Orbit Post Sitemap
Fundamental Research Report $NMR / Numeraire (AI/Computing Power) $3.20
To put it simply: Numeraire ($NMR) has a composite score of 52/100, with a rating that emphasizes narrative over execution. Breaking it down into three layers: the company team has cash reserves, the protocol network shows signs of paid usage, and token value capture has been realized.
Project Overview: Numeraire (token $NMR) operates in the AI/computing power sector, focusing on AI modeling for hedge funds. Competitors include FET and TAO. Traditional computing power rental is dominated by giants like AWS and CoreWeave, charging by GPU hours, with A100 monthly rents ranging from $12,000 to $25,000—expensive and high-threshold. On-chain solutions fragment computing power for bidding, allowing suppliers to avoid centralized audits and turn idle GPUs into available supply. Average customer price ranges from $50 to $500/month, requiring settlement in USDC or fiat. This is a narrative-driven sector, with usage dropping 60-80% in bear markets. Positioned as an end-to-end vertical platform.
Product Implementation: The protocol layer is officially operational, with on-chain dashboards showing accumulating protocol fees and evidence of paid usage. The latest version was not found; there were 60 valid commits in the past 90 days.
User Metrics: Monthly active addresses (MAU) and daily active addresses (DAU) are undisclosed; 24h trading volume is $80.00M; TVL not found. Wallet addresses do not equal unique monthly active users; concentration of large addresses may overestimate real user count. Revenue side: user fees undisclosed; supplier income is about 80-90% of user fees (distributed to LPs and nodes); protocol treasury income is $2.00M; token holders have no annualized buyback and burn mechanism. The 24h trading volume represents business flow, not revenue. Company profitability does not equal protocol profitability, and protocol profitability does not equal token holder profitability. Code side: 60 valid commits in 90 days, 25 active contributors; latest version not found. GitHub is grade A evidence and can be directly verified. Investment background: company equity financing can be checked on PitchBook/Crunchbase (grade A); token private and public sales can be verified via whitepaper, release schedule, and on-chain unlocking contracts (grade A); market makers and ecosystem grants are grade B and do not represent long-term holdings by technical VCs; technical integration is grade B based on API/SDK evidence; strategic partnerships and logo walls are grade D. NVIDIA GPU usage does not equal NVIDIA investment; exchange listings do not equal strategic exchange investments.
Token Metrics: Total supply 1,300,000,000; circulating supply 950,000,000 (73.1%); FDV $4.20B; next unlock in 2026-Q4 (adds +3.50% to circulation); no clear annualized buyback and burn. Is buying tokens required to use the product? Partially yes, with moderate value capture (staking/discounts/governance). Comparing peers (using consistent criteria, no cross-sector comparisons): Circulating market cap: Numeraire $3.00B, FET undisclosed, TAO undisclosed. FDV: Numeraire $4.20B, FET undisclosed, TAO undisclosed. Annual revenue: Numeraire $2.00M, FET undisclosed, TAO undisclosed. Monthly active addresses or users: all undisclosed. Data based on public snapshots; missing data supplemented by official or industry sources. Valuation: circulating market cap $3.00B, FDV $4.20B, P/S 1500.0x, FDV divided by revenue 2100.0x. Pessimistic scenario discounts $3.00B by 30-50%, neutral range oscillates, optimistic scenario includes revenue doubling, burn implementation, and enterprise clients, aligning FDV P/S with top peers.
Summary: Fundamentals are solid (score 52/100). Token value capture is realized (buyback/burn/gas). Circulating market cap is relatively expensive compared to fundamentals, reflecting over-optimism; FDV is moderate. Main risks: short-term large unlocks causing price dumps, protocol revenue dropping to zero long-term, token demand relying solely on incentives (usage collapses if incentives stop). Key future indicators: weekly protocol fees, burn amounts, active address retention, TVL/loan balances, GitHub version releases. Information sources are public; logic is self-developed; this does not constitute investment advice. Data deviations over 30% require reassessment.
That's all for now, see you next time.
#FundamentalResearchReport #Crypto #Research #OKXOrbit$BTC $ETH $SNDK From July 27 to August 2, 1,638 BTC at an average price of $63,957, cashing out 104 million, half dividends paid and half repurchased preferred shares. Sounds pretty scary, right? But looking at the data for the first seven months of this year, 174895 BTC bought and 3,620 BTC sold, selling volume less than a fraction of the buy. The ledger looks like this: holding 842138 BTC, average cost $75,419, current price around 63,000, floating loss about 17%, book unrealized loss 10.7 billion But this isn't a cash loss—it's a book loss caused by fair value accounting rules. Over 99% of losses were never sold. They said they'd never sell coins at first, but now they're forced to sell. What's the difference? It's not that beliefs have changed—it's that STRC preferred shares have dropped to 89 yuan with a par value of 100. A 12% dividend can't be skipped. Selling coins is the fastest way to raise funds, so the company shifted from just buying and not selling to active capital management. The core goal isn't to hoard coins, but to bring STRC back to 100. If this price gap isn't fixed for a day, large-scale buying won't bring it back. This will have a negative impact on BTC and short-term sentiment The biggest bulls have started selling. Just that statement is shocking enough, but structurally, the fundamentals haven't changed: 4 billion in cash reserves, 840,000 BTC in position. As long as Bitcoin's price doesn't crash, this system can keep operating. The real question is whether they will continue selling in the future. The company has authorized a maximum reduction limit of 5 billion USD, about 78,000 BTC, which accounts for less than 10% of total holdings. Is the quota large? Actually, it's not large, but the direction...ETH's critical level at 1,848—broke it but then reclaimed it.
Current price 1,863, up 1.1% in 24h. Two days ago on 8/2, there was a wick down to 1,824 breaking 1,848. That day I wrote, "Whether it's a fake breakout or a real breakout depends on the 8/3 open." The answer is out—it was a fake breakout. On 8/3, no US-Iran conflict broke out at the open, Trump canceled the large-scale airstrike and moved to negotiations, and ETH was directly pulled back above 1,848, now holding steady at 1,863. 1,848 turned from resistance back into support.
This fake breakout carries a lot of information. On 8/2, I said "there is buying below 1,824," now confirmed—not retail buyers but institutions stepping in. WEEX data shows the 50-day moving average at 1,783, with price still above it, so the mid-term structure remains intact. Simply put, the wick down to 1,824 hit leveraged positions; spot positions were untouched. This kind of wick breakout followed by a quick recovery actually strengthens support below 1,848—because the market is telling you with real money that there are buyers willing to step in below 1,824.
But don’t rush to turn bullish. The trend direction is still sideways to weak, not a reversal. From 7/27’s 1,973 to now 1,863, it’s dropped 110 dollars in eight days, a 5.6% decline. EMA5/10/20 are tightly clustered between 1,870-1,890, a typical consolidation signal—short-term bulls and bears have roughly equal cost bases, no clear advantage. MACD is still a death cross; the negative bars are shrinking but not positive yet. RSI is 51.97, neutral to slightly weak. These indicators tell me ETH is grinding inside a range, not building a bottom for a rebound.
The resistance above price is clear—1,872 is today’s 24h high, touched briefly then retreated. Above that, 1,890 is the toughest level, where EMA5, EMA10, and EMA20 all converge. Breaking above 1,890 signals bulls; failing to break means continued consolidation. Above 1,890 there’s 1,926 (last week’s high), 1,948 (SAR reversal point), and 1,975 (7/27’s concentrated short zone). Each layer presses down; without breaking one, you can’t see the next.
Support below is 1,848—the just confirmed fake breakout bottom, now the first defense line. Below that, 1,828 is today’s 24h low, then the round number 1,800, 1,783 is the 50-day moving average and mid-term defense, and at the bottom 1,758 is July’s low.
Why didn’t breaking 1,848 on 8/2 cause a crash? The core reason is US-Iran shifted from conflict to talks. Trump canceled the large-scale airstrike on 8/1, and from 8/2-3 moved to negotiations, saying "this is Iran’s last chance," with phase one opening the Strait of Hormuz and phase two denuclearization. Iran verbally denies talks with the US but is actually advancing Strait navigation with Oman. Oil prices plunged—WTI down 5.11% to 80 USD, Brent down 4.73% to 83.77. US stocks rose three days in a row, risk appetite returned. The fear index rose from 17 to 25, still in fear territory but less extreme than 8/2.
But don’t celebrate too early; two things remain uncertain. One is the 65% chance of a rate hike in September, 10-year US Treasury yield at 4.74%, 30-year hitting a 19-year high—oil prices fell, but the previous rise already pushed inflation expectations up; whether rates drop depends on next month’s PCE. The other is the CLARITY Act; Polymarket lowered its passing probability to 31%. Congress recesses on August 10, likely too late to review, and failure of this bill is bearish for crypto.
Regarding positions, here’s my take. For longs near 1,850, 8/2 was the toughest day; now at 1,863 profits have returned, so move stop loss from 1,824 to 1,845 to lock in profits. Take half profits at 1,890; if it breaks, hold for 1,926. Those who bottomed between 1,824-1,837 have the best positions, with 26-39 dollars profit; move stop loss to 1,848, reduce half at 1,890, fully exit at 1,926, or hold to bet on a rebound if talks succeed. If no position, don’t enter at 1,863—the odds aren’t good. Either wait for a pullback to 1,848-1,855 to lightly test longs with stop loss at 1,828, or wait for a breakout above 1,890 and enter on pullback with stop loss at 1,870. For shorts, placing orders at 1,890 has better odds than chasing longs at 1,863; stop loss at 1,905, target 1,855, but keep position under 5%. Heavy positions in a choppy market are suicidal. Leverage 2-3x is enough; ETH’s 24h volatility is only 45 dollars, high leverage betting direction in a choppy market dies fastest.
My own half position at 1,837 on 8/2 that I didn’t close is now alive with 26 dollars profit. Honestly, I should have closed that day; holding on was pure luck—if US-Iran had really fought, 1,837 would have been mid-mountain. Lesson learned: in front of geopolitical black swans, technical supports are just paper.
The key variable ahead remains US-Iran. If talks succeed, ETH will surge to 1,890-1,926 or even 1,948; if talks fail, it will retest 1,848, and breaking 1,828 looks at 1,800. I bet talks will succeed because neither side can afford war—the US military ammo stockpile needs 4 years to replenish, and Iran’s economy can’t hold out. But betting is betting; position sizing must be cautious.
Do you think the dense moving average zone at 1,890 will break this week? I bet it won’t—MACD is still a death cross, no major positive news means no direct breakout. But if US-Iran officially ceasefire and reopen Hormuz, that’s major positive, and 1,900 is a given. Are you planning to short at 1,890 or wait for a breakout to chase longs?
#从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 $ETH 🛡️ XAUT/USDT (4H) – Safe-Haven Stability
📊 Trade Setup Details
* Pair / Timeframe: XAUT / USDT (4-Hour)
* Bias: 🟢 LONG / HEDGE
* Entry Zone: 4,025.00 – 4,045.00
* Stop Loss (SL): 3,985.00
🎯 Take Profit Targets
* TP1: 4,095.00
* TP2: 4,155.00
* TP3: 4,225.00
💡 Why This Setup:
Tokenized Gold stable near $4,041.5 (-0.07%) with $4.87M volume, continuing its tight holding range.
⚠️ Disclaimer: NFA – Educational purposes only.
#Crypto #XAUT #Gold #Trading #OKX The Fed itself looks like a scene of division, so why do you dare to fire all your bullets at once?
A patient has had a fever for five years without fully subsiding—the inflation rate has been above the 2% target for more than five years. Yet the heart rate is slowing down, unemployment is at 4.2%, and labor force participation is at its lowest since the pandemic.
Reducing the fever (tightening liquidity) will slow the heart rate, while strengthening the heart (easing policy) will cause the fever to flare up again. This is the Fed as of August 2026.
On July 29, the Fed held steady for the fifth time at 3.50%–3.75%. The real news isn’t "no change," but the 9-to-3 split—three members want to raise by 25 basis points, the first time since 2016 that three dissenting votes have come together. Chair Powell himself said the meeting felt like a "family argument."
Hawks (Harker/Logan/Kashkari): Inflation has lingered above target for over five years; Harker says the longer the delay, the higher the cost of pulling back; Kashkari prefers gradual tightening now rather than being forced into aggressive moves later; Logan bluntly says—without restraint, inflation will continue to exceed the target. The logic: if you don’t tighten now, the cost will be greater later.
Doves (Waller): Employment is cooling, layoff plans are increasing, raising rates now is like giving a patient with a slow heart a strong stimulant.
What is new Chair Powell doing? Three sentences: inflation is high, the target is to return to 2%, and I am confident. But he doesn’t say which path to take. Morgan Stanley calls it "clear target, unclear path," in plain language: who knows where we’re going, no roadmap given.
The 30-year US Treasury yield hit 5.23%, the highest since 2007. The market prices with its feet. CME prices a 67.2% chance of a 25bp hike in September, but only one member publicly supports a cut. The market bets on a hike, but inside the committee there’s debate over hike or cut—how do you expect to price that?
BTC has retraced nearly half from the 126,000 high, down about 28% year-to-date, now hovering around 63,000. High inflation → tightening expectations → risk assets fall; high inflation → fiat currency weakness → digital gold rises. The same data, two opposite interpretations, chaos in one word.
What Powell leaves behind is not direction but confusion. STS Digital calls it a "new volatility mechanism"—repeatedly oscillating between cuts, pauses, and hikes.
Jackson Hole is coming in August, and two CPI reports before September. The Fed itself has no clear plan.
So why do you dare to fire all your bullets at once?
Not investment advice, DYOR#Korean Leveraged ETF Trading Volume Drops 90%, Volatility Narrows
To get straight to the point: the previous wild surge and plunge in Korean storage stocks were entirely driven by leveraged funds creating an emotional market; now that leverage has been cut off and trading volume slashed drastically, prices will truly start to reflect fundamentals. I've already cleared my short-term speculative positions and am preparing to gradually build long-term positions once stability is confirmed.
Here’s my own recent strategy:
When Hynix was tanking along with the Korean stock market recently, I bought a long position at a low point, then caught the 17% surge on July 31. I closed out before it reached the previous high.
It’s not that I’m bearish on the storage cycle; I clearly understand that surge wasn’t driven by fundamental changes—an 18% drop over three days followed by nearly an 18% rise in one day can’t be explained by industry supply and demand flipping overnight. Essentially, it was a deep pit created by forced liquidations from high leverage, followed by short covering and leveraged bottom-fishing pushing prices up. The whole process was a capital game, with little relation to industry logic.
Now regulators have raised the margin requirement for single-stock leveraged ETFs to 30 million KRW, effectively blocking retail investors from high leverage. Trading volume has plunged from 12.4 trillion KRW to 1.24 trillion KRW, a full 90% drop.
With leveraged funds withdrawing, the "excess liquidity" in the market is squeezed out. Any future rise will be driven by genuine institutional buying and real demand; any fall will reflect true selling pressure and valuation adjustments. There’s no need to guess if it’s a leveraged sell-off or a short squeeze; the trading logic becomes simpler.
Many think no leverage means no big moves, but I see this as a positive.
Previously, tokenized Hynix volatility was crazier than altcoins, making technical analysis almost useless. Holding positions was nerve-wracking with constant fear of flash crashes, making long-term holds impossible. As volatility narrows, price action will increasingly align with the real storage industry cycle, making it more suitable to invest based on the big-picture logic of AI and HBM, without daily chasing of pumps and dumps.
Of course, don’t rush to bottom-fish; there will likely be aftershocks during the deleveraging process. Wait for a week or two of consolidation and a clear direction before acting, and the risk-reward ratio will be much better.
Did you trade along with the Korean stock fluctuations this time? Did you profit or ride a roller coaster?
$SKHYNIX The price has bounced back, but I'm more interested in what the on-chain data and whales have been doing these past two days. $BTC has risen from just over 62,000 to 63,800. On the surface, it looks like the bulls have won, but if you take a look at the net flow on exchanges and the actions of large addresses, you'll find that much of the rebound is actually short squeezes in the derivatives market, not large spot purchases. The difference between these two determines whether this move is a "bottom" or just a "rebound": real spot accumulation with actual money gives the rebound legs; pure contract short squeezes will burn out and revert to the original state. So don't just be happy watching green candlesticks—asking "who is buying" is often more valuable than "how much it has risen." Those who understand, understand.#CLARITY法案剩72小时，动议仍未提交
The CLARITY Act has 72 hours left, and the motion has yet to be submitted.
The Senate recesses on August 10, which is the last window. Procedurally, if a motion to end debate is submitted before August 5, a procedural vote can still be gambled on August 7. But so far, the bill has neither appeared on the full Senate schedule nor has any motion been submitted. The Senate agenda released on Monday doesn't include this bill at all, not even a slot reserved. Senator Lummis said he has been trying to reserve a spot for this bill for weeks, but the schedule can't fit it, and nothing said helps.
The vote gap hasn't been closed either. The bill needs 60 votes to overcome the filibuster; Republicans have 53 seats, so at least 7 Democrats need to support it. Currently, only two Democratic senators publicly support the bill, 5 votes short. And there is no sign anyone is going to flip.
Expectations have collapsed. On Polymarket, the probability of the bill passing this year dropped from 51% last week to about 31%, while it was as high as 82% in February. The market is voting with its feet, and expectations are rapidly retreating.
The impact on the crypto space is not about "if it will drop," but "how much it will drop." Bitcoin's rebound since late June was partly based on the expectation of the CLARITY Act passing. Now that expectation is fading, that premium will be reabsorbed. If the bill ultimately fails, short-term market sentiment won't look good.
The mid-term impact is even greater. The core of this bill is to give the CFTC exclusive jurisdiction over the "digital commodity" spot market, resolving the long-standing classification dispute in the industry. Institutional funds have been waiting for this regulatory framework; without a clear compliance path, Wall Street money won't come in at scale.
My judgment is straightforward — this bill is basically dead this year. Even if a motion can be submitted before August 5, it takes time from procedural votes to final passage, which is completely insufficient. What passed the House with 294 votes may get stuck in the Senate's last 72 hours.
August 5 is the final submission deadline; after that, any push will have to wait until after the midterm elections in September.
What do you think?
$BTC $SNDK $ETH $BEAT this trade
I reversed too early
The short position from a few days ago
Entered at 4.1172, exited at 3.0391
Made over 100 U
Just closed it, haven't caught my breath
Then reversed to long at 3.1334
Now the price is 2.87
Unrealized loss of 82%, lost 25 U
Margin is 28 U
Not a small amount of money, and I can't save face
Looking back at the 15-minute chart
It dropped straight down from 3.55
No decent rebound in between
I went long at 3.13
Which is like stepping onto a falling elevator
Reaching out to press the up button
A typical falling continuation catching a flying knife
Just made money on the short position on this coin
Then immediately wanted to go long
Not because the market is problematic
But because I rushed back right after exiting
Still stuck in the rhythm of the previous trade
No adding to position, no stubborn holding
Set a bottom line at 2.70
If it breaks down with volume, close the position
If it rebounds near 3.0, also close
No dragging it out
$PUMP is moving quite strong today
Daily chart shows a volume breakout
Around 0.0022, just a step away from the previous high
But Meme coins are too volatile
Chasing highs easily gets stuck at the top
Not chasing
$UB is moving steadily
Daily chart shows a V-shaped reversal
MACD golden cross above zero line
0.16 is support
Wait for a pullback without breaking it before considering
If no opportunity, let it run on its own
This $BEAT trade
Not losing due to technique
Losing due to rhythm
Just finished profiting from the short
Hastily grabbed another bite
Choked on it
25 U, a costly lessonToday's follow-up question: Do you have fixed position management rules? Share your fund allocation methods.
Yes, all rules learned from losses.
I used to have no idea about position management, just went all in. Put all the account money into one trade, at most split into two. If the direction was right, a single pullback would shake me out, no bullets left to add positions, just watching the price rally afterward. If the direction was wrong, even worse, stuck with losses, cutting losses hurt but not cutting hurt more.
Later I set a strict rule: never fully invested, always keep some reserve.
Now I allocate like this:
· Divide total funds into 4 parts. One part buys $BTC and $ETH as base positions, rarely moved, like saving money. One part for swing trading, enter and exit as opportunities arise. One part kept empty waiting for opportunities, usually untouched, only used when there's a crash to have bullets to shoot. The last part is backup funds, used only in extreme market conditions.
· Single trade no more than 20%. Even if this trade loses all, it's only 20% of total funds, which is acceptable.
· Enter and exit in batches. When confident, enter half first, add the other half if price drops. Same for taking profits, take half off first to secure gains, let the rest run. When price rises, no panic; when it falls, still have bullets, feel secure.
In summary: never go all in at once, keep some reserve, no matter how the market moves, you won't be afraid. Missing out is better than losing everything.
How do you manage your positions? Let's chat in the comments.👇
#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 ‼️Beware of the US stock market pullback‼️Oil prices have risen📈
$CL $BZ reversed upward
The reaction that followed is the weakening of the US stock market
Oil prices plunged yesterday
Starting to reverse today
Mainly due to geopolitical news reversal
The US released news of delaying strikes on Iran and the possibility of negotiations
Causing oil prices to plummet on Monday
But Iranian officials directly denied that negotiations are underway
Indicating that the US-Iran conflict and the shipping risk in the Strait of Hormuz have not truly been resolved
The market re-added the geopolitical risk premium
Driving oil price rebound
Inventory and demand expectations support
The market expects US crude oil inventories to likely decrease tonight
Strong refinery demand during the US summer driving season
Provides fundamental support for oil prices
The US dollar slightly weakens
Market expectations for a Fed rate cut heat up
The US dollar slightly falls back
Oil priced in dollars becomes cheaper for buyers using other currencies
Bringing buying support
Strong oil, weak US stocks, weak mainstream coins
Seems to have become a chain reaction
So be cautious:
US stocks open high and close low + early realization of AMD earnings
#从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开
#财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 Is SpaceX safe just because it rose 6%?
Last night, $SPCX surged from around $105 to $116, finally closing at $114.53, up nearly 6%.
This bullish candle is strong, but I think it's still too early to call it a reversal.
Tonight is SpaceX's first quarterly report since going public, but the real challenge lies ahead: on August 6, up to 911.5 million old shares will become eligible for sale. Based on the current stock price, this corresponds to a market value of about $104.4 billion.
To be clear, the unlocking is not a new issuance, nor does it mean these shares will definitely be sold. It won't increase the total share capital out of thin air; what changes is the supply of tradable shares in the market.
Currently, SpaceX's float is about 640 million shares, and the shares to be unlocked exceed the current float. If all enter the market, the tradable supply could theoretically increase by about 142%. This is the biggest pressure after the earnings report.
SpaceX's financials are interesting.
In 2025, revenue is $18.674 billion, up 33.2% year-over-year; adjusted EBITDA reached $6.584 billion, and operating cash flow was $6.785 billion. Looking at these alone, it doesn't seem like a poorly performing company.
But on the other hand, the net loss for the year was $4.937 billion. Adding up the data disclosed by the three business segments, capital expenditures in 2025 have already exceeded $20.7 billion.
The money is mainly burned on Starship, the Starlink satellite network, and AI data centers.
Among them, the connectivity business where Starlink operates is actually quite profitable: annual revenue of $11.387 billion, operating profit of $4.423 billion. The real drag is the AI business, with an operating loss of $6.355 billion in 2025.
So tonight, don't just focus on whether revenue beats expectations.
.
$SPCX
#财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 $SNDK $XRP is sitting at one of the most important support zones we've seen in months.
After a prolonged downtrend, price is now testing a major demand area where the market will likely decide its next big direction.
Personally, I think this is the kind of setup that deserves attention.
If buyers manage to defend this level and regain control, the first upside target could be around $2.70.
Should momentum continue to build, a move back toward the previous all-time high in the $3.50–$3.80 range becomes a realistic long-term scenario.
That said, support has to hold.
If this zone fails, the bullish thesis weakens significantly and sellers could regain full control.
The next move from here could shape XRP's trend for weeks, if not months.
What's your view—are we looking at the start of a real reversal, or just another bull trap? This is the deal that no one is watching, and it’s not even a deal yet—it’s a warning.
The United States and Japan have just made a rare move on the yen, and everyone is asking what that means for stocks. Meanwhile, $BTC is sitting at 63,600 as if nothing happened. The pace of talk about “unwinding” the borrowing deal has hit markets before, and this time cryptocurrencies seem to be just watching from the sidelines.
I’m not trading volume right now. If the yen story is going to actually blow something up in stocks, $BTC will feel it quickly—it always does. For now, price action is calm, and that’s the only thing I trust.
$BTC BTCBitcoin's short-term activity has already approached historical lows.
Many people think this is a bad thing.
But historically, it's often the opposite.
Because the real bottom is never formed when everyone is optimistic, but rather when everyone feels uninterested and unwilling to watch the market, it slowly emerges.
However, low short-term holder activity does not mean the price will immediately rise.
Historically, in 2015, 2019, and the end of 2022, such indicators remained low for extended periods.
The market can consolidate at the bottom area for several months or even longer.
For long-term holders, this is a very noteworthy signal.
Regarding this round of market adjustment, I strongly agree with one saying:
Truly cheap assets are often not believed to be cheap when bought; when truly expensive, everyone thinks they can still rise. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到
Having been in the crypto space for so many years, I have personally experienced three full bull and bear cycles. The deepest lesson these years have taught me is that position management is not a technical issue, but a matter of life and death. My position management rule is not to pursue overnight riches, but to survive extreme market conditions. My capital allocation system is a survival rule forged through countless close calls with liquidation and anxiety over missing out.
I. The Three-Part Division of the Capital Pool
I divide all trading funds into three physically isolated accounts that never interact with each other.
1. Strategic Reserve Layer (40%) — Ballast This part is allocated only to BTC and ETH spot holdings, using a dollar-cost averaging plus buying on major dips strategy, with an annual target of only 15-20%. Its purpose is not appreciation, but to ensure I have capital to turn the tide in any extreme market. After the 2022 FTX collapse, it was this fund that allowed me to calmly build positions at the BTC bottom of $15,000.
2. Tactical Execution Layer (35%) — Main Battlefield This is the core ammunition for daily trading. I strictly enforce the iron rule that single trade risk exposure does not exceed 3% of total funds: for a $100,000 account, the maximum loss per trade is controlled within $3,000. Funds are split into 5-8 parts; when the trend is unclear, only one part is used to test, and after confirmation, gradually increase to 3-5 parts.
3. Mobile Guerrilla Layer (25%) — Profit Regeneration Only after the tactical layer generates profits do I allocate 30-50% of those profits here. It is dedicated to capturing high-odds opportunities: panic bottom-fishing after black swan events, pyramiding during trend acceleration, and cross-exchange arbitrage windows. The original principal never enters, and once lost, trading stops immediately with no replenishment.
II. The Breathing Rhythm of Dynamic Positioning
My positions are not static numbers but living entities that pulse with the market.
1. Consolidation Phase — Hibernation Mode When the market lacks direction, positions are compressed to within 5%, or even fully exited. Frequent trading at this time is chronic suicide. I’d rather miss false breakouts than make mistakes on real pullbacks.
2. Trend Emergence Phase — Awakening Mode When a structural breakout appears on the daily chart, with volume expanding to 1.5 times the 20-day average, initiate the first 2% test position. Stop loss is set 1-2% below the structure, and the risk-reward ratio must be at least 1:3 to enter.
3. Trend Acceleration Phase — Running Mode Price runs strongly along the 5-day moving average; for each key resistance broken, add 1-2% position, but total holdings do not exceed 15%. Simultaneously, move stop loss up above cost to let profits run freely.
4. Trend End Phase — Contraction Mode When volume-price divergence appears and sentiment is extremely greedy (Fear & Greed Index > 80), proactively reduce positions by over 50%. The goal is not to sell at the absolute top, but to sell with certainty.
III. The Relativity Reconstruction of Leverage
The market generally misunderstands leverage = risk. My formula is: Real Risk = Leverage × Margin Ratio × Expected Volatility.
100x leverage with 0.5% margin means actual risk exposure is 0.5%, which is light position; 5x leverage with 30% margin means 30% risk exposure, which is heavy position. During the May 19, 2021 crash, I shorted with 125x leverage and 0.3% margin, ultimately profiting but drenched in cold sweat — it wasn’t strategy, it was luck. High leverage is a magnifying glass that amplifies profits and human weaknesses; since then, I have permanently banned leverage above 50x.
IV. Three Iron Rules Etched in Bone Marrow
1. Never add to losing positions: This is the epitaph of those liquidated. In 2022, LUNA fell from $80 to $0.0001, and countless people perished trying to bottom-fish on further drops. My rule is to exit immediately at preset stop loss when floating losses hit, no questions asked.
2. Black Swan Circuit Breaker: If daily loss exceeds 4% of total funds, forced lock for 48 hours; if over 7%, suspend trading for a week and write a 10,000-word review. Emotion is the greatest enemy in trading; the circuit breaker is a cooling-off period for myself.
3. Monthly Withdrawal System: If monthly profit exceeds 25%, forcibly withdraw 40% to fiat account. Account numbers are vanity; bank balance is freedom. Over ten years, I’ve seen too many paper riches; withdrawals are the only real profit.
There is no eternity in crypto, only probability. My position management does not chase one-hit riches; it pursues the ability to calmly press the order button no matter how crazy the market gets. Over ten years, my annualized returns are not high, far less than those boasting hundredfold contract wins, but I’m still alive and living well. Principal intact means opportunity exists; principal lost means the market is just someone else’s party. The Fed's internal fracture becoming public record changes the calculus for risk assets. Three dissents for a hike signal the committee is no longer just cautious, it is divided, and divided central banks historically struggle to act decisively. That ambiguity is what crypto is quietly pricing in right now: not a cut, but a paralysis that keeps rates stable long enough to matter.
The modest green across BTC, ETH and SOL reflects this read, not conviction buying. With MSTR trimming 1,638 BTC and Amazon committing $50 billion to OpenAI in the same news cycle, attention is fragmented across macro, corporate treasury, and AI capex narratives. That kind of noise usually precedes a directional flush one way or the other. I would not chase this bounce.
Just my read, not advice.
#OKXOrbitFriends who rely on credit card cash advances and loan refinancing all understand the risks of U.S. Treasury bonds. Interest rate hikes worsen the risks of U.S. Treasuries.
Issuing new U.S. Treasuries to pay off old ones.
This is almost the same as what friends who rely on credit card cash advances and loan refinancing do.
Some friends might say the difference is that the U.S. government's creditworthiness is higher than ours.
However, the credit of U.S. Treasuries is not what it used to be.
Around 2004-2005, the Federal Reserve was clearly raising interest rates, but U.S. Treasury yields were actually falling. This is the Greenspan Conundrum in financial history, mainly caused by countries like Japan and China increasing their holdings of U.S. Treasuries, which drove up bond prices and pushed yields down.
Currently, China, Japan, India, and even Saudi Arabia and Russia are significantly reducing their holdings of U.S. Treasuries.
If interest rates rise, the financing cost of U.S. Treasuries will increase, and the Treasury Department will have to issue more bonds to cover these higher costs.
On one hand, demand for U.S. Treasuries is decreasing; on the other hand, supply is increasing, further accelerating the decline in bond prices and the rise in yields, creating a vicious cycle.
This is why Brother Feng dares to bet that the Federal Reserve will not raise rates in September. #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 Xiao Han, is this what you call the “Golden Age”?
Back to looking at Korean stocks again.
Previously:
Continuous circuit breakers
Storage giants exploded
The golden age of Korean stocks
Afterwards:
Index halved
Finance minister publicly apologized
Mass account liquidations
The golden age ended way too quickly.
But after the drop so far, the plot has reversed. Wallstreetcn cited HSBC raising a counter question: have storage stocks already fallen too far?
HSBC’s conclusion is quite striking: Samsung Electronics is now priced by the market as if it has no AI.
· By reverse deduction, the current stock price implies long-term earnings only 0.8 times the EPS of that year, with the implied compound growth rate of EPS from year 3 to 9 hitting a historical low of -35%.
To translate, the market assumes that even if the AI cycle ends, Samsung’s profits won’t return to this year’s level, and the AI premium is almost completely wiped out.
· The contrast is very clear. TSMC, also in the AI supply chain, still retains an AI premium, but Korean memory stocks have been crushed as if they have no AI. HSBC believes SK Hynix’s pricing is also overly pessimistic.
On the capital side, leveraged ETFs are deleveraging, foreign investors have net sold $60 billion, but the most intense mechanical selling pressure may be nearing its end.
· The golden age ended too quickly, precisely because it initially rose too much on leverage and sentiment.
Now priced as if there is no AI, it’s just sentiment swung to the opposite extreme.
Whether Korean stocks next experience an oversold rebound or a value trap does not depend on the golden age slogan, but on the single fundamental anchor of AI storage demand.
#韩国杠杆ETF成交额降九成，波幅收窄 Losing $57 million while aggressively buying BTC—what exactly is the Trump family playing at?
Brothers, a news piece yesterday really confused me.
American Bitcoin (ABTC), the mining company under the Trump family, reported a Q2 net loss of $57.2 million, marking the third consecutive quarter of losses.
But the same financial report shows—Bitcoin reserves increased from 7,021 to 8,002 coins, a 14% growth in a single quarter.
Losing money but still buying hard?
Even more surreal—on the same day, Trump Media (TMTG) transferred $165 million worth of Bitcoin to Crypto.com.
Although they later clarified "no sale, just a custodian change," on-chain data shows—2,628 BTC were transferred out, leaving only 4,261 BTC, just enough to cover convertible bond collateral.
Same family, two companies, same day, one is buying, the other is leveraging.
Who do you trust?
Let's first break down American Bitcoin's numbers.
Where did the $57.2 million loss come from?
$71.2 million is the "fair value impairment" of Bitcoin holdings—not actual cash lost, but an accounting mark-to-market loss.
What about the mining core business?
Q2 revenue was $67 million, mining 932 BTC, a single-quarter record.
Mining cost per coin is about $36,500, while BTC's current price is $63,000—gross margin close to 50%.
CEO Mike Ho said: "Bitcoin is a growing capital asset, and we believe its long-term compounding will outperform our cost of capital."
In plain language: the loss is on paper, the profit is real BTC. Paper losses are bearable, BTC cannot stop.
Now look at Trump Media.
$165 million BTC transferred to Crypto.com.
No sale? Fine, I believe you.
But after transferring out 2,628 BTC, the remaining 4,261 BTC exactly equals the convertible bond collateral.
What does this mean?
Those BTC were previously "free holdings," now they are "pledged assets."
Pledging carries liquidation risk—if BTC falls to a certain price, creditors can liquidate.
One buys more as price falls, the other pledges more.
Same father, two different strategies.
Back to your main concern: does this affect my short-term BTC price outlook?
Today (August 4) in Asian morning trading, BTC briefly approached $64,100, up about 2% from the previous day, reclaiming the $63,000 level lost on Monday.
But don't get too excited.
BTC's current price is about $63,150, down roughly 45% from a year ago.
ABTC's stock price? Down about 95% from its peak, forced a 1-for-15 reverse stock split in July just to stay on Nasdaq.
Eric Trump personally holds 6% of shares, with market value shrunk by over $600 million.
A company with a $57 million paper loss, a founder personally losing $600 million—and still buying.
Is this faith or foolishness?
My judgment is simple:
In the short term, these two news items have limited direct impact on BTC price. The market focuses more on macro and liquidity, not a mining company's earnings.
But in the medium to long term, ABTC's choice sends a clear signal:
At a mining cost of $36,500, BTC at $63,000 is "cheap."
Eric Trump himself said: "Our advantage is that we don't buy at market price; our mining cost is about half the market price."
Translation: others buying BTC at $63,000 is speculation; I mine it at $36,500, that's profit.
The Trump family's two companies made opposite moves on the same day—
ABTC is hoarding, TMTG is pledging.
One tells you "BTC is bullish long-term," the other says "I’m pledging BTC first."
Who do you believe?
I believe the data.
ABTC's mining cost is $36,500, gross margin 50%—as long as BTC doesn't fall below $40,000, this company can survive and grow.
TMTG pledging BTC means they need cash and are borrowing.
One is the producer's logic, the other the consumer's logic.
Are you a producer or a consumer?
$BTC $ETH $SOL #特朗普家族矿企亏损仍增持BTC US-Korea Memory Alliance: On the Surface Cooperation, But Essentially Binding
Let's talk about something macro today. Samsung and SK Hynix going public in the US is a matter deeper than most people think.
Simply put, South Korea exchanges HBM production capacity for US GPUs and computing power, trying to settle transactions while avoiding the US dollar as much as possible. On the surface, it looks like technological cooperation, but essentially it follows the same logic as when Quisanti planted cotton back in the day—the resource-exporting side is always the weaker party.
From the US perspective: It alleviates pressure on dollar payments and provides a "physical anchor" for the AI bubble. When the bubble bursts, the risk can be offloaded onto the South Korean economy first.
The cost for South Korea: They get long-term orders but lose technological sovereignty and equity control. The Lee family of Samsung gradually becomes professional managers, and the country's growth fully depends on the capital expenditure decisions of the US Big Seven. The deeper the binding, the less initiative they have.
A key variable: The US-Korea lock on high-end memory actually opens a market window for China's mid-range DRAM/NAND, forcing accelerated self-reliance. Where the blockade line is, the breakthrough point lies.
Behind this is a US-led colonial symbiosis. South Korea is betting its national fate, but whoever can maintain industrial autonomy will be the one to stay at the table.SanDisk's big plunge is coming soon!!! Urgent analysis of the current short-selling strategy!
Short position at 1324.87, current price 1288, floating profit of 36 points. The position is still profitable, but the profit has shrunk significantly.
Let's first look at the current market situation
SanDisk closed at $1288.03 on August 3, up 6.03% for the day, with huge intraday volatility, a low of 1121.33 and a high of 1316.44. On the daily chart, the price is still suppressed below the 20-day and 50-day moving averages, with short-term bears dominating. The first short-term resistance is between $1360 and $1410, and the medium-term strong resistance is between $1560 and $1610. On the support side, $1180 to $1200 is the current strong/weak dividing line, and $998 is the trend lifeline.
Rationale for the short position at 1324.87
Technically, 1288 is near the lower edge of the short-term resistance zone; the rebound is an oversold correction, not a trend reversal. The moving averages are in a bearish alignment, and the price repeatedly contests around EMA10 but never effectively breaks above it.
From the news perspective, on August 4, SanDisk and SK Hynix jointly released the first standard specification for HBF, which temporarily stimulated a stock price rebound. However, technical positives do not equal a fundamental reversal; HBF commercialization still requires time.
Earnings window: Q4 earnings will be announced after market close on August 5, with very high market expectations (EPS $34.67, revenue $8.42 billion). High expectations mean very low tolerance for error. If the earnings only meet expectations rather than significantly exceed them, the "buy the rumor, sell the fact" scenario will play out.
Core reasons for shorting
First, valuation bubble. The 52-week low is $40.53, the high is $2354.39, an increase of over 5700%, with a TTM P/E ratio above 42, which is bubble territory in a strong cyclical industry.
Second, risk of cycle peak. Citron shorted at the beginning of the year, with the core logic that the market is mispricing strong cyclical NAND companies as AI core assets.
Third, worsening competitive landscape. Samsung is entering SanDisk's core high-end SSD market with the most advanced chips. Long-term supply-side pressure is accumulating.
Fourth, crowded positioning. Turnover rate has long been maintained above 14%, indicating a high-level speculative stock.
For those without short positions, where to short
Don't chase shorts. Wait for a rebound to the $1300 to $1320 range, near the lower edge of the short-term resistance zone, and observe the 1-hour chart for signs of volume contraction and stagnation. Once confirmed, enter short. Place stop loss above 1360, first target $1180 to $1200, second target $1120. Keep position size within 10% of total capital, leverage no more than 3x.
If the price directly breaks below 1250 with volume, you can lightly chase shorts, stop loss at 1280, target $1180 to $1200.
How to manage the 1324.87 short position
Move stop loss up to 1320 to ensure that even if stopped out, there is still profit. Take profits in two batches: first batch at $1200 to $1220, close half; second batch at $1120, close all. If price oscillates near 1288 and does not break 1320, continue holding. If volume breaks above 1320 and holds, reduce position by half to protect profits. Breaking below 1250 indicates the rebound is over; add to short position, with overall stop loss at 1300.
Shorting profits from the trend; pullbacks are an inevitable cost of holding positions.
Think it over. #SouthKoreaLeverageETFTradingVolumeDown90Percent #SPCXFirstEarningsReportToBeReleased #DepreciationPeriodExtendedTo25Years MicrosoftCapitalExpenditureGuidanceLowered $BTC $ETH $SNDKWith the US stock market and risk assets showing simultaneous strength, BTC and ETH have once again approached short-term resistance zones. However, the overall rise in altcoins is limited, and it is important to note that the driving force behind this rally is not broad liquidity spreading across the market, but rather selective supply and demand concentration in specific assets. What has already been reflected in the price, and what variables have not yet been introduced? Currently, the market is not a beta rally where not all coins rise. Assets driving price increases are limited to those with clear narratives, deep liquidity, and confirmed real demand. This structure differs from the "wave-riding" of past cycles, where funds concentrate in certain assets while the remaining stocks move sideways or undergo corrections due to lack of liquidity. The key lies in its derivative positioning. The futures basis for BTC and ETH has risen, but funding costs across all altcoins have not yet approached the overheated zone. This means that long positions are still concentrated in specific assets, and the conditions under which a short squeeze can occur are correspondingly limited. I believe the changes in Ethena are not only something USDe holders need to pay attention to, but any RWA investors or stablecoin holders should understand.
The underlying revenue sources of Ethena USDe have undergone a huge transformation, shifting from the past "fee arbitrage" to a "multi-strategy comprehensive yield."
At the end of last month, Ethena's official ecosystem account explained this in detail ⬇️
Previously, USDe's core revenue mainly came from Crypto Basis Trade, which in simple terms means arbitrage between spot and perpetual contract basis, as well as funding rate arbitrage.
The market generally equated Ethena with protocols that rely on funding rates for income.
Now, Crypto Basis accounts for only about 1%, and the backing has shifted to:
- DeFi Lending ≈ 39%
- Liquid Stables ≈ 37%
- RWA ≈ 13%
- Institutional Lending ≈ 10%
The revenue sources are diversified into DeFi lending, institutional lending, RWA, and more.
It is clear that USDe's income sources now have significantly reduced correlation with the crypto market cycle.
I think this is a good thing. Previously, USDe relied on taking from the crypto pools to support holders. Although it played the role of arbitrageurs to improve market efficiency, the funds were ultimately circulating within the crypto circle.
But now it's different. USDe draws from the large global market pool and then feeds the yields back on-chain, back into the crypto ecosystem.
This is truly a good thing, a very good thing 👍$ENA I am Brother Ci, the former Bitcoin whale who "only bought and never sold," and I have sold coins at a loss.
The event itself
On August 3, Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) submitted an 8-K filing to the SEC, reporting that from July 27 to August 2, it sold a total of 1,638 BTC, cashing out $104.7 million at an average price of $63,957. After the transaction, it still holds 842,138 BTC, accounting for 4% of the global total. The overall holding cost is $75,419 per coin, with a book loss of about $11,462 per coin.
Use of funds: $52.4 million paid in preferred stock dividends, $52.3 million used to repurchase discounted STRC preferred shares. During the same period, it also sold over 3 million shares of MSTR common stock, raising $290 million. As of August 2, the dollar reserves have reached $4 billion.
Why sell?
STRC is the preferred stock issued by Strategy, with an annual dividend of 12% and a par value of $100. The 12% dividend must be paid. STRC currently trades between $89 and $92, below par value, breaking the positive cycle of "issuing preferred stock to buy BTC." Without selling coins, they cannot pay dividends; without paying dividends, preferred stock will continue to fall; continued decline makes it harder to issue new shares for financing. This is a choice forced by the structure.
The bigger picture
On June 29, Strategy officially launched the "Digital Credit Capital Framework," breaking the unwritten rule of "never selling." It authorized the sale of up to $5 billion worth of Bitcoin, four times the $1.25 billion plan from early July. The use is divided into three parts: $1.25 billion to replenish reserves, $1.76 billion to pay dividends, and $2 billion to repurchase shares. Michael Saylor said $5 billion is the upper limit, "but the total amount may ultimately be higher."
The company has shifted from "only buying and never selling" to "active capital management." Bitcoin has changed from a "faith asset" to a "liquidity tool."
Impact on BTC
In the short term, it is a negative sentiment. The phrase "the biggest bull has started selling" itself will scare the market. The lower the price, the more coins need to be sold to raise enough dollars, creating a negative feedback loop. This time 1,638 coins were sold; next time it could be 2,000.
In the medium to long term, this precisely shows that large institutions need liquidity management. Strategy is not bearish on BTC; it is forced to sell by the 12% dividend. As long as STRC does not return to $100, they will not resume large-scale buying. Now it is 10% below, and this 10% is the signal the entire market is waiting for.
Impact on Sandisk short position
Strategy’s coin sales do not directly impact the storage sector, but it confirms one thing: the largest holder of 840,000 BTC is systematically reducing holdings. As a benchmark risk asset, Bitcoin’s selling pressure will transmit to the pricing of the entire crypto and tech asset market. In a high interest rate environment, all high-beta assets face liquidity tightening pressure. The 1324.87 short position’s logic remains unchanged in this macro context.
The whale who once said never to sell is now forced to sell by its own preferred stock structure. Understanding this shift is ten thousand times more important than obsessing over the sale of 1,638 coins this time.
Brother Ci has finished speaking. Think it over. #MSTR再卖1638枚比特币，规模腰斩 $BTC $SNDK $ETH Purely handmade post, not AI
$ETH pulled back from around 1800 to 1860, looking quite strong in the short term, but the position hasn't followed. The entire market's contract positions increased by only 0.48% in the past day, with active selling accounting for 54.46% in the last four hours; the price has rebounded, but the relay funds are still hesitant.
What's more troublesome is that it hasn't stabilized above 1900 in the past few attempts. The short-term indicators have already bounced back from the oversold zone, not overheated, but this is not evidence of a strengthening trend. No rush for now.
The previous low is the defense line, and the upper round number is the re-examination zone. Only after effectively standing above it should we look for recovery; if it falls back, it means this wave is just a short covering. Data as of 6:30 AM Beijing time on August 4. Let's first see the market's own answer; this does not constitute investment advice.
#Ethereum #CryptoMarket #Derivatives #RiskManagement A bill being stuck does not mean regulation is at a standstill; first, let's see how the two lines proceed!
Don't interpret this news as "If the CLARITY Act is stuck, $BTC must fall." Bernstein provides a scenario judgment: if the bill continues to be blocked this year, short-term risk appetite may be further suppressed, and both Bitcoin and the broader crypto market could come under pressure.
But regulation is not only about Congress. According to reports, the SEC and CFTC may rely on the coordination mechanism under Project Crypto to accelerate rules on token classification, DeFi, self-custody, and token issuance exemptions. Administrative rules can buffer sentiment but are unlikely to replace the long-term, cross-government certainty brought by congressional legislation. This is also why the bill has greater significance for institutional infrastructure and the boundaries of securities and commodities regulation.
In practice, I break the information into three columns: bill text and agenda, official SEC/CFTC announcements, and analyst scenario simulations. First, check if it has moved from a headline to an executable rule, then assess its impact on trading platforms, DeFi projects, and institutional participation. "Another leg lower" is just a downside scenario, not a price target.
Disclaimer: This is only an information summary and logical review, not any investment advice. The market has risks; please do your own research. Strategy recently sold 1,638 BTC at an average transaction price of $63,957, raising $104.73 million. Compared to the previous total sale of 3,588 BTC, the quantity dropped by 54.3%, indeed close to a "scale halving."
But what’s more worth watching in this transaction is where the money ultimately went.
Of the $104.73 million from coin sales, $52.4 million was used to pay preferred stock dividends, and $52.3 million was used to repurchase STRC. During the same period, Strategy also sold 3.0114 million shares of MSTR common stock, raising $290.6 million, of which $250 million supplemented the dollar reserves, $28.9 million continued to repurchase STRC, and the remaining $11.7 million went into the cash account.
The two financing channels combined brought back $395.33 million, with total STRC repurchases reaching $81.2 million, and dollar reserves increasing to $4 billion. This indicates that Strategy’s current funding priorities have shifted from simply increasing BTC holdings to maintaining preferred stock, cash reserves, and the overall stability of the financing system.
After completing the coin sale, the company still holds 842,138 BTC, with a cumulative purchase cost of $63.513 billion and an average cost of $75,419. The average selling price this time was 15.2% lower than the overall average cost, which cannot be directly equated to a single accounting loss but at least shows this was not a high-price cash-out.
Based on the BTC price of about $63,482 near 17:11 Beijing time, the remaining holdings’ market value is approximately $53.46 billion, about $10.05 billion lower than the cumulative purchase cost. Meanwhile, 1,638 BTC only accounts for 0.195% of the current holdings, which is not a significant amount for spot supply itself.
The real change is happening in Strategy’s capital cycle: previously, BTC purchases mainly relied on issuing stock and debt; now BTC also begins to serve functions such as paying dividends, repurchasing securities, and supplementing liquidity.
What needs to be tracked next is no longer just "how many coins were sold," but also the coverage period of dollar reserves, the cost of preferred stock dividends, and the dilution rate caused by weekly MSTR stock issuance. The reduction in coin sale scale does not mean the sale is completely over; it is more like a gradual realization under controlled pacing.
#MSTR再卖1638枚比特币，规模腰斩 Circle's biggest competitor now might not be Tether.
Instead, it is:
Everyone who wants to issue digital dollars.
Many people look at Circle and only see USDC.
But what really deserves attention is that the stablecoin war is shifting from "who issues more coins" to "who controls the entry point of dollar liquidity."
In the past:
Banks controlled payments.
Visa and Mastercard controlled credit card networks.
Now:
Stablecoins are trying to move the dollar onto the blockchain.
And what Circle wants to do is not just issue USDC.
It wants to become the infrastructure of the digital dollar era.
Here comes the question:
Will the entry point for digital dollars really belong to Circle?
Currently, the biggest competitor in the market is still Tether.
USDT holds a huge advantage in global crypto trading due to its earlier market layout.
USDC's advantages are compliance, transparency, and institutional acceptance.
That's why Coinbase, the Base ecosystem, and more financial institutions tend to use USDC.
But the real competition in the future may be even fiercer.
Banks can issue their own stablecoins.
Payment giants can connect on-chain dollars.
Tech companies might also launch their own digital payment networks.
In the future, even automatic trading between AI Agents might not require a single stablecoin as the only choice.
So Circle's real question is not:
"Is there demand for USDC?"
The answer is already clear.
Rather, it is:
Can the growth in USDC demand be transformed into an irreplaceable business moat for Circle?
Because issuing stablecoins itself is not difficult.
What is difficult is:
Having users;
Having liquidity;
Having payment scenarios;
Becoming the industry's default standard.
Visa succeeded not just because it had payment technology.
More importantly, merchants and consumers worldwide are accustomed to using it.
The future of stablecoins is the same.
The winner will not just be the company with the largest issuance.
But the company that becomes the global default network for digital dollars.
So when I look at Circle, I don't just look at USDC's market share.
I pay more attention to:
Whether in the next 10 years, the flow of dollars on the internet will go through Circle.
If the answer is:
Yes.
Then today's market valuation for it might just be the beginning.
If the answer is:
No.
Then it might just be a financial company earning interest spreads.
The stablecoin war has only just begun.
DYOR. $CRCL 🚀 #Altseason 2026 💸
The bull market may just be getting started.
The next 6–12 months could very well be the most critical phase of this crypto market cycle.
If history repeats itself, with liquidity continuing to return, the market is expected to enter a new upward cycle.
Market targets:
🟠 $BTC → $250,000 🚀
🔵 $ETH → Break through $10,000 🔥
🟡 $BNB → $5,000 💥
🟣 $SOL → $1,000 ⚡
⚪ $XRP → $10 🌊
As capital keeps rotating, quality altcoins and MEME coins are expected to have greater room to perform.
The real big opportunity is never about chasing highs and selling lows.
It’s about positioning early when the market is still full of doubt and patiently waiting for the trend to play out.
⏳ Time is the best friend in a bull market; patience is the greatest advantage.
The above content is only market opinion and does not constitute any investment advice. Please be sure to do your own research (DYOR).
#Altseason #BullRun #Bitcoin #Ethereum #Crypto #DailyOrbit YOU ARE AN $SPCX HOLDER? GET READY FOR THIS
Today we'll see the first $SPCX earnings report ever
But forget the revenue number - it simply doesn't matter
Good earnings? - Insiders finally get to sell. The pop becomes your exit liquidity
Bad earnings? - Weakness plus a doubled float. A trapdoor
There is no clean path through this week
And that's just August 4
Two days later the first unlocks hit - and that's where it gets worse
Aug 11 - Aug 21 - Sep 9 - Sep 24 - Oct 9 - Oct 24 - Nov 7 - Dec 8
Every single date, more shares flood the market
A doubling float doesn't get bought. It gets absorbed. Slowly. Lower
This isn't just a correction - it's structural selling pressure that lasts for months
I've been warning about this for weeks
The trap isn't the earnings. The trap is what comes after
#DailyOrbit $BTC $ETH $SNDK ISM Hits Four-Year High While U.S. Treasury Yields Fall: Who's Lying?
The ISM Manufacturing PMI for July surged directly to 55.6, marking a four-year high, and even the factory employment index unexpectedly returned to expansion territory. Normally, such strong recovery data should have pushed U.S. Treasury yields sky-high. But strangely, the 10-year Treasury yield actually fell, retreating to around 4.70%.
Why does the bond market respond with rising prices (falling yields) despite such robust economic data?
Because the bond market sees through the false boom in this manufacturing surge.
If you carefully break down the PMI subcomponents, you'll see that strong demand is mainly concentrated in two areas: one is the AI infrastructure in the tech sector ramping up rapidly, and the other is companies preemptively rushing orders and stocking up due to concerns over rising sea freight costs caused by Middle East tensions. This prosperity is not driven by endogenous expansion from consumer spending but is a defensive, concentrated short-term burst. So, when this wave of front-loaded orders recedes, what remains?
What remains is the real economy being dragged down by high interest rates.
Even if the Federal Reserve, pressured by three dissenting votes in September, chooses to raise rates by 25 basis points, pushing restrictive rates even higher, it will only accelerate the coming credit contraction. The long-end Treasury market trades on the long-term economic outlook for the next 12 to 18 months. Its decline indicates that smart money would rather believe the short-term manufacturing PMI is an illusion than bet that the economy can withstand a real benchmark rate near 4% over the long term. But is the bond market pricing solely due to pessimism about growth?
Actually, there is also a structural capital factor at play.
Recently, the risk of unwinding yen carry trades has reignited, and with the retreat of commodities like crude oil amid geopolitical conflict expectations, global long-only funds are reallocating across asset classes. Capital is flowing out of high-risk equity assets and flooding into long-term Treasuries as a safe haven, and this strong buying pressure forcibly pushes yields down.
Therefore, between the hot data and the cool-headed bond market, I choose to unconditionally trust the bond market.
Those who rush to short U.S. Treasuries and go long on commodities just because PMI hit a four-year high are very likely to fall into a bull trap. My position remains in gradually building long-end bond holdings. At the tail end of the macro cycle, the bond market’s insight has always been deeper than macro data.
Of course, if next week's nonfarm payroll data shows explosive growth proving that factory hiring is not defensive restocking but genuine trend expansion, then my "false boom" theory will be invalidated. At that time, I will close half of my bond longs. Until then, I choose to stand with the bond market.
#ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌 YOU ARE AN $SPCX HOLDER? GET READY FOR THIS
Today we'll see the first $SPCX earnings report ever
But forget the revenue number - it simply doesn't matter
Good earnings? - Insiders finally get to sell. The pop becomes your exit liquidity
Bad earnings? - Weakness plus a doubled float. A trapdoor
There is no clean path through this week
And that's just August 4
Two days later the first unlocks hit - and that's where it gets worse
Aug 11 - Aug 21 - Sep 9 - Sep 24 - Oct 9 - Oct 24 - Nov 7 - Dec 8
Every single date, more shares flood the market
A doubling float doesn't get bought. It gets absorbed. Slowly. Lower
This isn't just a correction - it's structural selling pressure that lasts for months
I've been warning about this for weeks
The trap isn't the earnings. The trap is what comes after
#DailyOrbit $BTC $ETH $SNDK #MSTR sells another 1,638 BTC, scale halved MSTR recently disclosed a reduction of 1,638 BTC, cashing out about $105 million. Compared to last month's single sale of 3,588 BTC, this sale's scale is nearly halved. The average transaction price this time was $63,957, far below the company's average holding cost of $75,400, resulting in a loss on cashing out. The funds are mainly used to pay high-interest preferred stock dividends and supplement USD liquidity. This is a routine financial operation under the board's $5 billion coin selling framework and does not reflect a bearish view on Bitcoin's long-term value.
Previously, MSTR adhered to "only holding, no selling" for a long time. Now, regular coin selling has completely broken the market's inherent belief, temporarily suppressing crypto market sentiment. Although the volume of this sale has decreased, easing actual selling pressure, the expectation of continuous institutional reduction remains. The market worries that if the coin price continues to weaken, the company will need to sell more BTC to cover fixed dividends, creating a negative cycle of price decline and forced selling. $BTC $ETH $SNDK
In the medium to long term, the company's total holdings still exceed 840,000 BTC, remaining the world's largest corporate holder. The reduction accounts for only a very small proportion of total holdings. In the short term, BTC is easily disturbed by institutional selling sentiment and fluctuates. Going forward, focus will be on MSTR's subsequent selling pace and changes in US stock market risk appetite.#特朗普家族矿企亏损仍增持BTC
Trump family mining company ABTC: The more they lose, the more they buy? After three consecutive quarters of losses, the stock price plummeted 95%, but insiders are quietly increasing their holdings
Brothers, the Trump family mining company American Bitcoin (ABTC) just delivered a "shocking" Q2 report — a net loss of $57.15 million, marking the third consecutive quarter of losses.
But the strange thing is, the more they lose, the more they buy; the more they buy, the more they lose — this drama is playing out again.
Let's talk numbers, how bad is it?
ABTC's Q2 revenue slightly increased to $67.01 million, but it couldn't withstand Bitcoin's 45% year-over-year price drop, causing a significant shrinkage in held assets. Even worse, the stock price fell about 95% from its peak at listing, forcing a 1-for-15 reverse stock split in July just to barely maintain its Nasdaq listing qualification.
Eric Trump stubbornly said on the conference call, "Bitcoin never moves in a straight line, our conviction remains unchanged."
Saying losses with words, but honest with actions
On the surface, losses, but the buying never stopped. As of June 30, ABTC held about 8,000 BTC, a 14% increase quarter-over-quarter, setting a record of mining 932 BTC in a single quarter.
More intriguingly, during the window period after the financial report disclosure, two directors immediately increased their holdings by about 1.63 million shares combined, at an average price of around $1.
This kind of "company huge losses, insiders bottom-fishing" play is well understood by those in the know.
What’s the truth?
Forbes previously dug into the details: this company claims "mining costs are half the market price," but 70% of its Bitcoin was acquired by issuing more stock, not mined. Insider Eric's personal wealth increased by about $90 million from this operation, while ordinary investors who chased the highs lost about $500 million collectively.
In short, this is an arbitrage game leveraging the Trump IP to hype valuation, cashing out at highs to buy coins, and stacking holdings with retail investors' money.
Summary
Now ABTC is a typical case of "using brand to exchange for liquidity, using losses to exchange for holdings." When the coin price falls, mining loses money; when the coin price rises, it might break even. But continuous losses plus reverse splits to survive indicate significant cash flow pressure.
Retail investors rushing in are gambling on the Trump concept rebound, but don't forget — this company has only two full-time employees, the rest is all story.
What do you think? Is it faith-based accumulation, or should you stay away from this "family game"? $SKHY Short-term institutions are buying insurance, while long-term funds have not given up on bullishness.
1/ Near-term defense is very heavy. On August 7, Put OI was nearly 4.8 times that of Call, and about 3.4 times on August 21. Institutions are clearly guarding against high volatility and rebound failures in the coming weeks.
2/ But the long-term structure is actually more bullish. Call OI for September, December, and January 2027 is clearly dominant. Especially in January 2027, Calls increased by about 10,699 contracts, while Puts only increased by about 248 contracts.
This does not look like an outright bearish stance, but rather holding long-term longs while buying Puts to protect against short-term risks.
3/ In bulk, institutions bought October $135 Puts while selling $180 Calls. This protects against risk below $135 while still willing to hold near $180.
4/ The biggest short-term issue is negative Gamma.
$141 is the Put Wall, $145 is the Dealer acceleration point, and $160 is the Call Wall.
Breaking below $141 may accelerate a move toward $135. Holding steady between $145–$150 is needed for a chance to repair toward $160.
The long-term logic remains, but short-term insurance is heavy. Before $150, it is still a rebound test; $160 is the next real resistance. [Crypto Script]
#Amazon Market Cap Surpasses 3 Trillion, 50 Billion Bet to Win the First Round
I am Script Brother. Amazon breaking through 3 trillion may seem like a rise in US tech stocks on the surface, but for BTC, the real impact lies in the change of market risk appetite.
Currently, BTC has rebounded from around 62200 and reclaimed the 63500 level, showing some resonance with the recovery of US tech stocks. In the short term, market sentiment is recovering, with key resistance to watch between 64000-65000.
Meanwhile, the three major US stock indexes all strengthened today, with the Nasdaq rising over 2% and the S&P 500 up nearly 1.5%. Tech sector sentiment is clearly warming up, and AI-related sectors are active again. This signals that funds have not fully exited risk assets but are waiting for a new direction.
Gold is currently maintaining a high-level consolidation without a significant rise, indicating a cooling of market risk aversion. Crude oil, on the other hand, is rising, with WTI back near $82, mainly influenced by geopolitical factors and supply expectations. Simply put, the market is not purely in a risk-off mode but is trading on improving economic expectations and liquidity recovery.
This environment is actually quite favorable for BTC.
Looking at BTC’s price action, it bottomed near 62200 before quickly rebounding and now is back above 63500. From the chart, this rebound is not just driven by sentiment but resonates with external markets.
US stocks rising indicate a return of risk appetite; gold not surging wildly shows reduced risk-off pressure; oil rising reflects the market starting to price in economic activity recovery.
Therefore, BTC can quickly recover from the lows.
Technically, BTC remains in a consolidation and recovery phase. Around 62200 has formed short-term support, with key resistance at 64000-65000. If volume expands and BTC breaks above 65000, market sentiment will improve further, opening the door to challenge higher levels.
However, Script Brother reminds everyone not to blindly chase longs just because external markets rise.
The biggest variable now is still Fed policy expectations. If rate cut expectations continue to heat up and liquidity improves, US tech stocks and BTC may continue to benefit. But if inflation data remains volatile and the market re-prices high interest rates, short-term volatility will persist.
So the core logic of this rally is simple:
US stocks depend on AI and tech capital inflows, gold reflects risk sentiment, oil reflects geopolitical changes, and BTC depends on global liquidity.
Script Brother believes the market is slowly recovering from panic. As long as BTC holds near 62000, the trend is not broken. The focus now is whether it can break through 64000-65000. Once it breaks through, the space truly opens up. $BTC $BICO $SOL #亚马逊市值破3万亿，500亿押注先赢一局
Amazon's market value has surpassed 3 trillion, becoming the fifth U.S. stock to do so. On Monday, the intraday high reached $287.16, up more than 5%, closing at $284. The key point is that this bullish candlestick was not driven by news — last week's earnings report already revealed the bottom line clearly: AWS revenue was 42.2 billion, a 37% year-over-year increase, the fastest growth in 18 quarters. Annualized revenue reached 169 billion, with a backlog of 496 billion. AI-related chips and cloud business annualized revenue also exceeded 25 billion.
It took just over two years to go from 2 trillion to 3 trillion, three times faster than the six years it took to go from 1 trillion to 2 trillion. The shortened timeframe indicates that the market is pricing this AI narrative faster, not that the fundamentals are accelerating.
What’s even more worth pondering than the market value itself is the 50 billion bet on OpenAI.
On July 31, Amazon disclosed in its 10-Q that the full 50 billion has been delivered, holding about 5% equity. The agreement signed in February stated that the remaining 35 billion would only be triggered upon OpenAI completing an IPO or achieving AGI breakthrough. Neither condition has occurred, yet the money has already been received.
Why the early payment? In April, OpenAI renegotiated its cloud contract with Microsoft, breaking Microsoft's near-exclusive control. AWS can finally legitimately provide computing power to OpenAI. Once the contract changed, Amazon immediately transferred the funds. In exchange, OpenAI committed to spending 100 billion on AWS over the next eight years and to run 2 gigawatts of computing power using Amazon’s self-developed Trainium chips. Fifty billion out, 100 billion back — the math is clear.
Even more intriguing is that Amazon is one of the largest investors in both OpenAI and Anthropic — it committed 33 billion to Anthropic, with 18 billion actually delivered. The two leading AI labs globally are both AWS customers.
Roth Capital said Amazon is the "largest-scale company with the highest capital return on AI investment." This makes sense. Microsoft boosts its stock price by cutting capital expenditures guidance, while Amazon supports its valuation with AWS’s 37% growth and 496 billion backlog. Both approaches can drive stock gains, indicating the market now focuses on "whether the money spent can generate returns" — if yes, you get a premium; if not, you get penalized.
The next step is to see if AWS can convert the 496 billion backlog into real revenue and cash flow, and whether these large investments in OpenAI and Anthropic can continue to drive adoption of Trainium chips. The direction is right; the pace will be the most critical factor going forward. #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 The real focus of the market is not whether the Fed will act this time, but that internal consensus is shifting.
A few months ago, the market's core discussion was still "how many more rate cuts can we expect this year"; now, more and more officials are discussing "whether a rate hike is needed again." The latest FOMC meeting even saw 3 voting members support a rate hike, a rare public internal disagreement in recent years, indicating that the decision-makers no longer share a unified view on inflation.
Many like to simplify market moves as "rate cuts are good, rate hikes are bad," but what the market truly trades on is never the interest rate itself, but changes in expectations.
If the market has already priced in rate cuts, then what really impacts asset prices might be the renewed warming of rate hike expectations. When capital begins to reprice future liquidity, volatility in high-valuation assets, growth sectors, and the crypto market will noticeably increase.
For traders, more important than guessing the next meeting's move is to watch three signals:
* Whether inflation rebounds again;
* Whether supply-side pressures like oil prices and tariffs continue to push prices higher;
* Whether the market starts repricing a higher and longer-lasting interest rate environment.
My understanding is that the biggest risk to the market is not rate hikes, but that the market is still pricing based on a "rate cut logic."
When most are still immersed in easing expectations, the truly smart money has often already begun preparing for another possibility.
Trading is never about predicting the future, but about being the first to understand capital's choices when expectations change. $BTC 💡 Idea of the Day
Extreme Fear at 25 (↓3) persists, but today’s **liquidations** flip the script: 91% shorts vs 9% longs — a massive **short squeeze** (bear trap), not retail capitulation. Total flows are modest at $18.4M.
Similar setups on May 30 and July 14, with FNG 22–23 and 91% short liquidations, preceded local bounces.
For traders: squeezing shorts can extend toward `64
📊 Key levels:
• BTC: $63,000 / $64,000
• ETH: $1,800 / $1,900
DYOR | Not financial advice
#Dailyorbit$BTC $ETH $SNDK #特朗普家族矿企亏损仍增持BTC
Loss of $57.15 million, stock price down 95%, Trump's son still adding BTC up to 8,000? Is this faith or a trap? Net loss of $57.15 million in Q2, three consecutive quarters of losses; revenue $67.01 million, looks okay, but can't withstand BTC-denominated assets dropping.
But guess what——
American Bitcoin (ABTC) is not reducing holdings but increasing, up to about 8,002 BTC, a 14% quarter-over-quarter increase. Mined 932 BTC in a single quarter, a record.
Eric Trump said: "Confidence remains unwavering, building a leading American Bitcoin giant for the long term." In July, the company's stock price plunged about 95% from its peak, forcing a 1:15 reverse stock split to avoid delisting.
Losing heavily, adding positions, and splitting stocks at the same time——
Does this scene look like those "hold and never sell" miners in 2022? I think there are three layers of logic:
1. Mining company becomes a treasury: ABTC essentially does "mining + buying coins"; when coin prices fall, it shows losses on paper, but the coins themselves accumulate more and more;
2. Counterintuitive operation: peers switch to AI computing power to earn stable cash flow, but it refuses to sell, betting on the cycle's return;
3. Family IP premium: The Trump name itself attracts attention, and loss news actually saves marketing costs.
In short:
Wall Street will flee when seeing financial reports, crypto community follows faith. But ordinary people shouldn't just rush in because "Trump is adding positions"—they can withstand stock splits and unrealized losses, can you withstand contract liquidation?
Personal opinion, not investment advice. The most expensive word at the cycle bottom is "hold," the cheapest word is "leverage." Is SpaceX safe just because it rose 6%?
Last night, $SPCX surged from around $105 to $116, finally closing at $114.53, up nearly 6%.
This bullish candle is strong, but I think it's still too early to call it a reversal.
Tonight is SpaceX's first quarterly report since going public, but the real challenge lies ahead: on August 6, up to 911.5 million old shares will become eligible for sale. Based on the current stock price, this corresponds to a market value of about $104.4 billion.
To be clear, the unlocking is not a new issuance, nor does it mean these shares will definitely be sold. It won't increase the total share capital out of thin air; what changes is the supply of tradable shares in the market.
Currently, SpaceX's float is about 640 million shares, and the shares to be unlocked exceed the current float. If all enter the market, the tradable supply could theoretically increase by about 142%. This is the biggest pressure after the earnings report.
SpaceX's financials are interesting.
In 2025, revenue is $18.674 billion, up 33.2% year-over-year; adjusted EBITDA reached $6.584 billion, and operating cash flow was $6.785 billion. Looking at these alone, it doesn't seem like a poorly performing company.
But on the other hand, the net loss for the year was $4.937 billion. Adding up the data disclosed by the three business segments, capital expenditures in 2025 have already exceeded $20.7 billion.
The money is mainly burned on Starship, the Starlink satellite network, and AI data centers.
Among them, the connectivity business where Starlink operates is actually quite profitable: annual revenue of $11.387 billion, operating profit of $4.423 billion. The real drag is the AI business, with an operating loss of $6.355 billion in 2025.
So tonight, don't just focus on whether revenue beats expectations.
More importantly, watch whether Starlink's profits can continue to grow, whether the burn rate of AI and Starship slows down, and whether management
What do you think?
$SPCX
#财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #dailyorbit#ISMBeatYieldsFall #KoreaETFVolDown90 Five earnings reports, five types of risks: Don't just focus on EPS, look at growth quality—is it a risk or an opportunity?
Key points
NVIDIA: Strongest earnings quality. Q1 revenue $81.6 billion, up 85% year-over-year, with data center accounting for 92%. Q2 consensus basically aligns with the company's $91 billion guidance; the real catalyst is the Q3 guidance, Rubin/Blackwell supply, and gross margin. NVIDIA earnings report
AMD: Focus on market share realization. Q1 data center revenue $5.775 billion, up 57%; Q2 expected revenue $11.3 billion, EPS $1.61. Meeting guidance alone is not enough; MI350, EPYC market share, and Q3 guidance need to continue exceeding expectations. AMD earnings report
SanDisk: Highest profit elasticity and also the highest expectation threshold. Q3 revenue grew 97% quarter-over-quarter, gross margin 78.4%; market expectations already exceed the upper end of the company's Q4 guidance, representing a typical high prosperity, high expectation, high volatility trade. SanDisk earnings report
Circle: Essentially a multiplication problem of interest rates and USDC scale. USDC circulation $77 billion, up 28%, but reserve yield has dropped to 3.5%. The key is whether USDC expansion can outpace the yield decline caused by rate cuts. Circle 10-Q
SpaceX: Highest event risk. Market expects revenue around $6.8 billion, loss per share $0.23–0.29. Starlink is the profit pillar, but AI and Starship continue to burn cash, and immediately after the earnings report, 911.5 million shares will be unlocked, supply pressure may outweigh single-quarter outperformance. SpaceX earnings report schedule
In a nutshell:
NVDA focuses on quality | AMD focuses on market share | SNDK focuses on cycle | CRCL focuses on interest rates | SPCX focuses on cash flow and unlocks. #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 $BTC #$ETH $BTC 💡 Market Idea of the DaExtreme Fear remains elevated at 25 (↓3), but today’s liquidation data tells a different story. With 91% of liquidations coming from shorts and only 9% from longs, this looks more like a potential short squeeze than a retail panic sell-off.
Total liquidation volume remains relatively low at $18.4M, suggesting this move is more about positioning than a full market flush.
Similar conditions were seen on May 30 and July
14, when Fear & Greed levels were around 22–23 and short liquidations reached similar levels. Both instances were followed by short-term rebounds.
For traders: if shorts continue getting squeezed, momentum could push higher toward the $64K area.
📊 Key Levels: • $BTC : $63,000 / $64,000
• $ETH : $1,800 / $1,900
DYOR | Not financial advice.Many people in the market say that Bitcoin's bullish structure is intact. I thought about it and didn't argue, just smiled. There are reasons to be bullish, but not many can predict the turning point. Many people get caught during the transition between bull and bear. Back when it was between 60000-82800, it dropped from 82800 back to 78500, then bounced back to 81000. At that time, I also thought the bullish structure was intact. But later, I really got scared, scared.$BTC rejected the previous weekly low and left equals.
Currently price is rejecting the 64K level, which is an important momentum level for this week.
Now we rejected the 62.3K PWL, in terms of direction the market is indecisive.
We engineered lots of liquidity at those lows obviously, and the grinding highs above are also stacked with liquidity.
What do I do in certain conditions? I simply wait.
I'm still in my shorts, and those 62.3K equals are still a target, but we all know price can leave liquidity for later.
The 64K momentum line is important for me, and there is one short-scenario I'm eyeing.
If we sweep internal liquidity around 64.5K and get a strong bearish rejection, I'm shorting it again.
The short is still interesting because open interest shows that this pump is mainly driven by shorts closing.
If price pushes above 64K and consolidates + new buy/longs stepping in, I'm sitting on my hands.
Those who follow me know that 68.1K is a HTF target on Bitcoin for me, and strength above 64K could result in more momentum into the highs.
For longs I simply cannot execute here per my system.$BTC #BigTechEarningsWatch $SPCX has retraced nearly half from its peak, with 34% of the initial circulating supply already held by short positions. On August 6, a share unlocking event will release 1.5 times the current circulating supply. The restructuring of holdings combined with expectations of Q2 losses is squeezing short-term capital risk appetite. If results confirm that rocket launches and AI operations continue to burn cash, the massive unlocking volume could significantly amplify downward pressure. Only a short squeeze or major shareholders opting for long-term lock-up can disrupt the current selling pressure logic. Close attention should be paid to the actual turnover after the unlocking.
#美日确认联合购汇 #亚马逊市值破3万亿，500亿押注先赢一局 #MSTR再卖1638枚比特币，规模腰斩What the market fears most now is not Bitcoin falling, but global capital becoming increasingly conservative.
Bitcoin has dropped to around $63,600, and many are starting to worry whether the bear market will deepen. But I think this pressure mainly comes from the macro market, not the crypto industry itself.
The US and Japan have rarely joined forces to intervene in the yen, and the market is again worried about carry trade liquidations. As long as global capital begins to deleverage, risk assets like stocks and cryptocurrencies will all come under pressure together, and BTC naturally will find it hard to strengthen independently.
However, on the other hand, there are some positive signals.
Bhutan's GMC has chosen not to sell its 10,000 BTC holdings but plans to manage returns through professional institutions, allowing dormant Bitcoin to generate cash flow. This shows that more and more institutions are treating BTC as a long-term allocation asset rather than simply selling when prices rise.
At the same time, a Bitcoin wallet dormant for 13 years suddenly transferred BTC worth $31 million, and several ancient addresses have recently been waking up one after another. Such news always scares the market, but historically many old wallet transfers were just custody changes or asset adjustments and do not necessarily mean immediate selling.
In a bear market, any negative news is amplified, and any positive news is ignored; this is the market norm. What really deserves attention is that institutions are still positioning, countries are still holding, and old coins are starting to recirculate—these changes all indicate that Bitcoin's ecosystem continues to develop.
Now, do you think this bear market is nearing its end, or does it still need more time to bottom out? $UB coins have no spot market, no real token trading; it's all margin betting. The entire market is just a USDT game between longs and shorts, with no "spot market dump" weapon.
1. Who controls the price?
- Latest transaction price: entirely determined by contract order book trades. As long as the market maker eats the sell orders, the price can keep pushing up, repeatedly hitting new highs with shallow pullbacks.
- Mark price (which triggers liquidation): Here's the problem—it can't find an external spot index, so the exchange algorithm can only use the contract's own order book average price as the mark price.
This means: contract transaction price rises → mark price rises accordingly, with no external spot to constrain it.
For regular coins: no matter how crazy the contract is, the spot market pulls it back; for pure contract coins, with no anchor, the contract itself is the anchor.
2. Can a short whale dump the price?
It's very hard to push the price down, even worse than regular small coins with spot markets.
1. The short whale only has contract short positions, no spot to sell, so no real token selling pressure.
2. To push the price down, the whale can only place large sell orders on the contract order book.
But the order book depth is very thin, and the market maker has ample USDT funds to directly eat all the short sell orders.
No matter how many short orders you place to suppress the price, the market maker eats them all, and the price not only doesn't fall but continues to rise.
3. The short side's worst nightmare: short squeeze liquidation loop
Price keeps rising → many short positions trigger forced liquidation;
Forced liquidation is system market buy to close, becoming active buy orders;
This burst of liquidation buy orders pushes the price even higher, liquidating more shorts, forming a loop of rising prices.
In a contract-only market, short liquidations themselves fuel price rallies. The bigger the short positions, the more the market maker wants to push prices up.
3. So how does the market maker take profits? Without spot, how to realize gains?
Key point: Without spot, the market maker doesn't earn tokens but directly earns USDT from the opposing side.
Regular coin market makers: push up spot, sell tokens to convert to USDT and exit.
Pure contract coin market makers don't "sell tokens"; the process is:
1. Early on, eat sell orders, continuously push prices up, lure many retail traders to short; funding rates stay positive long-term, continuously collecting short funding fees.
2. Market open interest (OI) piles up high, with ample funds in the long-short game.
3. Two ways to complete the harvest:
- Method A: Instant dump: market maker liquidates all long positions at market price at once, huge sell orders hit the order book, crushing longs and harvesting their margin.
- Method B: Back-and-forth oscillation with spikes, using high leverage to liquidate longs and shorts repeatedly, collecting liquidation fees and commissions.
⚠️ Key point: For this type of coin, the market maker doesn't need to "slowly unload" or wait for retail spot buyers. As long as total contract open interest is large enough, they can dump and harvest anytime with one click. The crash has no warning signs, and traditional top signals like big bearish candles or volume spikes may not appear.
4. The only condition for a short whale to beat the market maker
Only if one of these is met can the price be pushed down:
1. The short whale's USDT capital is greater than the market maker's long capital, continuously placing large sell orders that the market maker can't absorb, so selling pressure overwhelms and the price drops.
2. Market sentiment reverses, everyone refuses to chase longs, no new buy orders enter, the market maker has no counterparties, and can't push the price up. This is going to get very, very ridiculous
In the last cycle, 90% of retail traders were the liquidity exit for smart traders, because centralized exchanges only listed meme coins after reaching billions in market cap, and the listing infrastructure has been down since launch, with no easy-to-use mobile apps
This cycle, we will see retail traders empowered to buy any on-chain trending asset with one click, crossing any blockchain in under a minute
In the history of cryptocurrency, there has never been a time when retail traders could speculate on low market cap coins so easily and with such low friction costs
Additionally, we have centralized exchanges that missed huge trading volumes and are more likely to list tokens in the future. In my view, this is evident from how Coinbase has natively integrated Coinbase Wallet into the exchange, even allowing people to instantly buy newly issued tokens
Meme coin trading volume will attract retail traders but also builders, because open blockchains are the best place for smart developers to get instant liquidity for ideas, especially with AI tools like Fable and others. I am very optimistic about tokenization and innovative applications
Tokens like $bonk, which can command and accumulate attention throughout the bull market, will reap huge rewards
On-chain super cycle