Orbit Post Sitemap
$ZRO combined with the large holder long-short ratio on 4.12 and the 500% recharge data from GSR market makers, the script is already very clear: the dog whales forcibly pump the price with funds, blowing out the retail short positions at the bottom. After the short positions are blown out and retail turns long, they immediately flip and dump the chips to retail.
Key resistance level: $1.9500
Key support level: $1.8500
Long-short ratio: retail short, large holders heavily holding long (typical short squeeze script)
Binance retail long-short ratio 0.7416 (bearish), OKX retail long-short ratio 1.87 (bullish).
For large holders: number of large holders long-short ratio 1.008 (balanced), but large holder position long-short ratio as high as 4.1205!
Arkham on-chain core signals: In the past 7 days, top market maker GSR Markets balance surged 506.22% (inflow about $246,000), Bitkub increased 250%, Coinbase Prime increased 2.04%. The front-line positions are mainly LayerZero Foundation multisig wallets (totaling over 17%). With market makers entering and foundation controlling the supply, this counter-trend rally is very likely a manipulated setup.
$BTC $ETH #ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ $BTC fell below 82,000, with a 24h pullback of 1.48%; it has cumulatively dropped 6% since the beginning of the month from 86,700, currently quoted at 81,528, with key support levels intensifying the battle between bulls and bears.
Macro side: The US Dollar Index is flat to slightly down at 99.12, the 10-year US Treasury yield is narrowly fluctuating at 5.12%, with no significant movements in the dollar or US bonds; this round of pullback is an internal digestion within the crypto space.
Capital side: BlackRock IBIT saw a single-day net inflow of 665 million, channel net inflow of 527 million, institutional replenishment landing; the total scale of the two major US dollar stablecoins remains unchanged at 256 billion, with no new off-exchange incremental funds entering the market yet.
Core divergence: On-exchange institutions are absorbing, while off-exchange funds remain inactive.
Technical judgment: If 83,000 cannot be reclaimed, this deep pullback is not yet over The midterm elections are coming soon. According to past statistics, the US stock market usually takes a dip during midterms. Sandisk continues to short $SNDK The South Korean stock market closed down nearly 4% today, ending at 5552, having evaporated more than 20% from 7080 a month ago. Hynix retraced 35%. Foreign investors sold over 400 million USD, institutions sold over 300 million USD, and retail investors bought over 600 million USD but still couldn't hold it up. Last night, US chip stocks rebounded by more than one point, but Asia continued to fall, indicating that the current cuts are not just overnight sentiment but that someone is recalculating AI capital expenditures. Bitcoin has been fluctuating between 81,000 and 83,000 in the past ten days, today at 81,700, with only a 5% retracement in the same period. 80,000 is the watershed; holding above it means staying bullish, breaking it means accepting otherwise. $BTCENA stands above the $0.18 mark, rising nearly 5% in 24 hours, seemingly a bullish short-covering. However, a closer look at the order book reveals smart money accounts continuously net shorting, with net positions returning to zero, indicating institutions are fundamentally unwilling to build positions at the current price. With a market cap of 2.5 billion and a daily volume of only 6.29 million, the turnover rate is less than 0.3%. This is not an actively driven rise with ample liquidity but rather a passive float due to lack of sell orders. Social sentiment is silent, with bullish and bearish ratios both at zero; retail investors lack even the interest to discuss. Such an emotional vacuum often signals that the next wave of price movement will be unilaterally defined by market makers. The price oscillates narrowly between 0.177 and 0.195, with symmetrical upper and lower shadows—a typical range arbitrage pattern. Once it hits the dense hedging orders near the upper boundary of 0.195, a pullback is highly probable. Core judgment: ENA is in a weak rebound characterized by low volume and empty gains; smart money is not supporting, retail investors are not participating, short-term upward pressure is heavy, and only a pullback to around 0.17 offers a favorable risk-reward ratio. 【1inch Card Suddenly Shuts Down, Is Crypto Spending Also Hitting a Dead End?】
1inch Card has announced the suspension of new user registrations and plans to terminate services by December 18, 2026, at the latest. Users need to withdraw or spend the remaining balance on the card as soon as possible. However, the official statement clarifies that the funds on the card are held by Monavate, not directly by 1inch; even if the account is closed, balances that comply with the issuer's terms can still be redeemed within the specified period.
This card originally aimed to solve a very practical problem: automatically converting crypto assets into fiat currency for direct Mastercard spending. Now that the service is withdrawing, it shows that integrating crypto payments into the traditional banking card system requires more than just wallets and users; issuers, compliance, and operational costs must be sustained long-term. As for the specific reason for the shutdown, the official has not provided a clear explanation and it cannot be directly attributed to regulation or business losses.
For the $1INCH token, this is not considered a confirmed major fundamental blow, since the card business is not equivalent to the core exchange protocol. On October 20, 1INCH was around $0.092, with a nearly 14% drop over the past month, but there is no evidence that this decline was caused by the card shutdown news.
The focus now should be on monitoring the core protocol's trading volume and revenue; if these also continue to weaken, then it would be more concerning.$ZEC Currently, ZEC contracts are flowing back, while spot is flowing out. The main force is secretly selling while the contracts are booming.Today's drop, the shorts didn't spend a penny.🧾
This morning I said that the 2,000 point was shorts covering, and the longs were taking the losses. Today's high was 82,276.2, not touching 83,168.2.
The other half is even worse: 162 million liquidated in 24 hours, longs account for 70.7%, 53,166 people were liquidated.
The largest single liquidation was a 10.32 million long on Binance, liquidated at 81,164.81, just 35 dollars above today's low.
This wasn't caused by shorts dumping. The rate is 0.0014%, benchmark 0.01% — shorts can't even collect rent. The slow drop means no one is taking the other side.
Market cap down 0.84%, volume up 0.80%. Increased turnover, shrinking market cap: someone is selling, no one is buying. ETF outflow of 54.9 million.
This round isn't a short market, it's a no-buyer market: not falling fast, but can't stop.
If by 21:30 tomorrow it doesn't stand back above 82,276, 80,680 will be touched. If within 6 hours of tonight's open it stands above 82,276 and the rate breaks 0.005%, I'll admit I'm wrong.
Shorts didn't spend money, longs are paying the bill.
(Not investment advice)
What to watch is not how much it falls, but when the rate starts charging.
Someone who was wrong three days in a row writes on the fourth day, like going on a fourth blind date after three failures 😂
Is this a bottoming process, or not finished falling?
$BTC $ETH #ETF continuous outflow, can BTC's rebound continue?#闪迪美光下跌，长鑫技术进展受关注
The breakthrough of Changxin's 4F² DRAM architecture triggers volatility in the memory sector, with Micron and SanDisk following the sector's downturn. This architectural innovation can significantly increase memory density and reduce unit costs. There are plans to launch server DDR5 products by the end of the year, breaking the expected technology rhythm of overseas manufacturers; however, it is important to distinguish between "R&D progress" and "large-scale mass production profitability." In the short term, it is more about expectation games, and continuous tracking of yield rates and customer adoption progress is needed.
Memory sector: $SNDK down, $MU down, Samsung Hynix also under pressure.Tesla and Meta report earnings on the same day, with results revealed after the market closes on the 22nd. Both are investing heavily in AI, but their ledgers look different: Tesla is spending on autonomous driving and robotics, with revenue still relying on car sales; Meta is investing in models and recommendations, where ad unit prices can directly show returns. I’m more inclined to believe Meta can provide evidence of AI monetization this time, while Tesla’s performance depends on whether car gross margins have stopped falling. Both valuations are fully priced in, so earnings will likely first disappoint expectations; avoid chasing highs amid the divergence. $TSLA $METAThe expected $2.8 billion passive sell-off is not a baseline drift on an ECG, but a blood clot lodged in the market's left anterior descending artery.
The MSCI new rule for non-operating companies effective October 15 is not a routine checkup, but a coronary angiogram with a gold standard. It doesn't ask how fast your heart beats or how loud the narrative is; it only asks whether this vessel is truly supplying blood. Strategy and Metaplanet were put on the angiography table; the former raised objections on the 16th, citing unclear accounting standards—clinically called imaging artifacts: when diagnostic criteria themselves are disputed, rushing to place a stent is overtreatment. But the index committee ignores appeals and only looks at the final list. November 11 is the preoperative assessment, and the market close on November 30 is when the clamp falls.
The $2.8 billion passive sell-off estimated by JPMorgan is not bleeding but acute cardiac tamponade. Passive funds are the basic coronary perfusion, usually not involved in emotional fluctuations; once cut off, blood pressure won't alarm first, but the myocardium becomes ischemic. Strategy claims index funds hold about 3%, trying to prove perfusion reserve is sufficient; but 3% of the stock cannot hedge against a sudden $2.8 billion blood draw. This is like comforting a rupturing plaque with left ventricular ejection fraction—the numbers look good, but hemodynamics have already collapsed.
The deeper lesion lies in the definition of "non-operating company." It is like pathological grading in myocardial biopsy: once classified here, valuation models switch from growth stocks to controlling discounts, and the capillary bed of financing collapses first. Financing is extracorporeal circulation; Bitcoin purchases are myocardial work; when circulation stops, work is just idling. Index exclusion won't immediately kill the company but will raise refinancing venous pressure, followed by collateral shrinkage and a chain of low perfusion due to purchasing power decline. This is not something emotional treatment can handle.
The rise and fall of linked targets are just peripheral pulses and cannot replace central venous pressure monitoring. The real monitoring indicators are: after the final list is implemented, whether passive selling pushes up financing spreads and whether purchase plans are forced to reduce. That is the myocardial enzyme spectrum, not a placebo.
If the list falls on November 11, this is not a reversible arrhythmia but an organic stenosis requiring bypass. #strategyopposesmsciHidden Concerns Behind Delivery Exceeding Expectations: Inventory Digestion and Real Demand
Tesla's delivery data exceeded expectations, and the market is jubilant, but I want to look beyond the noise to a quiet indicator — inventory.
If a quarter's deliveries exceed production, it means the company is effectively digesting previously accumulated inventory. Cars are moving from parking lots into customers' hands, which is undoubtedly a positive signal, indicating potential improvement in capital turnover efficiency and that assets on the books are starting to flow. This is indeed something to celebrate.
However, it also leaves an unresolved question: can new orders in the next quarter sustain this delivery pace? Digesting inventory and entering a new round of demand growth require completely different evidence. The former is "de-stocking," clearing the past; the latter is "re-stocking," looking to the future.
More critically, under what conditions were these cars sold? This directly affects the company's profit statement. Were they sold at normal prices based on strong product appeal, or did they rely on substantial discounts and financial subsidies to stimulate demand? Although the delivery numbers are the same, the outcomes for shareholders and the company differ vastly.
#ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ Back in the day, Dimon called Bitcoin a scam. Now JPMorgan Chase has brought JPM Coin onto $ETH, allowing institutional clients to complete USD deposits and transfers 24/7 in seconds.
This isn't a pump call; Wall Street is directly building the "settlement layer" on Ethereum.
The scale of stock tokenization was about 650 million at the start of the year, reaching 3.8 billion by early October, nearly 5 times growth; BNB Chain accounts for about 1.5 billion, Ondo is squeezed by Binance and Robinhood, and unlisted equity is also moving toward 24/7 trading.
In the future, it won't be "crypto people rushing into US stocks," but US stocks being integrated into the crypto settlement system.
Institutional entry isn't relying on spot ETFs:
BitMine bought over 12,000 ETH, Strive bought over 1,200 BTC, Metaplanet wants to use a Nasdaq shell to finance coin purchases; ETF net outflows remain net outflows, but the channel for "buying coins with stock market money" has been accumulating.
BTC is oscillating below 82,000, and many have lost patience.
But don't mistake the long-term narrative for a short-term pump signal.
The real change is: the walls between traditional finance and on-chain are collapsing; trading, custody, and settlement are all being restructured.
Instead of staring at K-lines to bet on direction, better to explore on-chain US stocks, RWA, LP, and settlement paths.
When the trend materializes, don't be the one "chasing gains on news," be the one who has already taken position in the pipeline. $BTC $ZEC
#ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ Arthur Hayes said that quantum computing is not a reason to sell BTC. Yesterday we just discussed quantum risk, and today we happen to have a clearer perspective—Is he right? First, the news. The background is: recently there has been discussion pointing out that about 6 million BTC public keys have been exposed, theoretically facing future quantum computing risks; Arthur Hayes's view is that this does not constitute a reason to sell BTC, the real risk lies elsewhere. Market conditions at the same time: BTC at $82,493.7 (24h +1.62%, past week -0.28%); ETF net inflows for three consecutive days; Fear & Greed Index at 59; US Dollar Index 101.82, Gold 4,196.0. Next, the impact on capital. To judge whether this view holds, the most direct way is not to see who says it, but to see what the capital does. If quantum risk were seriously priced by institutions, you should see: continuous large net outflows from ETFs, accelerated movement of long-term holder addresses, assets with anti-quantum narratives gaining premiums. But the reality is: ETFs have net inflows for three consecutive days, BTC rose 1.62%, sentiment recovered—the behavior of capital is opposite to "quantum risk being priced in." Implications for BTC: Hayes's view can be divided into two parts—"the risk truly exists" and "it does not constitute a reason to sell," these two parts are not contradictory. Technical risk is long-term, with clear solutions (address migration, protocol upgrades); while sell decisions are short-term, driven by capital and liquidity. The long-termA commercial complex with 175,000,000 storefronts is suddenly required to reserve all settlement pipelines for stablecoins — this is the real blueprint behind this news, not some "crypto payment milestone" ribbon-cutting ceremony.
I've been in design for twenty years, and one of the three things I fear most from clients is: "Build it first, worry about the pipelines later." What Visa and Mesh did right this time is precisely not building a new building, but doing electromechanical renovations within the existing load-bearing system: merchants keep the existing Visa acquiring system, while Mesh handles fund routing and exchange in the backend. This is equivalent to not moving a single pillar but re-threading the underground utility corridors. The 175 million merchants are not new traffic but an already existing structural load surface, and this value far exceeds any rendering in a whitepaper.
Mastercard and BVNK are doing the same thing, simultaneously launching Stablecoin Security for risk detection, which is like adding fire protection and seismic code compliance. Shopify connecting USDC, bringing Stripe and Coinbase onboard, is like a secondary fine renovation of street-facing shops. Three teams, three construction crews, one underground pipeline network.
But the structural engineer in me tells me: being passable doesn’t mean there’s foot traffic.
Coverage rate is the easiest metric to fake. The paths drawn on the blueprint and the main beams that actually carry passenger flow are completely different things. How many of the 175 million merchants have truly switched on? Among those who have switched on, how many transactions are genuine consumption rather than just fund transfers taking a detour? This is the difference between "live load" and "dead load." The biggest hidden risk in stablecoin payments right now is not that the channels aren’t wide enough, but whether the flow of goods through the channels is genuinely needed — if it’s just replacing card payments with USDC transactions, that’s changing the pipeline, not increasing the building’s floor area.
Now look at the $xAMZN linkage. It is the most mature single building in this complex, enjoying all the infrastructure upgrade dividends, but its structural strength depends on the consumer side, not the quality of the settlement-side construction. The payment network renovation is like a facade renovation benefit for it, not a structural one. The only load-bearing metric that really matters is whether stablecoin payment transactions can grow organically without incentives or subsidies, and whether the average transaction amount trends upward. If it can’t hold up this one, all the pipelines are just embedded parts, and the acceptance form will say "reserved."
I’ve reviewed too many blueprints; buildings that eventually fail are never because the design wasn’t beautiful enough, but because no one truly drilled into the soil beneath the foundation. #visameshstablecoinpay$BTC had a net inflow of over 500 million from ETFs in a single day yesterday, the largest in a while. But Bitcoin surged to just above 83,000 before turning down, and today it’s back below 82,000.
The money has returned, but the price hasn’t.
Breaking down this 500 million makes it clear: BlackRock’s IBIT absorbed over 660 million, while Fidelity and Grayscale are still pulling out. This isn’t money from the whole market, it’s money from one institution—someone is allocating in IBIT, while money elsewhere is still withdrawing. Also, ETF subscriptions don’t equal spot buying; there’s a market maker hedge and a T+1 delay in between, so the inflow on paper takes a few days to actually hit the order book. The market didn’t hold it either; yesterday’s high exactly hit the densest chip area between 83,000 and 83,200, and the price was pushed back after breaking through. Overnight, the US tech sector rebounded well, and the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index stopped an eight-day losing streak, but Bitcoin lost 82,000—in the past it followed the rise but not the fall, now it follows the fall but not the rise.
So this position is grinding painfully, not because there’s no money. It’s that the buyers don’t watch the market, and those watching the market have no money: allocation funds build positions quarterly without caring about the current price; traders watching the order book daily are getting harvested back and forth these days.
The resistance up is still the 83,000 barrier, and the support down is between 81,000 and 81,500; breaking below that is the 80,000 whole number level. ETF outflows have narrowed, but the real focus shouldn't be on the outflow numbers themselves. You think "smaller outflows = selling pressure is over"? I actually believe this is the easiest stage to misjudge. My first reaction to this data isn't to breathe a sigh of relief, but to stay alert. BTC net outflows are about $16.87 million, the intensity is indeed easing, but it looks more like selling pressure has slid from "concentrated release" into a "repeated probing" range; ETH outflows are about $32.79 million, concentrated on the Fidelity side, and actions by a single institution are often more worth watching than total volume, indicating some traditional funds are actively reducing risk rather than passively rebalancing. SOL outflows are only about $64,400, so ETF-level pressure is almost negligible, but that doesn't mean the price is stable—thin liquidity means sentiment can still cause a drop. My current understanding is that the market is trading not "how much is flowing out," but "who is selling and how urgently." BTC is testing whether the rebound can hold, ETH is under the most pressure, SOL is relatively resistant to decline but don't mistake resistance for a safety net. On the bullish path, if ETF outflows continue to narrow and liquidation volume falls, risk appetite will first recover in small caps, then transmit to ETH and BTC; the bearish risk is that continuous reduction by a single institution may trigger a follow-on effect, and in the current volatile phase, early bottom-fishers can easily get swept back and forth. In terms of timing, I prefer to wait for two signals: ETF flows no longer one-sided, and liquidation data cooling down. Before that, rushing to catch the falling knife is less wise than clearly seeing who is retreating. You more On 10/19, the S&P only rose 0.42%, AMZN rose 4.98%, META closed down, a difference of 5.5 points on the same day.
AMZN was not strong in the previous four days, dropping a total of 3.7% over those four days.
That day, a single +4.98% surge brought it to 262.45, with a volume of 56 million shares traded, 1.66 times the average volume of the previous four days.
TSLA also rose 3.76%, while the other five stocks hovered around 1%.
I think deciding stock positions based on the market's color is like choosing which shirt to wear based on the weather forecast.
The index only tells you how strong the wind is, not which shirt is drafty.
In the same basket, some made two completely opposite decisions.
At times like this, divergence is more valuable than direction.
In the past twenty trading days, the net gain is +1.55%, excluding 10/19 which was -3.27%.
The face of these twenty days is supported by one long bullish candle; I don't consider it a trend.
That sharp rise is mostly a compensation for a prolonged slow decline.
I tend to observe rather than chase; I chase the next day, catching what others left behind.
I have fixed the invalidation conditions here.
If it holds 262.45 and daily volume is not less than 45 million, the long bullish candle counts, and I accept it.
If it falls back below 250.00, the long bullish candle is invalidated and treated as a slow decline.
The deadline is the close of 10/23.
If you hold the green one, will you switch to the red one, or wait for it to catch up?
$AMZN $META $TSLA
#InstitutionalFundsWeakening #TraderDeskCT surged directly to 0.393 on Upbit yesterday, then fell back to 0.30782 on OKEx today, down 6.18% — retreating over 20% from the peak, the coin listing hype is starting to fade.
The driver is clear: On October 19, Upbit and another Korean exchange simultaneously listed Concrete's CT. Korean funds rushed in, instantly pushing the price to 0.393. Today, profit-taking began; BTC and ETH only fluctuated slightly by 0.5%-1% across the board, while CT performed independently, a typical event-driven move unrelated to the overall market.
Looking at the chart: CT is currently priced at 0.30782, with MA5 at 0.3115 crossing below MA30, and a strong resistance at 0.32. The 24h volume is still 8.99 million USDT — price is retreating but volume hasn't dried up, funds are still battling inside. My judgment: The coin listing effect is essentially a one-time liquidity premium realization, coming fast and going fast. Don't rush to catch the falling knife on the pullback; wait for volume to shrink before expecting a decent stabilization.
Watch two signals: whether 0.30682 support holds — if broken, expect a deep pullback below 0.3; also watch when 24h trading volume shrinks below 3 million, which will signal the end of the hype.
#CT #Concrete #Upbit
Not investment advice, DYORUS Stock Market News Analysis: Amazon Gains Morgan Stanley's "Top Pick" Status, Surges 5%, Is AI Trading Sentiment Truly Warming Up?
Tech stocks rebound, but internal divergence is evident. On Monday, the three major US stock indices showed mixed results: the Nasdaq led with a 1.11% gain, the S&P 500 rose 0.41%, and the Dow Jones slightly fell by 0.07%.
On the surface, it looks like a broad tech stock rally, but in reality, capital is flowing only to the most certain places—Amazon was named Morgan Stanley's "Top Pick" and had its price target raised to $350, closing up 4.98% with $14.305 billion in trading volume; Micron Technology led with $23.292 billion in trading volume, up 2.97%; Nvidia announced completion of a 104-qubit fault-tolerant computing simulation, rising 1.38% with $21.355 billion in volume.
On the other hand, CoreWeave was upgraded to "Buy" by Goldman Sachs but still closed down 0.44%, Meta fell 0.55%, and Apple slightly dropped 0.15%.
The core message from the news is:
The market no longer buys into the "AI story," only recognizing "AI profits." Morgan Stanley's bullish stance on Amazon is based on the logic that AWS's profit contribution is severely underestimated, expecting AWS growth to reach 47% by 2027.
Meanwhile, CoreWeave's "good news but no price increase" precisely indicates that the pure AI infrastructure narrative is being tested for its ability to deliver profits.
The tech stock rebound is real, but the criteria for the rebound have become stricter. Giants with profit anchors are attracting capital, while those relying on stories to support valuations are bleeding out. This kind of divergence is more worth watching than a broad rally. $BTC $ETH With Iran disrupting overall energy transportation in the Persian Gulf, energy transport through the Strait of Hormuz has again dropped to 8.5 million barrels per day, causing a decline on the energy supply side.
At the same time, the pressure on the energy supply side has been transmitted to the production side. Asian refineries, facing the combined factors of high oil prices, high shipping costs, and high insurance, have begun to gradually reduce production. The dual deterioration pressure on energy supply and energy production has led to continuous price increases for Brent and WTI.
The only good news is that Pakistan Army Chief of Staff Asim Munir visited Tehran. As the highest-ranking official mediating the Middle East war on behalf of Palestine, he must have brought significant mediation news. The US-Iran mediation channel has returned to a substantive phase.
In fact, the development of the US-Iran situation to date forces us to face a harsh reality: to solve the energy problem, one cannot avoid US-Iran peace talks. Whether it is alternative routes or increasing non-Middle East energy output, essentially none can resolve the current dilemma and may even create bigger troubles.
Both the US and Iran should be aware of this issue, and so are countries worldwide. Therefore, all optimism can only bet on the US and Iran returning to negotiations, though the difficulty remains high and agonizing! #10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ Slacking off at work, I casually checked the perpetual contract snapshots of BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, and DOGE. I just wanted to take a quick look, but one number caught my eye: DOGE's 8-hour funding rate is 0.0100%, which annualizes to 10.9%, ranking first among the five asset categories.
During the same period, BTC is at 10.8%, ETH only 6.4%, and XRP also 6.4%. DOGE's rate is nearly double that of ETH.
A positive funding rate means longs are paying shorts. The price hovers around 0.08 without moving, yet the holding cost is the highest among all, so longs actually face considerable pressure on paper. But looking at it from another angle, for an asset's funding rate to top all five categories means there are enough people willing to bear the ongoing cost and keep their positions open. This is not a cost-free bullish sentiment; it's bullishness after paying the price.
Looking at open interest, $DOGE stands at $212.2 million, with long accounts making up 71.8%. OI hasn't shrunk, longs haven't exited, and the funding rate remains at the top. If this structure meets even a slight rebound in spot buying, the hedging cost on the short side will quickly flip. OpenAI’s reported ~$50B annualized revenue and Anthropic’s $16.8B Q3 revenue are not directly comparable, but that measurement gap is revealing. Investors are being asked to price rapid growth alongside enormous compute commitments. Revenue momentum may support valuations; funding costs could determine whether it becomes durable economics.
#OpenAIAnthropicIPORace On October 19th Eastern Time, the US Bitcoin spot ETF had a net inflow of 527 million. This is the largest single-day inflow since September 22nd.
BlackRock's IBIT contributed 665 million. Fidelity's FBTC saw an outflow of 83.63 million, and Grayscale's GBTC had an outflow of 54.93 million. The remaining 11 ETFs had no inflow or outflow.
The net inflow of 527 million was carried solely by BlackRock. They put in 665 million, others withdrew 138 million, subtracting that leaves 527 million.
This is not "institutions buying Bitcoin." This is "institutions buying BlackRock."
So what does this 527 million mean?
Before this, the ETF had a cumulative net outflow of 617 million in October. On Monday alone, the net outflow was reduced to 90.57 million. The bleeding stopped, but it hasn't turned positive yet.
Think about this sequence. In the first two weeks of October, ETFs were continuously withdrawing, pushing the price below 80,000. Then on Monday, BlackRock suddenly invested 665 million, pulling the price back near 82,000.
The average buy-in cost for US spot ETFs is around 81,500. Last week, Bitcoin fell below 80,000, causing some ETF positions to be at a floating loss. Now the price has returned to 82,000, just slightly above that line.
Consider this position. Those who are underwater, do they want to exit? Yes. But BlackRock's 665 million inflow that day shows someone is absorbing the selling. The buyers are not retail investors, but BlackRock's clients. The sellers are not retail either, but clients of Fidelity and Grayscale. $BTC $SOL
#ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ Regarding Elon Musk's promise to give every child in the United States one share of SpaceX $SPCX stock, I would like to provide some explanations.
First, the vehicle for the stock gift is the 530A account (also known as the Trump Account).
The eligibility to open this account is: U.S. children under 18 years old with a valid Social Security number. According to Census Bureau data, there are about 73 million people under 18 in the U.S.
Before Musk, other American celebrities have made similar promises:
Michael Dell, founder of Dell Inc., and his wife pledged $6.25 billion to deposit $250 in cash (note: cash, not Dell stock) for the first 25 million children born between 2016 and 2024 living in areas with median household incomes below $150,000.
The President and COO of SpaceX and her husband promised one share of SpaceX stock to about 2 million children who had already opened accounts at that time, prioritizing low-income families and children in Texas.
Musk's original words were "to give every American child"; currently, there are no age or household income thresholds, and specific implementation details have not yet been announced.
If calculated based on 70 million children, that would be 70 million shares of SpaceX stock;
Based on last Friday's closing price of about $146, the total value is just over $10 billion.
#特斯拉交付超预期后盈利修复成焦点 #arbitrum proposal seeks 100 million ARB to promote USDG adoption
[Old Leek Observation] Arbitrum plans to add 100 million $ARB to promote USDG, stablecoin competition shifts to ecosystem subsidies
Arbitrum DAO is reviewing an important proposal: to add 100 million ARB, redirect the DRIP incentive program to support the USD stablecoin USDG issued by Paxos, while using part of the treasury assets to support liquidity and converting some ecosystem project fees into USDG.
First, ARB: increased ecosystem investment, but token demand may not grow in sync.
The additional 100 million ARB will be used to expand the incentive budget for USDG, increasing the remaining DRIP budget from about 65 million to about 165 million. Subsidies can drive protocol integration and liquidity growth, but incentive tokens may also create potential selling pressure. The key is not how much ARB is allocated, but whether the investment can bring sustained users and revenue.
Second, USDG: competing for market share as a DeFi settlement asset.
USDG is already launched on Arbitrum and integrated with protocols like $GMX, $UNI swap, Morpho, Fluid, etc. If incentives succeed, USDG has the opportunity to expand its use in trading, lending, and collateral scenarios. However, stablecoin supply growth does not equal real demand growth; retention rate after subsidies end is the key to evaluating effectiveness.12 hours, nearly 40 million in compensation just paid off. After clearing, who is the most at risk? Check this injury report. BTC, critical condition: largest amount, nearly 30% share, long positions absolutely dominant, short positions only about 7%. The entire village's leverage squeezed through the same door; when the door collapses, the longs are wiped out en masse, a textbook case of extreme long liquidation. ETH, wounded on both sides: second largest total amount, longs in the lead, but shorts also exploded by 5,458,900, about 37% share. There was a strong rebound during the session; the longs didn't die out completely and counterattacked the shorts. SOL, minor injury: smallest total amount, only 3.56% share, longs about 69%, shorts about 31%. Leverage not squeezed, mild volatility, purely a runner-up taking a hit, lightest selling pressure. The most dangerous is never the one with the most explosions, but the one with the most concentrated squeeze. Next round, don't all squeeze through the same door.Since last night, there hasn't been a continued surge, but rather a mild pullback. BTC is at 81391, down 1.96%; SOL at 103.85, down 1.8%; XRP at 1.291, down 1.92%. All have dropped nearly 2%, with BTC falling the most solidly. Small coins haven't amplified the decline, indicating the overall market is dragging, not an altcoin crash.
However, I don't think this is panic selling. The US spot BTC ETF saw a net inflow of $527 million in a single day, the strongest since September. IBIT alone had $665 million, offsetting outflows from Fidelity and Grayscale. Money is coming in but prices aren't rising, so the selling pressure seems more from existing profit-taking. The Mt.Gox compensation deadline has been postponed for the fourth time to October 2027, with about 34,000 BTC still in custody, delaying supply risk. Funds are being sweetened and supply pressure eased, yet prices are still dipping, meaning the positive impact is weakening.
My view: 80,000 BTC is the first line of defense. If it holds, expect high-level consolidation; if it breaks effectively, look to 78,000. Only a rebound above 83,000 signals a restart of the uptrend. SOL at 103.85 is relatively strong; 100 is the key support/resistance line. Breaking it could trigger margin calls, with a rebound target of 110. XRP at 1.291 shows limited strength; after 13 consecutive weeks of net inflows into spot XRP ETFs, this is the first week of net outflow. Losing 1.25 would mean a return to the lower edge of the range.
Wait for BTC to climb back above 83,000 before adding positions; if it truly breaks below 80,000, reduce holdings first. Fundamentals aren't bad; what's bad is sentiment. Can 80,000 hold this week?
$BTC $SOL $XRP $SOL looks weak in the short term, down 1.68% in 24h. The main ones being squeezed out in this segment are the long leverage positions, with long liquidations clearly outweighing shorts. However, the bulls have not exited because of this. During the decline, the funding rate has been rising steadily over three periods, indicating new long positions are entering to catch the dip, and leverage has not been cleared. The funding rate level itself does not indicate direction; what matters is how positions are rotating: one round of longs just got cleared, and immediately new longs come in, with the price still close to the previous high. If it tries to break through again but fails, these new longs will be the fuel for the next round of squeeze-outs. The chart shows higher highs being made, which is a larger structural pattern reflecting position changes slower than daily fluctuations. The price being close to the previous high is essentially testing resistance; before breaking above, it acts more like a ceiling than a springboard. Conditions for a bullish reversal: reclaim and hold above 105.74, indicating the previous high has truly been taken out, then the outlook turns bullish. If it fails to hold, a retest of the lower boundary at 103.45 is more likely.Evening Notes: After grinding all afternoon, the funding rate surrendered first
The rhythm of today's session is very clear: a fake dump to 81,166 in the morning, a midday rebound that fizzled out at 82,272, and then a steady grind down all afternoon. Currently BTC is at 81,430, down 1.9%, just over 200 points above the morning low of 81,200; ETH is at 2,382, down 2.6%, still the weakest all day.
But one data point has changed and is worth mentioning: the funding rate has basically reset to zero, BTC +0.0017%, ETH +0.0019%. It was +0.0100% in the morning, with longs lining up to pay to catch the rebound; after grinding all afternoon, those who needed to cut losses have done so, and those who needed to retreat have retreated, so longs are no longer crowded.
This means the evening's script will be different from the afternoon's. Half of the downward fuel was originally from long liquidations; with the funding rate cleared, further drops will have to rely on real spot selling. The 21:30 US stock market open is tonight's decisive moment: if 81,200 is tested a second time and holds, that means a double bottom plus funding rate reset, and the rebound calculations start anew; if it closes below, the box bottom is broken, so don't comfort yourself with "fake falls" anymore.
The data speaks, mistakes are admitted. Which side are you betting on tonight: will 81,200 hold, or break down?Oil prices have returned to $110, but what really causes concern is the undercurrent in the derivatives market.
On the surface, the Middle East situation combined with high oil prices, inflation, and interest rates continues to suppress risk assets. However, unusually, last week the outflow from spot ETFs actually narrowed (BTC about 228 million, ETH about 320 million, SOL about 26 million). Selling pressure is slowing down, yet institutions have not returned.
Prices are oscillating at key levels, but capital shows no direction. BTC is stuck at 80,000, ETH holds at 2,400, SOL watches 100; in front of these three thresholds, no one dares to move first. Without a volume breakout, any rebound can only be considered a correction, not a reversal.
The derivatives side is even more subtle: if funding rates are positive and positions are not cleared, the so-called "slowdown in selling pressure" is most likely just a pause by shorts, not a return of bulls. Once oil prices push higher again, the first to be squeezed will be the highly leveraged short-term longs.
There is also an upward path: oil prices peak, inflation eases, ETF outflows turn positive, and BTC breaks above 80,000 with volume, then altcoins have a chance. But this requires volume confirmation, not just emotional calls.
The market has traded "high oil prices → tight interest rates → pressure on risk assets" very smoothly but has underestimated the fragility of the position structure. A lighter selling pressure does not equal stronger buying; during this vacuum period, false breakouts and whipsaws are most likely.
Therefore, it now feels more like the calm before a squeeze rather than the start of a reversal. Wait for volume to speak.#奈飞财报在即，广告业务成新看点 Views on Netflix (NFLX) can be summarized as: short-term pressure, but the long-term narrative remains intact, currently in a phase of "performance verification" and "valuation repair" competition. The upcoming Q3 earnings report (after market close on October 20, Eastern Time) is a critical point to test whether its advertising and price increase strategies can offset the decline in user engagement.
📉 Short-term pressure: user engagement and competition
The stock price has fallen about 23% this year; the core issue is not profitability but user attention.
• Decline in viewing time: average monthly viewing time per member dropped to about 49 hours in the first half of the year (66 hours in the same period of 2023), with total viewing time increasing only 2%.
• Intensified competition: YouTube's viewing time in the U.S. is nearly twice that of Netflix; short videos and creator content are dividing user time.
• Rising churn rate: Q3 U.S. user churn rate increased 16.6% year-over-year; downloads in the U.S. and Canada declined about 20%.
📈 Earnings focus: profit and advertising are key
Market expects Q3 revenue of about $12.87 billion (up 11.8% year-over-year), EPS about $0.82.
• Profit margin quality: the market is more focused on whether the 33.2% operating profit margin guidance can be achieved. This mainly relies on price increases (U.S., Mexico, Spain) and cost-cutting through layoffs; if profit improvement depends solely on cost reduction while revenue growth slows, the market may not buy it. Let me explain why I say
"Don't lose money trading contracts in a Bitcoin market like this"
Simply put, the recent rally started after 76 days of bottom consolidation
and this bottom is considered a second confirmation of the previous bottom
In other words, a large-scale double bottom
The previous consolidation range was 75k-80k, and after breaking through
logically, long positions could have gone further
But if you don't follow logic,
you get a retest of the previous high,
confirmed on the daily chart one day,
broken the next day,
fake break down then recover and strengthen - hold and go up,
break down again,
stabilize again,
fake drop again,
stabilize again,
drop again
Then, you almost lose everything
Because most crypto trading used to be based on 4-hour and daily charts
Now daily charts are basically all fake moves
The real moves are on the weekly chart, which only comes once every 2 months
So, divorce early and let yourself go Four-layer thermometer: stable base, waiting for the wind above
$BTC 81471, +0.15%, still the base. There was a lack of incremental funds at dawn, and the price is supported above 81000 by existing limit orders; long-term chips are locked in, so the drop is shallow, and short-term players haven't entered, so it can't rise either. The other three layers are all hanging on this base, and the current fluctuations look more like positioning, with limited directional reference.
ENA 0.18554, -1.94%, interest-bearing layer under pressure. USDe distributes collateral yields to token holders, the protocol scale is leading, but the market still has reservations about extreme de-pegging. It retreats along with the stablecoin concept; the model is not rejected, valuation is first suppressed, waiting for the sector to give direction.
$HYPE 78.091, -0.59%, on-chain exchange layer. Hyperliquid places order book matching on an independent L1, with transaction depth close to CEX; breaking 80 down to 78, depth remains. It is more resistant to decline than small coins at dawn, relying on transaction structure, not sentiment.
SPCX 144.25, -0.85%, unlisted rocket layer. SpaceX's first full quarterly financial report after listing has landed, on-chain shares are recalculated at 144: launch costs, Starlink subscription revenue, and profits are compared item by item. The US stock market is not open yet, the price is just positioning, waiting for the opening to give a real valuation.
📌 This article is for market analysis only and does not constitute investment advice. #ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 Netflix doesn't lose to YouTube when someone cancels a subscription — it loses every evening someone opens YouTube first
Nielsen's US TV data puts YouTube viewing at nearly twice Netflix's level
That makes attention the scarce asset, not subscribers
I'd watch whether new shows actually reclaim viewing time before celebrating another quarter of higher revenue
#NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins Recent on-chain hash rate data for DOGE shows that the current total network hash rate has retraced about 72% from the peak in February this year. However, despite the significant contraction in hash rate, the spot price has demonstrated strong resilience around $0.079.
The divergence between the sharp decline in hash rate and the stable price reveals a structural change in miner selling pressure under the merged mining model. Although approximately 13.67 million new $DOGE inflation coins are still generated daily, due to the merged mining mechanism of Litecoin and DOGE, miners' primary revenue anchors have diversified, significantly weakening the one-sided selling pressure driven purely by DOGE mining costs.
The decline in hash rate means high-cost mining machines are being squeezed out, while the firm spot price indicates that the daily 13.67 million inflation coins from fixed investment have been absorbed by genuine buying demand in the spot market. The reduction in cost-side selling pressure has completely shifted pricing power from miners to secondary market capital and ecosystem applications.
This trend of "mining marginal cost retreat and solid spot absorption" lays a relatively solid fundamental foundation for the price.
Going forward, two dimensions need monitoring: first, whether the total network hash rate can stop falling and rebound as the price recovers, forming a positive feedback loop between network security and asset price; second, whether the absorption rate of daily new inflation coins on exchanges can remain smooth when the price breaks through $0.087. If the resistance level is broken with volume, the price will directly open a recovery channel toward the $0.10 range. South Korea called five exchanges including Upbit and Bithumb to a meeting today: a 22% coin tax will be imposed starting January next year, and anyone earning over 2.5 million KRW annually (about 1700 USD) must pay it. This tax was legislated in 2020 but has been postponed three times already, and some lawmakers still want to delay it until 2029. Honestly, since the rules are unclear and the system isn't set up properly, this tax will be really hard to collect.#ETF outflows continue, can the BTC rebound sustain?
$BTC has finally rallied recently, but ETF funds keep flowing out. Many people are worried—can this rebound really hold?
Simply put, ETFs are a barometer of institutional money. When funds don’t rush in during a rebound but keep withdrawing, it shows big money has no real intention to come back and go long. This rise looks more like a short-term bottom-fishing bounce.
Without sustained institutional support, relying only on retail short-term funds, the market is unlikely to go far. A little upward movement will trigger sell-offs, and the price can easily fall back down after rising.
Of course, it doesn’t mean a big drop is imminent; it could just range back and forth. But as long as ETF funds keep flowing out, this rebound lacks solid backing and can fail at any time.
To confirm if the rebound can last, watch one signal: when ETFs stop outflows and start stable inflows, that’s when there’s a chance for a decent rally.
In the current situation, don’t get overheated chasing highs. Short-term trading is fine, but never hold heavy positions betting on a big surge. Be extra cautious with leverage—when funds can’t keep up, the drop can be fast, and profits can vanish in no time. $ETH $SOL
#10月FOMC临近，美联储暂停加息还有哪些变数？ #嘉信开放BTC转账，德银布局托管 After the U.S. stock market opened on October 19, the storage sector was suddenly aggressively bought by capital: $SNDK surged as much as 10% intraday, Micron rose 6%, and SK Hynix increased over 7%—just a few days ago, this sector had fallen to a level "even a mother wouldn't recognize." This rollercoaster-like tear movement precisely exposes the biggest divergence in the current market: how much longer can the AI storage sector remain profitable? 🍜 First, let's look at the earnings report to be released on October 29. The market expects revenue to fall between $10.3 billion and $10.8 billion, supported by a very focused logic—the rigid demand for high-end storage from AI data centers, combined with the continuous rise in NAND flash prices. Citibank directly judged that the supply-demand gap may continue until 2028. This is not short-term sentiment but a mid-term narrative backed by industry data. However, the truly worrisome signal is hidden in the behavior pattern of capital. The violent rebound after a sharp drop indicates that bulls have not retreated but are using real money to front-run earnings expectations. This "fall hard, rebound harder" structure often means the market is accelerating pricing for certainty rather than peaking. From this, two transmission chains that most people underestimate emerge. First, the shortage of storage chips directly locks in the cost floor of computing hardware; the hardware expenditure for mining machines and AI computing devices is unlikely to decrease in the short term, and the cost pressure on the $BTC miner community will not easily ease, so expecting a significant price drop on the hardware side is unrealistic. Second, the "AI concept" in the crypto market will be further squeezed—traditional giants are competing on hardware, orders, and earnings, while those relying only on white$ADA Damn it! This ADA market makes me furious! Outside it's quiet, but inside the market it's dog-eat-dog; the market makers have their sickles raised to their necks but still pretend to be dead. The K-line sticks to 0.2155, moving sideways like an ECG, volume shrinking again and again—a typical pre-washout pattern. Is this wave stable? Not at all! 🔥
Don't be greedy for that small rebound; the daily EMA is pressing down hard, and there's a lot of trapped positions above 0.2200. The market makers are just waiting to lure buyers. My plan is clear: short directly near 0.2155, set stop loss at 0.2190, target first at 0.2080, and if broken, look further down. Don't chase highs, don't get itchy!
If you want to follow, click on the token market card below to place orders yourself. 💡
The above is just my personal opinion and does not constitute investment advice. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile; please make decisions cautiously. Profit and loss are your own responsibility.
👇👇👇What if the Suez Canal also encounters trouble, can $BTC still hold up? Don't underestimate this nuclear-level negative event!
Iran has warned it might expand the blockade to the Suez Canal. If this threat escalates further and affects actual shipping, the global market will face not just a localized military conflict but a chain reaction impacting energy transport, trade costs, and inflation expectations.
My view is clear: in this environment, the short-term risk $BTC must first guard against is not missing out but a sudden liquidity crunch.
Many immediately invoke the digital gold narrative when war escalates. But when the market truly panics, investors may not have the patience to wait for Bitcoin to prove its safe-haven qualities. Leveraged accounts might be forced to liquidate, and institutions may prioritize reducing exposure to high-volatility assets.
If crude oil continues to rise and inflation expectations increase, while Fed rate cut expectations are suppressed, $BTC could face multiple pressures. Especially if key support levels break and contract leverage remains crowded, a rapid sell-off could amplify panic.
But it’s important to distinguish: a threat is not the same as an actual blockade. Only if shipping is truly obstructed and oil prices keep soaring does the risk truly escalate.
Don’t treat black swans as certainties, and don’t max out your positions before the risk is resolved. In this market, surviving is more important than guessing every single candlestick.
#ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 #奈飞财报在即，广告业务成新看点 BTC is currently trading around $81,800, down 1.28% in the past 24 hours, fluctuating between 81,200 and 83,158. The 7-day SMA is at 81,843, the 20-day SMA at 83,219, with the price caught in between. The 50-day SMA at 81,585 is the nearest current support line; the daily close below it means the short-term narrative needs rewriting. Only by reclaiming 83,219 can the neutral pattern be maintained. Yesterday, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net inflow of $527 million in a single day, with BlackRock's IBIT alone buying $665 million, marking the largest daily inflow in nearly a month; Ethereum ETFs continued to see outflows of $103 million the same day, with funds concentrating into BTC. However, looking at the longer term, Bitcoin ETFs still had a net outflow of $229 million last week, marking the second consecutive week of losses. A single day's inflow cannot change a two-week trend, but it at least indicates some institutions are willing to buy near 80,000. Another uncomfortable signal is Coinbase's premium index dropping to -0.141 on the 18th, the lowest since late June, indicating weak US buying support. On the macro side, the probability of a rate hike in October has dropped to 17.4%, but the probability for December remains at 83.3%. As the Federal Reserve enters the quiet period before the meeting, the market can only rely on data itself for direction. My approach: Do not chase this rebound driven by ETFs. Hold the base position if the 50-day SMA at 81,585 holds; if the daily close falls below this, reduce by half and do not hold on. Single-day ETF inflows are good, but until weekly outflows end, I do not consider one day's data a turning point. Oil prices, oil prices #WTI break through $100, Brent crude surges to $110
Still the Strait conflict, the stalemate in US-Iran talks caused it.
US stocks all fell in pre-market, Micron fell below $900, which is a pretty good value position, #SPCX fell below $148
It is estimated that the market may still decline at the evening open. Trump, your time is really running out.
If this week's geopolitics and oil prices do not improve, even if the earnings reports exceed expectations during the week, it won't boost the market.
However, oil prices have never stayed above $100 for a long time before. In September, #WTI surged to 106 then fell back, as news eased and funds repriced oil prices down.
Although this time is still the left side, the right side should not be too far away. During this period, having core US stocks at low positions is a pretty good value price.
Moreover, the foreseeable black swan risks are unlikely, so US stocks probably won't fall very deep.
Once the market eases and midterm elections and other events settle, US stocks will slowly come out of the bottom.
Trump, you should take action now.#SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓
After SPCX surged to a high point in August, it has been steadily declining and is now consolidating with low volume around 148, as if waiting for a verdict. The earnings numbers have actually been fully uncovered long ago—revenue is expected to be around 12.9 billion, EPS roughly between 0.14 and 0.19, and the market has even prematurely popped champagne for the "first profitable quarter." But last time, Q2 revenue beat expectations by 15%, yet the stock price dropped 9% because capital expenditures surged to 18.4 billion, and the market fears it is burning cash to chase growth.
This time, it's very likely the same script. Starlink user growth is indeed strong, with a net increase of 1.7 million in a single quarter, but ARPU remains steady at $66, with growth in volume but not in price. What really makes people hesitant to go all in are two hidden risks: 1.3 billion shares will be unlocked on October 22, followed by another 329 million shares hitting the market on the 24th; the 15th Starship flight is reportedly going to attempt the "chopsticks grab" maneuver for the first time, which would be a milestone, but a failure would be an emotional bombshell. Morgan Stanley says the earnings report is just the "appetizer," and whether you eat the appetizer or not doesn’t matter; until the main course is served steadily, the table could be flipped at any time.
So this is not the place to bet on the earnings report. The options market prices post-earnings volatility close to 7.5%, with 162 on the upside and 139 on the downside, the odds are not favorable. Better to wait for two things to happen—either the 15th Starship flight delivers a clear signal of reusability, or the lock-up expiration dumps a significant hole. The 148 level looks like it’s being supported by institutions, but support and rallying are two different things; low-volume sideways consolidation is the most frustrating, don’t stand guard for others halfway up the mountain. $SPCX Retail investors rushed to buy an IPO at 408 times leverage, but it dropped by one-third on the first day of listing.
South Korean AI company Elice was listed today, with retail investors bidding 10.3 trillion KRW in margin, opening with a 16% drop below the issue price, and intraday falling as much as 32.6%, marking the worst debut for a billion-KRW-level IPO in South Korea 📉
KOSPI closed down 3.73% the same day, the lowest close since April; SK Hynix -4.23%, Samsung -2.98%.
Back to today's question on the planet: The eight-day losing streak for chip stocks has ended, but can the AI rally continue? I think it's doubtful — the AI financing downturn has spread from the US stock market to Asia: last week CoreWeave's bond yield hit 15%, Firmus withdrew a $5 billion IPO, and this week Asian retail investors are voting with real money, even rejecting profitable companies.
Invalidation condition: If US semiconductor stocks hold and continue to rise tonight, it's just a one-day sentiment sell-off; if they don't hold, the correction is not over yet.
Which side are you on: a real correction, or the prelude to a bubble burst?
$MU
#芯片股终结八连跌，AI行情能否持续？ Ethereum is currently in a more passive position than Bitcoin. October's Ethereum ETF outflows have nearly reached $1 billion, which is real money being redeemed, and since it broke below 2450, it hasn't been able to mount a decent rebound. Basic Attention Token rose 10.7% today, and a few small coins made rounds on the hot list, but this did nothing to help Ethereum itself. Technically, 2350 is the last line of support; if it breaks, look to 2200. A rebound to 2450-2500 is an opportunity to reduce positions. Ethereum's role is very clear now: it is the most vulnerable in this round of decline because it lacks both Bitcoin's institutional base and the resilience stories of altcoins, stuck in the middle with no support on either side. The real signal that the entire market is warming up will be when Ethereum can outperform Bitcoin.$BR This wave has some substance. The most counterintuitive thing is that despite the bearish pressure of about 4.92 million tokens unlocking on October 20, the price still surged over 40%, reaching as high as around 0.73, with a 24-hour contract trading volume close to $400 million. The bearish pressure couldn't push the price down, which itself is a signal.
More importantly, the funding rate is still negative, meaning shorts are paying to hold their positions, yet the price keeps climbing. The buybacks from shorts covering their positions serve as ready fuel. Plus, with the Korean won market now online, the liquidity base is already established, and the 2.0 narrative is gradually taking shape—this is not just an empty pump.
The recent pullback from 0.75 did not break below the starting point of the previous big bullish candle, and the short-term moving averages are still supporting. As long as it doesn't fall below 0.60, this rebound driven jointly by short covering and the bearish unlock still has potential. $ETH
#SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 #Meta巨额AI投入进入回报检验期
Meta's Q3 figures themselves are not bad, but profit-side pressure is increasing.
The market consensus expects Q3 revenue to be about $63.3–63.5 billion (year-over-year about +23–24%), with advertising revenue estimated around $62 billion. Q2 actual revenue was $60.8 billion (+28%), including advertising at $59.4 billion (+27%), with ad impressions up 14% and price per ad up 12%. Family DAP reached 3.6 billion, and Instagram daily active users surpassed 2 billion.
Reality Labs remains a drag: Q2 revenue was only $431 million, with an operating loss of $4.62 billion. AI-related Capex remains high, and Q3 free cash flow is expected to be negative. Some analysts have lowered EPS forecasts due to one-time legal expenses (some versions as low as $3.79, while consensus remains in the $5.9–6.8 range).
Revenue growth mainly relies on advertising, but expenses and capital expenditures are rising simultaneously. This time, the focus is on whether both ad price and impressions can continue to grow, or if Reality Labs losses and AI investments will further compress profits. I really can't trust it
$PUMP unlocks nearly 50 million USD worth of tokens every month
Not just once, but every month, this much every month
How can the price still go up with such selling pressure above?
I entered at 0.0059, now it's 0.0044
Profit is close to 25 points, although it has already dropped a lot
I still think the price is high
$LIT is still fluctuating around 3u now, some people say it won't fall further, but I still hold my view that the next step is 2u, and 2u is not the bottom, there is a lot of room for further decline. Currently, about 25% is circulating, the locked tokens have not been unlocked yet, need to wait until early next year.
For $CAP, although the holding volume has been declining recently, the long-short ratio is only 0.61. There are quite a few shorts, I feel it might still do some wild moves. Although I am also short, this situation is really a bit hard to understand!
#ETF持续流出，BTC反弹能否延续？ $TIA Discussing my view on this coin
After a volume surge followed by a sharp drop, it has declined for three consecutive days with volume moderately shrinking, indicating cumulative short-selling profit-taking over these three days.
Today's rise shows a strong pattern, but this increase did not continue with added position volume.
The 1h and 4h position volumes show slight oscillation, indicating funds are in a turnover state. Based on volume and candlesticks, it appears short sellers are closing positions and pushing prices up.
At the same time, there are funds opening both long and short positions at this price level, making the rise seem effortless.
After three days of volume-driven decline, is today's rise a trend reversal? I am not optimistic. The three days of volume-driven decline sufficiently prove that the short-term price above is not justified. Daily position volume is also stable, with no further institutional involvement. Today is merely a turnover between internal and external positions, a short-term rebound driven by closing short positions to take profits.
Moreover, there is still resistance from trapped positions above. Unless market sentiment reverses, it is difficult to reach previous highs again. Using appropriate leverage is most important.