Orbit Post Sitemap
Reject FOMO! When everyone is hyping institutional research on CORE, what should we really focus on?
⚠️This article only reviews the fundamentals of the sector and does not constitute any investment advice.
BTCFi fever is sweeping the market, with many KOLs grabbing the "institutional research on CORE" news to create FOMO, constantly hyping "institutions are about to enter, the market is about to take off."
But experienced players know: institutional research does not equal secondary market buying. Just because the sector has real demand doesn’t mean the token will keep rising.
Faced with overwhelming positive narratives, don’t get swept up emotionally. Let’s skip the marketing talk and focus only on 4 hardcore facts.
1. First, clarify: what exactly are institutions researching?
Institutional researchers investigating CORE are primarily studying BTC native staking infrastructure, not the CORE token.
1. Evaluate the Satoshi Plus technical solution to see if it can achieve BTC non-custodial staking and solve the pain point of institutional cold wallet BTC lying dormant without yield;
2. Assess BitGo and Copper custody chains to determine if this system can serve compliant institutional clients;
3. Benchmark horizontally against STX, Babylon, MERL to compare competitors in the sector and improve industry research reports.
Research is industry reconnaissance, technical evaluation, and business cooperation negotiation—not a signal to build positions or buy.
In institutional risk control checklists, the protocol-level vulnerability from 8.31 is a permanent stain. Even if the code is fixed, the entry threshold for institutional funds remains very high, making large-scale CORE token allocation difficult. Many bloggers deliberately confuse concepts, packaging "researching infrastructure" as "institutions massively buying tokens."
2. Set aside narratives, focus on 4 core hard metrics (no storytelling with charts)
1. Progress on disposing of ghost tokens (the biggest hidden bomb)
Focus on on-chain data: whether there is a clear plan to recover, burn, or lock the ghost tokens left by the vulnerability.
Continuously monitor large wallet addresses to see if tokens are still being transferred to exchanges.
As long as this hidden risk is unresolved, every rally could face large-scale dumping. Verbal promises don’t count; it must be verifiable on-chain.
2. Actual scale of lstBTC deployment, distinguishing real institutional funds from retail TVL stacking
TVL numbers can be misleading; the key is the real BTC staking volume brought in by custody institutions, not staking data inflated by retail funds.
lstBTC is the core catalyst of the CORE narrative; if it’s only hype and institutional BTC assets don’t enter, the grand narrative will be falsified.
3. Ecosystem’s self-sustaining ability, can fees offset token inflation
The hard fork only patched the excessive issuance vulnerability; the base network inflation mechanism remains. Validator nodes and ecosystem incentives continue to issue CORE; the more active the ecosystem, the more tokens are released.
Track ecosystem fees and protocol buyback amounts to judge if fee income can offset selling pressure from new tokens.
Key point: staking BTC earns BTC yield; CORE is just a supporting certificate to boost yield. BTC staking growth does not automatically create rigid buying demand for CORE.
4. Latest security audit report
The 8.31 incident exposed flaws in the reward mechanism design. Continuously follow third-party independent audits to confirm no new vulnerabilities in the underlying consensus and reward logic. After a major protocol vulnerability fix, institutions remain vigilant against similar risks recurring.
3. Zhang Sufen’s contrarian evaluation of CORE
Zhang Sufen’s core stock selection premise: clean fundamentals, no irreversible major historical risks, waiting for valuation repair.
CORE is in the BTCFi main sector, has experienced deep declines, and has narrative elasticity;
but protocol vulnerability history, ghost tokens looming, and ongoing inflation are three major hard flaws, so fundamentals are not clean.
✅ Positioning: a narrative option, a very small position speculative target, strictly no heavy long-term holding of base positions.
Only speculate on pulse rallies brought by lstBTC deployment and institutional custody fund inflows; if indicators fall short, exit decisively, refuse to hold long-term waiting for a rebound.
4. Two anti-FOMO rules retail investors must follow
1. On the news front: only trust on-chain hard data, not verbal positives
Media hype, roadshows, institutional research news are all expectations; on-chain transfers, staking data, and buyback records are facts. When positive news comes out, wait for on-chain data verification first, don’t rush in immediately.
2. On position sizing: set take-profit and stop-loss in advance, do not add or average down
Speculating on narrative-driven markets has high odds but low win rates. Don’t blindly add positions during rallies; if core indicators worsen, strictly follow exit plans, don’t get trapped by "long-term value" narratives.
Summary
BTC native yield is the real demand of the sector, no doubt about that.
But sector dividends do not equal token dividends. Institutions researching are assessing infrastructure, not boosting retail.
When the whole network is hyping the token, don’t follow FOMO; calmly verify ghost tokens, lstBTC, ecosystem fees, and security audits—these four hard data points. Data fulfillment is real good news; stories alone are just emotional speculation.
💬 Interactive question: Do you think lstBTC’s launch can substantially improve CORE token’s value capture problem? Feel free to leave comments for discussion.
#CORE #BTCFi #lstBTC
Token tag: $CORE The interesting part isn't only price.
It's where the volume is moving.
$BTC → stable
$ETH → recovering
$SOL → stronger beta
$ZEC → aggressive participation
Capital rotation is becoming easier to see.$ALAB $ALAB /USDT This is purely a capital game, with no fundamental support; the candlesticks are all manipulations by weak hands to shake out holders. At 289.42, I tried a small position—not based on narrative, but because the volume hasn't died and the order book shows some support; short-term funds might still want to speculate. But don't go heavy; sudden shakeouts can happen anytime, and if you're slow to exit, you'll get trapped. Do you think this level is a shakeout or a real sell-off?
👇👇👇$ZEC has decoupled from the market's rhythm. While $BTC grinds sideways and $ETH waits for its rotation, Zcash has already run its own race — a more than 20-fold move inside a single year, from a few tens of dollars to current levels. What matters for positioning is not the multiple itself but its persistence: the trend has not broken on pullbacks, and it has kept breaking out when the broader market fragments. That behavior points to a specific capital structure. Privacy narratives, ETF speculaMany people blindly buy the dip when they see the funding rate turn negative, treating the negative rate as "the house giving away money," but they overlook whether the price structure itself has already stopped falling—this is the most typical position management mistake.
$HEI current price is 0.1304, down 10.01% in 24h, with 30 candlesticks showing an amplitude as high as 24.23%, and volatility significantly higher than $DOT's 11.74% and $LINK's 7.21%. With such amplitude, any heavy position without a stop loss is gambling. From a technical perspective: MA5=0.12836 is still slightly above MA20=0.127845, RSI=53.2 is neutral, MACD histogram slightly turned positive, Bollinger Bands lower band at 0.12286 is a short-term key support; funding rate is -0.0058%, shorts need to pay, indicating crowded shorts and a basis for a short squeeze, but the trading volume is only 6.8M USDT, liquidity is thin, and slippage risk is high. The Fear and Greed Index is 50, neutral, with no extreme sentiment to rely on.
Directional view: cautiously bullish (playing the rebound, not chasing the trend). Entry reference is 0.1270–0.1290, close to MA20 and the Bollinger middle band; a pullback that does not break these levels is valid. Take profit 1: 0.1328 (Bollinger upper band, reduce half position), take profit 2: 0.1365 (previous high resistance extension, combined with amplitude estimation).A load-bearing wall has been chiseled with a hole, and now the owner says it can be repaired in six weeks—but the structure won't return to its original state just because of a project timeline. The east-west oil pipeline in Saudi Arabia is a main trunk corridor running through the entire energy heartland; it’s not a decorative line, but the core shaft of this system. The goal is to restore it to half capacity within a few days and fully reset the entire line within six weeks. Note the wording: repair outlook, not yet confirmed to resume work. In the design institute, this means the drawings are not stamped, supervision has not signed off, yet the client has already issued a press release claiming the building is habitable.
The market feedback on September 16 was very honest: West Texas Intermediate crude dropped 3.2% to around $102, Brent closed below $106—this is the first pullback since the attack. What is the market doing? It is recalculating load based on the repair schedule. The day before, Oman crude’s premium over Brent approached $24, the highest since March, a typical sign of localized stress concentration—when the main beam breaks, the adjacent secondary beam must bear the entire floor slab alone, with rebar stretched red-hot. The premium contraction process is the stress redistribution process, not an emotional recovery.
The six-week figure must be broken down. Emergency repair and reconstruction are two different matters. Half-load operation is equivalent to providing temporary support for a damaged high-rise: it can hold its own weight but not wind load. True full-capacity restoration requires replacing pipe sections, redoing the anti-corrosion layer, conducting hydrostatic tests and weld inspections. Any corner cut in these steps will be paid back by brittle fracture in the next load cycle. So whether the pipeline can climb to half capacity in a few days only proves the enclosure is up; it does not prove structural safety.
Looking at the linked asset $xNFLX, this is exactly the type of project I am most cautious about—it is not the main structure of this building but a settlement monitoring point on the adjacent plot. Crude oil is the foundation of this energy complex; US risk assets are the upper framework. When the foundation settles, the first to crack are always the far-end cantilevered decorative components. The cost-side loosening caused by premium collapse will briefly benefit vehicles like $xNFLX that are tied to equity narratives, but that is not a new foundation being poured, just scaffolding temporarily stable.
Trump’s meeting in the Gulf next week is dealing with the aftershocks of the Iran situation, a political supplementary survey to the geological report. The only real criterion is whether all welds on the main trunk corridor pass inspection. A full line reset after six weeks is a structural correction; if after six weeks it’s still half-load patching, that means damage has penetrated the bearing platform, and the entire energy tower’s center of gravity must be rebalanced. Any valuation model based on the old balance must be torn down and redrawn. Every inch of pipeline stress will be written into the load-bearing of the next K-line. #oileasesonrepairoutlookMy $SOL plan, and it isn't the one most people want to hear.
I think it pushes to 103 first, taps the supply that's rejected price four times since Sep 5, then flushes to 93.
That's where the real buying is. 95 and 93 have held since late August and nobody has touched them in three weeks.
So I'm not buying 101. I'm waiting for the sweep below 95, then looking long.
The obvious trade is buying strength here. I'd rather be patient.
Buying now or waiting for 93? Short setup on $AAVE Entry 128.73, stop 133.58, target 113.38. That's 3.16 R:R.
Here's the read. Price crashed to 115 on Wednesday, then rallied 11% straight back into the order block at 129 to 132. Same zone it broke down from.
That's not strength. That's price returning to the scene of the crime to fill orders before the next leg.
The bounce has been vertical with no base underneath it. If 133.58 goes, I'm wrong and out.
Fade the bounce or trust it? HYPE rose nearly 6% today, currently priced around $58. But there is a whale going against the entire market.
On-chain data shows that a certain whale sold $27.45 million worth of HYPE spot yesterday, while still holding a short position of 369,000 HYPE, valued at about $30.23 million. This person has lost $5.82 million in 30 days, with a total loss of $6.79 million. Selling spot and still shorting — either they are crazy or they really have confidence.
On the other side, the Hyperliquid project team is desperately buying. The cumulative buyback and burn scale has just surpassed $1.3 billion, with trading fees continuously used to buy HYPE from the market and then burn it. The more active the trading, the more buyback funds, and the less supply.
This is the core contradiction of HYPE right now: retail investors and the project team are buying, while the whale is selling. Who is right or wrong? In the short term, look at the price; in the long term, it depends on whether Hyperliquid can break into the US market. They are negotiating with US regulated exchanges through Phantom for the listing of perpetual contracts, but approval has not yet been granted.
But honestly, the image of a whale losing $6.79 million and still holding short positions is quite interesting. Do you think they are stubbornly holding on, or have they seen something you haven't? $HYPE Capital doesn’t move all at once. It rotates.
➤ $BTC shows whether the market has confidence.
➤ $ETH shows if liquidity is expanding.
➤ $SOL shows how far risk appetite is willing to go.
The interesting part isn’t one asset moving alone.
It’s when BTC stability, ETH strength, and SOL momentum start aligning.
That’s when the market narrative begins to shift.Crypto doesn't need every coin to pump at once.
First comes BTC stability.
Then ETH and SOL start attracting volume.
Then traders look further down the risk curve.
The real signal is not one green candle.
It's whether liquidity keeps spreading.$TAO long: entry 229.4, stop 213.9, target 251.4. R:R is 1.29.
Here's the read. It flushed to 214.4, tapped the sellside liquidity sitting there since August, and bounced 7% off it. The stop goes under that sweep, not above it.
Being straight with you though, 1.29 is thin. I said the same about a ZAMA setup last week and skipped it.
The difference here is the sweep. I'll take a mediocre ratio on a level that clean.
Would 1.29 be enough for you?The market structure is getting interesting:
$BTC → stability
$ETH → recovery
$SOL → higher-beta momentum
$ZEC → explosive relative strength
The question now is whether strength spreads or stays concentrated.
Volume will tell us.Most retail investors in BSC, SOL, and RBH are also heavily losing, and the outcome for Arc is probably similar.
There are plenty of projects with strong backing on BASE, and recently Meme's performance has been just so-so. The two on Arc are still high-control insider schemes created by the official team themselves.
The so-called "strong backing" is the least valuable story in Meme — the more obvious the market control, the more the pump looks like a pre-dump show.
Retail investors see the narrative, insiders see liquidity exit.
For this kind of scheme, watching the show is safer than getting on board.😅 $ZEC hits a new high again, has the mid-term bearish view been disproved?
ZEC's surge yesterday was indeed somewhat unexpected.
Actually, until 2 AM, ZEC's performance was within expectations: it rebounded to a high of 1275, close to but did not break the previous high, and the rebound volume was not large.
However, a major variable appeared at 1:30 AM when Paradigm co-founder Matt Huang posted on X about Zcash, revealing that Paradigm holds ZEC and describing Zcash as Bitcoin's "privacy supplement."
This statement reinforced the market's institutional narrative of Zcash as a "privacy supplement" to Bitcoin.
Subsequently, ZEC quickly broke through the previous high with increased volume, reaching as high as around $1385.
But it is still not confirmed that the mid-term bearish view on ZEC has been disproved:
1. Although ZEC previously approached the upper boundary of the upward channel, it never reached it. Today, ZEC just reached the upper boundary of the channel. It is still uncertain whether ZEC will pull back under the channel's resistance or break through the channel limit to continue a significant rise?
2. It is also unclear what Paradigm's purpose is in publicly supporting at this point—whether they truly have a long-term optimistic stance and hold firmly, or if it is to sell off? Is the volume surge at 2 AM a long-term fund purchase or a buying climax driven by retail FOMO? CLARITY stole all the shots, but on the same day, two seemingly inconspicuous side quests had already crossed the line.
After the Senate debate ended and there weren't even 60 votes, social media immediately flooded with 'Regulation on Hold Again.' But the House didn't stop: the digital asset tax bill passed the Ways and Means Committee 38:5; The Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill passed the Financial Services Committee 28:21. The former controls tax filing standards, while the latter controls confiscated coins and doesn't make any moves. One helps players know how to do the math, the other ensures the state has clear rules for holding currency.
CLARITY, which takes everything in stone, bundles market structure, stablecoins, and DeFi, making everyone want to add conditions, but in the end, they can only get stuck. The small cutoff is actually like a screwdriver: you only tighten one at a time. Tax first, reserve later—not necessarily fast, but every step counts.
BTC is still grinding around 76,000, the shadow of rate hikes lingers, and funds have no time to price legislative votes. But by the time it hits the headlines, it's often no longer a buying opportunity.
The giant ship was still noisy at the port, and the small boat had already left the dock. Tax revenue or reserves—which landed first? #美国加密税收与BTC储备法案获推进 $BTC $ETH $ZEC 140U Challenge 10000U｜Day 161
Initial principal: 140 USDT
Current total assets: 21029.30 CNY
Today's profit: +582.58 (+2.85%)
All-time high: 33000 CNY
ZEC
This position was a short from September 4th, held for more than ten days. After the Federal Reserve's announcement, the market completely deviated from expectations, with prices surging all the way up, reaching a high of 1520. If I hadn't decisively exited yesterday and stubbornly held on until now, I would only be facing a deeper abyss.
I mentioned before that I was waiting for the news to settle. If the market holds above 1450, the upside could reach 1700; but no one can guarantee the bulls will continue, and the risk of a pullback after the surge also exists. News-driven markets cannot be forced into conventional technical logic.
This long-term layout taught me a profound lesson. Trading is not about fighting the market or battling manipulative whales; it's not about winning or losing at all costs. If your prediction is wrong and you hit the risk control line, accepting the loss and exiting is the best choice. Protecting the remaining chips in your account is what qualifies you to stay in the market and wait for the next opportunity.
The challenge has reached 161 days, and the ups and downs have long become familiar. Profit is a form of practice, and big losses even more so. Don't regret the market movement after closing a position; profits that don't belong to you should never be expected. Stick to your trading bottom line and patiently wait for your own opportunity. This path is walked slowly.What if in the future quantum technology and AI generate new coins superior to BTC and ETH?
AI can assist in code development and protocol optimization; quantum technology has two sides: quantum computing threatens existing cryptographic systems, while quantum key distribution is the anti-quantum security solution. Even if AI quickly writes a new blockchain with technical indicators comprehensively superior to BTC and ETH, stronger technology ≠ being able to replace BTC/ETH's market position. Technology is only a necessary condition, not a decisive one.
1. What can AI do?
AI can quickly accomplish:
1. Generate blockchain underlying code, smart contracts, and rapidly iterate consensus mechanisms;
2. Simulate network transactions, optimize fees, improve sharding, and privacy algorithms;
3. Automatically audit vulnerabilities, reduce development costs, and shorten public chain development cycles.
But AI cannot:
- Create global consensus accumulated over more than a decade out of thin air;
- Automatically build a decentralized ecosystem, attract developers, and long-term institutional participation;
- Eliminate trust issues caused by project founding teams and early investors' pre-mining.
AI is just a tool that can accelerate chain creation but cannot directly create "digital gold."
2. Changes brought by quantum technology
1. Quantum computing (threat)
A sufficiently powerful quantum computer can break the elliptic curve signature algorithms currently used by BTC and ETH. At that stage, BTC and ETH account private keys risk being cracked, requiring them to upgrade signature algorithms to quantum-resistant cryptography.
Note: It’s not that the blockchain itself becomes obsolete, but the signature algorithm needs a soft upgrade. The community already has plans for quantum-resistant upgrades.
2. Quantum-resistant cryptography (opportunity)
New projects can embed quantum-resistant signatures from genesis, inherently resisting future quantum computer attacks. This is the technical advantage: new chains are natively quantum-resistant, while BTC and ETH rely on later patch upgrades.
3. Even if AI + quantum technology create a technically superior new public chain, to challenge BTC and ETH, several huge barriers must be overcome
Barrier 1: Decentralized trust barrier (the hardest)
New projects assisted by AI development are still led by people or institutions. The market will ask: Is there pre-mining? Do VCs hold large early positions? Who controls governance rights?
BTC’s huge advantage: no team, no founder, no entity that can be regulated or shut down. Any new public chain with a traceable responsible developer entity naturally has one less layer of trust.
Barrier 2: The test of time through bull and bear markets (Lindy effect)
BTC has survived over 16 years, enduring multiple hacks, crashes, and regulatory crackdowns; ETH has also experienced several major crises.
A new chain, no matter how perfect technically, must at least go through a full bull and bear cycle to prove network stability and governance reliability before consensus slowly accumulates. Consensus cannot be rushed by AI and quantum technology.
Barrier 3: Ecological network effects, especially hard to replace ETH
ETH’s greatest asset is not its code but the massive ecosystem composed of hundreds of thousands of developers, countless contracts, assets, DAOs, and RWA applications.
Developers won’t easily abandon existing tools, assets, and users to migrate to a completely new base layer. New chains can only slowly nibble at niche scenarios and are unlikely to seize the ETH ecosystem overnight.
Barrier 4: Acceptance by institutions and sovereign funds
ETFs, institutional funds, and national reserve proposals currently build compliance frameworks around BTC and ETH. A brand-new coin aiming to enter institutional asset allocation lists requires lengthy compliance validation; technical excellence alone is insufficient for acceptance.
4. Two future scenario simulations
✅ Scenario 1 (high probability): AI + quantum-resistant new projects rise in niche tracks
For example, native quantum-resistant privacy public chains or high-performance RWA dedicated chains. Technical indicators surpass BTC/ETH, attracting specific developers and users, becoming important ecological supplements but not replacing BTC’s value storage or ETH’s general smart contract base layer status. Similar to current MINA, STORJ, and other specialized public chains.
❌ Scenario 2 (extremely low probability): New chain fully replaces BTC and ETH
Requires simultaneously: native quantum resistance, fully decentralized with no central entity, fair issuance with no large pre-mining, years of stable operation, attracting massive developers, and large-scale institutional/sovereign fund allocation. Multiple conditions combined make this extremely difficult.
5. Summary in one sentence
AI can accelerate development, quantum technology brings native quantum-resistant technical advantages; technically, it is entirely possible to create a base layer stronger than BTC and ETH. But consensus, network ecology, and decentralized trust cannot be directly generated by AI and quantum technology. Most likely, new coins will shine in niche tracks but will hardly completely replace BTC and ETH. $ETH found support where it should have appeared — the $2,365–$2,380 range supported the rebound. Now we are testing the broken ascending trendline near $2,460. This is the watershed. $BTC
If we can firmly reclaim it, the next stop is the resistance zone at $2,520–$2,530. If rejected here, a retest of the lower support is expected. $SOL
The reaction on this trendline says it all. Watch how the price behaves here — this is your signal. A clean reclaim = continuation of the trend; rejection = stay patient and wait for the next trade setup.
This is textbook technical structure. Let the charts speak.I'm starting to look bullish on SNDK again.
During the previous drop, I actually didn't rush to buy in myself, for a simple reason: for stocks that have risen too fast, I'd rather miss a segment than buy aggressively during a downtrend.
But now my personal view is beginning to change.
Regarding this adjustment in SNDK, I think it's no longer just about how much it can rise, but whether there is capital continuing to support it below.
From a fundamental perspective, SanDisk's data center business growth is still quite evident, the storage demand driven by AI hasn't disappeared, and the company's latest financial report data is also strong. (Sandisk)
So my current approach is:
Don't chase the highs, wait for a pullback confirmation.
If the current position can hold steady, showing clear signs of stopping the decline and support, I will consider buying in again.
If there is another quick drop afterward but it quickly recovers, I would actually treat that as a good opportunity to buy at a low price.
Of course, the biggest risk for this stock now is obvious — the previous gains were really large, so I won't interpret "bullish" as going all in.
My personal judgment on SNDK now:
Short term — leaning bullish;
Medium term — the logic still holds.
#美联储三年来首次加息25个基点 #sadk#美国加密税收与BTC储备法案获推进 #长端美债5%会成新常态吗？ Many people ask me, when is the bull market actually the most dangerous?
It's not during a crash, but when you're making continuous profits.
Because once your account is rising every day, people tend to go all in, use leverage, chase highs, and feel they can't be wrong. The real major drawdowns often start from this kind of sentiment.
Right now, I’m focusing on three things: whether BTC can hold key levels, whether ETH is continuously increasing volume, and whether the rotation among altcoins has ended. If the major coins show shrinking volume and the hot spots change daily, I will reduce frequent trading to protect profits.
The bull market isn’t about who earns the fastest, but who can keep the money earned until the end.
#BTC #ETH #Altcoins #BullMarket #OKX
@OKX中文 @吴说区块链 @Ai姨 @CryptoKOL @币圈子32 years old, no will left, and then his mother bought a $4 million yacht.
The first reaction of people on-chain seeing this news is probably: ONDO is going to crash.
My first reaction is a bit different. For someone holding ONDO long-term, the biggest fear has never been this kind of gossip, but that no one is managing the company. Now the acting CEO wants a $11 million compensation package, the founder's sister and investors have gone to the Hawaii court to apply for supervision, and both sides are fighting back and forth between Delaware and Hawaii.
It's really lively, but in terms of corporate governance, nothing has been settled.
What I'm watching is not the yacht, but who ultimately signs off on this case. Until then, don't take ONDO's story seriously.
#美国加密税收与BTC储备法案获推进
#CLARITY法案下一步怎么走？ #AI发展焦虑升温，监管讨论升级 $ONDO Why is BTC still suppressed after the Fed's 25bp rate hike?
The rate hike itself was expected; what really troubles BTC is the "dot plot leaning hawkish, higher and longer."
1. Short term: Negative factors realized but not fully cleared
CME had already priced in over 90%, BTC didn’t crash, just hovered between 75,000–77,000. However, the dot plot shows most officials still support more hikes this year, with the median rate moving up, and the market starting to price in October or December. The dollar strengthens, short-term US Treasury yields remain high, increasing the cost of holding zero-coupon assets, making rebounds easily suppressed by macro factors.
2. Transmission chain
Rate hike → Dollar/US Treasury yields rise → Risk asset discount rates increase → US stocks under pressure → BTC risk appetite declines. Meanwhile, ETF funds weaken, with a net outflow of 450 million on 9/15, and CLARITY delays further dampen institutional expectations.
3. Key price levels
75,000: Short-term lifeline, holding this means weak consolidation; if broken, look to 71,000.
71,000: Next support
66,900: Strong demand zone
77,000–78,000: Only a recovery here can break hawkish pressure
80,000–82,000: Previous high resistance zone, hard to break without rate cuts or ETF inflows
4. This time is different
BTC is no longer purely a Fed shadow. ETF, post-halving supply, institutional holdings, and stablecoin on-chain dollarization can hedge some rate hike negatives. More likely, it won’t crash straight down but shift lower in a range, with altcoins suffering more and BTC relatively more resilient.
I’m watching three points:
· Can 75,000 hold?
· Will ETF net outflows narrow?
· Have the dollar and 2Y Treasury yields peaked? Many people reflexively think "longs are giving money to shorts, it's going to drop" when they see a positive funding rate, which is a typical misinterpretation. The direction of the funding rate only indicates the position structure, not the price direction—the real signal is the triangular relationship among funding rate, price, and open interest.
$ADA current price 0.2009, 24h +3.18%, funding rate +0.0100%, a mild positive value, far from a crowded long position. MA5=0.20186 has crossed above MA20=0.199655, RSI=56.9 is in a neutral to slightly strong zone, MACD histogram +0.0001057 maintains bullishness, Bollinger Bands [0.194959, 0.204351] show price running close to the upper band. The amplitude of the last 30 candlesticks is only 6.97%, indicating compressed volatility; in this structure, wicks often occur between the upper and lower bands rather than a one-sided breakout. Fear and Greed Index is 50, market sentiment is neutral, funds show no obvious tilt to either side, but a trading volume of 23.2M USDT combined with a mild positive funding rate indicates longs are the active takers.
Directional judgment: slightly bullish, but only buy on dips within the range, do not chase highs. $APT $APT Suddenly the order book around 0.5822 got lively, while outside the news is very quiet, volume is gradually building up, and buy and sell orders seem to be biting each other. The most challenging are rallies without narrative support: the advantage is fast chip turnover and concentrated short-term sentiment, the downside is if you can't hold on, it’s a counterattack. Try with light positions, plan your stop loss first, don’t get carried away. Are you watching this wave as a turnover or a bull trap?
👇👇👇The crypto market enters a phase of differentiation: BTC as the anchor, ETH rotation, ZEC testing elasticity
This round of market action is no longer about all rising or falling together, but about each playing its role and advancing in layers.
BTC acts as the "ballast stone." After briefly dipping near key support and quickly recovering, it shows there is buying interest at that level. Bulls and bears are digesting within a narrow range, neither letting the market lose order nor removing the buffer for subsequent moves. BTC doesn't need to surge; as long as it holds its level, the market has a floor.
ETH has taken over the rotation baton. After technical repair, it begins to absorb active funds overflowing from BTC, leading among mainstream assets in showing elasticity. This signals that funds are unwilling to exit but are merely rotating internally—ETH strengthening means risk appetite hasn't waned, just shifted outlets.
High-elasticity assets like ZEC moving sharply confirm a further rise in risk appetite. Funds are starting to probe directions with greater volatility and higher odds.
Whether the market can upgrade from oscillation repair to structural breakout depends not on how much BTC rises, but on the strength of capital diffusion. Only if existing funds stop clinging to the top two coins and continuously spread to fundamentally supported strong altcoins will the profit effect truly open up.
BTC holding the bottom, ETH rotating, ZEC probing—this sequence itself is the rhythm. What really matters is whether diffusion can continue, not the rise or fall on any single day. $BTC $ETH If it rises today and falls tomorrow, then reversals occur several times during trading, it's easy for traders to change their views along with the candlesticks. But what truly deserves caution is: have you changed your plans for several years just because of a single day's volatility? Even in bull markets, BTC has experienced significant drawdowns of over 20%. Fidelity Digital Assets cited Glassnode data pointing out that about 20% drawdowns during the 2015–2017 bull market were not uncommon, and the maximum drawdown in the 2023–2025 cycle even reached about 33%. Therefore, a "pullback" alone does not directly prove the end of a bull market. What truly determines account outcomes is often not prediction ability, but discipline. I agree more with a simple rule: only participate in assets you truly understand; don't chase high prices just because others post trades; always keep cash to avoid losing position flexibility; After profits, cash out in batches, not fantasize about selling at the peak. Especially the last point. Many people buy and take in the first stage, but lose because they don't know how to sell in the second stage. When prices rise 30%, they start fantasizing about doubling; when they rise 50%, they hesitate to cash out; after doubling, they feel "it can still rise," wait for the trend to reverse, then tell themselves "wait a little longer." In the end, paper profits reset to zero. So I prefer to divide the bull market into two stages: the first half earns cognitive money, daring to buy and hold; the second half earns disciplined money, daring to sell and accept. BTC determines the big trend, ETH observes capital preferences, and high-beta assets like SOL reflect risk sentiment; but whatever you buy, you have to do it in the endIn September, the Fed raised rates by 25 basis points, raising the interest rate range to 3.75%–4.00%, but what truly surprised the market was not the 25 basis points, but rather the clear policy signal that it was not "stopping there." The latest dot plot shows that most officials expect at least one more rate hike within the year. Immediately after, Goldman Sachs changed its previous view of a "pause after a September hike" and now expects the Fed to raise rates by another 25 basis points in October. CME data shows that the market has already priced in another rate hike in October by more than 50%. This means the market is shifting from "one increase and it's over" to "high interest rates may last longer." For BTC, the real pressure is not the 25 basis point hike itself, but the expectation that future funding costs will continue to rise. If another rate hike in October becomes the main theme, US Treasury yields and the dollar may continue to be supported, and the valuation space of high-valuation tech stocks and risk assets like BTC will be affected. But this cannot be simply interpreted as "consecutive rate hikes = BTC will definitely fall." The market has already undergone a round of policy expectation repricing. What BTC really needs to watch is: as interest rates continue to rise, spot funds are still willing to take on the market. If BTC remains unmoved even in a higher interest rate environment, it indicates the market is forming a new supply-demand balance; Conversely, if ETF funds continue to flow out and yields keep rising, pressure may be further released. So the most important thing to watch next is not Goldman Sachs' single statement, but three things: how the probability of a rate hike in October will change;
Can the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield continue to be pressured?Institutions Don't Buy In, Inflation Is Endless: Has CORE's BTCFi Dream Shattered?
⚠️ This article only reviews the fundamentals of the sector and does not constitute any investment advice.
The BTCFi mainline market is booming, with STX, MERL, and Babylon successively receiving funding support, but CORE in the same sector has shown a completely disconnected market performance.
Many ask: CORE's BTC native yield concept is so grand, why do institutions only research it but not enter with heavy positions? With persistent inflation and ghost tokens looming overhead, has its BTCFi dream truly shattered?
In short: The sector dream of BTC native staking has not shattered, but the value narrative of the CORE token faces very difficult structural obstacles. The sector opportunity is real, but it may not be realized through CORE token profits.
1. The core reason institutions research but remain unwilling to allocate
Institutional researchers continuously follow CORE, essentially studying the BTC non-custodial native staking infrastructure, not bullish on the CORE token.
1. The product concept indeed hits a pain point: a large amount of institutional cold wallet BTC is idle long-term; centralized custody and WBTC wrapped tokens carry credit risk. CORE’s staking solution that does not require BTC transfer or asset wrapping is technically differentiated.
2. Custody channels have been connected, interfacing with leading custodians like BitGo and Copper, providing basic conditions to serve institutional clients.
But institutional risk control hits two hard barriers:
① The protocol-level over-minting bug on 8.31, fixed only by a hard fork. Code bugs can be fixed, but this remains a permanent stain in institutional risk files, greatly raising entry barriers;
② The ghost token legacy issue has no on-chain disposal solution, this uncertain existing token supply is a latent selling pressure that could crash the market anytime.
So the current situation is: institutions are willing to discuss infrastructure cooperation and conduct sector benchmarking research, but have very low willingness to allocate CORE tokens in the secondary market, which explains the observed research without buying.
2. Endless inflation: the native shackle of token economics
The hard fork only patched the over-minting bug; the base network incentive inflation mechanism remains fully intact.
Validator nodes and ecosystem incentives continuously release CORE tokens. The more active the ecosystem, the more CORE rewards are issued through staking mining, with new supply continuously flowing into the market.
A logic mismatch often overlooked by retail investors:
- Users stake BTC and receive BTC yield;
- Staking CORE only serves as an additional condition to increase BTC staking APY;
- BTC staking TVL rising does not automatically generate long-term buy demand for CORE.
Currently, ecosystem fee volume is very small, and protocol buybacks are far from offsetting inflation dilution. The more prosperous the ecosystem, the more token supply is released, a typical growth-as-selling-pressure scenario.
Even if lstBTC liquid staking is launched, lstBTC captures BTC asset yield, not CORE’s value.
3. The dream is not completely shattered, but two concepts must be distinguished
✅ The sector dream remains: unlocking BTC dormant assets and native BTC yield is a long-term real demand for BTCFi. This big direction is not disproven, and CORE has indeed built a runnable infrastructure; the ecosystem is still operating.
❌ The token narrative faces huge challenges:
Token economics’ inherent flaws, historical security bugs, and ghost tokens combined cause institutional funds to continuously avoid it.
Even if lstBTC launches, the real scale of institutional BTC custody staking matters, not just community hype data. If lstBTC falls short of expectations, the core logic supporting CORE’s narrative will be disproven.
4. Zhang Sufen’s contrarian investment perspective
Zhang Sufen’s core stock selection criteria: prioritize clean fundamentals, no major historical risks, and wait for valuation repair.
CORE is in the BTCFi mainline sector, with a deeply fallen price and narrative elasticity;
but protocol bug history, ghost tokens, and persistent inflation are three hard wounds making fundamentals unclean.
Positioning: a narrative option, a very small position speculative target, absolutely not to be held as a core long-term position.
Only speculate on pulse rallies brought by lstBTC launch and institutional custody fund inflows. If the three hard evidences fall short, exit decisively; refuse to hold on hoping for a recovery.
5. Three critical indicators to watch that determine if CORE can break through
1. Ghost token disposal: whether an on-chain verifiable lock/destroy solution appears, and whether large wallets continue transferring to exchanges;
2. lstBTC large-scale launch: real institutional custody BTC staking scale, not retail-driven TVL;
3. Ecosystem self-sustainability: whether fee income plus buybacks can gradually hedge token inflation selling pressure.
Summary
The BTCFi wave is truly arriving, but sector dividends do not equal token dividends.
CORE has built an imaginative BTC native staking infrastructure; the sector dream is intact, but the token dream still needs the above three hard evidences to prove it.
The essence of institutions not entering is not a denial of BTC native yield, but unwillingness to bear the inflation, token supply, and security risks corresponding to the CORE token. When the tide recedes, only fundamentals landing can support a long-term market; pure narrative cannot withstand continuous inflation erosion.
💬 Interactive question: If lstBTC successfully launches at scale, do you think it can offset the negative impact of CORE inflation and ghost tokens? Feel free to leave comments for discussion.Will the crypto world produce a new coin in the future that challenges and replaces Bitcoin?
It is very difficult for a new coin to fully challenge and replace BTC as the digital gold and the foundational value anchor of the crypto market in the future.
However, many high-quality new coins will continue to emerge, dividing niche sectors and surpassing BTC in specific scenarios (smart contracts, privacy payments, RWA, on-chain transactions, etc.), forming a "division of labor" rather than a replacement.
1. Three major moats that make BTC hard to replace (not code, but consensus and network effects)
1. The Lindy effect of monetary consensus, impossible to replicate
BTC was born earliest, surviving multiple bull and bear markets, hacker attacks, and regulatory crackdowns. Satoshi Nakamoto disappeared, no project team, no company control—this genesis narrative is unique.
Global institutions, ETFs, and sovereign reserve proposals are all based on BTC's "digital gold" consensus. Consensus is accumulated over time, not written by better code. Historically, countless "Bitcoin killers" with faster technology and lower fees have failed to replicate the global monetary consensus accumulated over more than a decade.
2. Computing power security barrier
Bitcoin's total network hash rate is many times that of all PoW coins combined, making network attacks astronomically costly.
Even if new public chains have more advanced code, their starting hash rate is extremely low, and network security is weak. Security is the core indicator of a value reserve asset; institutions storing huge assets prioritize networks with the highest attack costs.
3. Rigid monetary policy: 21 million total supply cap, stable and unchanging rules
BTC's monetary rules have remained basically unchanged for decades. Many new projects have teams or governance committees that can adjust total supply and inflation rules at any time.
As a value storage asset, the market trusts "rules cannot be arbitrarily changed," which most new coins inherently cannot guarantee.
2. What new coins can do: challenge BTC in niche sectors but not fully replace it
1. BTC's shortcomings: slow transactions, high fees, fully public ledger, no smart contracts.
Therefore:
- ETH: smart contract sector, building on-chain applications and RWA, long-term second in market cap; it does not compete with BTC for "digital gold" but acts as the world's computer;
- Privacy coins: address BTC's public transaction shortcomings;
- Various DeFi and launchpad tokens (UNI, PONS, etc.): provide liquidity and token issuance, belonging to the application layer.
These coins can perform stronger in their own sectors and earn higher gains but will not replace BTC's value reserve position.
Analogy: gold will not be replaced by credit cards or payment systems; no matter how good payment tools are, gold remains a safe-haven reserve asset.
3. Under what extreme conditions could a coin replace BTC? (very low probability)
All conditions must be met simultaneously:
1. Brand new underlying cryptography (e.g., mature quantum-resistant cryptography) to solve BTC's future quantum computing risks;
2. Completely decentralized, no founding team, no large VC pre-mines, no centralized entity subject to regulatory accountability;
3. Long-term survival, enduring multiple bear markets, accumulating broad global consensus;
4. Extremely stable monetary policy, permanently locked total supply rules;
5. Large-scale acceptance by institutions and sovereign funds, included in reserve allocations.
Meeting this entire set of conditions requires a long time, not just a few years.
4. Two concepts the market often confuses
✅ Sector surpassing: a new coin outperforms BTC in transaction speed, smart contracts, privacy features (very common)
❌ Full replacement: replacing BTC as the crypto world's primary value anchor and digital gold (extremely difficult; all historical "BTC killers" have failed)
5. Summary in one sentence
Technically, better code than BTC can be written at any time; consensus, computing power security, and decades of accumulated monetary network effects cannot be simply replicated. Excellent new coins will continue to emerge, challenging BTC in niche fields, but the probability of fully replacing BTC's foundational value anchor status is extremely low.$ZEC Keep a close eye on this giant whale! The real short signal for ZEC hasn't arrived yet 🔥
Many people are itching to short directly now, but remember one core logic:
This is not the best shorting window yet!
The biggest short whale in the market, Garrett Jin, just added 5,000 more short positions at 1252.5. Currently, the total short position is 37,760 coins, with an average opening price of only 665.8, already floating a loss of 21.6 million USD.
The current market is a typical short squeeze drama! As long as this whale is still holding the floating loss, without large-scale stop-loss closing, and hasn't been liquidated, the bullish momentum is hard to stop.
✅ The real opportunity:
Wait until this big short can't hold anymore, showing large stop-loss or direct liquidation signals on-chain. Once his huge short positions are swept, the last short power in the short term is exhausted, the bullish relay funds break, and the price can easily start a spiral decline. This is the shorting point with a higher safety margin.
Key levels on the chart
Short-term previous high above at 1518.23; if volume breaks through, the short squeeze will continue to amplify;
First support at 1427; strong support near 1200 below.
⚠️ Reminder: Shorting against the trend prematurely now is like stubbornly resisting the trend and can easily get liquidated further. What price do you think this whale will fail to hold and stop loss? Let's discuss in the comments! #ZEC刷新历史新高，NU7升级预期受关注 The 32-year-old founder suddenly passed away without leaving a will, and Ondo's controlling shares and tokens ended up in the hands of his parents—this in itself is a hidden mine.
Previously, Nathan managed the company; now, mother Kathleen sues the acting CEO demanding an $11 million compensation package, while her daughter and investors apply for regulatory custody.
The account in the documents was straightforward: a $4 million yacht, six-figure charter flights, and a $4,000 hotel per night. The lawyer denied it, saying it was a counterattack after the failed seizure.
The company's refusal to comment indicates that no one inside can make a final decision. This uncertain status of equity and token ownership is harder to price than any previous unlock.
I tend to believe that until regulatory applications are finalized, the governance level of $ONDO is just a shell. Founders leaving no will is like throwing the company into court.
#CLARITY法案下一步怎么走? $ONDO 44 votes blocked the Clarity bill, $ONDO responded with a 9% increase on double volume
A little over an hour ago, Senator Durbin called crypto a "bubble about to burst," and 44 Democrats voted against the Clarity bill. $ONDO's market responded: up 9% in 24 hours, volume ratio 2.0. I'm bullish, buying the dip on pullbacks.
Clarity is blocked, regulatory clarity is delayed, RWA should take a hit, and $ONDO is exactly in that space; but the market is trading another narrative — rumors from over ten hours ago that the SEC is opening an exemption channel for tokenized stocks (unconfirmed); the environment is supportive too, with 70 coins, 65 up and 5 down.
Daily RSI is neutral at 47.5, MA7 still below MA30, MACD dead cross below zero line for the 6th day; but 1h ADX is 55.1, short-term trend is in the bulls' hands. After the event, price moved from 0.3748 to 0.371 (-1.01%), the criticism didn't shake the market. $BTC at 76568, the overall market is stable.
Resistance above: 0.3723 → 0.379 (24h high, breakout confirms)
Support below: 0.3693 (15m support) → 0.3662 (breach wipes event premium)
Watershed level: 0.379.
The strategy is simple — buy the dip between 0.369 and 0.371, stop loss if it breaks 0.3662, target first 0.379. Following this saves time.
$ONDO $BTC$BTC and $ETH are facing a real flow test.
Spot ETFs saw another ~$520M combined outflow on Sept. 16, taking two-day withdrawals above $1B.
BTC ETFs lost ~$296M while ETH ETFs saw ~$224M leave.
Price is holding for now, but the key question is whether buyers can absorb this selling.
If ETF outflows continue, I’d expect volatility to stay elevated. No need to chase either side here. According to Arkham data, in the past 20 days, BlackRock's ETHA and ETHB holdings totaled about $1.57 billion in ETH, with ETHA about $1.27 billion and ETHB about $297 million. It's important to note that this mainly refers to ETF inflows, not BlackRock's all-in ETH use of its own funds, but it does reflect that institutional investors still have demand for Ethereum allocation. Meanwhile, the macro environment is not easy. On September 16, the Federal Reserve raised the federal funds rate by 25 basis points to 3.75%–4%, clearly stating that inflation remains high and future policies will depend on data. This creates an interesting market divergence: macro funding costs are rising, but some institutions continue to increase their ETH exposure. I prefer to understand it as two logics coexisting: in the short term, interest rates and Treasury yields determine risk asset valuations; In the medium to long term, institutions are trading ETH staking yields, on-chain finance, and future asset on-chain demand. So BTC, ETH, gold, and crude oil are not simply rising and falling together. Rising interest rates usually suppress non-interest-bearing assets, but if the market starts trading for improved future liquidity, funds will start positioning themselves in highly elastic assets in advance. Recently, BTC has been fluctuating around $76,000, essentially still a tug-of-war between macro and institutional demand. What really matters to watch is not "how much BlackRock has bought," but whether ETF funds can sustain and whether ETH can continue to attract incremental funds in a high interest rate environment. Macro factors are responsible for creating volatility, institutional funds are steadyPosition size is part of the strategy.
$BTC can handle a bigger core position. $ETH can have a smaller one, but I still want to see the flows before adding.
$DOGE and $ZEC are more like satellite plays. Once those smaller positions start taking up most of the portfolio, one bad session can wipe out a week of gains.
Volatility doesn’t mean conviction.
Keep the size under control.
NFA. DYOR.$THETA is slightly bullish in the short term, but this is a "left-side test buy before the moving averages golden cross," not a trend-confirmed breakout.
First, the method: to judge whether the trend is healthy, only two factors are considered — the price and moving average arrangement, and whether momentum is synchronized. A healthy uptrend should have MA5 > MA20 and MACD bars positive; if the price rises but the moving averages are still in a bearish arrangement and MACD bars are negative, it indicates a rebound rather than a reversal, so only light positions, short trades, and strict stop losses are advised.
Back to $THETA: current price is 0.0684, 24h +4.91%, trading volume 76.4M USDT, volume is the strongest among the three candidates. But MA5=0.06868 is still below MA20=0.068895, MACD bar -0.0001666 is bearish, indicating the mid-term moving averages have not yet recovered, which is a typical "rebound without reversal" pattern. RSI=51.7 is in the neutral zone, neither overbought nor oversold, with room to rise; Bollinger Bands [0.0675, 0.0703] are narrowing, price is close to the middle band, indicating accumulation before a breakout. Funding rate +0.0050% is positive but very low, bulls are not overheated, the fear and greed index at 50 is neutral, not causing reverse pressure.BTC completely parted ways with the US stock market last night. The Nasdaq rose +1.69%, chip stocks collectively surged, AMD up 6%, Intel nearly 8%, risk appetite clearly visible; but the crypto market just had a relief bounce and then softened again. Don't rush in to catch the bottom of crypto just because US stocks turned positive — the correlation between the two markets has been fluctuating these days, mistaking the strength of stocks for the bottom of crypto is a classic mix-up. $ZEC is approaching a level I’m watching very closely. 👀
the $1,750–$1,760 area lines up with the 1.618 log Fib extension, a major macro level on the chart.
What matters next isn’t just touching it. It’s the reaction.
✅ Break + hold above → strength remains
⚠️ Spike above + rejection → possible exhaustion
with ZEC already moving hard, a rising-wedge breakout can sometimes turn into a move back inside the structure.
for me, the reaction around $1,750+ could tell us a lot. 👀 $BTC / $ETH | LIQUIDITY IS STILL IN PLAY
$BTC has swept the higher-TF lows but left equal lows on the lower timeframes.
If $ETH takes its triple lows, $BTC could also revisit those LTF equal lows.
But the bigger draw remains liquidity above $BTC. 🔥
$ETH may prefer to clear the lows first rather than push for the highs and leave that liquidity behind for later.
Liquidity first. Direction second.
#LongYields5%NewNormal
#FedFirst25BpsHikeSince23 Interest rate hike implemented, BTC and ETH instead strengthen, the market may be repricing
This round of adjustment actually had early signs. Before the interest rate decision, BTC and ETH had already completed a round of pullback in advance, the market had fully priced in the rate hike expectation, so when the actual news landed, the anticipated secondary sell-off did not occur.
This is a typical "buy the rumor, sell the fact."
What is more noteworthy is that mainstream coins began to collectively recover today, indicating that capital sentiment is shifting from defense back to offense. If subsequent trading volume expands simultaneously, there is further room to recover the previous decline.
ETH is currently one of the most worth watching assets. Around $2500 has become a key short-term level again; once volume increases and it holds steady, the market may continue to push toward higher resistance zones.
BTC is even more important; the previous high remains the true dividing line between bulls and bears. Whether it can retest the previous high is more important than a few points gained in a single day.
So the current market is sending a signal:
The macro bearish factors have landed, and capital is beginning to seek resilience again.
If BTC retests the previous high and ETH holds above 2500, with altcoin capital further spreading, then the crypto market, which has been quiet for a while, may be re-entering an active phase.
The rate hike is just a milestone; what truly determines the height of the market is how far capital is willing to go next. $ETH $BTC #美联储三年来首次加息25个基点 $TRUMP's leverage bubble continues to deflate. The total liquidation amount in the past 24 hours is about $480,000, with $420,000 long positions and $63,000 short positions; the largest liquidation was only $24,000, and 283 accounts were liquidated, yet the system still marks it as "normal." This indicates that crowded trades have been dismantled—not a chain of forced liquidations, but a silent withdrawal of funds. The price has dropped from $3.68 to $1.97, with the early 7000% gain shrinking to 2000%, a 24-hour volatility of 5.66%, and trading volume under $100 million. The topic remains hot, but new buying is absent; the market is shifting from emotional pulses to stock competition. The CLARITY Act is the only potential catalyst: if passed, it could reignite expectations; if blocked, there will be no pricing anchor. After liquidity thins, large orders have amplified impact, and small amounts of capital can cause sharp moves; even without news, sudden drops are possible. The risk is that the outcome of the bill is unpredictable, low-volume rebounds have low credibility, and recent cost zones may not be reliable. Only if trading volume returns above $100 million and long-short liquidations tend to balance can it be considered a signal of capital inflow. Please judge for yourself and strictly control your positions. 1. Will BTC definitely surge if both houses of Congress pass the Bitcoin Strategic Reserve Act?
Answer: There is a high probability of a short-term emotional spike, but it does not guarantee a sustained rally and may even see a pullback after the positive news is priced in.
1. Expectations are priced in advance by the market
From proposal, debate to voting, the market continuously trades on this expectation throughout the lengthy process. Many funds buy in early to speculate on the positive outcome. When the bill is finally passed by both houses, it typically marks the "good news fully priced in" moment, triggering a buy-the-rumor, sell-the-fact scenario.
2. The details of the bill matter; a nice name alone doesn’t guarantee a positive impact
- Version A: The bill only allows the government to use BTC already confiscated through judicial means as reserves, prohibiting the Treasury from using new funds to buy BTC on the secondary market. This version brings no new buying demand, merely confirms existing assets, so the positive impact is limited.
- Version B: Authorizes the Treasury to use public funds to continuously purchase BTC on the secondary market to build reserves. This version creates long-term new buying demand and has a stronger positive effect.
The market cares most about whether new funds will be used to buy coins, not just reclassifying confiscated BTC as national reserves.
3. The macro environment is the underlying market driver
BTC is a risk asset. Even if the bill passes, if the Federal Reserve maintains high interest rates, inflation rebounds, and U.S. stocks plunge, no policy benefit alone can sustain a bull market. Macro liquidity takes precedence over any single crypto bill.
4. Political uncertainties remain
Passing the bill is just legislation completion. Execution details by the Treasury, budgeting, audits, and whether the next administration overturns the bill all carry uncertainties. The market won’t fully price in decades of expectations at once.
2. How does Trump’s term affect Bitcoin?
1. The term is a policy-friendly window but with a time limit
During Trump’s term, the crypto industry generally sees favorable policies, including pushing crypto legislation, establishing strategic reserves, and reducing SEC enforcement pressure—a positive window. But the presidential term is fixed; after four years, the next president can modify, shelve, or repeal these policies.
The market applies a "term discount" to this friendly policy: funds won’t price in permanent benefits indefinitely, only what can be realized during the current term.
2. Policy risks of wavering
Trump initially criticized Bitcoin, and his stance shifted with elections, industry donations, and public opinion. Campaign promises may be positive, but late-term fiscal and congressional pressures could alter plans. It’s not guaranteed that policies will be greenlit throughout the full four years.
3. Election expectations will disturb the market in advance
As the term nears its end, the market begins to anticipate the next election outcome. If the Democratic candidate’s chances rise, crypto-friendly expectations will be downgraded early, suppressing BTC valuation.
3. Does BTC’s current high price limit further gains?
High prices bring profit-taking and trapped holders’ selling pressure, increasing resistance but not completely blocking upside.
1. Sources of resistance
- Many early holders, ETF institutions, and leveraged funds are in profit. When positive news spikes prices, they sell in batches to take profits, creating selling pressure.
- Near historical highs, many trapped coins accumulate. Each approach to previous highs triggers large-scale selling to break even, increasing the capital needed to push prices higher.
- High leverage at elevated prices means even small pullbacks can trigger cascading liquidations, amplifying volatility. Major players hesitate to forcefully push prices up.
2. But high prices don’t mean no further gains
The core of the rally depends on whether incremental funds keep entering:
If the Strategic Reserve Act allows the government to keep buying, combined with continuous allocations from global sovereign and large pension funds, the new capital volume can absorb selling pressure at highs and push prices higher.
Conversely, if it’s only speculative hype without sustained new capital, the high price zone becomes a strong resistance area, and prices tend to fall back after the initial positive spike.
4. Summary in one sentence
If the bill passes both houses, a short-term spike is highly likely but not guaranteed to sustain a rally. The key is whether the bill authorizes new funds to buy BTC; Trump’s term offers a 4-year policy-friendly window but carries risks of policy expiration with administration changes. BTC’s current high price brings significant profit-taking and trapped-holder selling pressure, raising resistance. Whether it breaks through depends on sustained new capital inflows, not just a single policy story.On September 16, the Fed did raise rates by 25 basis points to 3.75%–4.00%. But the latest SEP shows the median federal funds rate at the end of 2026 is 4.1%, and also 4.1% in 2027. This means the market really needs to focus on whether there will be further hikes in the future, and whether the number of hikes will change from more to fewer. This is why simply applying the 2022 bear market logic to the "rate hikes in effect" is not necessarily reasonable. In September 2023, the Fed also signaled that "inflation remains high and tightening will continue if necessary." The September meeting paused rate hikes, but the SEP set the median rate at 5.6% at the end of 2023, implying another 25bp hike within the year; However, the November and December meetings did not raise rates further. So what the market really trades is "how expectations will change next time." Today there are two more rate hikes expected; if data improves tomorrow, it becomes one; Later, it may not happen again, and the market may even start discussing when to cut rates again. Note that prices often don't have to wait until a real rate cut happens before prices start rising. As long as funds confirm: "The future won't be as tight as we fear now." Risk premiums may fall earlier, and BTC and ETH may be priced in earlier. Similarly, even if high interest rates remain in 2027, it does not necessarily mean asset prices will be in a bear market. The latest SEPs themselves are examples: the Fed forecasts median GDP growth of 2.4%, unemployment rate of 4.1%, and median policy rate of 4.1% in 2027. High interest rates andBitcoin is still setting the tone for the overall crypto market. When $BTC starts moving, the rest of the market usually reacts. But I’m not looking at Bitcoin alone. $ETH is one of the assets I watch to see whether that momentum is actually spreading beyond BTC or staying concentrated in Bitcoin. Momentum Alignment Matters There are two situations I’m paying attention to: $BTC leads + $ETH catches up → Broader momentum When ETH starts following Bitcoin with decent strength and volume, it suggesThe Federal Reserve's first rate move in three years landed as a liquidity signal, not a growth verdict. A 25 basis point hike pushed the policy band to 3.75%-4%, and a majority of officials still see one more increase before year-end. Chair Walsh framed the problem bluntly: the issue is not expansion, it is prices that remain too high. For crypto, that reframes the entire debate from "when does the bull return" to "who can hold inventory through a tighter funding regime." $BTC spent the decisio$HEI is slightly bullish in the short term but represents a weak rebound structure, so heavy positions chasing highs are not advisable.
Technical breakdown: Current price is 0.13, down 12.98% in 24h, but MA5=0.12838 still stands above MA20=0.127805, with moving averages showing a weak bullish alignment, indicating the mid-term structure is not yet deteriorated and the current movement looks more like a recovery after a sharp drop. RSI=52.6 is in the neutral zone, neither overbought nor oversold, with room to rise. MACD histogram = -0.0001231 is bearish but with a very small absolute value, close to the zero line, and may turn positive at any time, which is a key signal for short-term strengthening. Bollinger Bands [0.122877, 0.132733], current price is near the upper part of the middle band, with the lower band at 0.1229 serving as strong recent support. Funding rate is -0.0082%, shorts pay fees, indicating crowded shorts and potential short squeeze rebound momentum; Fear and Greed Index at 50 is neutral, showing no extreme sentiment.
Trading strategy: Enter long on pullback in the 0.1265-0.1285 range, which overlaps with MA5 and Bollinger middle band support; take profit 1 at 0.1327 (Bollinger upper band resistance), take profit 2 at 0.1380 (extension of previous high); stop loss at 0.1225, exit if price breaks below the Bollinger lower band.
Also monitor concurrently: $XLM, $NEAR, among which $NEAR RSI has reached 70.5 indicating strength, while $XLM shows relatively mild movement. Oil prices suddenly plunged, why did BTC breathe a sigh of relief?
The crude oil market has just seen a clear reversal. Market news indicates that Saudi Aramco is bypassing damaged pipelines for repairs, expecting to restore about 2 to 2.5 million barrels per day within a few days, with full repair possibly taking about 6 weeks. The U.S. Energy Secretary also stated that this supply disruption is temporary.
After the news broke, Brent crude briefly dropped more than 3%, closing at $105.83; WTI fell about 3.2%, closing at $102.43. The "supply disruption premium" caused by the supply interruption began to retreat.
This is actually a short-term buffer for BTC: falling oil prices imply that inflation expectations may ease, reducing the marginal pressure for the Federal Reserve to continue tightening, and U.S. Treasury yields also have a chance to catch a breather.
But do not interpret the "oil price decline" here as a trend reversal. The pipeline is only gradually recovering, the risk in the Strait of Hormuz remains, and oil prices may still fluctuate again in the future.
So the more accurate current understanding is:
Oil price decline = temporary relief of inflation pressure; BTC pressure eased = short-term repair window.
This is neither a bottom-fishing signal nor an indication that oil prices have peaked.
What really needs to be watched next is whether the supply repair can be fulfilled and whether oil prices can continue to fall.
What the macro market fears most is never bad news, but the repeated occurrence of bad news. $BTC #沙特管道修复预期压低油价 After CLARITY was blocked, US crypto legislation took a different path
On September 16, two crypto legislative tracks advanced simultaneously in the US House of Representatives: The House Ways and Means Committee passed the Digital Asset Tax Transparency Act by 38 to 5, covering tax rules on digital asset transactions, mining, staking, and broker reporting. The Financial Services Committee advanced the American Reserve Modernization Act by 28 to 21, proposing to enshrine a federal strategic Bitcoin reserve into law, set a minimum holding period of 20 years for reserve BTC, and explore budget-neutral ways to increase holdings.
But note: Both bills are currently only progressing at the committee level, not yet law, and do not mean the government will immediately buy BTC. Further procedures in the House and Senate are still required.
Therefore, what the market should truly focus on is whether US crypto policy is shifting from "comprehensive regulation" to "separate advancement of tax and reserve policies."
CLARITY is temporarily blocked, but legislation has not stopped. $BTC $ETH #美国加密税收与BTC储备法案获推进 The smoother the BTC rebound, the more cautious you should be about the illusion of "only rising, no falling."
Up to now in this rebound, what really deserves caution is not the price increase, but the market sentiment becoming optimistic again. A short-term rebound does not equal a trend reversal. Before the key resistance is effectively broken, I still tend to see it as a corrective move within a weak structure.
Currently, BTC's key observation zone is 77800–78500. If the upper side continues to be pressured, further pullbacks need to be guarded against; if it cannot hold above the key resistance, the area around 73500 remains worth watching.
The same applies to ETH. The 2480–2520 range is an important short-term battleground. If it fails to break through for a long time, the area around 2350 may still become the next line of defense.
Previous short positions near 2600, 2565, and 2535 have already partially reduced positions; the remaining positions continue to be monitored. For this round in the 2480–2520 zone, more attention is paid to whether the price will weaken again.
The biggest fear in trading is not making one wrong call, but starting to believe you can't be wrong after several consecutive profits.
You can participate in the rebound, but don't mistake the rebound for a trend. The real direction ultimately depends on confirmation from resistance levels and price. $BTC $ETH #美联储三年来首次加息25个基点