Orbit Post Sitemap
[Beware of Geopolitics]
In the early morning, the US and Iran continued their verbal battles, Brent crude returned to around 89, and the 30-year US Treasury yield rose again.
To put it bluntly, the current liquidity pump in the market is not about whether the Fed will raise rates, because it is unlikely to choose to raise rates. Therefore, the negative side of the rate hike can be directly ignored.
The biggest negative factor affecting liquidity is the U.S. Treasury yield.
U.S. Treasury yields are positively correlated with crude oil prices, so the transmission chain in between will not be elaborated further.
Therefore, now the double-edged sword is in front of us: risk assets continue to surge higher, requiring US-Iran taco. If the situation worsens, the rebound may be hindered.
$BTC $SNDK $QQQ
#标普盈利超预期, why is Wall Street still cautious? 美股卖空的借股费率保持在0.28%
包括日内最高最低开盘收盘都是0.28%
但是，今天出现了0.43%借股费率
最近2次是7月24日和8月5日
都是借股费率上涨、同时借股的供给量减少
这两天sndk都是收阴线$SNDK $MU Look at SanDisk's candlestick chart; if you didn't know, you'd think it was some altcoin.
Honestly, I think the underlying logic behind SanDisk's recent rise has little to do with the NAND cycle. What the market is really trading on is the story of its transformation from a strong cyclical storage company to a "quasi-infrastructure" company. Long-term contract volume locks, AI structural demand, and high cash returns—once these three come together, the valuation system really should change.
I've now completely given up shorting the storage sector. Micron, Hynix, Samsung—all the same. Not because the fundamentals suddenly reversed, but because the overall environment doesn't allow it. The S&P 500 has hit new highs, Nasdaq is looking at 30800-31000, and storage, as a weighted sector, holding short positions at this level seems very low in cost-effectiveness.
Volume and major player behavior both clearly point to a higher probability of sweeping stop-loss orders near resistance levels. Shorting in this environment, I think, is really pointless because you probably won't even get a decent pullback.
Going long with the trend is currently the only direction I can convince myself of. Of course, short-term sentiment has already been pushed up, so chasing the rally is definitely not worthwhile. But the big picture is clear: wait for a pullback to buy in, or wait for a breakout confirmation to follow. Short positions? At least not this week.
$SNDK $SKHYNIX $MU
#闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证 BTC rebounded to around 64,000
It looks more like short covering: 24h liquidations at $85.7 million, shorts account for $82.65 million, fear and greed index still at 40.
The market isn't lacking buyers, but the sentiment hasn't recovered yet.
Here, I'm more concerned about whether spot volume will follow up later, rather than just looking at a single bullish candle. Last weekend, Vitalik publicly stated on X that the Bitcoin community's contributions to the UTXO technical concept are commendable, including state optimization solutions like Utreexo.
Then he added—Ethereum won't just copy UTXO, but should have UTXO-style states, dynamic states, and various states in between, enabling massive scaling without sacrificing decentralization or node usability.
This is quite different from Ethereum's traditional approach. Previously, Ethereum's scaling strategy was basically "L2-centric, L1 secondary," but now Vitalik is discussing how to integrate different state models at the L1 level.
The market is currently pricing in ETH's short-term trend, while Vitalik is looking at the technical pattern for the next five to ten years. The ETH/BTC ratio is 0.02994, still far below the high of 0.08 in 2021.
The final trend of technology and the short-term pace of price have never been on the same timescale
Vitalik himself once said: "Ethereum will be quantum-resistant, prioritize user privacy, secure and stable, resistant to censorship, high performance and scalability, and have an extremely streamlined overall architecture."
These things have little to do with today's price of 1,900, but they determine how much ETH will be worth ten years from now $BTC #财报观察员：小米即将发布财报，你更看好哪条业务线？
$AXTI 网格暂停了。
78进场，三天拉到97.5，涨了24%，确实有点猛。总收益35.78U，50.72%的收益率，网格收益10U，底仓赚了25U，两边都在收，这单做得挺顺的。
但涨太快了，RSI冲上80，明显超买。一根线从80拉到97，中间没像样的回调，获利盘堆了不少。我的判断是大概率会回踩到80附近，到时候再重启网格。80是前期平台和均线支撑位，那个位置重启比较舒服。也不是说一定要等到80，85左右如果企稳了，也会考虑重新开，边走边看。
情绪驱动的涨幅，等情绪退潮就会回来一些。闪迪那边93.9亿长期协议确实硬，但$SNDK 闪迪涨不代表AXTI能一直跟，设备商业绩比存储厂滞后，故事可以讲但兑现需要时间。
$XIAOMI 我在前几天也开了一个网格，其他准备布局特斯拉网格。波动大、长期看涨，300-360区间适合网格慢慢跑。AXTI这笔如果能在80接回来，正好两个网格错开节奏，互不干扰。
涨太快了，歇一歇挺好。不急，等它自己下来。#财报观察员：小米即将发布财报，你更看好哪条业务线？
小米财报临近，市场目光聚焦人车家全生态，几条核心业务线分歧明显。
汽车业务是最大的增长期权，前期经历换代阵痛，交付有所修复，市场重点观察亏损收窄幅度与新车爬坡能力。优点是想象空间大，但重资产投入高、行业价格战激烈，盈利稳定性仍待验证，波动风险最高。
手机+AIoT属于基本盘，行业整体需求疲软，竞争内卷。看点不在出货冲高，而是高端化推进、毛利率能否稳住，负责托住集团收入底盘，弹性有限，但确定性更强。
互联网服务是隐形压舱石，依托澎湃OS庞大用户基数，毛利率长期维持高位，随着车机生态打通，跨终端变现存在增量机会，是稳定的利润来源。
个人观点：短期博弈看汽车业务数据，一旦交付、亏损数据超预期，容易带动情绪；中长期更看重互联网业务变现，以及手机业务毛利率能否扛住行业压力。
映射加密市场，更多是科技板块情绪参考。科技企业AI研发投入景气度，间接影响风险资产偏好，但不会直接驱动币价。后续财报重点看交付、亏损、毛利率三大核心指标。8月10日到14日，美国现货比特币ETF净流出了3.852亿美元。
以太坊ETF同期只流出了226万美元。
比特币ETF的流出量是以太坊ETF的170倍。
更值得看的不是绝对数字，是相对规模——6月份以太坊ETF净流出占基金规模的4.65%，比特币ETF是8.09%；7月份以太坊ETF净流入占基金规模的3.19%，比特币ETF只有0.34%，前者的流入率是后者的9.4倍。
以太坊ETF连续五周的净流入趋势在上周终止了。但流出的幅度只有226万，在105亿美元的总盘子面前可以忽略不计。
比特币ETF那边一周流出了将近4亿，以太坊这边只流出了226万，两个方向完全不一样。
有人在减仓大饼、有人在加仓二饼，方向在变，但变化的速度不快。ETH/BTC比率在8月18日升到了0.02994，三个月来的最高点。$ETH $BTC 刚看到一个兄弟开了个 SNDK 多单，路子不算野，但也别急着把自己当聪明钱。
币种是 xyz:SNDK，1x 杠杆，方向开多，成交价 1777.97。
持仓规模 125,477 美元，数量 70.573，这种单子看着稳，其实也就说明人家敢上仓位，不代表你跟着抄就能活。
1x 确实不像那些高杠杆莽夫那么容易当场去世，但开多这事说白了还是吃行情，方向一旦看错，仓位再大也得老老实实挨打。
别看见别人下单就热血上头，自己没计划、没退出条件，最后最容易变成死扛的那个。
该止损就止损，留得住本金，比在那硬撑着等市场教育你强。谈判窗口正式破裂！美伊备忘录不再延期，霍尔木兹风险重新拉满 局势一下子又紧绷起来。 6月签署的美伊谅解备忘录，原本留给双方60天缓冲谈判期，现在已经到期，特朗普直接官宣：美国不会延长这份备忘录。 美方态度非常干脆，不谈延长、也没有放出新的谈判方案，唯一底线依旧是：伊朗绝对不能拥有核武器，其余细节全部闭口不提。等于外交缓兵的窗口期，正式关上了。 另一边伊朗直接放出强硬警告： 已经给美国定下数周的履约期限，如果外交彻底谈崩，伊朗做好准备升级霍尔木兹海峡以及整个中东的紧张局势，最后通牒会通过第三方斡旋国转达美方。 简单复盘整件事： 备忘录签署才没多久，7月就已经爆发一轮互相军事打击，事实上这份协议早就名存实亡，双方从一开始就对条款解读完全不一样，分歧根本没有解决。 美国想要控制海峡、限制伊朗核能力；伊朗要解除制裁、守住海峡的主导权，两个核心诉求完全没法短期妥协。 对全球市场的直接影响 1、油价避险溢价重新打开 霍尔木兹承担全球近三分之一原油运输，一旦局势升温，油价第一时间会做出剧烈反应。油价反弹又会反向推升通胀预期，间接打乱美联储降息节奏。 2、风险资产避险情绪升温 美股、加密市场都会开始计$OKB is trading at $OKB 98.22, down 0.86% after pulling back from its recent high of $109.85. Despite the cooldown, it is still holding above the key Supertrend support at $95.96 and the MA20 line. If buyers step back in to defend this zone, we could see a bounce back toward the $103 resistance level.
Do you think OKB will hold above $95 and bounce back, or will it drop lower this week? Let us know your thoughts!
$OKB $BTC Don't automatically interpret "stablecoin regulation" as a signal to pump.
The U.S. Treasury is advancing the implementation rules for the GENIUS Act stablecoins, focusing on clarifying several key points: who qualifies as a U.S. payment stablecoin issuer, which domestic and foreign activities fall under regulation, and how the rules will be implemented in detail. A 60-day public comment period is currently open.
Market interpretations show mixed views: it's generally positive for compliant issuers like USDC because the regulatory path is clearer; for foreign-led stablecoins like USDT, there is more attention on whether they can continue to smoothly access U.S. trading platforms.
This matter does not directly correspond to a pump of any single token, but as stablecoin regulation enters the detailed rulemaking phase, it will impact exchange listings, payment settlements, and the competitive landscape of U.S. dollar stablecoins.
Source: CoinDesk
#USDC #Crypto100W 宏观与市场： •地缘与风险偏好：60天美伊停火协议即将到期，霍尔木兹海峡航运几乎停滞（仅5艘船通过周六，0周日），油价反弹（Brent ~$88–90），中东紧张重压风险资产。BTC一度跌破$63,000测试200周均线，但凌晨逼近$64,500+，显示地缘风险尚未压制全面崩盘，但限制了增量资金入场。 • 主流资产进入“等待9月政策窗口”阶段：美联储政策预期（FOMC 会议纪要即将影响利率预期）及地缘风险（中东紧张局势）等核心因素，均在 9 月（国会复会后及政策窗口期）重新主导，市场情绪没有明显恶化，但也缺乏新的增量资金推动突破。当前最大的特点不是恐慌，而是资金进入观望状态。监管、ETF资金流向以及美联储预期，都将在9月重新成为市场核心变量。 • SEC监管节奏放缓，但长期框架仍在推进：此前SEC取消加密监管会议后，市场短期催化暂时落空；与此同时，国会层面的数字资产立法（Clarity Act 等）仍在等待9月复会后继续推进。短线来看，监管无法提供新的上涨驱动，但中长期“规则逐步明确”的方向并未改变。 • BTC继续处于关键筹码区间：目前$BTC仍维持高位震荡，市场分歧加大。一方面，部SanDisk has locked in future capacity through over $90 billion in long-term contracts, converting cyclical hardware into definite cash flow. The core conflict lies in the 80% gross margin expectation and the alignment between the data center capital expenditure rhythm.
$SNDK Currently near $1,787, up 79% from the July low of $998, with a 44% increase over the past seven days indicating capital is betting on the revaluation logic of memory chips. Breaking through the $1,800 mark means the market has digested previous negative factors, but there is still 24% room to fill the gap between the all-time high of $2,354 and subsequent earnings to fill the gap.
The drivers are the visibility of cash flow locked in long-term contracts, the premium of computing power hardware quotas, and the 100% excess cashback policy. The $93.9 billion long-term agreement has changed institutional allocation, boosting risk appetite amid rising inflation risks in tech stocks and attracting safe-haven funds to concentrate on highly certain computing power assets.
The trigger for the upward scenario is that institutional funds continue to flow in net after the market opens and hold above $1800. If the financial report confirms that the adjusted gross margin reaches 80% and major clients fulfill their contracts smoothly, the stock price is projected to retest the historical high of $2354; This scenario fails signal: macro liquidity tightening has led to a passive reduction in overall positions in tech stocks.
The trigger for a downside scenario is that cloud computing giants temporarily cut capital expenditures or industry supply expands beyond expectations. If gross margin falls short of expectations, the stock price may fall below the $1700 support level and pull back to the $1500 area; This scenario signal is failing to add a new round of procurement agreements to major clients.
The core variable to watch over the next seven days is the actual progress of major clients' contracts on agreements exceeding $90 billion and the turnover at the $1800 level of exchange.
#CLARITY表决待定, SEC rules have not been implemented #消费动能转弱, and September policy remains constrained by inflation最近越来越觉得，Coinbase、Robinhood、Strategy这些上市公司，正在把BTC/ETH拉进美股估值体系。
以前买BTC/ETH就是直接买币，现在买COIN、HOOD、MSTR也能吃到敞口。数据上，Coinbase机构侧覆盖已经到千万级，托管资产数千亿美元；Robinhood数千万用户，crypto业务占比持续往上走，收入里加密相关一度超过四成；Strategy更直接，账上堆了几十万枚BTC，基本把自己变成了一只带杠杆的BTC基金。等于美股每天开盘，都在给BTC/ETH报第二次价。
但两个资产的分工也明显变了：$BTC 越来越像资产配置，机构拿它当长期储备，看的是稀缺性和购买力；$ETH 更像生态增长，DeFi、L2、RWA、稳定币这些都要消耗ETH，所以ETH的弹性更多取决于链上活跃度和真实需求，而不是单纯避险情绪。
这就形成了“双市场”——币市场看链上供需和情绪，股票市场看公司现金流、合规预期和beta。两边偶尔脱钩，但长期估值会互相锚定。所以现在看BTC/ETH，光盯K线不够，还得盯财报和机构持仓变化。
仅为个人市场观察，不构成投资建议，DYOR。Pump.fun launches a zero-fee "price war"—the Meme launch platform is entering a comprehensive reshuffling period
---
📊 1. Event Overview: From 1.25% to 0%, Pump.fun "flipped the table"
On August 18, Solana's leading meme coin launch platform Pump.fun officially announced it would reduce on-chain token transaction fees to 0%, with cross-chain transaction fees set at 0.1%. Previously, Pump.fun charged a fixed fee of about 1% to 1.25% per transaction. Now, the 1%+ has gone directly to zero, effectively cutting off the vast majority of the platform's revenue sources.
🔥 2. Why the "suicide-style" fee cut? — Three knives at your throat
1. Market share eroded
In 2025, competitors like BonkFun once took over 55% of Solana's token issuance share. Although Pump.fun later regained ground to 73.6%, launch platforms like BAGS have successively launched "almost zero fees," and platforms like GoFundMeme have even offered zero fees. Pump.fun's zero fees are essentially a strategic response to competitors.
2. Token economic model failure
Pump.fun co-founder Alon Cohen admitted in January that the creator fee model had "failed"—token issuance far outpaced the sustained liquidity of the secondary market, issuing was more profitable than trading, and the market structure had been distorted.
3. Activity levels have significantly cooled
Solana network fees have been heavily affected by Pump.fun activity, dropping from about 33,000 SOL per day in January to about 5,300 SOL in June, a decrease of about 84%. Meme coin activity has slowed, forcing platforms to reignite trading enthusiasm with zero fees.
📉 3. What is the cost? — The money printing machine that earns tens of millions a day is about to shut down
Pump.fun set a single-day trading volume record of $2.03 billion at the beginning of 2026, with average daily fee income reaching as high as $39 million. Zero fee rates mean this income will be reduced to zero—Pump.fun is using a "self-cutting revenue stream" approach to regain traffic and market share.
⚠️ 4. Hidden Risks: Zero-Rate Boosts 'Industrial-Grade Hair Scraping'
Zero fees are good for real traders, but they also attract a large influx of bots and junk tokens. Previous analyses have shown that zero-cost token creation combined with predictable syndicated curve pricing enables bots to front-run the first purchase of new tokens. When "issuing tokens without pay, trading without pay," Pump.fun may shift from a "meme factory" to a "junk token pipeline."
💎 5. Summary
Pump.fun slashing the fee from 1%+ directly to 0 is a high-stakes gamble of "trading revenue for traffic"—under the dual pressure of competitors and the cooling of Memes, it chose the most aggressive defensive approach. How many new users and trading volume zero fees can attract, and whether it can be converted into the long-term value of PUMP tokens, will determine the ultimate outcome of this "price war." When platforms don't even charge transaction fees, they gamble: as long as people remain, the money will come back sooner or later.
$PUMP On August 17, an Ethereum community update showed that Lido is advancing preparations for new validator key submission and migration for Curated Module v2 (CMv2). Distinguish the stages: not all validators have completed the migration, nor are stETH users required to operate. According to official Lido information, the first phase of CMv2 is planned to launch on mainnet in Q3 2026, and the testnet version is already running. The technical basis for this change comes from EIP-7251 in the Ethereum Pectra upgrade. In the past, a validator's effective balance was typically 32 ETH; After using the "0x02" withdrawal voucher, a single validator's maximum effective balance can reach 2,048 ETH, and consensus layer rewards can be automatically reinvested in. Lido's CMv2 only accepts 0x02 validators: the new key is first deposited with 32 ETH, and more staking can be allocated afterward; 0x01 validators from the original CMv1 migrate to new validators through Ethereum's native merge mechanism. The most common misunderstanding among ordinary users is that a decrease in validator numbers does not mean a large number of ETH are being staked. During the merge, source validators exit, and their balances are directly merged into the target validators at the consensus layer, without needing to withdraw first or requeue for deposit. It may reduce the number of validator instances and network messages nodes need to maintain, improve operational efficiency, and make it easier to reinvest rewards. If the number of active validators on the chain is noticeably declining in the future, you should also observe total staked ETH, the number of independent operators, and client distribution, rather than just the total number of staked ETH从“买币机器”到“信贷工厂”——Saylor的180度大转弯，正在改写Strategy的底层逻辑
---
💥 一、核心表态：股票回购靠边站，STRC、现金、信贷才是“亲儿子”
8月17日，Strategy执行董事长Michael Saylor明确表态：公司目前优先考虑STRC优先股、现金储备和信贷业务，而非股票回购。受比特币下跌影响，MSTR今年已下跌约38%。
Saylor称，若MSTR相对资产净值出现“非常深的折价”，可能考虑回购，但目前并非优先事项。CEO Phong Le为发行新MSTR股份辩护，称当MSTR高于基础资产价值时，发行股份购买比特币可提升每股BTC含量。
Saylor在投资者问答中进一步解释了他对“数字资产”的分类：比特币是“数字资本”（与黄金、房地产、股票竞争），而STRC代表“数字信贷” ——旨在以低于比特币的波动性产生收益。他认为，公司应该先稳定信贷业务，“股权是之后的事。
📊 二、STRC为何成为优先事项？——一场从“脱锚”到“面值保卫战”的危机
STRC是Strategy发行的可变利率A系列永续优先股，面值100美元，年化股息率约12%，每月分两次以现金形式发放。
STRC的定位：面向那些希望参与Strategy商业模式、又不想每天面对比特币10%波动的收益型投资者。2025年7月上市时，STRC为Strategy募集约25亿美元。
脱锚危机：2026年年中，STRC价格一度跌至74至88美元区间，较面值折价超25%。散户持有STRC约80%份额，保证金平仓加速了下跌。Saylor随即从“发行股票”转向“回购”，7月完成2500万美元回购，随后追加1.32亿美元。此后又投入1.322亿美元回购138.87万股STRC。
Saylor的承诺：“如果STRC跌破面值，公司将动用所有资源使其回归面值。”他的策略是：低于面值就买入支撑，高于面值就发行供给，目标将STRC稳定在99-100美元区间。
💰 三、48亿美元现金储备：STRC的“弹药库”
截至8月17日，Strategy的美元储备已增至48亿美元。资金来源主要是通过ATM计划出售MSTR普通股——过去五周通过出售约21亿美元的普通股，其中约3.47亿美元专门用于回购STRC优先股。
48亿美元现金的核心用途是覆盖STRC股息支付——目前股息覆盖期限已超过2.8年。Saylor计划维持大规模现金余额以保持灵活操作。这笔现金还可以用于购买比特币、回购MSTR或优先股、或偿还债务。
但48亿美元也远不够覆盖所有潜在风险。 公司还面临约67亿美元可转债将在2027-2028年到期。STRC等工具的股息率约为12%，意味着每年股息义务超过15亿美元。在15%复利增长情景下，即便比特币回升至新高，STRC仍有44.6%的概率最终跌破85美元。
🏦 四、信贷业务：Saylor的“新故事”
Saylor将信贷业务称为公司“最重要的目标”——建立最可持续、最高质量的信贷业务。
“数字信贷” 指以Strategy比特币储备为抵押的收益型工具。6月29日，Strategy正式发布“数字信用资本框架”，核心包括：设立25.5亿美元现金储备、授权10亿美元STRC回购和20亿美元MSTR回购、以及开放有限BTC变现。
这个框架实际上承认了Strategy从“单向买币”到“主动资本管理”的范式转移。但批评者将其称为“金融工程”——瑞波CEO Brad Garlinghouse直言，这种模式“损害了更广泛的加密市场”，STRC暴跌25%就是证据。
📉 五、被牺牲的MSTR：普通股跌75%，还要被MSCI踢出去
STRC跑赢了比特币，但MSTR普通股崩了。
截至8月14日，STRC过去一年上涨9%，而比特币下跌47%。但MSTR从52周高点367.57美元跌至约95美元，跌幅约75%。普通股股东承担了全部杠杆风险，优先股持有者获得了相对稳定的收益。
💎 六、总结
Saylor的这场战略转型，本质上是将Strategy从“比特币的杠杆ETF”重塑为“比特币信贷银行”：
· 比特币储备（840,447枚BTC） 是底层资产和信用背书
· STRC优先股是面向收益型投资者的“存款凭证”
· 48亿美元现金是维持信贷信用的“准备金”
· 信贷业务是连接比特币和传统资本的“通道”
但风险同样清晰： 每年超15亿美元的股息义务、2027-2028年67亿美元可转债到期、MSCI可能剔除的28亿美元被动资金流出——这些都在考验Saylor的“信贷工厂”能否真正运转起来。
核心矛盾在于： Strategy不再用比特币创造收益，而是用比特币的“信用”去借钱、付息、回购——这本质上是一个杠杆游戏。当比特币上涨时，这个游戏很美好；当比特币横盘或下跌时，所有承诺都可能变成“纸面担保”。STRC距离100美元还有约5美元的差距——这5美元，可能是Strategy未来最昂贵的5美元。
$MSTR $STRC #消费动能转弱, September policy remains constrained by inflation
$BEAT
BEAT fell 17% in one day. To be honest, my first reaction wasn't "how badly it dropped," but rather "it seems no longer deserves to be re-examined by capital."
Have you noticed retail investors see it drop from 0.39 to 0.24 and then pull back to 0.30? Their eyes light up and they think, "Wow, the opportunity is here!" But the market actually votes with its feet—even $620 million in turnover can't hold up the price. This isn't capital entering the market; it's clearly retail investors cutting prices among themselves. If a coin relies on this to maintain its price, then its so-called "bottom" is not really a bottom, but just a rest stop before the next drop.
Let's look at what BTC, ETH, and SOL are doing at the same time. They are quietly capturing the liquidity that has emerged after the shrinking scale of DeFi lending. Galaxy Research's data is quite heartbreaking: total on-chain lending has dropped 40% from its peak, and at times like this, weak assets are the first burden to be discarded. Funds now only recognize mainstream consensus, not the word "cheap."
So my judgment is simple: whether BEAT rebounds in the short term doesn't matter; what matters is whether it can still be re-examined by capital. Without new stories and no market makers willing to actively set prices, each rebound feels more like an opportunity for those holding stocks to reduce their positions, rather than a signal to get in on board.Many people on OKX treat $XSNDK as a 'trend-following US stock market.'
Let's look at the data first: this week it wasn't just following the crowd, but was the leading gainer in the storage sector. OKX $XSNDK: about $1,804, up +7.7% in 24h US stocks SNDK: closed at $1,787, about +8.9% for the day 7 days: +44% Rebound from July 29 low of $998: +79% All-time high $2,354 (2026-06-22), only $43 from ATH's -24% 52-week low In the same week, Micron was about +18%, Western Digital was about +22%.
SanDisk is almost twice their speed. 1. First, look at the one-year path clearly: this is not an air pump. Within a year, SanDisk has experienced the volatility of other companies in ten years: repriced from around $43, surged to $2,354 in June, and after earnings guidance fell short of expectations, it fell back to around $1,000. After investor day, it regained the $1,700–$1,800 range. This path says two things: the first half was a revaluation (NAND was labeled as an AI asset), and the second half was a battle for pricing power (the market is asking: can high growth be sustained)—now it stands at a time 1800 is neither the starting point nor the top yet.
Professionally, it's called a second start after a main upward wave, not a garbage rebound. 2. It's not that SanDisk is going crazy alone, it's that it has gained a premium within the sector. Same time window: Reading: 7 days, 3$GPS indeed "can both rise and wash out": single-day jump from 0.009846 to 0.017440, with intraday volatility exceeding 73%, and both long and short positions facing severe liquidation; The rally was driven by a safe narrative, but also saw large unlocked selling pressure, raising both the psychological and capital risks of chasing rallies at high levels.
Why does it "rise fiercely and be washed hard": The tug-of-war between narrative and capital
- Security narrative activated: Recently, wallets and hardware such as SafePal, Trezor, and Coldcard have been exposed for security incidents. As a Web3 security infrastructure project, GoPlus Security's on-chain security scanning and risk detection services have rapidly gained attention, driving capital inflows.
- Limited fundamental support: The project achieved $4.7 million in annual revenue in February 2025, indicating some commercialization potential, but the current rally is driven more by event-driven sentiment rather than sudden performance shifts.
- Unlocking selling pressure occurred simultaneously: During the price rally, OKX Ventures transferred about 48.61 million GPS (about $750,000) into Binance, these tokens from its investment unlocked, representing a typical profit-taking signal.
- Intense contract market turmoil: Within 24 hours, net liquidations exceeded $4.45 million across the network, with $2.8 million in short and $1.65 million in long, with the largest single liquidation close to $30,000. The cycle of "rally—short blowout—pullback—long selling" reinforced the consolidation characteristics.
You're right now to "not want to chase": the price of chasing rallies at high levels
- Narrative-driven markets are more prone to sharp rises and falls: Once the event's hype fades, funds may withdraw quickly, and buying at high prices carries significantly higher drawdown risks than stocks with sustained performance support.
- Unlocking selling pressure is a real threat: When investors unlock selling at high levels, it directly suppresses the price upward and may even trigger profit-taking stampedes.
- Leverage games amplify volatility: Severe two-way liquidation means the market is dominated by leveraged funds, making short-term trends harder to predict. Chasing rallies can lead to "pullbacks when chasing and rebounds when cut off."
A more stable approach: turning 'looking' into 'waiting for signals to move'
- Wait for pullbacks and stabilization: Focus on price pullbacks to key support levels (such as the 0.0155–0.0160 area, or near MA20) and stabilize with increased volume, then consider small positions testing long positions.
- Wait for a breakout and backtest: If the price can effectively break above the previous high of 0.017440 with increased volume, and the backtest confirms support, then move up again to avoid chasing the peak after a "false breakout."
- Use position size and stop-loss to control risk: Even if the above signals appear, it's recommended to start with small positions and set clear stop-losses (for example, placing them below the nearest low or key moving averages) to calculate the "cost of making mistakes" first.
$GPS GPS's strength comes from the combination of security narratives and capital competition, but short-term gains and unlocking selling pressure amplify volatility; Your current "dare not chase" is a reasonable risk aversion. Giving the entry time to "pullback stabilization" or "breakout backtesting" is more stable than betting on the direction at a high emotional peak.[Institutional holdings showing counter-trend growth, BTC bottom signals emerging?] 】
Bitcoin Strategy's compilation of institutional 13F data for Q2 2026 shows BTC fell 14.2% in Q2, but institutional ETF holdings grew 7.5%, from 498,000 to 536,000, with institutions also reaching a new high of 44.2%.
Looking at specific institutions, 17 of the top 25 holders increased their positions, with Wells Fargo and JPMorgan each adding over 10,000 BTC in a single quarter, and Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth funds further increasing their allocations.
However, the number of institutions dropped by 6.8% over the same period, indicating that the market is not simply a "collective bottom-fishing" by institutions, but rather a re-differentiation and allocation of institutional funds.
For the market bottom, quarterly increase in positions cannot directly prove that "the bottom has formed," but if institutional holdings continue to grow, the reference value of this signal will significantly increase.SSD prices rise 80%, delivery weeks in 20 weeks, cloud bills spiral out of control...... Filecoin has recently been wildly talking about "deployed capacity"
In the past two weeks, the official Filecoin account has been posting the same kind of content almost every day:
Enterprise SSD contract prices rose about 80% in Q1 2026 (TrendForce data)
Industrial-grade SSD delivery cycles have been extended to over 20 weeks
84% of companies are troubled by cloud spending spiraling out of control, and one-third spend over $12 million annually on public cloud bills
Data center construction faces dual shortages of electricity and labor
The core logic behind the official repeated comparisons is simple: Filecoin's capacity is already running online, so there's no need to wait for new hard drives, new batteries, or future delivery commitments.
At the same time, they emphasize the "zero egress tax"—in the cost model for moving 1PB of data away from AWS, network outflow fees can account for nearly 40%. Filecoin has directly cut this part.
This wave of promotion isn't just empty talk, but a redefinition of "storage availability" against the backdrop of real supply chain tensions and runaway cloud costs. For teams with large-scale hot and cold data, AI training intermediary results, and long-term archiving needs, this narrative is becoming more convincing.
#BTC成交萎缩, whether ETF buying can rebound $FIL Over the past 30 years, the total returns of the S&P 500 during market open hours have been negative.
All the money was made after the market closed.
Bespoke conducted a statistic: from 1993 to 2021, if you bought at the open and sold at the close every day, your total return would be -10%.
Conversely, if you bought at the close and sold at the next day's open, your total return would be 853%.
In other words, watching the market all day and seeing those ups and downs adds up to losing money.
The real gains happen after the market closes, when you're sleeping, eating, working, and not even looking at your phone.
This data completely proves one thing: frequent trading, watching the market, and day trading are not making you money; you're participating in a negative-yield game.
Meanwhile, those who buy and hold the S&P 500 capture the full 853% overnight gains without missing a cent because they never sell.
The tighter you watch the market and the more you trade, the more likely you are to make wrong decisions amid the daytime noise and perfectly miss out on the evening gains.
The most profitable strategy is really just to buy and forget about it.Infura IPFS officially shut down on August 15, and Filecoin took center stage this time
On August 15, Infura officially shut down its IPFS service and dedicated gateway. New uploads and pinning had actually stopped since August 3.
For projects heavily relying on Infura for content fixation, NFT metadata, and front-end hosting, this was a real stress test. A simple "download and re-upload" would change the CID, directly causing link failure and broken smart contract references.
Filecoin's official team quickly released a solution: using infura-rescue to export deterministic CAR files by block, preserving the original CID structure, and migrating to the Filecoin network. The official team repeatedly emphasized one point—data can no longer depend on a single company to survive.
This isn't the first time centralized IPFS services have been phased out; this year there have already been more than one. The real problem isn't "a certain company shutting down," but the application layer's overreliance on a single gateway. Filecoin's move this time is clear: it is launching "verifiability, multi-node holding, and CID immutability" as its core selling points.
There will be migration friction in the short term, but in the medium to long term, this is the moment decentralized storage is truly needed.
$FIL #闪迪长期协议成焦点, the opening performance remains to be seen 伊朗又搞事，摩萨德住宅被“点名”，油价蹭蹭涨，BTC却稳如老狗，6.4万刀还涨了1.8%。说好的“地缘风险必砸盘”呢？剧本拿反了吧？
其实市场精得很：只要霍尔木兹没真堵，原油没破百，通胀不抬头，美债不飙升，那就只是“嘴炮级升级”。BTC现在硬气，不是不怕死，是知道真正要命的是油价和利率，不是推特上的战报。
所以别盯着新闻标题一惊一乍，那玩意儿连导火索都算不上。油价破不破、6.3万守不守，才是真·生死线。地缘政治是火柴，流动性和通胀才是汽油——火柴没点着汽油，BTC就当看戏。
（纯属吐槽，别杠，杠就是你对。）
$BTC $SNDK $SPCX
#SPCX持股结构曝光，哈佛13F重仓
#美方酝酿打击伊朗能源设施，使馆发撤离预警
#闪迪长期协议成焦点，开盘表现待验证 CryptoQuant data shows that BTC untouched for over 10 years has reached 3.56 million, accounting for 17.7% of circulating supply, setting a new historical high. Over the past 30 days, new coins have continued to "lie flat" and enter this range
What does that mean? About one out of every 5 to 6 Bitcoins hasn't moved for ten years, most likely because the private key was lost or the wallet was forgotten, completely disappearing from the market. Plus, the circulating supply now reaches 20.07 million coins, with less than 930,000 coins left to mine below the 21 million cap, causing supply to shrink on both sides
Industry estimates that 10%-20% of Bitcoin has been permanently lost, while Chainalysis initially gave a range of 17%-23%. By this calculation, the actual circulation is much less than the number on the chain. Scarcity This story is not made up; it is recorded on-chain, one by one
But don't just look at the bullish trend in ancient wallets in August, with over a thousand dormant coins activated in the first 10 days, outpacing the entire July. Some coins cost just over $800 in 2014 and have now risen nearly 8,000%—Galaxy Research monitored that on August 10-11, several wallets from early 2014 transferred 114 BTC, with an average price of $814 and a return of 7,746%. If it were to be dumped, it would be real selling pressure
Long-term dormancy + deflationary staking supports prices; short-term revival of old coins means real selling pressure. $BTC 63,000 and $ETH 1900 are neither above nor down; it all depends on how much the market is willing to pay a premium to structural scarcityThe data is a bit scary:
In the past 30 days, those non-BTC/ETH BSC coin perpetual contracts on Binance have contributed nearly 95 billion U in trading volume, accounting for one-third of the total perpetual market volume, with liquidation amounts directly hitting 38%. Even when including BTC and ETH, these highly volatile coins still consume 14.3% of Binance's perpetual volume and 18.6% of liquidations.
In short, the trading volume (and fees) of some centralized exchanges actually rely heavily on these high-leverage, sentiment-driven "meme coins." The ones that truly sustain volume growth are often not the stable assets but those prone to liquidation and extreme volatility.
Take a look at projects like Dusk, which embed privacy, compliance, and deterministic settlement directly into the protocol layer, taking a completely different path—not profiting from volatility but enabling real RWA and regulated assets to safely circulate on-chain. The short-term trading volume might not be as lively, but in the long run, this is the infrastructure institutions truly dare to engage with. Peter Schiff Bears Again—Is $65,000 the "Ceiling" or the "Starting Line"?
---
📊 1. Real-time Price: Above $64,000, just one step away from $65,000
As of August 18, Bitcoin was still up 2.13% to $64,288 amid ongoing US-Iran tensions. Currently, the price has reclaimed the $64,000 level, just about $700 (about 1%) away from the $65,000 resistance level mentioned by Schiff.
📉 2. Peter Schiff's Core Viewpoint
On August 18, economist and Bitcoin opponent Peter Schiff posted on X that he was unsure why Bitcoin did not fall today, but the rebound provided another selling opportunity for HODLers. He questioned what factors are supporting Bitcoin and pointed out that $65,000 is a resistance level, with little upside and significant downside.
Even if it breaks below $65,000, the upside is very limited; and once it falls below this level, Bitcoin faces significant downside risk.
🔍 3. The power that stands against Schiff
Every time Schiff makes remarks, the market tends to go in the opposite direction, and this time is no exception:
1. Continuous inflow of institutional funds
Tudor Investment Corp, owned by Paul Tudor Jones, increased its holdings in BlackRock IBIT by 18.9% in Q2 to $22.9 million; UBS tripled its IBIT holdings to nearly $90 million, with call options surging 24 times. Macro hedge funds and traditional banking giants increased their holdings simultaneously in the same quarter, with Bitcoin shifting from an "alternative asset" to a common option in asset allocation for traditional financial institutions.
2. Storing supercycles to provide a macro narrative
Storage giants like SanDisk and Micron saw their gross margins soar from 22% to 85%, with $93.9 billion in long-term contract contracts locking in revenue for the coming years. The ongoing expansion of AI infrastructure is providing fundamental support for the entire tech sector, and Bitcoin's narrative as "digital gold" is also being strengthened.
3. Bears are being hunted
On August 18, a short address was liquidated 288 BTC ($18.55 million) during the BTC rally, and currently holds 512 BTC short positions at a liquidation price of $64,665. This is only about 1% below the current price—once broken, it will trigger a chain of short covering.
📈 4. Key Locations
Current price: approximately $64,288
Schiff resistance level: $65,000
Short liquidation price: $64,665 (the "lifeline" of 512 BTC short orders)
Bullish target: If 64,665 is broken → triggers a short chain liquidation→ target is $65,500-67,000
Bearish target: If resistance hits at 64,665→ pullback will test $63,000-63,500
💎 5. Summary
Every time Peter Schiff goes short, it's like a mirror—it doesn't reflect Bitcoin's true value, but traditional finance's fear and confusion about new things. Is $65,000 the "ceiling" or the "starting line"? The answer isn't in Schiff's tweet, but in whether the $64,665 short liquidation price breaks through.
When "always bearish" becomes a label, his words are no longer analyses but contrarian indicators. In recent years, every time someone believed Schiff sold Bitcoin, they missed something, and history has already given the answer.
$BTC In the crypto space, on-chain data has been revered by countless traders. From MVRV and SOPR to exchange balances, many in the industry are obsessed with using these indicators to capture Bitcoin's bottoms or tops. However, looking at the actual trends over the past two or three years, these once highly accurate indicators are now experiencing distortion. People are increasingly realizing that on-chain indicators are not a cure-all crystal ball. Without considering changes in market structure, blindly trusting historical data not only fails to help you escape the top, but may even lead you into a fatal trap. Take MVRV as an example—it was once a tool for judging cycles. This metric evaluates whether the market is extremely overvalued or undervalued by comparing the current market cap with the average acquisition cost of tokens across the entire network (realized market cap). The bull markets of 2013 and 2017 precisely marked the bursting of the bubble. $BTC Another example is SOPR (whether on-chain BTC is in profit or loss), where SOPR consistently below 1 is usually seen as a deep retail investor surrender zone in a bear market. In a market dominated by retail investors and native crypto whales, these indicators almost perfectly quantified human greed and fear. But if we use this old map to navigate the new road after 2024, we are very likely to hit a dead end. The market over the past two years shows that the effectiveness of on-chain metrics is significantly declining, mainly for the following reasons. The approval of the U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF at the beginning of 2024 has completely changed the rules of the market game. Today, over 5% of Bitcoin across the entire network is directly locked in the marketWhat’s most aggressive about SanDisk right now isn’t NAND price hikes.
It’s that they no longer want to rely on NAND price increases to make money.
They have already signed 8 long-term agreements covering 6 customers, with a minimum contract value of about $93.9 billion and an average term of about 4 years; by FY2028, roughly two-thirds of their capacity is expected to be locked by these agreements.
In plain language:
Customers have pre-ordered their goods for the next few years.
Storage companies used to fear cycles:
Price hikes meant huge profits, then expansion, then price crashes.
Now SanDisk wants to lock in revenue first.
But here’s the problem:
If NAND prices keep soaring in the future,
will locking prices early actually mean less profit?
So after the market opens, I’m not just watching if it goes up.
I’m more interested in seeing how much the market is willing to value “stable profits.” This overnight rebound was, to put it bluntly, bears being crushed and rubbed on the ground.
$BTC broke above $64,200, $ETH to 1905, Bitcoin's market share soared to 58.77%, and funds are still pouring into the leaders. In the past 24 hours, 186 million yuan was liquidated across the internet, with short positions accounting for nearly 80%—$BTC short positions accounted for 86%, and $ETH 64%. This data clearly illustrates: the rebound isn't about bulls being too strong, but about the short squeeze that just a little pushing leads to a massive explosion.
On the macro level, things are somewhat interesting. Last Friday, the SEC suddenly halted the crypto asset framework meeting, reportedly because Wall Street opposed it too much, fearing it would affect the CLARITY Act negotiations. Trump is scheduled to hold a crypto meeting at the White House on Wednesday, with CEOs from major companies like Coinbase and Ripple attending. With this show of force, regulatory trends may shift. Meanwhile, the Treasury is advancing the GENIUS Act, officially entering the public consultation phase for stablecoin frameworks. The footsteps are still in place, but at least moving forward.
The stock market was in the red, with the S&P, Nasdaq, and Dow all falling, and Europe and Japan not doing much better. Crypto, on the other hand, bucked the trend and rebounded. Although the increase isn't exaggerated, holding steady in a global risk-off environment is already tough.
That said, the sustainability of rebounds driven by liquidation is often questionable. After a wave of liquidation of short positions, new competitor positions haven't accumulated yet, so what will keep pushing it upward is a question. Bing standing above 64,000 is a good thing, but whether it can truly hold this level depends on whether daytime volume can keep up.
Unitree Technology's IPO tomorrow is worth keeping an eye on. The AI robotics sector has been quite hot lately, which somewhat reflects sentiment toward tech stocks. Overall, the rebound is real, but the confidence is still insufficient. Don't get carried away just by seeing a bullish candle; play it safe. CORE Panorama Overview | Institutional Negotiations + SatPay Warm-Up, Objective Review under BTCFi Competition
⚠️ This is for the purposes of public information only, not investment advice
Market style is shifting toward "yield-bearing assets," and BTCFi is under scrutiny once again. As a non-custodial BTC staking L1, CORE has several recent trends that can be examined:
1. Institutional side: North American roadshows are underway, but not yet "officially announced"
The team connects with family offices and custodian/asset management institutions in Los Angeles and other places, mainly promoting lstBTC non-custodial time-lock staking (BTC does not hand over custody rights). This does meet institutional compliance requirements, but currently it is still due diligence and solution demonstrations, with no official cooperation announcements or on-chain institutional staking incremental data. Business cycles are calculated monthly, so don't assume "negotiations" are "already implemented."
2. SatPay: More warm-up than commercial use
Positioned as BTC staking + debit card consumption + interest generation, the waiting list is increasing. But as of August 2026, the current situation is Beta/waitlist beta, no global public beta, no compliant payment license, and no real merchant transaction volume. If public beta opens in the second half of the year, that will be the real catalyst for retail investors.
3. Ecosystem Fundamentals: DeFi holds the market, other areas are weaker
Staking: BTC non-custodial staking + CORE dual staking mechanisms are running, but BTC staking growth has slowed, with pure DeFi TVL only in the millions of dollars (including staked BTC market cap, it is promoted as "1 billion+").
Products: Colend (Lending), Molten (DEX), lstBTC/LST reuse is the core; NFT/RWA/GameFi have no viral releases.
Hermes' upgraded infrastructure framework remains stable, but what it lacks is developers and hit apps.
4. Rumor Analysis: OKX Abandons CORE?
No solid evidence. OKX's own X Layer ≠ has removed CORE; currently, CORE spot trading, Web3 wallet chain support, and validator nodes remain. There are only three real warning signals: (1) removal of on-chain staking entry points (2) liquidity cliff of trading pairs (3) official halt of all ecosystem linkages. Before triggering, it is considered "normal support," not "abandonment."
5. Board and Rhythm
Long-range fluctuations, chips washing speculative markets, trends tied to the BTC market. Fed hawkish bias + high interest rates suppressing counterfeit growth. Institutional shift from pure stored value BTC to yield-generating assets (such as ETH staking ETFs) is the background, CORE narrative is relevant, but expected → rally requires solid evidence (institutional staking, SatPay public beta, buyback income) to ignite; otherwise, it will continue to grind.
Track 5 hard metrics:
(1) Has North America officially announced custody/asset management cooperation?
(2) The institutional end of lstBTC adds new staked BTC amounts
(3) SatPay public beta timing and user base
(4) OKX staking entry points and liquidity fluctuations
(5) BTC market direction
Summary: Non-custodial BTC staking has its differences, with a clear institutional path; But implementation is slow, SatPay is not commercially available, TVL is small, and token unlocking is at a peak. In the short term, don't rely on news to heavily hold positions, waiting for volume to break resistance; For the long term, distribute idle money in batches, and be prepared for volatility and bottoming.
Do you prefer CORE to rely on lstBTC institutional funds, or SatPay to break through on the consumer end and cash out first? 👇 28,000 BTC returned to exchanges, erasing 84% of the six weeks of outflows—potential selling pressure is increasing, but "physical creation" is rewriting the game
📊 1. Core Data: Exchange balances have risen to their highest level since June
On August 17, Santiment Intelligence revealed that the Bitcoin balance on exchanges had risen to its highest level since June 15. The balance rebounded from about 1.304 million on July 28 to about 1.332 million on August 16, an increase of about 28,000 coins, erasing about 84% of the outflows from the previous six weeks.
This data means that, in the previous six weeks, users continued to withdraw Bitcoin from exchanges (usually seen as bullish signals—withdrawing coins to cold wallets for long-term holding). But in the past three weeks, this trend has reversed—a large amount of Bitcoin is flowing back into exchanges (often seen as a potential selling pressure signal).
📉 2. Why are funds flowing back to the exchange?
An increase in exchange balances usually means potential selling pressure is rising. Possible reasons for capital inflow include:
1. Take Profit: Some holders choose to cash out profits in the $62,000-$65,000 range
2. Macroeconomic Uncertainty: The US-Iran stalemate and high US Treasury yields have led some funds to exit and observe the situation
3. ETF capital flow volatility: On August 12, ETFs saw a net outflow of $61.16 million, with some arbitrageurs transferring BTC on-chain back to exchanges for ETF-related transactions
🔄 3. Another key variable: ETF physical creation approval
The article mentions a key factor that may be underestimated by the market—the SEC allows the creation of spot Bitcoin ETFs in a physical manner. Previously, ETF creation was mainly conducted in cash (Crypto), meaning authorized participants (APs) would buy ETF shares with cash, and the ETF issuer would then use cash to buy BTC in the market.
In-kind creation allows authorized participants (APs) to deliver Bitcoin directly to eligible funds in exchange for ETF shares, without needing to go through cash intermediaries. This means ETF funds can be sourced directly from OTC counters, existing holders, and other off-exchange channels—not necessarily corresponding to a decrease in exchange wallet balances. This explains why exchange balances continue to increase even as ETFs continue to flow in.
📈 4. Combined with other data: contradictory signals coexist
Exchange balances increase (potential selling pressure): About 28,000 BTC have flowed back to exchanges over the past three weeks
ETF inflows (potential buying): The first full week of August saw a net inflow of $853.5 million, with IBIT alone holding $693.5 million
Market sideways (balanced bulls and bears): BTC has been trading sideways in the $62,000-$65,000 range for nearly two months
Rising exchange balances provide new selling ground, while sustained ETF inflows provide buying support. These two forces cancel each other out, explaining why Bitcoin neither rises nor falls.
💎 5. Summary
28,000 BTC returning to exchanges, erasing 84% of the six weeks of outflows, is a short-term signal to watch out for—more BTC is in a sellable state. However, the introduction of the ETF physical creation mechanism means that the channels for acquiring BTC are expanding from "exchanges" to "off-exchange," which may reshape the traditional relationship between exchange balances and prices.
Key observation: If exchange balances continue to increase while BTC prices do not fall, it indicates that over-the-counter buying (ETFs, institutions) is digesting this selling pressure—this is healthy chip turnover. If exchange balances increase accompanied by price breakouts and drops, it indicates insufficient market support. The current level of 1.332 million exchange balances is not enough to constitute systemic risk, but it is worth continuous tracking.
$BTC $ETH “Interest Rate Cut” Big Discussion ⚙️｜EIP‑8363 Staking Economic Brake, How to Grasp the Timing Window?
Master from Shanghai Jiao Tong University｜Entered the crypto space in 2016, experienced multiple bull and bear cycles, witnessed hundredfold and thousandfold gains, no motivational talk, only practical trading insights ✨
Recently, the EIP‑8363 proposal has stirred the entire Ethereum ecosystem, effectively installing an economic brake on staking incentives 🚦. Currently, the network-wide ETH staking ratio is around 34‑35%, with protocol APR about 2.6%. The logic of this new mechanism is straightforward: the closer the staking ratio approaches the 50% saturation point, the higher the proportion of validator rewards burned, leading to net issuance contraction and continuously declining staking incentives. Future APR may drop to around 1.2%.
Many mistakenly believe that staking now locks in a high 2.6% yield, which is a huge misconception ⚠️. This is not a policy arbitrage but a timing window. The compound interest chart clearly shows: with the same holdings, early participation in compound accumulation results in a significant asset gap after 5 years; the later you enter, not only is the compounding period shorter, but the base yield is also suppressed by policy. The lost time is the greatest cost.
At the same time, the four staking paths each have trade-offs: running your own node offers the highest control but has a high threshold; service providers, liquid staking tokens (LST), and CEX platforms each have advantages but come with trust, contract, and centralized custody risks. If you need to access funds in the short term, it’s unnecessary to take on extra risks for a few percentage points of yield.
The proposal itself is highly controversial 🔥. Supporters hope to alleviate excessive staking expansion; opponents worry that low yields will drive out retail nodes, leaving institutions with scale advantages to retain chips, thereby exacerbating centralization risks. The proposal is still in draft form and has not been implemented.
From a trader’s perspective, locked chips are a medium- to long-term positive, but don’t overextend the narrative prematurely. It’s suitable for long-term holders to play the timing window; short-term players don’t need to blindly rush into staking.
So here’s the question 📢: If you hold ETH, would you choose to stake now to earn compound interest, or wait for the proposal to be finalized before deciding? Share your judgment in the comments.
Like and follow for continuous breakdowns of on-chain fundamentals, let’s navigate bull and bear markets together toward financial freedom!
#以太坊草案EIP-8363引争议 #财报观察员: Xiaomi is about to release its financial report. Which business line do you think is more optimistic?
"Xiaomi loses 38,000 yuan on selling a car; interim report released today"
In the first quarter, Xiaomi delivered 80,000 cars, with nearly 20 billion in revenue but an operating loss of 3.1 billion. Spread the gap on each car, about 38,000 units—the more you sell, the more you lose.
Last year, I bought an SU7, and the topic in the car owner group these days is only the mid-term report. Some car owners asked in the group whether this counts as using phone profits to support the car. Who is taking over? The answer lies in today's numbers and in the expectations of the two research reports.
CICC drew a line on August 14: Q2 revenue was 107.1 billion, a year-on-year decline, and adjusted net profit was 6.1 billion, nearly halved. Goldman Sachs was even more direct, cutting net profit expectations in half. There are two reasons: auto gross margin has fallen for three consecutive quarters to 20.1%, memory chips are about five times more expensive, suppressing smartphone gross margins.
You only need to look at three lines of numbers in the mid-year report. Whether auto gross margin can hold 20%, and whether losses narrow or expand, are all written here. Has deliveries accelerated? The annual target of 550,000 units means the remaining three quarters will average deliveries of 150,000 units per quarter. The transmission of smartphone gross margin and storage price increases is still ongoing. After reading these three lines, Xiaomi knows better than any slogan which stage of its cycle Xiaomi is headed $BTC $SPCX
When SpaceX announced it would stop accepting ride-sharing services, I said that such services would be taken over by intermediary companies in the future
This report confirms my thoughts. Of course, another payload distribution company, EXO, had already ordered two Falcon flights for their own "ridesharing"
But this similar move by both companies basically confirms that this is not an attempt by any one company, but rather a gradual formation of a potential industry understanding
When SpaceX's Starlink business and others were still immature, ride-sharing was a "good" business, allowing it to leverage its cheap capacity advantage while expanding its business scope. However, as SpaceX's own business exploded, the drawbacks of the second-generation ride-sharing business began to surface, with too many and too many satellite stakeholders to organize and coordinate. For SpaceX, the return rate is not very significant
Therefore, the carpooling business is transferred to third-party payload distribution companies, who sign the "arrow contract" with SpaceX as a whole. This eliminates the need to coordinate the complicated many payload parties, allowing the third-party company to find payload orders, coordinate launch times, organize payload distribution, and save a lot of manpower. For smaller payloaders, this solution offers greater flexibility compared to carpooling where they can only queue for SpaceX, and the two parties have greater room for bidding negotiations
Whether for SpaceX, payload distributors, or payload operators, there is some profit margin, making it a rare win-win situation The most awkward part of last night wasn’t that $BTC failed to rally.
It was watching storage and AI stocks move higher while crypto traders decided the next rotation had to be into altcoins.
So they started piling into longs.
$BTC and $ETH were still consolidating, Strategy had recently sold 1,638 $BTC, yet some traders were willing to 5x leverage old names like $OP, $ARB, $MATIC and $DOT .
#SandiskDealsInFocus #BTCVolumeDriesUp As predicted yesterday, Bitcoin rebounded today and reached the 64.5K level. As shown in the chart, it is constrained by a downtrend line, and above is the 65.5K partition cutline, making it difficult for Bitcoin to break through and hold firm in the short term.
Next, Bitcoin trend forecast: Bitcoin is very likely to reverse downward, breaking below recent lows to hit new lows $BTC $3.36 million HYPE withdrawn from Coinbase—whales "bottom-fishing" at $58, or "moving"?
---
📊 1. Event Overview: 57,000 HYPE, $3.36 million
On August 18, data from on-chain monitoring agency Onchain Lens showed that an address had cumulatively bought and withdrawn 57,000 HYPE from Coinbase, worth about $3.36 million.
On August 15, another new wallet withdrew 33,800 HYPE from Coinbase, worth about $1.88 million. In the past two weeks, several addresses have continued to withdraw large amounts of HYPE from exchanges.
🔍 2. Operation Analysis: Withdrawing ≠ to Sell, More Like "Hoarding"
Withdrawing tokens from exchanges to on-chain wallets usually implies two possibilities:
1. Long-term holding (hoarding): Transferring assets from exchanges to wallets controlled by oneself indicates not planning to sell in the short term. This is a bullish signal—whales around $58 believe there is room for price increases.
2. Participate in the ecosystem (staking/wealth management): Use HYPE for staking in the Hyperliquid ecosystem, providing liquidity, and other on-chain operations to earn returns. On August 17, some addresses withdrew suspected staked ETH from Kraken.
If you want to sell, there's no need to "withdraw"—just sell directly on the exchange. Withdrawing to an on-chain wallet is itself a signal of "not selling."
📈 3. Price Position: $58, 24% retracement from historical high
As of August 18, HYPE was trading near $58.72, up about 1.61% in 24 hours, with an intraday high of $59.91 and a low of $57.09.
HYPE's all-time high was around $76.67, with the current price pulling back about 24% from the all-time high. After dropping to a low of $53.75 on August 10, it rebounded and is currently in a volatile upward channel.
🐳 4. Long-Bear Battle: Institutional Hoarding vs. Whale Selling
Bullish signals:
The three wallets linked to Multicoin still hold about 1.777 million HYPE, valued at approximately $102 million. Over the past two weeks, multiple addresses have continuously withdrawn HYPE from exchanges, with a cumulative total exceeding 90,000 tokens (about $5.4 million), indicating that some funds are accumulating near $58. HYPE's price has rebounded from the August 10 low of $53.75 to the current $58.72, a rebound of about 9.2%.
Bearish signals:
On August 17, a whale unstaked 20,000 HYPE (about $1.15 million) and transferred it to Kraken, suspected to be preparing to sell. Since December 2025, this address has cumulatively bought 1.37 million HYPE ($47.79 million) and sold 1.25 million HYPE ($45.47 million), resulting in a cumulative loss of about $406,000. Early, low-cost whales (cost price about $19.79) continue to sell, cashing out about $110 million within two weeks.
📉 5. The deflationary mechanism is still in operation
Hyperliquid has burned a total of 47.57 million HYPE, valued at about $2.64 billion, accounting for 4.76% of the maximum supply of 1 billion tokens. The agreement allocates 99% of eligible proceeds through the aid fund to the open market for HYPE repurchase, providing sustained deflationary support.
💎 6. Summary
$3.36 million of HYPE was withdrawn from Coinbase and placed at the $58 price level, which is more likely interpreted as "hoarding" rather than "selling"—whales are accumulating near $58, transferring tokens from exchanges to on-chain wallets, preparing to hold long-term or participate in the ecosystem.
$58 is a key short-term support level—holding this level combined with ongoing deflation burns and institutional accumulation could lead HYPE to recover toward $60-63; If it falls below $57, it may pull back to the $53-54 range.
The core contradiction is: the tug-of-war between institutions continuously accumulating (hoarding at $58) + deflation burn mechanism versus early whales continuing to release (cost $19.79) continues.
$HYPE August 18, 2026 (Tuesday).
Macro and Federal Reserve Rates: Nonfarm Growth Establishes 'Accommodative Consensus', Liquidity Turning Point Reveals Far-Reaching Impact of Nonfarm Data:
The unexpected negative turn of July nonfarm payrolls (-23K) completely shattered the illusion of "higher rates lasting longer." The cooling labor market has forced the Federal Reserve to officially begin cutting rates at the upcoming September policy meeting. Liquidity Gate: Both U.S. Treasury yields and the dollar index have recently declined, releasing previously tight macro liquidity. As the Fed shifts its policy, marginal funds are accelerating spillover from money market funds and short-term Treasuries, returning to risk assets $BTC
BTC vs Gold: Liquidity Premium and the Evolution of Defensive Funds Gold: Supported by the dual support of Fed rate cut logic and geopolitical de-dollarization demand, it remains strong at high levels, continuing to support the safe-haven and defensive needs of conservative funds. BTC (Cryptocurrency): As the "high-beta asset" most sensitive to global liquidity, it has shown strong resilience after rate cut expectations were established. Recently, it has been trading sideways around $62,800–$63,500, indicating the market is currently in a period of capital accumulation transitioning from the end of tightening to the early stage of easing.#SanDisk Long-Term Agreements in Focus, Opening Performance to Be Verified
"SanDisk Earnings Beat Expectations but Fell 8%, Then Rose 13% a Week Later"
Revenue of $8.97 billion, nearly $600 million above expectations, yet SanDisk's stock fell 8% after hours. I did the math; the market is waiting for the answer on gross margin.
Investors' Day a week later will reveal it. Eight long-term contracts guarantee $93.9 billion in minimum revenue, with a median term of 4 years. The CEO said this is light years ahead compared to three quarters ago. The stock rose 13% that day, rebounding 55% cumulatively from the July low, then rose another 9% on August 17.
Retail investors often make the mistake of treating earnings as the endpoint. SanDisk's real trump card lies in the contracts: half of the 2027 fiscal year capacity is locked by long-term agreements, and two-thirds by 2028. Locked-price contracts dismantle half of the short thesis on cyclical stocks—spot prices may crash, but long-term contract revenue still flows in.
Here are two key observation metrics, both related to contracts. Watch the proportion of NBM agreements; if this number rises, the path to 80% gross margin becomes achievable. Also watch buybacks—the company just approved $14 billion, showing commitment with real cash. Earnings are a rearview mirror; contracts are a telescope. SanDisk has laid out the next four years on the table. The only thing left to verify is whether the long-term agreements can solidify the 80% gross margin. If confirmed, it becomes half a utility stock. $BTC Bitcoin shows signs of spot buying, with about 2.1K net active spot buying in the past 12 hours.
The rise from $62.8K to > $64.4K appears to have been driven mainly by short closing and stop-losses/liquidations
During the rise, OI dropped from 498K to 485K.
Futures CVD leaded, with funding rates remaining relatively stable until OI bottomed out and began to rise.
Since then, the funding rate has dropped from 0.0066 to 0.0002, indicating that bears are now entering at this rally's high. Or… you can hold Bitcoin in $MSBT or $IBIT in your @MorganStanley account and get a rate of 5-6% against your holdings.
Spot Bitcoin (and crypto) lending platforms are going to face (are facing) fierce competition over the next few years.#闪迪长期协议成焦点, the opening performance remains to be seen
How did SanDisk manage to turn cyclical stocks into high dividend rotation this time?
▶️ The model has changed: cyclical stocks have become long-term contract cash flow
This time, SanDisk signed new long-term agreements with eight major data center clients in one go. This directly turned the previously volatile hardware sales into highly certain long-term orders
▶️ Terrifying profits: The AI rigid demand behind an 80% gross margin
After the forecast adjustment, gross margin soared to around 80%, and operating margin soared to 75%, which is extremely rare in the storage industry. With the explosion of AI computing power and demand for large-capacity Flash, SanDisk held the quota and gained absolute pricing power
▶️ Peace of mind: 100% excess cashback
After the business investment, 100% of the excess cash returns will be returned to shareholders, directly dispelling market concerns about oversupply caused by blind expansion, making it highly attractive for long-term capital
🤔 What will $SNDK do next?
▶️ Short-term: The positive news is clear. There is a high probability of continued capital rushing at the open, but the previous gains have already been significant, and at high levels, there may be intense volatility caused by profit-taking selling pressure
▶️ Mid-term: Focus on key client fulfillment and financial reports delivering 80% gross margin. As long as AI data center construction does not slow down, the trend of hitting both performance and valuation remains in place
🪁 Risk: Caution is needed regarding the overall correction in tech stocks and the $XSNDK of cloud computing giants temporarily cutting capital expenditures
Long-term contracts have smashed the moat deep; as long as AI storage demand remains strong, the medium- to long-term upward trend remains solid
DYOR Real-time analysis of Bitcoin ETF buy/sell orders (August 18, 09:09)
Last week, the US BTC spot ETF recorded a net outflow of about $385-390 million, marking the largest single-week redemption in recent weeks. Institutional selling momentum temporarily dominated, with a clear divergence in funds.
By product, Fidelity FBTC, ARK ARKB, and Grayscale BTC are the main sources of selling outflow, with many medium- and long-term allocation institutions choosing to redeem and take profits at high prices; Only a few small and medium-sized ETFs maintain small inflows, and sporadic buying cannot hedge against large-scale redemption selling pressure. Intraday ETF trading volume was $2.785 billion, with active turnover on the exchange, but most are short-term inter-institutional transactions, making new long-term off-exchange buying extremely scarce
A unique phenomenon has appeared in the current market: ETFs continue to see selling pressure, but BTC prices have not dropped sharply. This is mainly because selling pressure is being absorbed by on-chain whales and off-exchange spot funds, with on-exchange stock funds rotating to support the market, rather than a trend-driven rebound driven by ETF funds.
Short-term ETF funds are the core indicator for judging trends. To start a new bull market, ETFs must shift from continuous net outflows to stable net inflows for several consecutive days, indicating that institutional buying is re-entering the market; If redemption outflows continue, then this rebound can only be characterized as a game by existing funds, with uncertain upward continuity, and we must wait for the Fed meeting minutes to bring macro variable shocks
This article is only a market review and does not constitute any investment advice for $ETH Simultaneous reduction of U.S. Treasury holdings by China, the UK, and Japan is a medium- to long-term negative expectation on liquidity, with short-term effects being more of an emotional shock rather than directly triggering a major drop. The impact logic is as follows:
1. Underlying logic: U.S. Treasury sell-off → rising U.S. Treasury yields, the U.S. dollar tends to strengthen
Multiple countries continuously reducing U.S. Treasury holdings raises market concerns about increased pressure on U.S. Treasury absorption, pushing yields higher. Crypto assets (such as Bitcoin) are risk assets and are highly sensitive to real U.S. Treasury yields: as yields rise, the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding crypto assets increases, which is unfavorable for coin prices.
2. Distinguishing short-term and medium- to long-term impacts
✅ Short-term (within a few days): mainly emotional, volatility likely to amplify
This data is lagging (June holdings, published in August), and the market has already priced in some expectations in advance, making it difficult to trigger a one-sided large move directly. It is more likely to exacerbate short-term fluctuations, with rapid sharp declines followed by recoveries.
✅ Medium- to long-term: continuous reduction will keep suppressing risk assets
If multiple countries maintain a continuous reduction trend, it indicates global central banks are steadily lowering dollar asset allocations, and expectations of tightening dollar liquidity will persist, which is unfavorable for a sustained bull market in crypto.
3. Key variables to watch
The ultimate market direction cannot be judged by this data alone; the core factor remains the Federal Reserve's interest rate expectations:
If the market believes the Fed’s rate cut pace will not be delayed because of this, the impact of this news is limited; once the market starts repricing "delayed rate cuts and prolonged high rates," the negative effect will significantly amplify. $BTC $ETH 🚨HYPERLIQUID AND DOURO LABS BACK SEC MOVE TO KILL TRADE-THROUGH RULE!
@HyperliquidPC and Douro Labs filed a joint comment letter supporting the SEC’s proposal to scrap Rule 611 of Reg NMS.
The decades-old trade-through rule requires brokers to always hit the best displayed price on traditional exchanges, but it clashes with how onchain markets actually work.
They call for clear, flexible best-execution rules so brokers can properly serve customers onchain.The scale of tokenized US stocks is approaching $2 billion, with the core contradiction being whether the efficiency improvements brought by market-making depth and cross-market margin reuse can cover settlement and quotation frictions.
Within 12 months, on-chain tokenized stocks expanded to nearly $2 billion, with 470,000 holding addresses. This changed the market's perception that it was merely a conceptual experiment and confirmed that cross-market capital stock had reached substantial scale.
The prioritization of drivers is: capital efficiency gains from margin reuse, higher than retail channel expansion, and higher than pure spread returns from market makers. Stock positions can serve as contract margin and collateral for stablecoins, changing the opportunity cost pricing of funds in single derivatives trading.
The upside scenario is based on the assumption of improved trading depth. When the liquidity depth of the direct order book model on top assets gradually flattens to hundreds of times the quote gap, large arbitrage will drive up turnover rates in spot and derivatives pools. The expiration signal is that market makers have significantly reduced the number of US token quotes and order listings.
The downside scenario focuses on market-making friction and compliance settlement shocks. If market maker quote depths continue to deteriorate, causing bid-ask spreads to erode margin reuse profits, funds will flow back into traditional settlement channels. A variable to watch is the actual collateral conversion change of tokenized stocks in derivatives margin. The failure signal is that the number of on-chain US stock holdings falls below the 470,000 benchmark.
The overall simulation fails if tokenized stocks are removed from the margin asset pool, or if the direct connection to exchange order books deteriorates so deeply that they cannot handle conventional large-scale arbitrage.
The most important variable to watch in the next 7 days is the narrowing of the bid-ask spreads in the order books of leading stocks and the depth of order placements by market makers.
#OpenAI与Anthropic估值竞赛升温 #CLARITY表决待定, SEC rules have not been implemented #消费动能转弱, and September policy remains constrained by inflation为什么巴菲特从来不推荐纳斯达克，
一直让普通人买标普500。
不是都说纳斯达克是年轻人财富密码吗？
巴老爷子是不是不行了，看不懂AI，看不懂科技股，
他踏空了吧
其实，巴菲特才是真正理解我们普通人的
过去20年，纳斯达克100的收益确实远远跑赢标普500。
如果你只看结果，纳指像一辆法拉利。
而标普像一辆丰田。
问题是，大多数人根本开不到终点。
因为投资最大的敌人从来不是收益率，
而是容易追涨杀跌的人性。
过去二十多年里，纳斯达克经历了好几次大回调
2000年互联网泡沫暴跌78%
2008年金融危机暴跌50%
2022年俄乌战争，一年跌33%
100万变22万的时候，我告诉你
绝大多数人不会想着未来翻十倍，
他们心里想的永远都是
再跌下去该怎么办啊，我的家人还要养活呢？
要不要先卖了，工资最近也降了，等再跌一段买回来？
是不是美股长达七十多年的大牛市宣告结束了？
于是很多人高位冲进去，低位割出来。
最后指数赚钱的，自己怎么操作都在亏钱
而巴菲特早就看透了这一点。
他知道普通人有房贷、有孩子、有工作压力。
账户跌一半的时候，
不是每个人都能像基金经理一样冷静。
所以他才会推荐标普500
不是因为收益最高，
而是回撤足够低
这样大多数人更容易拿得住。
投资里有一个残酷的事实：
年化13%和年化10%的差距，
只有坚持20年的人才能享受到。
如果你中途因为恐慌下车，
后面所有上涨都与你无关。
所以巴菲特真正想告诉普通人的其实只有一句话：
投资最重要的不是比赚得最多，
而是谁能够活得最久。
收益率属于指数，
但最终赚到的钱，
属于那个能够一直拿住的人。
这也是为什么他留给家人的遗嘱里，
要求遗产中的90%买标普500，而不是纳斯达克。
因为真正的智慧，
从来不是寻找最好的资产
而是找到那个自己能够安心持有二十年的资产。