Orbit Post Sitemap
Why does the US stock market keep rising?
The long-term upward trend of the US stock market index does not mean it always goes up; historically, there have been multiple significant bear markets, but the overall long-term trend is upward. The US pension system provides continuous fixed investment funds, companies conduct large-scale stock buybacks after profits, the US dollar attracts global capital inflows, combined with the index's survival of the fittest—eliminating declining companies and including emerging leaders—top tech companies harvest global profits, and institutions dominate the market, all jointly supporting the long-term cycle of the US stock market. However, individual stock crashes and delistings are also very common.
In contrast, the A-share market's domestic companies also have a real business foundation, with financial report supervision and dividend mechanisms. But the market has a higher participation rate of retail investors, making it more susceptible to policy and sentiment-driven themes. Delisting enforcement is weaker than in the US stock market, and it lacks long-term continuous incremental institutional funds. The characteristics of short bulls and long bears are obvious; many companies have profit growth, but their stock prices remain stagnant for a long time. Short-selling tools have high thresholds, so ordinary investors mostly can only go long.
The crypto space follows a completely different logic. The vast majority of coins have no real business, no revenue or dividends, and prices rely on capital and consensus speculation. Trading is 24/7 year-round, leverage contracts are prevalent, making it a zero-sum game where one party's gain is another's loss. Without formal regulation, platform risks and zero-value risks are always present. There is no corporate profit as a value base, and price surges and crashes are entirely driven by sentiment.
Comparing the three: the US stock market relies on corporate profits and systems to achieve long-term index growth; A-shares have real asset backing but are constrained by market sentiment; the crypto market lacks value anchors, has the strongest speculative nature, and carries risks far higher than stock markets.
(Information is for reference only and does not constitute investment advice) Global equity funds attracted another $18.62 billion last week, marking the 12th consecutive week of net inflows. The previous week saw $17.27 billion, so this week added over a billion more. The MSCI Global Index hit a historic high of 1163 points. Why is money continuously flowing in? Two factors are driving this. One is that the interest rate hike expectations are quickly fading. July non-farm payrolls directly dropped by 23,000, and PPI remained flat. Market bets on a September rate hike fell from nearly 70% to just over 40%. With rate hike expectations down, risk assets naturally become more attractive. The other factor is that corporate earnings are indeed strong. 85% of companies in the S&P 500 exceeded profit expectations. AI concept stocks like Caterpillar and Palantir posted impressive results, boosting overall market sentiment. The capital flow is also interesting: Europe leads with $13.52 billion in a single week. Asia saw $4.13 billion, and the U.S. shifted from a net outflow of $1.36 billion to a net inflow of $2.58 billion. But one signal is worth noting—tech stock funds saw a $1.7 billion outflow in a single week, ending six consecutive weeks of inflows. Meanwhile, gold and precious metals funds attracted $1.6 billion. This indicates some smart money has started moving into defensive assets. What does this have to do with the crypto space? The logic chain is clear—cooling rate hike expectations → funds flow into risk assets → liquidity expectations ease → medium-term positive for BTC. BTC has been trading sideways around 64,000 for the past few months with no clear direction. Now the macro environment is moving toward a "rate cut trade," which is overall favorable for the crypto market. But it’s not a time to blindly rush in. Tech stock funds are flowing outHahaha, dying of laughter, brothers, digging my own pit!
$BEAT is crashing like dog crap, damn it, I wasn’t convinced and bought the dip again, even opened another isolated margin dip buy, and got trapped again. Really fed up with BEAT, feels like I’m the inverse indicator of the crypto world—buy and it drops, hold and it keeps dropping.
Let me explain why this coin is crashing so badly. The biggest bearish factor is the massive unlock on August 1st. 21.25 million BEAT tokens dumped directly into the market, worth $67.78 million, accounting for 6.87% of the circulating supply. The project team only buys back and burns 790,000 tokens weekly, the unlock volume is 26 times the weekly burn, totally unsustainable.
Look at the current trend. From the all-time high of $10.99, it’s been smashed down to around $0.28, a drop of over 97%. It bounced back a bit a couple of days ago but then turned down again. Although the MACD just turned positive, it looks more like a short-term oversold rebound, not a real trend reversal.
I’m losing more the more I open positions, and the more I open, the more I lose. Full position in BEAT is down 217%, isolated margin dip buy lost another 25%. Bottom fishing in this downtrend is just hurting my own wallet. I’m totally fed up with BEAT, this coin probably will keep dropping, only the whales know where it will finally stop falling. Brothers, I’m laying low, do as you please!
$OKB $BEAT
#闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证 Another big news on-chain. BlockBeats reported that about 3.56 million BTC are lying dormant in addresses, accounting for 17.7% of the circulating supply, hitting a historic high. Once the data came out, the community instantly split into two camps: one shouting "scarcity maxed out, hurry and get on board," the other sneering "this isn’t lost coins, it’s clearly intentional lock-up pretending to be dead." I checked the original report, and the meaning is straightforward — these coins are inferred from inactive addresses and UTXO age. Simply put, coins that haven’t moved for over X years are all counted as "possibly lost" or "long-term held." But here’s the problem: you can’t equate miners who lost their private keys with whales holding mnemonic phrases and earning interest. Chainalysis and Chain.info have also given estimates ranging from 2.78M to 3.61M, such a wide range itself shows no one is absolutely sure. This kind of meme is well understood by veteran holders. In the past, it was often said "Satoshi’s wallet lost 1 million BTC," and every bull market this was brought up to hype a "supply gap." But what happened? Prices fell or rose as they should. What really determines floating supply is market sentiment, not dead on-chain data. Remember the 850,000 BTC lost in Mt. Gox? It was talked about for years, yet in the end, it was offset by ETF buying. So don’t treat "dormant" as a decree; you have to see if it suddenly wakes up before a price crash — that’s the real dump signal. Also, at this time, the US CPI is coming out tonight, the Iran issue is still unresolved, and four Fed members have voted against.At 17:00 on August 17, analysis of the impact of major national stock markets' closing in the Asian session on the crypto market
Today, the major stock indices in the Asian session showed divergent trends: A-shares closed slightly down, the Nikkei fluctuated upward, the Hong Kong stock market surged then retreated, and South Korea was closed with no trading. After all Asian markets closed, the capital sentiment transmitted to the crypto market, with the impact mainly divided into three layers.
First, the overall sentiment of A-shares and Hong Kong stocks was cautious; short-term funds in the Asia-Pacific market did not show obvious risk flight nor large-scale inflows into the crypto market, resulting in a very weak direct impact on large-cap coins like BTC and ETH. Mainstream coins continued to oscillate within the 63000‑63800 and 1880‑1910 ranges.
Second, the market sentiment of the semiconductor storage sector in Japan and South Korea directly transmitted to the US stock market's mapped sector tokens. Intraday fluctuations in Japanese and Korean semiconductor stocks alter market expectations for the storage sector, indirectly affecting the capital enthusiasm for storage-mapped tokens like $SNDK. Today, there was no extreme movement in the Japanese and Korean stock markets, so sector sentiment was not rapidly ignited; SNDK's rise was more driven by crypto speculators themselves.
Third, the Asian session ended steadily, with most Asia-Pacific trading funds exiting to observe. Market focus shifted in advance to the US stock market opening in the evening. Short-term speculators quickly withdrew from high-flying tokens like BEAT and HU, with only a small amount of funds rotating among small-cap coins. After the Asian session closed, overall trading volume in the crypto market further shrank; major players are temporarily unwilling to launch large-scale moves and are waiting for direction from the US stock market.
This article is only a market review and does not constitute any investment advice. Venture capital is flowing from $BTC BTC to US stocks and AI assets. BTC is currently struggling in the $62,000-$64,000 range, unable to effectively reclaim $64,000 for several consecutive days. As long as this "stocks rise, BTC doesn't follow" pattern continues, BTC will find it difficult to have a trending market. The real turning signal will be when funds flow back from stocks and gold into the crypto market. Until then, BTC can only continue to be consumed in a zero-sum game.After the BTC halving, the market logic has completely changed.
The vast majority of people are still trading with the mindset from before the halving: that the halving event itself will trigger a major bull market.
But historical patterns tell us: the main rally driven by halving speculation usually happens before the halving. After the halving is completed, the market logic shifts to focusing on macro liquidity rather than the halving narrative.
Once the halving is done, the positive effect of supply contraction has already been fully priced in by the market.
Subsequent price increases no longer rely on the expectation of "future deflation" but must depend solidly on new capital entering the market.
This is the current situation:
$BTC mining output reduction is a settled fact, the positive effect remains but is no longer sufficient to drive a major market rally on its own.
$ETH does not benefit from halving at all; its market depends entirely on multiple external factors such as ETF approvals, on-chain revenue, and risk appetite in the US stock market.
Don’t keep using the halving story to hype yourself up.
Halving is the foundation of a bull market, but it is not the ignition source. The ignition source is Federal Reserve liquidity.Stablecoin CIP rules are entering the countdown, and $BTC's opportunity lies not in payments, but "after the digital dollar"
The public comment period for the US stablecoin regulatory customer identification rules is nearing its deadline. This news may seem far from $BTC, but it is actually deeply related. Regulators require licensed payment stablecoin issuers to implement customer identification and anti-money laundering rules like financial institutions, which means stablecoins are increasingly becoming part of the banking system. Stablecoins are no longer just settlement tools within crypto exchanges but are being pushed toward a more compliant, more regulated, and more traditional financial position.
This is a big deal for the crypto market. If stablecoins are brought under clearer bank-like regulation, institutions and payment companies will be more willing to participate, and the scale of on-chain dollars may continue to expand. Ordinary users entering the crypto world often first encounter stablecoins rather than $BTC because stablecoins have stable prices, convenient transfers, and straightforward uses. They are like digital cash, suitable for payments, trading, settlement, and cross-border flows.
Many therefore feel that stablecoins will weaken $BTC. Because if stablecoins have already solved the usage needs of digital currency, and $BTC is expensive and volatile, why do we still need it? This question is reasonable, but the answer is not substitution but division of labor. Stablecoins solve "how to use the dollar more conveniently," while $BTC solves "whether to fully bet on the long-term value of the dollar's credit."
These two issues are not the same. The more compliant stablecoins are, the more it shows that the dollar is going on-chain; the more the dollar goes on-chain, the more it will expand the on-chain financial gateway; the bigger the gateway, the more people will keep funds on-chain. Once they get used to the digital dollar, they will naturally ask the next question: if I don't just want to hold digital dollars, is there an on-chain hard asset? This question will ultimately bring attention back to $BTC.
So stablecoin regulation is not the enemy of $BTC; on the contrary, it may be an entry project. Regulation makes stablecoins more like compliant financial products, compliance attracts more institutions, and once institutions come in, they will not only care about stablecoins. They will study custody, trading, lending, collateral, and reserve assets. $BTC, as the clearest, most liquid, and least controversial non-sovereign digital asset, will be reconfigured in this process.
Of course, stablecoin regulation will also bring new risks. The more compliant, the more issues with customer identification, freezing, scrutiny, and secondary market regulation arise. Stablecoins will increasingly resemble financial institution liabilities rather than completely free on-chain assets. This, in turn, will reinforce $BTC's difference: stablecoins represent regulated digital dollars, while $BTC represents digital hard assets that cannot be arbitrarily issued.
What is most worth writing about today is not "stablecoins are good for crypto," but "after stablecoins bring the dollar on-chain, $BTC's non-dollar attributes will become clearer." One is responsible for liquidity, the other for reserve; one depends on the dollar system, the other questions the dollar system; one is a compliant payment layer, the other is a scarce asset layer.
The bigger the digital dollar, the more the market needs a reference that is not the dollar. $BTC's opportunity is precisely hidden after the success of stablecoins. The biggest contradiction in the crypto market right now: institutional base holdings remain, but incremental funds are lagging behind.
The Fear & Greed Index is at 37, indicating market sentiment has entered a cautious zone. BTC$BTC is oscillating repeatedly around 63,000, with a slight pullback of 3% during the week. There has been no panic sell-off, so the medium to long-term trend cannot be declared over yet.
However, ETF data has already issued a warning.
Last week, combined ETF inflows for BTC and ETH$ETH totaled $1.1 billion, proving that institutional allocation demand still exists. But subsequent funds quickly weakened, and the price has consistently failed to break through the 64,000 resistance. With only base holdings supporting the market and lacking continuous incremental off-exchange funds, the market can only repeatedly tug within a range, relying on existing funds to play back and forth.
Do not directly apply the rotation script from past bull markets.
The previous sequence: BTC stabilizes, funds overflow, ETH strengthens, high-elasticity tokens take over, and finally altcoins broadly rise.
But this round of ETF funds is distinctly different; a large amount of institutional funds only allocate to BTC and do not naturally flow to other public chains. The transmission logic of the old cycle may not be replicable.
Several key observation points:
1. BTC: 62,000 is the core defense. Holding this maintains the oscillation pattern; a decisive break below opens further downside.
2. ETH: Don’t just look at the USD price; focus on the ETH/BBTC ratio. An increasing ratio indicates funds truly overflowing from BTC outward. It has now fallen back into the oscillation range, marking the end of the strong phase.
3. $SOL: ETF fund data looks impressive, but the price has not strengthened correspondingly. Pay attention to selling pressure from token unlocks; buying and selling pressure offset each other, causing a disconnect between data and price action. Do not go long solely based on ETF inflows; wait for market confirmation.
Distinguish between two types of rebounds:
If BTC stabilizes, ETF net inflows continue, ETH and SOL strengthen simultaneously, and funds spread to small and mid-cap coins, this is a credible recovery.
If BTC remains flat and individual altcoins pump alone, this is internal fund rotation, with a high probability of a pullback after the spike.
Current strategy: no need to rush to guess or bottom-fish, nor chase various altcoin get-rich-quick stories.
Without confirmed signals of full fund diffusion, sudden bullish candles are more likely traps. It’s better to confirm signals a bit late than to rush into the market.Еще один важный потенциально бычий сигнал по BTC дала сегодня метрика BTCUSDLONGS. Напомним, это набор лонгов на Bitfinex, имеющий обратную корреляцию с ценой #BTC. По тикеру на Trading View BTCUSDLONGS можно удобно следить за тем, как игроки на #Bitfinex набирают и сбрасывают лонги. Исторически набирают они их по мере падения актива и разгружают - по мере роста. Выраженная обратная корреляция с ценой #BTC. Это - типичное поведение "умных денег". Которые разгружают лонги в толпу в тот момент, к🚨Stock market hits new highs, but consumer confidence plunges to the bottom? The most awkward part: Bitcoin surprisingly didn’t benefit from the capital rotation this time.📉👀
The current market feels a bit surreal.
On one side, the stock market keeps hitting new highs, with AI, tech stocks, and commodities taking turns attracting capital; on the other side, consumer confidence has dropped to historic lows.
Logically, when money flows in the market, BTC should get a share of the "soup". But this time, Bitcoin clearly wasn’t the first choice for capital.
Where did the money go?
It’s simple—stocks, AI, and commodities.
In short, capital isn’t lacking places to go; it’s just being "picky."
People are willing to take risks but prefer to put money where they understand and see the story. AI has earnings, capital expenditures, and industry implementation; commodities have inflation and geopolitical logic; stocks continuously deliver profit potential.
Looking at BTC, the short-term narrative isn’t as strong, so capital naturally starts to overlook it.😂
That’s why you should never reflexively think "risk assets will take off, BTC will follow" just because the stock market rises.
The market is never a bucket where all assets rise as the water level rises.
Capital will seek stronger narratives, more certain logic, and easier profit opportunities.
But from another perspective, this is actually worth paying attention to.
If in the future AI and stock capital become crowded to a certain extent, valuations start overheating, and BTC regains a stronger macro narrative and capital appeal, then capital might switch tracks again. Here are my current impressions of the $BTC market and the possible mid-term trend:
1. Right now, the characteristics of the late bear market for Bitcoin are very obvious: low volatility, low topic interest, and a clear decrease in participants (retail investors) and capital.
Although this makes it tough for those still in the market, it’s actually a good thing. Looking back historically, at the end of every bear market, Bitcoin goes through a very boring phase like this.
Looking back at the last bear bottom (end of 2022), Bitcoin’s price stayed below 20,000, consolidating sideways from early November for two months until early January when the market finally started moving. This was also a period of extremely low volatility.
2. In chart 2, the three short-term moving averages on the daily chart (EMA21, MA30, MA60) have completely flattened and converged. The most likely scenario is a move up to test the longer moving averages (MA120, MA200), then continuing down to find a bottom. Actually, whether it breaks the previous low or not is not very significant anymore.
My judgment is that without any major negative news (like the FTX collapse), even if it breaks 57, it won’t drop much further.
The reason is: since Bitcoin is already consolidating sideways here to test patience, it means the chip prices aren’t easy to push down further. A key consideration for the main funds is whether, if they really spend money to push the price down, they can buy it back. Will someone else buy it? 如果周一开盘前你还在犹豫要不要挂空单，那这波回撤大概已经替你做完了选择。 为什么每次大跌都发生在你刚关掉电脑的五分钟内？ 我昨晚到家瞄了一眼盘面，$H 和 $AEON 已经趴在地上不动了。H 我挂在 0.19 的空单倒是成交了，但看着价格一路往下，心里没有半点快感，反而有点想捶墙。AEON 的空单我直接撤了，这种跌法已经不是"回调"，是有人抢跑。 但真正让我挪不开眼的，是 $CAP。 大盘那副样子，它居然还绿着，洗了好几轮都洗不掉持仓的人。我本来想挂在 0.1 的位置做空，结果离现价太远，只能眼睁睁看着它继续硬气。这种时候你会意识到，市场上确实存在一种资金，它不看大盘脸色，只认自己的节奏。 $SNDK 是另一个故事。 开盘冲高那一下，纯粹是 SanDisk 官方放话说要返还 100% 的利润，情绪直接拉满。但这种好消息，往往在落地的那一刻就已经被定价完了。我的空单还挂着，但我心里清楚，这件事没那么简单。 如果我是控盘的人，我不会让它就这么跌下去。 我会先让空头尝点甜头，再拉一波，把那些刚进场的人全部夹爆。所以我现在最关心的不是美股，而是明天韩国的开盘。Hynix 同为存储大厂，只要它继Every quarter, U.S. institutions submit a 13F report to expose their large holdings. On this quarter's list, SpaceX-related names are getting heavier and heavier: Alphabet holds $94.18 billion, Nvidia holds 12.27M shares (about $21 billion), Harvard University holds $2.2 billion, Saudi sovereign wealth fund shares 154.1M shares—Tiger Global is still building new positions in Q2. This isn't some rumor—it's a written disclosure of institutional holdings. The market reviewed the list from start to finish, and $SPCX was brought to the table. Why does the equity disclosure of a private listed company make $SPCX go viral? Because $SPCX's positioning on OKX mirrors SpaceX's equity in the crypto market—institutions get equity in the traditional market, retail investors get tokens in the crypto market, and they're anchored to the same company. 13F Once exposed, it was like telling the market: the most wealthy institutions in the world are voting on SpaceX's long-term value with real money. This endorsement is direct to the narrative of mapped tokens. $SPCX The current price trend also responds to this narrative. On the 60-day chart, it fell from the June high of 190 all the way down to around 104 at the end of July, down more than 40%, then stabilized and rebounded in August: the MA20 rose from 126 all the way to its current level, MA5 (139.95), and MA#S&P Earnings Exceed Expectations, Why Is Wall Street Still Cautious?
The boss has something to say
S&P earnings exceeded expectations, yet Wall Street remains cautious.
Q2 earnings grew 31% year-over-year, surpassing the previous 23% forecast. The full-year earnings growth forecast was raised from 15% to 27%. Earnings outpaced the index gains, and the P/E ratio dropped from 26x to below 22x.
The data looks great, but institutional year-end average targets only see 7894 points, just 1.4% above the current closing price. Money hasn’t flowed in yet; everyone is waiting.
VIX has dropped to its lowest level this year, and option positions have shifted from downside protection to bullish calls. Risk appetite is indeed warming up, but there’s a problem with this setup. Low volatility combined with clustered bullish positions means the market will become very sensitive if there’s an unexpected move in interest rates or earnings.
Whether the index can break 8000 depends on two factors: whether the profit margin improvements brought by AI can spread to more industries, and whether cooling consumption will start to erode corporate revenues. If earnings continue to be revised upward, risk appetite can persist. If earnings stall, Bitcoin will have to adjust accordingly.
Bitcoin missed out today; shorted Ethereum near 1911 and secured a double profit, very comfortable. Sandisk was also within expectations $BTC $ETH $SNDK
The above analysis is time-sensitive; stop losses must be set on trades. Good luck.$AEON | Market Update
Current Price: $0.08237
$AEON is building a crypto settlement layer designed for the emerging agentic economy, connecting digital assets with real-world payments and AI-driven transactions.
With AEON recently gaining wider market attention and trading activity, the $0.08 zone is an interesting level to watch for the next move.
#DailyOrbit @OKX中文 #SPCX Shareholding Structure Revealed, Harvard's 13F Heavy Position
Harvard holds $2.2 billion heavily invested in SPCX, accounting for more than half of Harvard's publicly disclosed U.S. stock portfolio. One of the world's top universities is putting more than half of its public market stock allocation into a newly listed company — this is not diversification, this is voting with their feet.
The 13F filing on August 14 revealed that Harvard Management Company (HMC) holds approximately 12.9351 million shares of SpaceX, corresponding to a market value of $2.21 billion. This accounts for 51.9% of its $4.26 billion U.S. stock portfolio. The second largest holding, TSMC, is only $350 million, less than one-sixth of SpaceX.
However, note that the $4.26 billion disclosed in the 13F is only 7.5% of HMC's total assets of about $57 billion. SpaceX accounts for about 3.8% of the overall assets. While $2.2 billion looks significant, it is just a portion of the entire portfolio.
Other institutions are also entering simultaneously. Alphabet holds 551 million shares ($94.18 billion), the largest 13F reported position. Fidelity FMR holds 303 million shares ($51.66 billion). Nvidia holds 122.8 million shares ($20.98 billion). Approximately 1,697 filers disclosed SPCX positions.
But the 13F reflects data as of June 30, when SPCX closed at $170.86. As of August 14, it closed at $140, down about 18%. Harvard's $2.2 billion book position has now shrunk to about $1.8 billion.
The key point is that the smartest money globally is positioning SpaceX as a core AI infrastructure asset. But 13F disclosures are historical data, not a buy signal. SPCX has fluctuated greatly, dropping from $225 to $104 before rebounding to $140. Institutions are buying, but that doesn't mean the current price is good. Harvard's cost basis is far below the current price; its position and chasing the stock at this level are two completely different stories.📊 First, let's look at the battlefield: Bulls are charging ahead, while bears lie scattered everywhere. Before the market opened on August 17, SanDisk surged nearly 6%, briefly spiking to $1773. It closed last Friday at $1528, with a pre-market high of $1773 — a more than 35% surge in five days. On August 13, Investor Day released heavy guidance: mid-to-high double-digit revenue growth for fiscal years 2028-2030, gross margin around 80%, operating margin about 75%, and adjusted free cash flow margin around 50%. Eight long-term NBM agreements have been signed, covering about 50% of bit shipments for fiscal 2027 and about two-thirds for fiscal 2028, with a total contract value of approximately $94 billion. JPMorgan's target price is $2250, Goldman Sachs $2200, and Bernstein even calls for $3000. Bulls are celebrating wildly. What about the bears? Bears have accumulated losses exceeding $3 billion. But at the end of the celebration, there is often someone holding a scythe. ⚔️ Germany's Blitzkrieg: Why is this precisely the best time for bears? The core of Blitzkrieg has never been "head-on collision," but rather "concentrating superior forces to strike a fatal blow at the enemy's most unexpected moment and from the most unexpected direction." Guderian's tank corps did not confront the Maginot Line head-on — they went through the Ardennes Forest, circled behind the line, and pierced it with a single strike. SanDisk's current bulls are like the Maginot Line. On the surface, it's impregnable — long-term contracts locked in, 80% gross margin, AI demand explosion, institutions collectively bullish. But the Maginot Line has a fatal weakness: it can only defend the front, not the flanks. The bears' blitzkrieg$SNDK has recently become a market focus, but its trading logic is not simply the narrative of “AI storage shortage.” Signals released during the company’s investor day event, including an 80% gross margin level, long-term growth outlook for 2030, and signed long-term contracts, have collectively driven the stock price higher. However, for shareholders, these narratives themselves do not constitute a basis for decision-making; what really needs to be examined is how much of the current $1641 per share price reflects expectations. The core question the market is answering is: $SNDK is not trading on whether “storage products will increase in price,” but on whether it can convert the extraordinary profits achieved in Q4 of fiscal year 2026 into sustainable profitability after fiscal year 2027. This means that short-term financial report performance is only a starting point for validation, not the end point. The next financial report needs to focus on two dimensions: first, the sustainability of the high gross margin level in Q4, i.e., whether the extraordinary profits come from one-time factors or structural improvements; second, the delivery pace and pricing terms of long-term contracts, and whether they can support the market’s extrapolation of the profit curve after fiscal year 2027. If these two dimensions cannot provide clear evidence, the growth assumptions implied by the current valuation will face repricing pressure. $SNDKMarket Analysis｜SNDK Continues to Surge: Institutional Narratives Drive the Market, While Risks of Overpriced Expectations Gradually Accumulate
📌Key Points: This round of rally is driven by the ongoing fermentation of industry narratives since Investor Day. The logic that long-term contracts smooth out the cycle has been widely accepted by institutions. Short covering combined with analysts raising target prices has jointly pushed the stock price higher, but there are underlying fundamental concerns. The stock price has already priced in optimistic long-term expectations in advance.
Core Highlights
1. Multiple Drivers Behind This Rally
Institutions recognize that the long-term contract model can smooth out storage industry cycle fluctuations; a large number of shorts were forced to cover, creating a short squeeze effect; coupled with brokerages consecutively raising target prices, multiple forces resonate to continuously push prices to new highs.
2. Hidden Contradictions in the Market
Consumer demand remains weak, and the entire rally heavily depends on the main theme of AI capital expenditure by cloud providers.
The market has already priced in optimistic growth for the coming years, essentially pricing based on fantasy. If subsequent cloud provider capital expenditures fall short of expectations, reality will not keep up with the high valuation, and the correction will be very severe.
3. The Essence of the Bull-Bear Game
Bulls: AI storage is a rigid demand + large companies locking in revenue through long-term contracts, weakening cyclical attributes and enjoying valuation uplift.
Bears: No recovery in consumer demand, stock price overpricing long-term expectations; once growth margins decline, a valuation crash will follow.
4. Trading Insights
Do not subjectively guess the top in a strong trend, but be clear that the foundation of the market is a long-term story. The hotter the narrative phase, the more cautious one should be about the risk of expectation falsification; do not simply get swept up by the market's rise. Rotational bounces are happening — just not everywhere
$BICO, $BEAT, $KAITO, $ALLO and $APR have all seen sharp rotational rallies recently, some triggered by buybacks, product launches, or oversold snapbacks after brutal flushes. Liquidity clearly found its way into these names.
$SNDK tells a different story than the "99% drawdown" narrative floating around — it's actually the tokenized SanDisk stock, and it peaked above $2,300 in late June before pulling back roughly 55% on profit-taking and AI-memory sector jitters. Real pullback, but nowhere near the collapse some posts are describing.
Point still stands though: not every asset is catching this rotation. Some are consolidating while others get the liquidity. Worth checking the actual numbers before assuming a name is "dead" — SNDK's chart doesn't match the doom framing it's getting.
NFA
#SandiskDealsInFocus #BTCVolumeDriesUp #OKXOutcomeLeagueS2 Today the entire market weakened, and the core reasons are explained clearly and are easy to understand:
1. Classic rule: buy the expectation, sell the fact
Before the CPI release, funds had already positioned themselves betting on "moderate inflation, no rate hikes," leading to a preemptive rebound based on expectations.
The data release fully met market expectations, with no unexpected positive surprises.
No surprises = no new buying interest; the short-term funds that had positioned earlier took profits and exited, turning the positive news directly into selling pressure.
2. No new external inflows, on-exchange funds collectively taking profits
Currently, it is purely a game of existing funds with no new money entering to take over positions.
BTC has repeatedly tested the 65500 resistance level but has been unable to break through with volume, resulting in a large accumulation of trapped sell orders above.
The bulls' attack is weak, confidence among funds is declining, and short-term traders are reducing positions to avoid risk, leading to a collective market pullback.
Recently, $BTC spot ETFs have also seen phased capital outflows, increasing institutional investors' cautious sentiment.
3. All altcoins are highly correlated with BTC; they rise and fall together
Don't expect a bear market mindset of "sector-specific safe havens"; at this stage, the vast majority of coins are risk assets:
When BTC turns downward, whether mainstream or altcoins, it's hard for any to remain unaffected.
The differentiation only reflects the degree of decline:
✅ Strong performers ($OKB, $GRVT, $HYPE) have smaller declines and stronger support;
❌ Weak coins like $FIL, $WLD, $ORDI, $AVAX will experience larger pullbacks.
4. Market sentiment has entered a wait-and-see phase
#闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证 Market Analysis｜In a strong one-sided uptrend, abandon the trading mindset of a ranging market
📌Key point: In a ranging market, it’s common to place limit orders waiting for pullbacks. In an extreme one-sided uptrend, this often leads to missing out on sustained gains; different market phases require switching to the appropriate trading framework.
Key Takeaways
1. Ranging and one-sided trends require completely different strategies
In a ranging market, waiting for pullbacks to place low-price limit orders is an efficient strategy.
However, in a truly strong one-sided uptrend, there won’t be deep pullback opportunities to enter; small-scale retracements are quickly followed by renewed rallies. Stubbornly waiting for pullbacks with limit orders will cause you to miss out on major moves. In extreme conditions, you need to accept market orders to chase the price.
2. Historical case study of SOL
During SOL’s main uptrend from 38 to 210, it surged strongly for several months with only minor 1-3% pullbacks before pushing higher again, hardly providing deep pullback entry windows.
In such a market, waiting for a big pullback to go long results in missing out; shorting against the trend mid-move offers almost no chance to recover, ultimately forcing a passive loss exit.
3. Practical trading insights
- Main uptrend phase: Don’t stubbornly wait for big pullbacks; small retracements are entry opportunities. Adjust your entry approach to fit the strength of the trend;
- Biggest risk: In a strong one-sided trend, subjectively predicting the top and shorting against the trend is a major source of losses;
- Market cycles rotate; one-sided trends don’t last forever. When the market shifts from one-sided to ranging, your trading mindset must switch back to a ranging approach. $MOONSHOT opened this high. Only fools would come, institutions value it at only 40 billion, and you opened directly at 60 billion#闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证
$SNDK The core catalyst this time is the NBM long-term agreement signed between SanDisk and leading cloud providers—8 customers, weighted over 4 years, guaranteed total revenue of $93.9 billion, locking in more than half of shipments for fiscal year 2027 and about two-thirds for fiscal year 2028, also including customer prepayments and price floors. The cyclical stock logic is shifting positively to a "stable cash flow target."
But don't get carried away at the open:
✅ Optimistic scenario: capital continues to trade for valuation re-rating, volume increases and stabilizes at 1600-1620, testing 1650-1700, with the storage sector (Micron/Hynix) strengthening in sync to continue the trend.
⚠️ Cautious scenario: positive news priced in, high open followed by a pullback forming a long upper shadow, with concentrated profit-taking from earlier gains.
Watch three signals: ① whether opening volume increases significantly; ② strength of Micron/SK Hynix correlation; ③ sentiment of the US tech market. The long-term agreement supports the performance floor but also caps some of the price increase benefits, so this is not a stock to chase blindly.Can Wall Street really "manipulate" BTC? They can't control the trend, but they can amplify the spike you fear most.
The so-called Wall Street "manipulating BTC, ETH"—their real advantage isn't predicting price rises or falls, but having access to larger capital, deeper liquidity, and more comprehensive hedging tools.
The first layer is ETFs. Continuous subscriptions and redemptions of spot ETFs directly change the market's marginal buying pressure, but ETF inflows don't mean all naked longs—institutions can simultaneously use futures and options for basis trading and risk hedging.
The second layer is spot depth. Large funds actively sweeping orders or reducing positions at key price levels may push prices to trigger stop-loss zones, which are then further amplified by leveraged liquidations.
The third layer is derivatives. In Q2 this year, CME's average daily trading volume of crypto derivatives was about 250,000 contracts, with an average daily open interest of about 216,000 contracts. Institutional hedging has become an important part of price discovery.
But note:
Liquidation heatmaps are not "whale maps," and large funds cannot create long-term trends out of thin air.
What they are better at is—using weak liquidity, crowded positions, and macro events to accelerate the direction the market is already set to move.
In the short term, look at the capital structure; in the long term, focus on liquidity cycles, real demand, and macro policies.
Institutions can create waves, but the tide's direction is never decided by any single trader. $BTC #BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 Don't understand U.S. Treasury bonds? Don't know why U.S. Treasuries can affect U.S. stocks? This article is enough.
When watching U.S. stocks, besides $NVDA Nvidia, $AAPL Apple, $SNDK SanDisk, you also watch CPI, non-farm payrolls, and earnings reports.
But if I had to add only one indicator, I would definitely add the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield.
Because many times, the real "waterline" for U.S. stocks is not in the stock market but in the bond market.
As of the 14th, according to U.S. Treasury data:
2-year U.S. Treasury: 4.17%
10-year U.S. Treasury: 4.68%
30-year U.S. Treasury: 5.25%
Especially the 30-year yield standing above 5% again is no longer a number to ignore.
1. What exactly is the U.S. Treasury yield?
The U.S. government borrows money by issuing Treasury bonds.
Buying U.S. Treasuries essentially means lending money to the U.S. government.
One of the easiest things to get wrong here is that Treasury prices and Treasury yields move inversely.
Suppose a bond will pay you a fixed $100 in the future.
If everyone is buying frantically, the Treasury price rises from 90 to 95, but you still get $100 back, so your yield naturally decreases.
Conversely, if no one wants to buy, the price falls from 95 to 90, but you still get $100 back, so the yield for new buyers increases.
Therefore, selling Treasuries → bond prices fall → yields rise.
This is why when you see the 10-year Treasury yield suddenly spike, it actually means the bond market is repricing.
2. Why do U.S. Treasuries affect U.S. stocks?
Because Treasury yields are essentially one of the most important risk-free rate benchmarks in the entire U.S. dollar asset world.
Buying a company's stock involves business risk, industry risk, and valuation risk.
Why are we willing to take these risks?
Because we expect to earn more than risk-free assets.
Suppose the 10-year Treasury yield is only 1%.
At this time, a company offering a potential long-term return of 5%–6% looks quite attractive.
But if Treasuries offer nearly 5% directly, the situation is completely different.
I don't need to research any company; lending money to the U.S. government yields nearly 5% nominally, so why should I pay a high valuation for stocks?
Therefore, stocks must offer investors higher expected returns.
How to achieve this?
The simplest way is for stock prices to fall first.
This is the core logic of how Treasuries affect U.S. stocks.
3. What kills valuations is the "discount rate"
What is a stock?
From a financial pricing perspective, it is actually the present value of future cash flows.
The Federal Reserve itself uses this basic framework in its Financial Stability Report: asset prices depend on how much future earnings are worth today after discounting.
Here's a very rough example.
A company earns 100 dollars 10 years from now.
If the discount rate is only 3%, it is worth about 74 dollars today.
If the discount rate rises to 5%, it is worth only about 61 dollars today.
The company is still the same company.
It still earns 100 in the future.
Nothing has changed.
Only the market's required return has increased, so the money willing to pay today is less.
So:
Rising Treasury yields
→ rising risk-free rates
→ rising market required returns
→ rising discount rates
→ falling stock valuations
This is why every time the long-term Treasury yield suddenly surges, high-valuation tech stocks usually suffer the most.
4. Why are tech stocks especially afraid of Treasuries?
Because tech stocks are essentially typical long-duration assets.
Banks, energy, and traditional manufacturing earn much of their profits now.
But many AI, software, cloud computing, and biotech companies are valued based on how much they can earn five or ten years from now.
The further the cash flow is from today, the more sensitive it is to the discount rate.
So the same Treasury yield rise from 4.2% to 4.8% may have limited impact on a traditional company with a PE of 10.
But for a tech company trading on imagined earnings ten years out, with a PE of fifty or sixty or even unprofitable, the impact is on a completely different level.
This is why rising interest rates do not hit all stocks equally but primarily hit the "longest duration" assets first.
5. Treasuries directly compete with stocks for money
Why was there previously an asset shortage?
Because Treasury yields were too low.
If risk-free returns are only 0%–1%, pensions, insurance, funds, and individual investors must keep pushing into stocks, real estate, credit bonds, PE, VC, and crypto assets to get higher returns.
This essentially means risk-free assets don't pay, forcing everyone to take risks.
But now it's different.
When the 10-year Treasury approaches 4.7% and the 30-year exceeds 5%, some capital naturally starts to question why they must take risks.
So capital flows back from risk assets to fixed income.
Therefore, high Treasury yields not only pressure stocks through valuation models.
They also compete directly with stocks for capital through asset allocation.
Why are U.S. Treasury yields so high now?
This question is even more important.
Many people's first reaction is because inflation is high.
This is only partly correct.
The real trouble with long-term Treasuries now is several factors stacked together.
First, high "real interest rates"
As of the 14th, the U.S. 10-year breakeven inflation rate is about 2.27%.
Recently, the 10-year TIPS real yield is about 2.4%.
This data is very important.
Because it shows that the 10-year Treasury near 4.7% cannot simply be understood as the market expecting runaway U.S. inflation.
Long-term inflation expectations are not out of control.
The truly abnormally high part is the real interest rate itself.
In other words, after subtracting the market's long-term inflation expectations, investors still demand a fairly high real return from the U.S. government.
This is especially unfriendly to stocks.
Because the real cost of capital is exactly what enters the core of asset valuation.
Second, the U.S. government really needs to borrow a lot
Bonds are also commodities.
If supply increases but demand does not increase proportionally, better prices are needed to attract buyers.
In the bond market, this means lower prices and higher yields. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到
Starting to consider $CORE.
From now on, all begging income plus big bro's tips, half will be used to buy CORE spot — but only if the coin price is below 0.02; once it rises, it’s not cost-effective anymore. Honestly, in the next altcoin season, it wouldn’t be unreasonable for CORE’s price to rise above 0.1, right? I’ve already placed an order at 0.019, not sure if it will fill, but I feel this level should be about right.
I will also focus on $BICO, its volatility is huge and very tempting. But it must be bought at the bottom spot; doing contracts is a sure way to lose — it’s had two big rallies in two months, from 0.02 to 0.06, and from 0.01 to 0.09. For the next wave, I’ll buy spot below 0.015, then sell in batches at 0.04, 0.06, and 0.08, and clear out immediately if the trend changes.
The other half of the income will definitely be all-in on BTC spot, buying blindly below 65000, and selling in batches at 80k, 100k, 120k, and 160k. Talk is cheap, but I’m really accumulating. But honestly, the liquidity below 0.02 for CORE feels a bit thin; I don’t know if my order will fill. Maybe I’m just too optimistic? But if the altcoin season really comes, this price is indeed attractive.
Are you guys waiting for CORE or BICO? What’s your cost? Share it so I can reference it 😭 $SNDK SanDisk has clearly peaked this round! Last night it quickly plunged and fell back!
NAND is a strong cyclical commodity with no moat, yet the market overvalues it as an AI growth stock. Samsung's capacity recovery plus high-end SSD impact means supply tightness might be a mirage; historically, high gross margin phases often mark cycle peaks, with significant price drop risks.
SanDisk is selling a commodity like Nvidia, with ridiculous valuation. Samsung can ramp up production and slash prices anytime, and Western Digital has long cashed out at high levels. High gross margins are just a cyclical illusion; historically, every peak is followed by a crash, and once supply loosens, it collapses. #闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证 ENGLISH BELOW FIL 4小时级别空头结构，95分置信度的机会。 $FIL/USDT - 做空 交易计划：（置信度：95.00%） 入场区间：0.6632 – 0.6644 止损：0.6683 止盈1：0.6605 止盈2：0.6582 止盈3：0.6549 为什么关注这个机会？ 日线趋势明确偏空，BTC 方向中性没有拖后腿，这种环境下 FIL 的反弹更容易被当成出货机会。4小时周期参考，当前价格 0.6638 正好卡在关键位附近，短期动能指标 RSI 已经在低位区，说明下跌还没走完，但短线追空要注意节奏。 入场区间 0.6632-0.6644，如果价格回到这个区间我会考虑介入 SHORT。第一目标 0.6605，第二目标 0.6582，第三目标 0.6549。止损放在 0.6683，这个位置破了说明结构可能变了，得认错。波动率方面 ATR 显示单小时波动不大，所以仓位不需要太激进，等回踩进场比追空更舒服。 这单的核心逻辑是日线空头趋势下的顺势做空，关键就看 0.6638 这个位置守不守得住。如果跌破，下方空间打开；如果反复震荡，那就要重新评估。整体把握大概九成左右，但市场🚨Big news! SoftBank is aggressively reducing its holdings in $TSM, is the AI chip logic about to change?
Breaking news💥 SoftBank has directly cut its TSMC shares by 71.5%, making a significant exit. At the same time, Nvidia is scaling back its massive OpenAI guarantee plan, signaling contraction among AI giants.
What does this mean for the market?
Although US storage stocks have rebounded in the past two days, there are already divergences within the AI industry chain, with major players cashing out their chips.
Storage altcoins are highly correlated with the sentiment of US stocks like SanDisk and Micron. The reduction of holdings by US AI chip giants will suppress the upside potential of storage tokens; the rebound looks more like a correction rather than the start of a new bull market.
✅ Regarding Bitcoin:
If AI tech stocks experience collective capital outflows, it will cool down overall risk asset sentiment, and BTC is likely to be dragged down as well. Even if there is a short-term rebound, the resistance above remains heavy.
Additionally, Anthropic's revenue expectations are off the charts, so AI is not all bearish; the bulls and bears are fiercely competing.
The current market is in a correction phase, so avoid heavy positions chasing highs.
$SNDK $MU The U.S. government sent $288 million in crypto assets to Coinbase: The real issue is not "whether they sold," but who actually controls these coins
Previously, a U.S. government-associated wallet transferred about 3,941 BTC + 30,007 ETH to Coinbase Prime, with a total value of approximately $288 million.
The market's first reaction was: Is the government going to dump?
However, on-chain data can only prove that the assets entered Coinbase Prime; it cannot prove a transaction has occurred. Coinbase Prime itself offers custody, financing, and trading services simultaneously, so transfers to the trading platform can at most be seen as an "increased possibility of disposal," but not equivalent to a sale.
What truly deserves attention is the difference in regulations.
The March 2025 executive order stipulates that government BTC officially entering the strategic Bitcoin reserve cannot be sold; whereas for non-BTC assets like ETH entering the Digital Asset Stockpile, the Treasury Department can formulate disposal strategies according to the law.
Therefore, the key is not to panic by watching addresses, but to confirm:
Has this batch of BTC been officially counted into the strategic reserve? Is the transfer a custody migration, a return to victims, or asset disposal?
Before official documents appear, any conclusion that "the U.S. government has already sold BTC" is premature.
On-chain data tells you where the coins went; legal documents determine why they went there. $BTC $ETH #BTC沉睡供应创新高，稀缺性再受关注 The old problem in the storage chip industry is the cycle. When demand is good, production expands wildly; when demand cools, inventory piles up, prices collapse, profits collapse, and stock prices ride a roller coaster. What $SNDK did at Investor Day was to try to smooth out this cycle hurdle with contracts. What they presented was very straightforward: they signed long-term business model agreements with 8 major customers, locking in most of the bit shipments for the next few years, along with minimum revenue guarantees. In plain language, it means — "I sell you capacity, you guarantee to buy at least this much, and the price is negotiated in advance." For $SNDK, this means revenue has a floor, and some inventory risk is transferred out; for downstream customers, in the current frenzy of AI data centers hoarding storage, locking in capacity equals locking in their lifeline. Along with this long-term agreement, the company also gave three hard targets: annual revenue growth of 15% to 19% from 2028 to 2030, non-GAAP gross margin of 80%, and operating margin of 75%. Additionally, they added a $14 billion buyback authorization and committed to returning 100% of excess cash to shareholders. The market’s view of these numbers is very direct — storage stocks were previously valued as cyclical stocks with low multiples; now $SNDK says it has contracts as a safety net and buybacks as support, so the market is willing to reprice it according to AI infrastructure stock logic. This is the fundamental reason why the stock price surged more than 13% in a single day on Investor Day, breaking above $1500. Institutions are increasing their positions. Wedbush reiterated "outperform," with a target price straight现在最值得研究的，不是美股为什么强，而是： 同样的宏观环境，为什么Crypto明显掉队？ 标普500上周刚刷新历史高点，最新一周仍录得约0.4%上涨；与此同时，美国10年期国债收益率虽仍高达约 4.68%，但9月加息概率已降至约29%，美元也有所走弱。 按传统逻辑，这至少不应该是Crypto最差的环境。 更有意思的是，黄金已经重新站上 4400美元。所以“高利率压制无息资产”并不足以解释BTC为什么趴在6.3万美元。 真正的问题可能来自Crypto自身： 现货增量资金缺乏连续性。 8月3—7日BTC现货ETF曾净流入约8.5亿美元，但8月10—14日迅速反转，累计净流出约 3.85亿美元，周五仍流出5620万美元。机构不是彻底离场，而是在明显降低追价意愿。 BTC：6.4万仍是多头必须拿下的门 BTC目前约 63,318美元，日内最低一度到62,670。 我继续看： 63,000—63,200：短线承接区；
**62,500—62,700：**失守后要防61,500—62,000；
**64,200—64,500：**真正的短线压力。 如果64,500始终拿不回来，那么所有反弹都只能定The market showed a mild rebound today, with $BTC and $ETH slightly bouncing back, while $SOL lagged behind: Is ETF capital shifting direction?
Capital has not fully entered the market.
$BTC is quoted at $63,362, up 0.46% in 24 hours; $ETH at $1,892, up 0.63%; $SOL fell back to $75.25, down 0.25%.
Total market capitalization rose to $2.26 trillion, an increase of 0.39%.
ETF data shows clear divergence: last week, BTC spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $390 million, with Fidelity's FBTC outflowing $153 million; ETH spot ETFs had a net outflow of $2.26 million; however, SOL spot ETFs had a net inflow of $10.26 million, with BSOL contributing $8.83 million.
In sector performance, Base rose 2.97%, LRTFi up 2.62%, PerpDEX up 2.40%.
$HYPE rose 3.10%, continuing to drive PerpDEX.
$ZEC increased 4.29%, $XMR up 1.93%, with the privacy sector maintaining strength.
NFTs dropped 4.24%, while GameFi, AI, and DePIN continue to face pressure.
Currently, it looks more like a structural recovery; BTC ETFs are still seeing outflows, indicating institutional buying has not truly returned; although SOL has net inflows, the scale is not enough to reverse the price. At this stage, focus can be on strong sectors, but chasing highs should still be done cautiously.
#BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 What the Strait of Hormuz is pricing now is not oil, but uncertainty itself
Negotiations between the US and Iran are going back and forth, shipping risk warnings remain, yet oil prices have not spiraled out of control like during the most panic-stricken times. On the surface, the market seems calm, but in reality, two forces are clashing: on one side, the strait, oil tankers, insurance costs, and route risks; on the other, weakening global demand and inventory buffers
I think this is where crude oil trading is most difficult right now
There are positives, even strong ones; but if demand is also weakening, risk premiums won’t translate linearly into prices. You think you’re buying war risk, but the market still shows you consumption, refineries, inventories, and the dollar every day
So before the agreement is finalized, don’t rush to lock in a direction
Oil prices now are like a contract without a stamp
Everyone is waiting for that final signature
#霍尔木兹协议待落地，原油风险等待定价 #SPCX Shareholding Structure Revealed, Harvard 13F Heavy Position
Heavy positions indicate both confidence and a potential source of selling pressure. What’s next for $SPCX?
Normally, our first reaction is:
Institutional heavy position = Strong optimism = Positive for $SPCX
In fact, institutional heavy holdings do indicate one thing: SpaceX’s long-term fundamentals and growth expectations are recognized by top-tier capital.
Having Harvard, Nvidia, Fidelity, and BlackRock all holding large stakes essentially means the market sees open pricing potential for its future.
But on the other hand, institutional heavy holdings never mean they won’t sell.
On the contrary, the more concentrated the holdings, the more concentrated the potential selling pressure once liquidity is available.
Lock-up period ends → Unlocking begins → Liquidity release
At this point, institutional behavior shifts from “price makers” to “traders.”
Heavy holdings represent both confidence and a potential source of concentrated selling pressure in the future.
Institutional heavy holdings are a double-edged sword for SPCX itself.
On one side, it’s a fundamental endorsement, indicating high asset quality;
On the other side, it’s a structural risk—once entering the liquid market, chips may be released in concentrated amounts.
Therefore, for $SPCX, when we chase high prices again, we should consider whether the market can absorb the selling when these top institutions start to sell? As of the week ending August 12, global equity funds saw a net inflow of $18.62 billion, marking the 12th consecutive week of capital inflow, with a cumulative inflow reaching $237.57 billion.
The core driver of the capital inflow is the cooling of the Federal Reserve's rate hike expectations. The July non-farm payroll data was unexpectedly weak, inflation slowed, and the PPI remained flat month-over-month; these three factors combined caused the market's bets on a September rate hike to drop significantly. Strong corporate earnings further boosted risk appetite.
However, funds did not flow into BTC; instead, they accelerated their exit.
There was a clear structural divergence in capital flows. European equity funds had a weekly inflow of $13.5 billion, U.S. equity funds $2.58 billion, gold and precious metals funds $1.6 billion, bond funds $18 billion, and money market funds $28.4 billion.
The $18.6 billion inflow into the stock market indicates that global risk appetite is indeed recovering. But BTC was excluded; funds chose traditional stocks, bonds, and gold rather than crypto assets. Some institutions pointed out that risk capital is moving from BTC to U.S. stocks and AI assets.
BTC is currently struggling in the $62,000-$64,000 range, unable to effectively reclaim $64,000 for several consecutive days. As long as this pattern of "stocks rising, BTC not following" continues, BTC will find it difficult to have a trending market. The true turning signal will be when funds flow back from stocks and gold into the crypto market. Until then, BTC can only continue to consume itself in a zero-sum game.The most interesting thing about the crypto market is that emotions always follow prices. When $ETH moves sideways, the market says it has "no story"; But once volume starts to surge, people suddenly rediscover its core value: 🔹 one of the 🔹 world's largest smart contract ecosystems, DeFi, stablecoins, and a large number of L2 infrastructures 🔹 (RWA) and key settlement layers for 🔹 tokenization of on-chain assets, an on-chain financial network continuously explored by institutional funds. And there's a data point that's often overlooked: Ethereum completed about 200 million transactions in Q1 2026, setting a new quarterly network transaction record, yet ETH's price barely reacted in sync at the time. Currently, $ETH price is around $1.89K, with a 24-hour range of about $1.87K–$1.91K. This is a common market misalignment: fundamentals change first, but prices may react last. Recently, institutional interest in Ethereum has not faded. At the end of July, there were several consecutive days of spot ETH ETF inflows, and institutional allocation logic still revolves around DeFi, stablecoins, staking, and asset tokenization. So I won't categorize $ETH as "missed opportunities" just because I'm temporarily bored. The market rarely rewards things that everyone agrees with. It prefers to reward assets that most people no longer care about, but whose capital and fundamentals are beginning to change. $ETH has already bored the market for some time. The problem isFrom "Bull Comes" and "Bear Goes" to "Stumble Body": DEV who launched four consecutive tokens, who did they cut on BSC?
The speed at which memes are created in the on-chain Meme circle is absurd, and the memory of retail investors being repeatedly harvested is equally short-lived.
In the past two days on the BSC chain, a Meme coin called "Stumble Body" has been flooding major communities and Twitter, with its market cap quickly pushed by hot money to around $310,000. Even more surreal are the various hype slogans—some shout that it’s a semiconductor concept, others even call for "dividends from Nvidia," but the label that most excites retail investors’ adrenaline is that someone uncovered this contract is the fourth token issued by the previously explosive "Bull Comes" DEV.
In the community, some emotionally shout that "Bull Comes is returning to the community, returning to Meme," but looking at the on-chain transfer records, this is just another standard, no-more-standard-than-this, conveyor-belt token launch game.
From the original "Bull Comes," to the later "Bear Goes," and now the homophone semiconductor-riding "Stumble Body," the same DEV has consecutively launched new contracts in a very short time.
Many retail investors eager to get rich quickly have a strange blind spot in their understanding, thinking that as long as a star DEV has launched a hit before, the new token will definitely replicate a multi-fold miracle. But the harsh truth on-chain is that for the high-frequency, consecutive token-launching whales, each new token is not a community belief poured with heart and soul, but a cash machine that extracts liquidity from existing retail investors while the hype is still hot.
The script for each new coin is almost identical.
At zero blocks and extremely low market cap stages, related wallets and insider rat trading have already completed the low-cost accumulation of chips. By the time the concept ferments on Twitter and the community is filled with the frenzy of "returning to the community" and "the fourth beloved child," the market cap has often already been pushed to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Retail investors who rush in at this point to catch the token think they have caught the next phenomenal narrative, but in reality, they are providing the perfect exit counterparty for early whales in an extremely thin liquidity pool.
The so-called "Stumble Body dividends from Nvidia" is just a fancy cover for an air token. In the extremely competitive cycle where existing funds fight each other, recognizing the liquidity predation behind consecutive token launches is often much more reliable than blindly trusting a DEV’s reputation.
Facing a star DEV who has launched four tokens consecutively, do you think this new token is a hot-potato opportunity to get rich quickly, or just pure liquidity provision for the whales?
---
The above content only represents personal views and does not constitute any investment advice. DYOR, NFA.
#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 "Goldman Sachs Changes Tune, BTC Faces Critical Moment"
Goldman Sachs has changed its stance.
While the market is still focused on the September rate hike, Goldman Sachs directly waved it off — you’re betting wrong. The data is too weak, inflation is tame, the timing of rate hikes needs to be pushed back, and easing might come earlier.
For $BTC and $ETH, the macro environment is sending warm signals, but distant support won’t solve immediate needs. ETFs are still seeing net outflows, buying pressure hasn’t caught up, and the resistance at 63800-64500 remains unshaken. Before a volume breakout, news can only provide a floor; don’t expect a price rally.
The mid-term logic is consistent: the weaker the data, the stronger the rate cut expectations; a weaker dollar plus liquidity release is potential support. But ETH needs BTC to first stabilize; don’t expect an independent rally.
Warm signals are warm signals, but if BTC can’t hold 63700, it’s all in vain. Watch the 62800-63700 range; don’t jump at every rumor — wait for confirmation before acting.
#BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 $BTC 目前仍在 $63K附近震荡，但我更关注的不是价格本身，而是成交量持续偏低、市场流动性变薄，以及大量长期沉睡供应继续处于休眠状态。 最新数据显示，超过 356万枚 BTC 已被归类为长期“丢失/沉睡”供应，约占流通量的 17.7%。与此同时，公开上市矿企今年已累计减少约 2.8万 BTC 持仓，市场边际卖压依然值得关注。 所以目前的结构更像是： 🔹 BTC：$62.6K–$63.8K 区间反复 🔹 ETH：约$1.89K，短线相对BTC表现更有韧性 🔹 SOL：约$76附近，风险偏好仍明显弱于主流资产 🔹 成交量：偏低，突破缺少足够资金确认 🔹 市场情绪：谨慎，ETF需求走弱也限制了上涨动能。 ETH近期虽然略强于BTC和SOL，但宏观环境并没有真正转向宽松。疲软的消费信号、Fed政策不确定性，以及AI板块持续吸引资金之间仍在形成拉扯。 我的理解很简单： 现在不是明显的熊市崩盘，也还不是确定的风险偏好回归。 BTC能够在低成交量下守住关键区域，说明卖方暂时没有完全占据主动；但如果后续没有新的资金进场，低波动横盘也可能只是更大行情前的压缩阶段。 所以我会继续保持一定仓位The market is still watching whether BTC can break through 64,000, but there is a more worthy change to study within institutional funds: ETH has outperformed BTC's ETF "capital efficiency" for two consecutive months. According to the latest statistics from DWF Labs, if we do not compare absolute dollar amounts but instead divide ETF net flows by their respective fund sizes: June:
ETH ETF net outflow was about 4.65%, while BTC outflow was 8.09%; July:
ETH ETF net inflow was about 3.19%, while BTC was only 0.34%. In other words, the relative capital inflow speed of ETH in July was about 9.4 times that of BTC. Why is this data important? Because the BTC ETF size is much larger than ETH's, simply comparing "how many billions of dollars flowed in" naturally favors BTC. But capital flow/AUM measures: for every 100 dollars of existing assets, how much new capital is willing to be allocated? From this perspective, institutional marginal preferences are changing. Even more interestingly, DWF Labs' judgment in May this year was completely opposite—they thought ETH ETFs were continuously bleeding, reflecting a lack of institutional interest. By June–July, the situation began to reverse. This at least indicates: institutions do not always only buy BTC; there may be the first real portfolio rebalancing happening within crypto. Why is ETH regaining attention? One potential variable is that yield attributes are re-entering the ETF system. In March 2026, Bl #闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证
The entire network is now focused on tonight's stock opening.
Goldman Sachs has set a target price of 2200, and 8 long-term agreements have locked in 93.9 billion in shipment contracts. Whether the market will gap up and confirm the previous gains as a new platform depends entirely on tonight's opening.
The impact on the $SNDK token can be analyzed in three layers.
Short term, xSNDK has been pushing up over the weekend, indicating that capital is already pricing in the benefits of this long-term agreement in advance. But the real direction depends on tonight's stock opening and how the market prices the 93.9 billion agreement. If the stock opens high and continues to rise, $SNDK will enter a new round of price revaluation. If it gaps up but quickly falls back, it means the market believes the positive news has already been priced in.
Mid term, the biggest value of this long-term agreement is turning AI storage demand from a "story" into a "contract." The 93.9 billion locked shipment volume over 5 years means the fundamentals are indeed becoming more concrete. If xSNDK can hold its position driven by the stock, the mid-term valuation center may move upward.
Long term, SanDisk's logic is indeed changing. From a cyclical stock that followed NAND price hikes, it is moving toward a hard tech asset with stable cash flow. If this long-term agreement model can be replicated, the valuation method for xSNDK might be redefined.
Don't be deceived by the current gains; have your own core thinking—that's the most important. Of course, you don't need to overthink it; just follow the trend and be patient.
$SNDK $BTC BTC is approaching 64,000 again: The real danger is not missing out, but misjudging a "rebound" as a reversal
BTC surged to $63,641 today, with trading activity picking up compared to the weekend, but 64,000 remains the first short-term test.
I won’t turn optimistic just because of a few bullish candles.
The reason is simple: the latest ETF data hasn’t proven that institutions are chasing prices again. Last week, BTC spot ETFs had a cumulative net outflow of about $385 million, with $56.2 million still flowing out on Friday.
So if 64,000 is only driven by leverage without spot following, the higher the open interest, the more violent the subsequent spikes and deleveraging could be.
ETH is also approaching $1,900 again today but still shows no clear independent trend.
I continue to watch the 1860–1920 range: only a firm hold above 1920 counts as structural improvement, while losing 1860 means returning to defense.
SNDK presents a different risk: AI storage logic still attracts capital, but after a big rally, its beta is extremely high, so if the market weakens, profit-taking could accelerate quickly.
It’s not that there are no opportunities now, but there is still a need for a real-money vote between "emotional rebound" and "trend confirmation."
Whether 64,000 can hold and where ETF funds ultimately flow on Monday—
this is the real answer for the next phase of the market. $BTC #BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 In the past three days, people trading stocks and crypto have probably been going through a very painful time. First, over the weekend, Bitcoin's performance was like a sudden cardiac arrest. We know the crypto market is quiet, and weekend trading volume is low, but the volume and volatility shrinking to this extent is really unexpected.
Then on Monday, storage stocks continued to rebound. Keep in mind that South Korea was closed today, so it was actually the Chinese A-shares playing the role of the engine, especially the giant ChangXin, which rose 12% and broke the 4 trillion market cap.
Among the three major storage stocks, SanDisk's rebound was the strongest, continuing the positive momentum from last week's SanDisk Investor Day. The market's attitude toward future cash flow sustainability and the cyclical nature of NAND storage has changed, with the cyclical stock characteristics gradually smoothing out.
As for how far this rebound can go, we still need to wait until the main stock market opens tonight to see whether the previously trapped shares will be used as an opportunity to reduce positions or if, after price discovery, investors plan to hold for a higher level. From the current 1750 upwards, strong resistance only appears around 1850-1950. $SNDK #闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证 Last week, the US BTC spot ETF saw a net outflow of $390 million, with Fidelity's FBTC experiencing a net outflow of $153 million; the ETH spot ETF had a net outflow of only $2.26 million.
This data looks more like a divergence in capital structure rather than a "unified institutional exit." BTC outflows are more concentrated, ETH is overall nearly balanced, but weekly data can still be easily influenced by portfolio rebalancing, redemptions, and basis trading. To judge the trend, at least several consecutive weeks of net flows, whether prices break key levels simultaneously, and Coinbase premiums need to be considered. Looking at just one day or one week can easily mistake rebalancing for a directional move.#BTC trading volume shrinks, can ETF buying pick up again?
The market is getting quieter and quieter
$BTC trading volume continues to shrink
$ETH bulls and bears are both reluctant to act
Fewer spikes, narrowing volatility, the market is stuck in a stalemate
Most retail investors are lying low and watching
Those who should have cut losses have done so, those who haven't are stubbornly holding onto floating losses
What the market lacks now is not chips, but incremental buying
The biggest variable now is whether spot ETFs can warm up again
If institutional funds only stop outflows, it’s far from enough
We need to see sustained net inflows to hope to break the current low-volume deadlock
Currently, only the selling pressure has weakened, but buyers have not truly entered the market
Low volume sideways trading often foreshadows a market shift
Without ETF buying support, rebounds are hard to sustain
No guessing direction, no betting on one side
Patiently watch two signals
Whether trading volume can expand again
Whether ETF funds turn from outflow to sustained inflow BTC starting to form a bottom does not mean the lowest point has been reached.
Now several long-term indicators are getting interesting:
200-week moving average: about 63,000
Monthly RSI: dropped to around 43
MVRV Z-Score: entering historically low territory
Looking at these signals together, BTC is no longer considered expensive.
But the last bear market also taught a lesson:
The 200-week moving average can be broken,
and the undervalued zone can last a long time.
So next, it’s not about guessing "Is 60,000 the bottom?"
If there is another drop, will it end near 60,000, or continue approaching the "realized price line" at 50,000–55,000?
For these two levels, my future position sizing will be completely different. With explosive demand growth and limited supply expansion, storage shortages are likely to persist for several years, so in the long term, $SNDK, $SKHY, and $MU, the three leading storage companies, will likely remain popular for at least two to three more years.