's the point? You still have to pay fees and even funding costs.
So you have to admit, whenever you enter any capital market with trading nature, you have to find a suitable reason for your trades, rather than just saying "you're an idiot, blindly placing orders!"
My trading methods and ideas naturally have their own rationale. I'm losing money now; I've said I don't even have tears left to cry. I'm very heartbroken, so please don't criticize me. If you really want to vent, vent on the market makers! I'm just an idiot!
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #Strategy Earnings Preview: BTC Book Gains Rebound Sharply
$MSTR 10/29 Earnings Report, Net Profit Expected at 6.171 Billion, Revenue 129 Million.
▪️ Expected Revenue 129.4 Million, YoY +0.52%
▪️ Net Profit 6.171 Billion, YoY +133.30%
▪️ Main Revenue Flat for Three Quarters: 123.0 → 124.3 → 122.4 Million
▪️ Holdings 848,250 coins, Average Price 75,444, Market Value 68.87 Billion, Cost 64 Billion
▪️ Closed at 146.01 on 10/23, down about 75% in one year
▪️ End of June mNAV fell below 1 for the first time; in July sold 3,588 coins to cash out 216 Million for dividends
Revenue 129 Million, Net Profit 6.171 Billion, a 47.8x difference. The difference is not from operations — starting 2025, new standards will directly include changes in fair value of holdings in profit and loss; last year's Q4 already recorded a 17.44 Billion loss.
This table measures two things: the upper half is business, the lower half is coin price. After mNAV fell below 1, the route of issuing shares at a premium to exchange for coins stopped. $AXIS庄真不用出货，资金费都让他吃饱了BTC breaks below 80,000: Cost line lost, chain liquidations incoming
The 80,000 level that held over the weekend finally broke tonight, triggering $291 million in liquidations within an hour. BTC is currently at 79,442 (24h -2.60%, low 79,221), SOL simultaneously fell below 100 (99.0), ETH at 2,294.
Why did it crash at this point: The long-short account ratio is 2.18 (long positions account for 68.5%, severely crowded), and below 80,000 is a dense liquidation zone for long positions—breaking this level instantly triggered chain liquidations, with thin weekend liquidity amplifying the stampede.
Next support levels to watch: 79,000 (previous low + psychological level), then 76,267 (EMA200 long-term support). Breaking below the corporate cost line means a batch of treasury companies are now showing unrealized losses on their books, potentially reinforcing passive selling pressure—this is exactly the scenario the macro post warned about last night.
Wicks don’t count, only the close matters. Can the weekend close reclaim 79,000? Let’s discuss in the comments.
$BTC #MacroNarrative #USStockMarket
(Market analysis, not investment advice)BTC slid all the way down from above 81000, hitting a low near 79220, currently around 79500, down 2% to 2.7% in 24 hours. ETH followed the weakness, altcoins even worse, ZEC dropped straight from around 1250 to 1137, down over 7% in 24 hours, leading the decline as expected.
I originally thought the weekend's low liquidity would just cause some grinding that would pass, but looking at the ETF data, the blame isn't all on the weekend. On October 22, the US spot BTC ETF had a single-day net outflow of about $635 million, the largest since June, followed by a combined outflow of about $773 million over the next two days. October overall has already turned negative. During the same period, the entire market saw liquidations of 500 to 600 million dollars, with bulls accounting for over 80%, meaning leverage was truly washed out. Next week, the Federal Reserve meets on October 27-28, with the market expecting no change, maintaining rates at 3.75% to 4%, but with September CPI hotter than expected and high oil prices, the expectation of a rate hike in December remains, continuing to pressure high Beta assets.
My view: Until rate hike expectations and ETF outflows settle down, don't lightly catch a falling knife. If you really want to be bullish, at least wait for the Fed meeting to conclude, US Treasury yields to peak and fall back, and BTC to reclaim 81000 to 82000. Bottom fishing now isn't brave, it's stubborn; better to miss out than to hold on hard. This is just my personal market analysis, not investment advice.
$BTC $ZEC $ETH "Decentralization of minting power" is a false concept? The total supply of CORE is fixed at 2.1 billion, so there is no "minting power" at all.
The so-called "decentralization of minting power" promoted in many campaigns is actually a conceptual sleight of hand. The total supply of CORE is hard-capped at 2.1 billion coins, with the upper limit written into the underlying protocol. No one, no node, can arbitrarily increase the total supply out of thin air; there is no traditional minting power to freely issue new coins.
The block rewards gradually released on the market are simply a pre-planned allocation from the genesis phase, unlocked slowly over an 81-year cycle. This is not free minting. The August 31 vulnerability actually proved that the reward distribution contract had a loophole, allowing validators to exploit the rules to over-issue rewards. The loophole was later patched through a hard fork led by the project team, not by community autonomous control over issuance rights.
The current reality: block reward distribution rules are controlled by code, and the right to modify the code remains in the hands of the official team; there are fewer than 20 active validators who only distribute preset rewards according to established rules, without the authority to decide total supply or arbitrarily mint new coins.
The so-called "decentralization of minting power" is just packaging the block reward distribution rights as minting power to deliberately confuse concepts. Staking BTC relies on Bitcoin's time lock, so the principal is safe and unaffected. With the total supply ceiling locked, where is the minting? This rhetoric is just a word game used to hype a grand narrative. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ Most likely a slight beat, with EPS falling in the $0.60–0.63 range, about 8–12% above the $0.56 consensus; this is a "small beat after expectations have been raised," not a big beat.#现货黄金跌破4000美元关口 Bro, there was big news last night: spot gold broke below the $4000 mark, dropping 4% this week — the first time since mid-July.
Many people are confused. The Middle East is still at war, oil prices have broken 114, so where’s the usual "buy gold in chaotic times"? Why is the safe-haven asset crashing first?
Let me tell you, this is a ruthless liquidity squeeze behind the scenes. When the market is extremely panicked or institutions urgently need cash to cover other positions (like margin calls from the tech stock crash in the US), the first assets they sell are those with the best liquidity and unrealized gains. Gold is the best cash machine.
Also, with oil prices so high, inflation expectations won’t come down. The Fed cutting rates is completely off the table; they might even raise rates. Gold is a non-yielding asset, so with risk-free yields so high, money naturally abandons gold to buy US Treasuries.
This directly affects Bitcoin. Gold and Bitcoin are often seen by macro investors as assets to hedge against fiat currency depreciation. Now that gold is being frantically sold to get dollar liquidity, it shows money is extremely tight in the market. In such a liquidity crisis, how could Bitcoin remain unaffected? This is the fundamental reason Bitcoin is struggling to hold the 80,000 level. $XAU Big Brother Maji's Ethereum long position has been liquidated again, with a cumulative loss of 37.05 million USD
Just now, Ethereum fell below 2300 USD, and all of Maji's $ETH long positions were liquidated, resulting in a cumulative loss of 37.05 million USD. Now, there is only 5,357 USD left in the address.
Two months ago, his account had 150,000.
Then: 150,000 → 12,000,000 → 800,000 → 10,000,000 → 100,000 → 560,000 → 150,000 → 20,000 → 300,000 → 5,357 USD.
Previously, every time, he managed to recover by "rolling positions," but now with only 5,367 USD left, it seems he is a bit unwilling to give up and has continued to go long on Ethereum, currently profiting 300 USD.its investment plan, and storage stocks got hit as well. 😂 Why? Because the market started to ponder: if the AI investment pace of major tech companies changes, will upstream chip orders be affected too? The logic behind MU and SNDK is that AI drives storage demand. But demand growth doesn't mean every company can exceed expectations every quarter. So the last thing I want to do now is to see storage stocks drop and shout "the golden pit has arrived." You can be optimistic about the industry trEveryone is hyping up trading volume, but who is really paying the token holders?
Decentralized derivatives (Perp DEX) is the most competitive sector. But the harsh reality is: the protocol's trading volume is just for show, the token's "cash flow capture" is the real deal. Without mandatory buybacks, no matter how high the trading volume is, retail investors are just spectators.
Look at the mechanism differences among these three popular tokens:
$HYPE is currently the absolute top player and truly extracts value. It uses about 99% of core trading fees directly for buybacks and burns. As long as there are users on the platform, millions of real dollars are backing it daily, with a mechanism that is fully transparent and extremely hardcore.
$DYDX is "well-intentioned but underpowered." Although governance passed an aggressive proposal to use 75% of net income for buybacks, due to market share being eaten by competitors and declining trading volume, the absolute amount used for buybacks each month has significantly shrunk. The mechanism is good but lacks fuel.
$GMX has a threshold in its mechanism. It uses 27% of fees for buybacks but stipulates that the token price must reach $90 before rewards are distributed to stakers. In a weak market, this "conditional buyback" does not provide substantial price support.
Conclusion:
In this sector, HYPE wins with pure and immediate burns, DYDX loses due to income depletion, and GMX is constrained by strict release conditions. When evaluating derivatives projects, don’t just focus on trading volume; first check if the buyback terms have conditions, and whether it’s real money or just empty promises.In two days, the ETF lost about 773 million, with the coin dropping from around 81,000 to below 80,000, down to about 79,500. $BTC has now broken support, and I believe funds are withdrawing.
On Thursday Eastern Time, the spot BTC ETF had a net outflow of about 635 million, and on Friday it lost another 138 million, with IBIT alone withdrawing about 110 million.
In total, about 773 million over two days. The weekly figure is still barely positive, but October overall is already tight.
OKX is currently around 79,550, with a 24h high of about 81,850 and a low of about 79,220. The key 80,000 level has been broken.
Last week, there was talk of about 1 billion entering over three days, but now more than half has been lost in two days, and the price has returned to September levels. I don't really believe this is just a short-term shakeout.
Let's first see if the area around 79,200 can hold, and then talk about standing back at around 80,800–81,800; if the 4H candle closes below about 79,200, it could loosen to around 78,000–77,500.
Do you think ETF redemptions are the main driver, or is it oil prices plus risk aversion ahead of next week's Fed meeting dragging it down?
$BTC
#Today'sMarketTalkJust took a shower, then opened the app and almost thought my phone was broken! BTC just smashed through 80,000, ETH dropped below 2,300, SOL even lost the 100 mark. This sharp drop must have stunned many brothers, right?
$BTC current price 79,347, the 80,000 whole number level completely lost. The most heartbreaking thing is, the 4-hour long-short ratio is still as high as 2.21! What does this mean? The more it falls, the more retail investors think it's a good opportunity to bottom-fish, all stubbornly holding and adding positions. The open interest hasn't decreased at all. With so many bulls crowded in, the load is ridiculously heavy, and the main force simply can't pump the price.
Looking at $ETH now at 2,292, down 4.6%, the data is even more nerve-wracking. The 4-hour long-short ratio has directly soared to 2.72! The screen is full of stubborn retail bulls. ETH has fallen the hardest this round, but the leverage hasn't been cleaned out yet, so another spike could come at any time.
Finally, $SOL is at 99, breaking below the psychological 100 mark. This load is even scarier, with the 4-hour long-short ratio hitting 3.19! The screen is full of people chasing longs. Once a chain reaction stampede is triggered, the downside space is huge.
Summary: This is a short squeeze market now. Retail investors refuse to admit defeat, the market hasn't bottomed yet. I continue to hold empty positions and watch the show, firmly refusing to catch the falling knife. Patiently waiting for this batch of high leverage to explode.
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？
#BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？
#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 Two stoves caught fire at the same time, one spewing rocket tail flames, the other boiling electric car battery slurry; the kitchen thermometer shot straight up to 161%—this isn’t a new dish, it’s about turning the whole kitchen into a pressure cooker. Space Exploration’s quarterly revenue surged to 14.575 billion, net profit 4.404 billion, and the fattest segment turned out to be AI, serving up a hefty 7.56 billion main course, with heat fiercer than the main stove. Musk confirmed that both companies have each set up independent board committees to test the flavors; the merger menu hasn’t been finalized yet, but rumors say a deal might be signed in the first half of 2027; it’s like two head chefs putting their knives on the cutting board to discuss sharing the stove—sauce recipes, plating flow, who manages cold dishes and who handles the hot stove, all still to be decided. In the cellar, there are still 30,221 barrels of old Bitcoin marinade, silent to the nose but pungent when uncovered. Linked to that US stock Token pot, the firepower is like triple-concentrated extra spicy chili oil: the main dish hasn’t been combined yet, but the spiciness has already shot up to the ceiling. The logic of this dish’s ratio is clear: mainstream assets are the heavy main course pressing down the table, altcoins are the fragrant seasoning, and leveraged contracts are the extra spicy chili—two drops to enhance flavor, half a bottle to overturn the table. Right now, this merger is just a taste test; revenue and AI profits are stoking the fire, Bitcoin broth adds a sweet aftertaste, but the transaction structure and business integration are still being chopped and changed on the cutting board; the merger committee has only heated the pot, plating still needs several thickening steps. What does the kitchen fear most? Not the fire, but someone mistaking the tasting ladle for the soup ladle. The pass-through window is already crowded with apprentices watching the spectacle, but the fire blanket is still folded in the corner. This thick soup hasn’t been salted yet, but the chili jar is already opened—whoever treats the extra spicy chili as the main dish will be the first to surrender their stomach. #spacexteslamergertalksThe most easily misjudged aspect of bull market faith is mistaking "no big drop" for "no risk" 🌙 But if even BTC is just grinding in place, who is really bearing the damage? I reviewed several charts last night, and the more I look, the more I feel this cycle is not simply about "whether the bull returns or not," but rather an event-driven repricing: $IRYS Yesterday's warning was definitely not redundant; I woke up to see acquaintances liquidated, with a 10x leverage cap set, the market maker controlling the pace tightly, price barely moving, but positions gone first. This kind of coin creates the strongest illusion—it looks like it's sideways, but it's actually accumulating people. Its weakness is not just in the price trend but in the holding experience. Even more painful is $DOGE. Usually, people complain about it verbally, but when it comes to their positions, they can't bear to leave; 0.1 becomes an obsession, while 0.065 is the liquidation line. Among mainstream altcoins, it bounces fast and falls fast, and even holding the weakest position bought, it endures all the way, essentially replacing discipline with hope. The signal I see here is very clear: the profitability effect of altcoins is narrowing, and rebounds look more like opportunities for trapped holders to exit rather than new funds entering. BTC is oscillating around 80000, not dropping deeply but moving so slowly it tires people out. This pace is the most draining for risk appetite because it gives neither panic nor excitement, only waiting. The bullish path is: as long as BTC holds the range and doesn't break the previous low, ETH and strong altcoins still have a repair window, and high-volatility assets like $DOGE will rebound first. The potential risk is that after a long sideways period, a false breakout could wipe out high-leverage positions, and altcoins will fall more decisively than they rise. So what I care about now is not "whether the bull is still$BTC shorting at 80000 now is really easy to get slapped by a rebound!!!
I said yesterday to short near 82000 on the rebound, the lowest this morning was 79700
Now around 80200, the idea remains:
Short on the rebound, but don't chase the drop above 80000.
The hard resistance today is between 81200-82000
Treat it as a weak rebound first.
Open interest dropped about 2.4% in the past 24 hours, leverage is retreating, but the pressure zone hasn't been reclaimed, so don't rush to call the bottom.
Wait for a rebound short after 81200-82000
If the 1-hour chart closes back below 81200
Then consider a small short position
Around 80000 and the previous low 79750
Don't rush to short at this position
Low liquidity on the weekend to prevent spikes, don't heavily bet on a breakout.
Now just wait to short on the rebound, don't chase at support $ETH $ZEC
#SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ Forward leases and irrevocable contracts worth $82.5 billion are laid out on the chessboard, and the opponent just used a seven-percentage-point blitz to snatch away the key pieces; this is already beyond the midgame stage, as someone has started counting the endgame rooks and pawns before you even finish your move.
Revenue grew 26% year-over-year to $64.6 billion, the pawn structure looks good on the surface, with central doubled pawns standing firm. But grandmasters never focus on those central pawns; they watch piece coordination and move speed. Investment in AI infrastructure is a classic sacrifice for attack: giving up immediate cash flow pieces, betting on promoting a passed pawn within three to five years. But sacrifices must have follow-up forcing moves. If the subsequent checkmate doesn’t materialize, the sacrifice is not tactical but a pure loss of material. Nearly $70 billion was disclosed in July, now raised to $82.5 billion — this sacrifice is still increasing, yet the follow-up forcing sequence has not appeared on the board.
In chess theory, this is called having your own position pinned down. Your pieces are restrained on an immovable line, while the opponent frees their hand to redeploy troops on the other flank. The five-year credit default swap spread widening to about 116 basis points is the pin the opponent has planted on your kingside — it doesn’t directly capture pieces but forces you to ask every time you want to move: after moving, who defends the baseline?
Looking at the linkage on the US stock token side: tokenized markets are essentially the same game but at a lower time control — spot is slow chess, allowing twenty moves of deep thought; token markets are blitz chess, where failing to move within three seconds loses the initiative. When the credit side of heavyweight stocks starts to loosen, the blitz board reacts before fundamentals are realized, which is why price drops come first and explanations follow. Token price slippage is a conversion error between two timeframes, not noise.
What truly decides victory or defeat is whether you have calculated the forcing sequence after the sacrifice; daring to sacrifice is not the key. A sacrifice without checkmate just hands pieces to the opponent; capital expenditures without cash flow output just hand chips to time. This time, the market is not adjusting valuations but recalculating who holds the initiative.
My judgment: the initiative has already changed hands, Meta is now on the defensive, and time panic has begun — every step the defender takes in time panic is completing the opponent’s game record. #metaaispendingconcernsAfter staying above for 66 days, BTC's 50-day moving average has been broken.
Bitcoin News (Odaily / ChainCatcher): Bitcoin closed below the 50-day moving average, with the price around $80,600, marking the first time since August that it has fallen below this average, ending a 66-day streak above it; it is still about 10% above the 200-day moving average. At the time of writing, BTC is around $80,800.
I actually think that breaking the line itself is less important than the inertia of "66 consecutive days" being interrupted; next, we should watch whether it quickly recovers or continues to grind down along the momentum.
Do you believe it will first recover above the 50-day line, or continue to test lower?
Stay tuned, I'll keep writing about how it moves around the moving averages.
$BTC Oh my god, Big Bro Maji's new hedging position is out!!!
$ETH $BTC $SOL
The entire position totals over 58 million U, with the strategy being short BTC, long ETH, and short HYPE, betting on both sides simultaneously.
The BTC short currently has a small floating profit, the ETH long has a slight loss, and the biggest pressure is on the large HYPE short, with a floating loss of over 3 million U and a liquidation price of 98.35.
HYPE, being a small-cap coin, is very prone to forced liquidation scenarios when funds push the price, making it extremely risky.
Although he wants to use long-short hedging to smooth out volatility, don't forget, all positions are high-leverage and full margin.
Hedging does not mean capital protection; if one direction experiences an extreme move, it still can't hold.
Just take a look at the big players' game plan, and never imitate high-leverage contracts!
⚠️ This content is just a position review, not any operational advice!
#中东原油供应风险再起，油价持续走强