Orbit Post Sitemap
Crash Analysis
$MMT crashed today, down 15.19% in 24 hours, with a volatility amplitude reaching 15.78 percentage points, directly slamming the market.
Current price is $0.130100, with a trading volume of $974,653, volume at least doubled compared to the same period, indicating significant capital involvement.
The 24-hour high was $0.154100, the low was $0.129900, creating a 15.8-point range for trading operations.
Belonging to another sector, this round of crash is not an isolated coin event; at least 3 coins in the same track moved synchronously, showing clear sector linkage effects.
First layer: selling pressure—profit-taking concentrated on cashing out; second layer: smart money reduced positions by at least 22 percentage points in advance; third layer: retail panic causing a cascade of selling.
Observation point: check if large funds are absorbing during the decline; if trading volume shrinks to less than 30% of today's volume, then it’s a real drop, not a shakeout.
My view: do not chase the abnormal movement, wait for absorption to finish and observe the structure; if the structure breaks, don’t stubbornly hold on.
Public market data, not investment advice, judge for yourself.
This is all I see in the market; the rest is for you to realize yourself. BTC has fallen below 75K, hitting a low of 75K, with the lowest at 74,910, a new low for September. Don't just blame FOMC; this is a triple kill: policy vacuum + rate hike expectations + CLARITY failure.
24h losers list: XRP -10%, ETH -8.3%, SOL -5%, BTC -5.3%. Altcoins are even worse, with the previously biggest gainers now dropping the hardest.
115,000 people liquidated, longs bore most of it. Before the bill failed, many bottom-fished betting on "approval benefits," but the good news turned bad, and leveraged longs got wiped out.
Interestingly, ETFs weren't heavily dumped; institutions didn't panic along with retail this time. Selling pressure mainly came from derivatives and altcoins, while spot remained stable.
Now 75K is the psychological floor; if it breaks, the next floor is 70K. Are you bottom-fishing or waiting for the FOMC decision?
#CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议
#本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ The Clarity Act is a U.S. law specifically designed to regulate cryptocurrencies. It clearly defines the jurisdiction of the SEC and CFTC, how digital assets are classified, issued, traded, and sets rules for intermediaries and disclosure obligations.
In this vote, it was mentioned that "holders of cryptocurrencies need to sell their shares or transfer management rights" to ensure that high-ranking public officials (president, vice president, members of Congress, and their spouses) avoid conflicts of interest and maintain regulatory neutrality. This is not targeted at general crypto company managers or all holders. However, the Democratic Party believes the clause still has loopholes (existing income sources, insufficient coverage of children, enforcement mechanisms, etc.) and demands stricter measures, ultimately voting entirely against it.
The market had already anticipated that this bill might not pass, so the decline was not entirely unexpected, but it still triggered high-leverage liquidations, intensifying the downward pressure.
$BTC $ETH ⚠️ Stop calling UNI dead money! The underlying logic has quietly undergone a huge change.
Many still treat UNI as an outdated coin, but simply looking at whether it rises in the short term is meaningless; the real turning point is that the underlying value logic is being reconstructed.
In the past, even if the Uniswap protocol earned a lot in fees, UNI holders could hardly directly share the profits, causing a break in the value capture link.
But now, protocol fees have started to flow back into the token system, a buyback mechanism has been implemented, and UNI has finally closed the loop on earnings.
This actually sends an important signal to the entire DeFi sector.
Once funds flow back into the on-chain market, I will prioritize targets with real business cash flow rather than coins that rely solely on short-term narrative hype to rise.
A simple summary of three different logical main lines:
✅ ETH: The foundational settlement and liquidity cornerstone of public chains
✅ UNI: The representative target of cash flow in the DeFi sector
✅ $ZEC: The most resilient variety in this round of privacy narratives
The directions of these three sectors are completely different, but the underlying stock selection logic is the same:
Don’t just focus on who rises the most crazily in the short term; the key is to see who long-term capital is willing to price.
So when the market still labels UNI as “dead money,” I actually feel the opportunity is brewing.
Often when the market collectively ignores or dislikes something, it’s easier to find opportunities from expectation gaps. In the past 24 hours, the crypto market quickly shifted from previous rebounds to safe-haven mode. The failure to advance the CLARITY Act, US Treasury yields surpassing 5%, and weakening ETF funds combined triple pressures, causing BTC to fall to around $76,000, while ETH, SOL, and high-Beta altcoins further extended their losses. Meanwhile, over $600 million was liquidated within 24 hours, about 83% of which came from long positions. Currently, the market's core has shifted from "seeking upside opportunities" to "reducing risk and waiting for FOMC repricing." 📉 Market: Comprehensive pullback, high-beta assets see even greater declines As of 09:24 HKT: BTC $75,851, -2.74% ETH $2,402.16, -4.55% SOL $97.15, -5.21% Total crypto market cap about $2.599 trillion, 24h -5.50%, clearly weaker than BTC; BTC's market share has actually risen to 58.53%. Mainstream coins have almost all fallen. BNB fell only 0.95%, making it the most resilient among the declines; XRP fell 9.36%, XLM fell 8.73%, ADA dropped 6.48%, LINK fell 5.97%. This indicates that BTC is not weakening alone, but rather funds are prioritizing the withdrawal of more volatile altcoin assets, with market risk appetite clearly declining. Total market trading volume rose to about $104.9 billion, 24H +15.31%. The decline and amplified trading volume indicate that this correction is not simpleThe big coin also failed to hold. In the previous hour, it could still be said that it was repairing within a small range, but after closing this candle, both BTC and ETH broke through the upper and lower boundaries of that range, yet closed below it.
From 09:00 to 10:00 on September 16, OKX spot BTC closed at 75500.1 USDT, ETH at 2390.78, with hourly declines around 0.35%. The numbers are close, but ETH closed weaker: only 0.15 USDT above the lowest price of this hour.
This time it did not continue the quietness of the previous hour. BTC trading volume increased by about 44%, ETH by about 74%. I consider this "increased trading but suppressed close" more significant than a simple small bearish candle. However, increased volume only indicates more activity; it does not tell us who is selling, so there is no need to fabricate stories about institutions dumping.
Also, do not directly escalate the hourly chart changes to a full four-hour breakdown. Both coins are still within the four-hour range from 04:00 to 08:00 recently closed; first, clarify which level is weakening.
Data as of 10:05 Beijing time: BTC has returned to the old range of 08:00–09:00, ETH is still below that range. There is a rebound, but the two coins are not recovering synchronously; only if ETH can also close back above later will there be reason to reassess this drop.
The 10:00–11:00 hourly and 08:00–12:00 four-hour candles have not closed yet.
For informational purposes only, not investment advice. $20 million seed round, Coinbase Ventures is on the list again.
My first reaction wasn’t envy, but a bit annoyed.
Fin.com is working on the "last mile" of stablecoin conversion to local bank accounts. Sounds like a real necessity, but count how many in the past two years have raised round after round doing payment channels, deposits and withdrawals, or white-label services, and how many have actually lowered retail fees?
Money is flowing into infrastructure, but the valuation is undisclosed.
Undisclosed valuations usually mean one of two things: either it’s too high and they’re afraid to scare off the next round, or it’s too low and they’re embarrassed to say. I lean toward the former, after all, even Uber’s co-founder is leading the investment.
But as an old investor, to be honest—this money most likely won’t turn into the few bucks in fees you and I save; it will just become another layer of middlemen.
The last mile of stablecoins has been under construction for three years, and I’m still taking the most expensive route.
#标普领投Kaiko，布局链上数据标准 $ZEC Reviewing the recent market, my biggest lesson: bottom-fishing against the trend is deadly.
BTC has dropped from above 78,000 to the current 75,622. In between, I impulsively tried to catch the bottom twice, once at 77,000 and once at 76,000, both times taking small losses and stopping out. Although the losses weren't big, being wrong on direction is still being wrong.
Why was I wrong? Because when the trend is bearish, rebounds are opportunities to escape, not reasons to enter. I kept thinking "it’s dropped so much, it should rebound," but the market taught me: when it should rebound, it doesn’t.
Now I’ve learned: in a bearish trend, focus on shorting the rebounds, and only consider going long when support holds steady. My plan: short on the rebound between 77,000-77,500, target 74,896; if 74,896 holds, then try going long. 5,000U, always use stop loss, no holding losing positions.
Trading isn’t about guessing the bottom, it’s about waiting for signals. When the direction is right, everything flows. $BTC #Regarding storage this round, I lean more towards A: the market may not be over yet for $BTC $SOXL $SNDK
After the drop in storage prices a couple of days ago, many started shouting that the cycle was over, but I think it's still too early.
The demand for **HBM, DRAM** from AI servers is still there. Micron recently launched large-capacity DDR5 aimed at AI servers; meanwhile, market institutions still say they haven't seen clear signs of weakening in customer orders, long-term contracts, or chip prices. ([MarketWatch][1])
So what I'm more focused on now isn't how much $SNDK or MU have risen, but:
When will capacity truly ease? When will prices start to fall?
As long as these two signals haven't appeared, the logic of the storage cycle still holds.
Micron Taiwan even currently faces potential labor risks, and supply is already tight. If any further disruptions occur, prices could remain sensitive.
So for now, I stand with A: storage can still continue to rise.
But the question is:
In this round, which will see the sharpest final rise—DRAM, NAND, or will the entire $SOXL be lifted together?
Share in the comments which you favor more.Many people think that a slight pullback in BTC means the overall market is completely safe, ignoring the weak divergence in ETH.
Current market situation:
BTC current price 75441, pulling back but holding the lower point at 74896, the major structure has not completely deteriorated;
ETH current price 2389, continuing downward, MACD bearish trend persists, performance clearly weaker than BTC.
Core contradiction: funds are withdrawing from ETH, BTC shows stronger resilience, the same correction has completely different intensities for the two coins.
🔴 Invalid defense level (1-hour volume break below, pattern further deteriorates)
BTC: 74896
ETH: 2356
🟢 Reversal confirmation level (above this, short-term decline pauses, repair begins)
BTC: 77000
ETH: 2440
Trading strategy:
$BTC BTC is in a range-bound pullback, do not chase shorts, and avoid heavy bottom-fishing positions;
$ETH ETH shows a clear bearish trend, do not rush to bottom-fish on the left side to bet on a rebound.
Do you think it will test the low first, or directly rebound and repair?Saying easing verbally, but cutting orders with actions.
European clients received notice today: some crude oil orders for late September are canceled. Reason? Pipeline restoration will take "weeks," and inventory only lasts a few days. The gap can't be filled, so customers have to be cut.
The nature has changed — it's no longer "worried about supply cuts," it's already cutting off.
Europe won't sit still; it will inevitably rush to the spot market. When spot premiums rise, other buyers follow, and the chain turns; oil prices become not a matter of "how much it rises," but "who can't get it first."
Interestingly, today there was news about Oman and the US talking about easing. In the past, such news would have knocked prices down by at least two dollars. What happened? Brent still rose to 104.93, and WTI returned above 100. No one believes in easing anymore; the market now only trusts pipelines and ships, not words.
Even the US Treasury Secretary came out to smooth things over, saying the US debt shock is a "global issue." The Treasury Secretary personally passing the buck means what? Even they are uncertain.
I've been watching this line since the pipeline was bombed. At that time, I said "avoiding the wolf's den only to fall into the tiger's lair," and now the tiger's lair is really biting.
BTC dropped to 75829, oil prices were still being fueled on the eve of the FOMC, and the hammer on Thursday early morning will only be heavier.
I'm now watching two signals: pipeline repair progress and Brent oil at the 105 barrier.
Orders have been cut; guess what's next — repair or a bigger gap? $BTC The CLARITY bill was rejected. $BTC immediately dropped to 75,860, down 3.2%. 120,000 people were liquidated.
The whole network started shouting again, "The bull market is over," "Regulation is going to crack down again."
Let me ask you a question: Has BTC's essence changed because the bill was rejected? No. Are ETFs still being bought? Yes. Are institutions still entering? Yes. Has the long-term logic changed? Not at all.
What has changed? It's the sentiment. It's retail panic. It's a leverage cascade.
You need to understand one thing: The CLARITY bill was never a necessary condition for the bull market. BTC rising from 30,000 to 70,000 in 2024 was because the ETF was approved, not because of any bill. The bill passing would have been a bonus; failing it doesn't really matter. The big regulatory direction is acceptance, not suppression, and this trend won't change because of one vote.
Also, think about it, this failure was due to a procedural vote, not a formal vote. The road ahead is still long.
The 75,000 to 76,000 range is a pit dug by sentiment, not by fundamentals. A pit dug by sentiment will eventually be filled. If you panic sell today, in a couple of weeks you'll regret it.
If you don't believe me, save this message. Check the price at the end of the month.
#BTC #CLARITYBill #Crash #Regulation #TimeTravelerThe procedural vote on the "CLARITY Act" just ended: 49 in favor, 50 against. The threshold was 60 votes, missing by 11.
Then the market exploded.
Bitcoin briefly fell below $75,000, hitting a low of 74,989. Ethereum dropped to 2,358, SOL fell below 100 to 97, and XRP plunged over 10% to 1.32.
But did you notice one thing—the Senate vote happened in the early morning, but BTC only dropped later in the morning.
What does this mean? The vote result was just the fuse; the real bomb is in another direction.
Let's talk about the bill itself first.
The core of this bill is to clearly define the jurisdiction boundaries between the SEC and CFTC; the industry wants "regulatory clarity." Before the vote, Republicans even proposed a "last, best, and final" revision, adding state attorney general enforcement mechanisms, authority to respond to stablecoin deposit outflows, and developer protection clauses. Trump also agreed to transfer crypto assets into a blind trust to try to resolve ethical controversies.
And the result? Warren still wasn't convinced, and Democratic senators collectively voted against it.
What does a 50:50 vote mean? It means the problem isn't the bill itself; it's political games hijacking crypto legislation.
With 53 Republican seats, they must cross party lines to get votes. Neither party wants to bear the political cost of deciding "who regulates what between the SEC and CFTC." Kennedy put it bluntly: it might have to wait until the lame-duck session. Cruz self-mockingly quoted a movie line: "There's a big difference between 'dead' and 'mostly dead.'"
In plain language: the bill isn't dead, but it's been thrown into the political meat grinder of the midterm elections.
What does this mean for traders? Don't expect regulatory benefits in the short term. The boot hasn't dropped yet, and that's the biggest bearish factor.
Now let's talk about the really important thing—the biggest bomb this week.
The Federal Reserve's interest rate meeting.
The market's probability of a 25 basis point rate hike in September has soared to 92.4%. Goldman Sachs changed its forecast, JPMorgan changed its forecast, HSBC changed theirs too—all shifting from "no change" to "rate hike in September."
The 10-year US Treasury yield has risen to 5.045%, the highest since 2007. The 30-year yield briefly touched 5.402%.
Have you thought about what this means?
A 10-year Treasury yield above 5% means the return on "risk-free assets" is higher than your expected returns from crypto trading. Why would institutional funds take risks? That's why Bitcoin ETFs have seen net outflows for three consecutive trading days, totaling $449.4 million, with net assets dropping from 101.3 billion to 97.49 billion.
Liquidity is tightening, and it's a more fundamental tightening than the CLARITY Act.
The bill's boot has dropped, but the Fed's boot hasn't. The real test is at the interest rate meeting, not in the Senate.
How to watch key levels?
Downside: 74,900-75,000 is today's low and today's lifeline. The 4/8 Murray level is near 75,000. The 75,500 support that Jiang Zhuoer mentioned has already been broken. If the daily close falls below 74,900, the next stop is 72,000-73,000, and further down is the daily Fibonacci 78.6% at 72,620.
Upside: 78,000-80,000 is the first wall. A new catalyst is needed to break through effectively—either weak nonfarm payrolls or a recovery in ETF inflows, one of the two.
Solana is worse off, dropping from above 100 last week to 97 now, with staking yields falling from 5.8% to 2.2%. Altcoins are getting hit doubly hard in this environment.
Trading discipline—three things:
First, don't chase longs on the first rebound candle after bad news hits.
This is the dumbest thing retail investors do. The bill failed, the first green candle appears, they feel "the bad news is over," and rush in. Then they get hammered by the second wave and get cut clean.
Second, wait 24-48 hours to see if BTC can stabilize above 74,000.
If it can hold and close above 74,000, a short-term rebound is possible, with a target of 78,000. If it can't hold 74,000, don't hold on; reduce long positions and reassess at a lower level.
Third, position size. Now is not the time for heavy positions.
Before the macro boot drops, any heavy position is a gamble. You're not betting on direction, but on the Fed's wording.
Three variables ranked by importance: Fed > US Treasury yields > CLARITY Act.
The bill is noise; the Fed is the signal.
Stop obsessing over the Senate vote results. What really determines your account's profit or loss this week are the few words coming from Powell's mouth early tomorrow morning.
$BTC $ETH $SOL 🚨 Cathie Wood reduces holdings early!
On the eve of the critical vote on the CLARITY Act in the U.S. Senate, ARK Invest reduced about $65 million in crypto-related assets.
These include:
🔸 About $40 million in ARKB Bitcoin ETF
🔸 Coinbase
🔸 Circle
🔸 BitMine
🔸 Bullish
Coincidentally, the CLARITY Act vote subsequently failed to advance.
📉 Market signals worth noting:
Institutions are not necessarily "bearish on Bitcoin," but proactively reducing risk exposure before major policy events indicates that funds are guarding against event-driven volatility.
My view:
With CLARITY blocked + the Fed's rate decision approaching, short-term BTC volatility may further increase.
Key points to watch next:
👉 BTC support near $76,000
👉 Short liquidity near $79,500
👉 Whether the CLARITY Act will be renegotiated
⚠️ The key is not to follow who is selling, but to observe large capital position changes before and after major events. Early this morning, the procedural vote on the US Senate's CLARITY Act stalled at 49:50.
The passing threshold is 60 votes. It fell short by a full 10 votes.
Bitcoin instantly dropped below $75,000, Coinbase plummeted 10%, Circle fell over 11%, and Strategy dropped 5.3%.
The entire crypto sector evaporated hundreds of billions of dollars overnight.
But interestingly—no one dared to say it was "completely dead."
Republican Senator Ted Cruz quoted a movie line:
"In The Princess Bride, there's a line: there's a big difference between 'dead' and 'mostly dead.' I hope it can come back to life."
In plain terms: it’s not flatlined yet, but the ICU lights are already on.
So where exactly is it stuck?
On the surface, it’s the vote count—not enough votes. Republicans have 53 seats and need at least 7 Democrats to defect, but didn’t get a single one.
But the real reason is more painful than the vote count.
Ethics provisions.
Simply put: can the Trump family simultaneously set crypto policy and profit from crypto?
Democratic Senator Warren fired shots before the vote—she said this bill would "tear a huge loophole" in nearly a century of securities law, allowing the Trump family to continue profiting through World Liberty Financial, and the newly added ethics provisions are just a "small fig leaf."
On the Republican side? They have accepted about 95% of the Democrats' amendment requests, and Trump himself agreed to transfer crypto assets into a blind trust.
But it still wasn’t enough.
Some Democrats privately admitted "it was almost done," but the Republican leadership shut down the negotiation window at the last moment before the vote.
Think about it—it’s not that they couldn’t reach an agreement, they just didn’t want to before the election.
Because November is the midterm election.
Political calculations trumped everything. Warren wants to use Trump’s crypto business as a target to win votes, and Republicans don’t want to give Democrats political ammunition before the election.
The crypto industry has become the "corpse" lying on the ground while the two parties fight.
Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse posted on X after the vote:
"That cut really hurts."
He also said something harsher: "The anti-crypto army in the Democratic Party has put politics above good policy."
Believe it or not, if someone else said this—it means the crypto industry itself is also being politicized.
Is there still hope?
Senator John Kennedy said—the bill isn’t dead yet; it can be pushed again during the "lame duck session."
What’s a lame duck session? It’s the transition period after the election but before the new Congress takes office. Outgoing members still hold their seats and their words still count. Pushing a bill then avoids fear of election retaliation.
This is the last window.
But the problem is—after the election, the congressional landscape could change drastically.
If Democrats take the Senate, the CLARITY Act goes straight into the coffin—not "mostly dead," but "truly dead."
Even if Republicans keep the majority, the lame duck session still has budget bills to pass, personnel appointments to approve, and the defense authorization act to review—no one can say where the CLARITY Act will rank.
Digital Chamber CEO Cody Carbone poured cold water: "Don’t expect the lame duck session to quickly fix this; the chances aren’t high."
White House crypto advisor Patrick Witt was even harsher:
"The cost of today’s vote may only be truly understood years from now. But one thing is certain—the future standards of global financial markets may no longer be set in Washington and New York, but in Brussels and Beijing."
So what’s the current status?
The bill isn’t dead. It’s just paralyzed, lying in the Senate hallway waiting for a stretcher.
The lame duck session is the last lifeboat. But whether there’s a seat on that lifeboat depends on the November election results.
And whether the lifeboat can depart on time depends on whether Congress is willing to spend less time talking and more time doing.
In Washington, the scarcest resource has never been votes—it’s willingness.
$BTC $ETH $SOL $XAU The position of gold is still quite unpleasant, consolidating below the neckline, indicating that the main market funds' intentions are not very clear right now, but the probability of a downward spike is still quite high. Especially around 4330, which corresponds exactly to the low point of the early August pullback, forming a large accumulation of chips. Once it breaks below, the path downward will be very smooth.120,000 liquidations, $670 million evaporated.
This wave early this morning was indeed tough.
The Senate voted 49 in favor and 50 against, failing to reach the 60-vote threshold needed to advance the CLARITY Act.
$BTC BTC briefly fell below $75,000, and crypto-related stocks like Coinbase and Circle also dropped significantly.
So the first reaction in the group chat was basically the same:
"It's over, regulation is getting stricter again."
But I found an interesting perspective from Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse:
If the technology is better, faster, and stronger, it will eventually be adopted by the market.
Translated into plain language, this means:
One bill failing to pass does not mean the entire crypto industry is finished.
Of course, the short-term pain is real.
Your positions shrinking is real.
Coinbase dropping 10% is real.
Market sentiment being crushed is real.
So telling you "don’t panic" at this moment doesn’t really mean much.
But looking at the bigger picture:
The failure of CLARITY affects the speed of regulatory framework progress, not the sudden invalidation of blockchain technology.
And crypto regulation in the U.S. is not completely stalled now.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong previously stated that regardless of whether CLARITY passes, the SEC and CFTC may continue to advance regulatory clarity through rulemaking.
So I’m more willing to interpret today as:
The regulatory path has encountered political resistance, not that the crypto industry has been sentenced to death.
What’s truly worth watching is what happens next.
If CLARITY is renegotiated and the SEC/CFTC continue to push rules, institutionalization of the crypto industry may still proceed.
But if Congress cannot reach consensus for a long time, regulatory uncertainty in the U.S. will persist longer.
These two outcomes have completely different impacts on the market.
So I won’t simply interpret today’s big bearish candle as:
"Crypto is finished."
Nor will I comfort myself with:
"The bad news is over, it will rise soon."
The market has already told us with price:
In the short term, funds are indeed repricing.
As for whether the long-term story is over?
I think it’s too early to conclude now.
Bills can fail, regulatory paths can change, but where technology and capital ultimately go depends on real users, funds, and applications.
This is why I think this CLARITY vote is truly worth watching.
Do you think this is just a temporary stall in the regulatory process, or has the U.S. crypto narrative really started to shift? #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议 #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ Chatting a bit with the bros. BTC is currently at 75622, leaning bearish. I know many people are itching to buy the dip.
I totally get that feeling. Every time it drops, I think "this is about it," but it’s always just a bit short. Losing 200,000 U is exactly how it happens—always trying to catch the absolute bottom but ending up buying halfway down the slope.
Now I’ve realized: bottoms aren’t caught by buying in; they’re waited out. When the price hits the 74896 support level and stabilizes, then it’s not too late to act. If it hasn’t reached that point, just watch and resist the urge.
My trading plan: If 74896 holds, lightly go long with 5000 U, stop loss at 74500, target 76500; if it rebounds to 77000-77500, lightly go short, target 74896. Every trade must have a stop loss; no holding losing positions.
Bros, control your hands and wait for the signal. The money to be made won’t be missed by a cent. $BTC #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ $BTC Short Liquidation Delta
SLD at ~4b to the downside suggesting shorts are heavy in the low 76k range.
If Support at 76k holds, bears might be in for a rude awakening.Spot ETFs have seen repeated capital inflows and outflows recently, with inflows on Monday, but overall buying did not keep up with the price surge. There is selling pressure from long-term holders on-chain in the 77,000–80,000 range, which is the main reason for the recent inability to break higher. In the short term, it looks more like a high-level consolidation and digestion; don't expect a sudden surge to 82,000. Be patient and wait for macro factors to materialize; it's more reliable than guessing the direction now. $BTC Finally dropped down, this short position was worth the wait.
Checked this morning, $BTC directly smashed through 75000, bottomed near 74900, now back to 75600 fluctuating.
Why did this drop hit so hard?
Last night the CLARITY Act procedural vote failed 49-50, didn’t get 60 votes, crypto regulatory legislation is stuck again. The market originally expected this bill to provide clear rules, but hopes were dashed, sentiment immediately turned sour.
On top of that, the Fed meets today, the market is almost certain of a 25 basis point rate hike. The 10-year US Treasury yield surged to 5.04%, the first time since November 2023. Money is flowing into Treasuries, crypto as a non-yield asset is being dumped directly. After breaking the 77000 support, about 98 million long positions were liquidated, triggering a chain sell-off.
Short on the rebound, resistance at 76200-76500, support at 74900-75100. Unofficial vote count 47:47, unless there’s a large-scale last-minute vote change, this hurdle is hard to pass.
I’m holding my short positions, no rush to close. Before the outcome is certain, I won’t say it’s a sure win, nor will I chase more shorts.
Next focus is one level: can BTC hold 75000? If it breaks, bearish sentiment continues to ferment; if it recovers, watch out for short covering.
The market always votes before the news.
Brothers, did this short position bring you profits?Short positions worth $5 billion are pressing down, yet the shorts have already lost $212 million.
Currently, the total position size is $9.468 billion, with long positions at $4.426 billion and short positions at $5.043 billion, clearly showing a heavier short position.
But what really deserves attention is the profit and loss:
Long positions have an unrealized profit of $192 million,
Short positions have an unrealized loss of $212 million.
In other words, although the short capital size is larger, it is currently the shorts who are losing money. Looking at the funding fees, longs pay $43.75 million, shorts receive $70.21 million. The current market situation is quite interesting: heavy short positions, funding fees still being earned, but the overall account is in a loss state.
If the market continues downward, shorts will maintain the initiative;
But if there is a sudden rebound, the $5 billion level short positions could become fuel for the rise. At this position, which side do you think is more likely to experience a stampede next? $BTC $ETH #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ Brothers, before the market opens today, I actually feel it won't go straight one-sided; more likely it will be weak oscillation plus repeated scanning before the news.
From the K-line structure, after continuous drops earlier, there has been some support, but the rebound strength is still insufficient, indicating that the bulls are only defending the market temporarily and haven't truly reversed the trend. For $BTC, if it continues to be suppressed in the early session, the key is whether it can hold around 75,000; for $ETH, watch the 2350–2400 range.
On the news front, the biggest variable today is the FOMC. The market's expectation for a 25bp rate hike is already very high, even reaching about 90%, so the rate hike itself has been priced in quite a bit in advance. Meanwhile, the US Treasury yield breaking above 5%, high oil prices, and pressure on US stocks will make pre-market funds more cautious.
Therefore, I personally lean towards: weak oscillation in the early session, possibly with slight recovery, but upward moves are likely to encounter selling pressure; only if BTC retakes above 77,000 and ETH stabilizes between 2400–2450 does it indicate buying is returning. Conversely, if it breaks lower again with increased volume, don't treat it as a normal shakeout; it means the market is still pricing in hawkish expectations ahead of time.
In short, the most important thing before the market opens today is not to guess the rise or fall, but to see if the K-line can stop falling. Funds will definitely be cautious before the FOMC, and the real big direction will most likely be left to tonight's news release.
#本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ #CLARITY投票前分歧未解 #10年期美债收益率突破5% BTC fell below $76,000, ETH fell even further, altcoins collectively pulled back, and many people's first reaction was: "Is the bull market over?" But today, my thinking is exactly the opposite: real major rallies always wash people in panic. First, why did it drop today? Last night, the US Senate failed to push forward a crypto regulatory bill, disappointing market expectations, and all funds were waiting for tonight's Fed rate meeting, putting risk assets under collective pressure, so Bitcoin, Ethereum, SOL, and SUI almost all fell in unison. This isn't about any single coin having problems, but rather the overall cooling of market sentiment. However, I think everyone should pay more attention to three signals. First, BTC did not experience a panic stomping. During the decline, many bulls were forced to liquidate, but BTC remained near key support zones and did not crash with heavy volume like in a bear market. This shows that some are selling, others are buying. Second, ETH falling more than BTC isn't necessarily a bad thing. In the middle and later stages of each bull market, ETH's volatility usually amplifies. When it drops, it's harder than BTC; when it rises, it's often even fiercer. If funds flow back into risky assets later, ETH may once again become the focus of capital. Third, and what I care about most: SUI and SOL. I've always held SUI and kept an eye on SOL. These two ecosystems have had real users and on-chain activity this year, not just storytelling. During major drops, these are often the main focus of capital observation. Today, I didn't chase the rally or panic sell. Instead, I rewrote my own bull market chroniclesETH｜Yesterday's strategy failed, why I didn't rush to post a new one
After yesterday's strategy failed, I didn't rush to find a new direction.
The reason is simple: the market movement for the day was not yet complete.
Especially since the market sentiment was already quite tense, with funds withdrawing.
In such an environment, the easiest mistake is to act prematurely without clearly seeing the market.
So yesterday I chose to wait.
It's not about losing judgment, but knowing when not to act.
Now ETH has fallen from 2666 down to around 2357, and the previous drop and panic have basically released some pressure.
If there is no obvious market recovery today, I will instead start focusing on rebound opportunities on the day of the interest rate meeting.
Because the market has been trading around the "rate hike" issue, when the meeting actually happens, a very common situation may occur:
The boot drops.
So today I won't just keep panicking over the words "rate hike" repeatedly.
What really matters is whether the price continues to release risk before the meeting and whether funds recover on the meeting day.
Currently, my core logic is:
I didn't rush to buy yesterday because the bottom wasn't confirmed.
In terms of levels, the 2350–2380 area is now a key observation zone. If it doesn't break down, there's a high probability of a rise tomorrow.
As always: saying it in advance, not hindsight. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议 #10年期美债收益率突破5% #CLARITY法案9月15日闯关，60票成关键
#CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议
How were you last night😎
The CLARITY Act failed to pass, with hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying funds all missed out
Last night in Washington, the Senate held a procedural vote.
Result: 49 votes in favor, 50 against.
The threshold for passage was 60 votes, missing by a full 11 votes.
But in the last hour before the vote, the market was still betting it would pass.
Then—nearly $300 million in crypto long bets were instantly liquidated.
Within 24 hours, 115,716 people were liquidated.
Coinbase -10.10%
Circle -11.45%
Strategy -5.36%
Robinhood -3.39%
What about Bitcoin?
It only dropped 4.08%, closing at $75,883.
The stock side fell 2 to 3 times more than the crypto side.
What the market truly priced in was never a deterioration in BTC fundamentals. It was the evaporation of the “regulatory expectation premium.”
Companies like Coinbase and Circle had a valuation component called the “CLARITY Act will pass” premium. When the bill failed, that premium went straight to zero.
BTC doesn’t have that premium, so it fell the least.
People who bought crypto lost 4%. People who bought Coinbase stock lost 10%. Same news, different wounds.
On Monday, the probability of CLARITY passing this year was still 31%.
After the vote, it dropped directly to 9%.
At 31%, the market was betting.
At 9%, the market was accepting fate.
Those who increased their bets at 31% were already off the table at 9%.
The bill isn’t dead, but a short-term restart is unlikely.
Senator John Kennedy put it bluntly—it may have to wait until the lame-duck session to move forward.
In plain language: Washington won’t touch this hot potato before the midterm elections.
Not a single Democratic vote was secured. All 45 Democratic senators voted against it.
The Republicans hold 53 seats, but a few defected.
The core sticking point is the crypto conflict of interest involving the Trump family.
The Republican compromise version required officials to divest crypto assets or set up blind trusts—but the restrictions did not extend to the Trump family’s sons who operate the crypto business.
The Democrats rejected this. Warren fired directly: rules shouldn’t give politicians and their families special channels.
One bill got stuck on whether the president’s sons can continue making money from crypto.
That’s Washington.
At the same time as the CLARITY vote failed, the SOL spot ETF saw a single-day net inflow of $1.34 million.
BTC ETFs are also recovering—Bitwise bought over $100 million of SOL in 20 days.
BlackRock’s IBIT attracted about $1.08 billion in the 20 days ending September 15.
The bill fell in the Senate. Institutional funds continue to flow in through ETF channels.
These two things happened simultaneously. Think about it.
Political games are playing out in Washington, while real money flows on-chain.
The bill failed, but the money didn’t stop.
The Fear & Greed Index dropped from 69 “Greed” yesterday to 51 “Neutral” in one day.
But the real issue isn’t sentiment.
The issue is: while Washington is still arguing over whether the president’s sons can make money from crypto, global institutional funds are quietly building positions through ETF channels.
CLARITY is stuck.
The money isn’t stuck.
$BTC $SOXLSpeaking with data, the current status of BTC is clear at a glance:
Current price: 75622
Resistance level: 78054 (about 3.2% from current price)
Support level: 74896 (about 1.0% from current price)
Trend: Bearish bias
24h characteristics: Weak rebound, downward shift in center of gravity
Space analysis: Closer to support, farther from resistance, indicating bears dominate. But shorting at this position is risky because it's too close to support, leaving little room.
My plan: Wait for a rebound, do not chase the drop. Light short positions at 77000-77500 with target 74896; or wait for 74896 to stabilize, then lightly go long aiming for a rebound to 76500. Small position of 5000U, stop loss mandatory, no holding through losses.
Recovering from a 200,000U loss, the data is clear, opportunities come from waiting, not chasing. $BTC #沙特关键输油管道受损，或停运数周 The probability of a rate hike has now increased to 90%, and the whole world is watching the rate hike... If it doesn't happen, that would really be a super bearish signal turning into a bullish one on the spot 😂 As I said before, if there's a spike, short positions in the wrong spots should either exit or reduce. If the rate hike really happens, it won't stop the calls before the midterm election for the small yellow hair. If it drops and you don't reduce your position, you won't have the courage to add when it goes up. The longer you're stuck, the more likely you'll sell quickly to get out, and then you'll miss out again 😂 There's no such thing as only one rate hike; this is a cyclical policy. Once it starts, it lasts at least about a year. It won't affect the likely rise before the midterm election, but it will affect the peak. For example, the previous estimates for BTC were around 93x-98x, ETH 3100-3300, SOL 120-135, BNB about 850. If the rate hike really happens, these levels before the midterm election might be hard to reach... The potential hawkish spike points from FOMC if no rate hike are around 756, 744, 723-728. These are purely technical levels; if sentiment comes into play, technicals don't matter. These levels are for reference only. If the rate hike really happens, the whole plan needs to be redone. Actually, a rate hike is a good thing, but preferably not right before the midterm election. After the midterm election "victory escape," they can hike however they want 😂····$ETH $ZEC $BTC #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ SOL plummets late at night: This is not a correction, it's a collective disillusionment of the "high-performance public chain" image
Let's put the conclusion here first: This round of SOL sell-off didn't kill the price, it killed the story itself that "Solana will replace Ethereum."
If you're still posting "SOL to the moon" or "corrections are buying opportunities" in the community, I suggest you read the following data word by word.
1. A single cut at midnight shattered everyone's illusions
At midnight on September 16 Beijing time, the crypto market collapsed across the board. Bitcoin briefly fell below $75,000, Ethereum dropped below $2,400, and SOL—down over 5%—ranked among the top decliners among major coins.
But this crash has a brutally harsh detail: CoinGlass data shows that nearly 120,000 liquidations occurred in the past 24 hours, totaling $670 million, with $570 million in long liquidations and only $98 million in short liquidations. $SOL $ETH $BTC #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议 #AI发展焦虑升温，芯片股集体走弱 $BTC BTC pulled back from 60,000 to above 70,000, the price is back, but confidence hasn't caught up yet
In the past two weeks, Bitcoin has been dragged from a low near 60,000 at the end of August back up to above 70,000 USD.
The price is back, but the market doesn't seem to truly believe it.
An interesting market condition: the candlesticks have repaired very nicely, but sentiment remains hesitant.
Many people still have the panic memory around 60,000 stuck in their minds, treating any slight rise as a rebound to escape, and any slight pullback as a second bottom test.
Leverage funds dare not firmly go long, big money is cautiously testing while reducing positions, ETFs flow in and out, sometimes flowing in, sometimes leaking out, rarely seeing reckless chasing of highs.
Even many bottom-fishers are mentally waiting for "a decent pullback" rather than firmly believing a new upward cycle has started.
This is a typical case of price leading and confidence lagging.
A rebound can rely on short squeezes, oversold recovery, or macro expectation warming; but a trend reversal requires repeated rounds of buying to verify.
What everyone sees now as a rise is partly valuation repair after a deep drop, partly leverage position replenishment.
Consensus hasn't formed yet, and divergence is at its peak: some think the pullback is over, others are convinced it's just a big B-wave escape window.
Don't simply judge "lack of belief means it will fall further," nor think "once it rises, it must keep hitting new highs."
When price leads faith, the market is most prone to repeated violent fluctuations.
It needs time, either slowly grinding until everyone accepts the rise, or taking a hard fall to shatter this wave of illusions.This wave, I really didn't understand it, but it understood me. I set up protection before going to bed last night and didn't mess with it anymore. $GAS rebound looks lively, but the volume didn't keep up, with sell orders stacked layer by layer; the bearish sentiment means high-level pressure.
Shorted near 1.3481, took profit at 1.2170, +193.6%. The earlier part was really slow, but the outcome is really sweet.
Don't get greedy with profits, don't despair with pullbacks. The market cures all kinds of arrogance, especially from those who think they're the smartest.
First close 80%, move the remaining 20% protection level toward the cost price; if it continues to drop, let the profits run, and if it rebounds, don't give back the profits. There are still opportunities, don't rush, wait for the next shot, patiently await good news.
$ETH $LAB Early session funds are reselecting strength and weakness; who will open space first among ETH, HYPE, and NEAR?
#本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？
Currently, the focus for ETH is on its ability to actively break out after consolidation. If volume continues to shrink during the pullback and the lows keep rising, it indicates that selling pressure has not significantly increased. If ETH approaches the resistance zone again and buying volume simultaneously expands, and $ETH can maintain stable turnover after the breakout, the structure will further strengthen; if it repeatedly fails to test resistance, be cautious of continued sideways digestion in the short term.
HYPE still maintains a strong trend attribute. Whether it can sustain higher lows after high-level turnover is key to judging if funds are retreating. If $HYPE adjusts with shrinking volume and rises with expanding volume, and does not quickly give back gains after the breakout, trend funds are likely to continue supporting; if sell orders increase significantly during the rally, watch out for concentrated profit-taking in the short term.
NEAR focuses more on chip concentration and volume-price coordination. If the price continues to approach the upper boundary during consolidation, it indicates funds are still waiting for direction. If NEAR’s pullback range gradually narrows and active buy orders start to increase, breakout conditions become more mature; later, if $NEAR breaks volume and holds above the resistance zone, elasticity is likely to be released, but volume-less rallies have limited sustainability.
Looking upward, watch for ETH breakouts, HYPE trend continuation, and NEAR volume expansion signals; downward, watch whether ETH’s structure loosens first and which of HYPE or NEAR falls back to the consolidation zone first. The truly worth-tracking direction is where turnover does not retreat after the breakout and lows can continue to rise.Maji’s leveraged trading journey is showing just how quickly big gains can disappear when the market turns against you. After making roughly $12M in 10 days, the aggressive bull saw his account take a brutal hit as the market continued sliding following the failed CLARITY bill vote. Over the past week: 🔻 $HYPE long closed 🔻 $BTC long closed 🔻 $PUMP long closed 💥 Combined losses: around $3.99M And the biggest bet is still open. Maji reportedly holds a 25x leveraged long on 12,500 $ETH, worth 120,000 people liquidated, $670 million evaporated, bulls bleeding profusely.
In the early hours of September 16, the U.S. Senate blocked the CLARITY Act from reaching the 60-vote threshold with a 49:50 result.
Bitcoin briefly fell below $75,000, hitting its lowest since June. Coinbase dropped 10%, Circle fell over 11%.
What was the first message you saw in the group? "It's over," "Regulation is getting worse," "Run quickly."
But on the same day, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said something extremely calm in Kansas City—
"If a technology is better, faster, and stronger, it usually wins."
In plain words: whether the bill passes or not, crypto will not die.
Acknowledge the pain, but don’t let it run you.
Coinbase’s 10% drop today won’t be fixed in a day. Circle’s 11% drop won’t either.
These numbers are real. Your position shrinking is real. Anyone telling you "don’t panic" might sound a bit hollow.
But please zoom out a bit—
Garlinghouse’s core logic is just one sentence: legislative progress and industry survival are two completely different things.
If CLARITY passes, institutionalization will accelerate. If it doesn’t, institutionalization just slows down—it doesn’t stop.
Think about it, the GENIUS stablecoin bill has already taken effect. That itself is a signal—the U.S. is not avoiding crypto; it’s just that the CLARITY path hasn’t been agreed upon yet.
What’s the sticking point? It’s the crypto conflict of interest involving the Trump family.
Ethics clauses couldn’t be agreed on, and the whole bill got stuck. Republicans say they accepted 95% of Democrats’ demands; Democrats say it’s not enough. Both sides are betting on the political landscape after the midterm elections.
This is not crypto’s failure; it’s Washington’s routine.
Regulatory clarity will come, but maybe not from Congress.
This is the signal you should pay attention to today—
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong tweeted after the vote, essentially saying: SEC and CFTC don’t need to wait for Congress; they already have tools in hand.
You read that right. The two major regulators are already advancing digital asset rulemaking. Even if CLARITY is stuck in the Senate, the SEC and CFTC’s rulemaking processes haven’t stopped.
Moreover—
California’s digital financial asset law has already taken effect. State-level regulatory frameworks are forming. You don’t need a federal bill to see rules being written.
Regulatory clarity doesn’t necessarily have to come from Capitol Hill. Sometimes, it comes from the daily operations of bureaucratic agencies.
FTX didn’t kill crypto, LUNA didn’t kill crypto, and a procedural vote won’t kill it either.
In 2022, when FTX collapsed, everyone said crypto was finished. In 2023, when the SEC aggressively sued, everyone said the industry was doomed.
And the result?
Bitcoin rose from 16,000 to over 100,000.
What really kills you is never regulation. It’s missing the cycle because you waited for regulation.
Galaxy CEO said something heavy today: if CLARITY doesn’t pass this year, the U.S. might not have crypto legislation for a long time.
But Coinbase CEO said: "Regulatory clarity for the crypto industry will come regardless."
They are two sides of the same coin—the legislative window is narrowing, but technology doesn’t need to wait for legislation.
The chips you panic-sold today, at what price will you buy them back tomorrow?
The bill isn’t dead. It’s just stuck at the procedural threshold. Senator John Kennedy said it might be pushed to the lame-duck session.
But can your position wait until then?
$BTC $ETH $COIN #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议 #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议
🚨 Breaking: CLARITY Act vote blocked!
The U.S. Senate failed to advance the CLARITY Act, with a procedural vote ultimately failing 49 to 50, still far from the 60 votes needed to move forward.
The core conflicts remain focused on:
🔴 Officials' conflicts of interest with crypto assets
🔴 Ethics and regulatory provisions
🔴 Differences between the Democratic and Republican final versions
For the crypto market, this is clearly negative in the short term, with expectations for regulatory clarity declining. BTC, ETH, and some regulation-sensitive tokens may continue to face pressure.
But note:
❗ Vote failure ≠ permanent death of the bill
There is still the possibility of renegotiation and another vote, but with the November midterm elections approaching, the time window is rapidly closing.
My view:
In the short term, watch for risk release,
In the medium term, focus on BTC support at $76,000–77,000.
If support holds, the market may interpret this event as an emotional shock;
If key support continues to break, further downside risks need to be guarded against.
#BTC #ETH #Crypto #CLARITYAct #加密货币Yesterday, the four major US stock indices continued to decline. The US 10-year Treasury yield reached an intraday high of 5.041%, the highest since 2007. Whether it’s traditional tech, AI hardware, or traditional manufacturing, the market was chaotic, with a clear rise in risk aversion among investors.
(1) Energy stocks were the only main theme, while consumer stocks were the weakest. Among the 11 S&P sectors, energy was clearly the strongest, up 2.3%, while consumer stocks had the largest decline. This is easy to understand, as rising oil prices have caused airlines, dining, retail, tourism, and small and medium enterprises to be squeezed by both higher energy costs and financing costs.
(2) Semiconductors continued to fluctuate. On Monday, the SOX index plummeted due to discussions about "AI slowdown," and on Tuesday, SOX only rebounded about 0.4% without volume recovery. This indicates significant market divergence on AI; the market worries that OpenAI, Anthropic, and others might actually slow down the iteration speed of cutting-edge models. So far, there have been no large-scale AI order cancellations or data center project cancellations, so AI development has not stalled, but valuations may be cut in the near term.
(3) The market believes there is about a 95% chance of a 25 basis point rate hike tonight, so if the 25bp hike happens, it carries no new information. It might even trigger a recovery as the bad news is priced in. However, if Fed officials hint at possible consecutive rate hikes afterward, the market may continue to face pressure. Don't mistake negative funding rates as bearish; $FET shorts are paying to hold positions. Current price 0.1496, down 8.78% in 24h, funding rate -0.0078%, shorts are crowded; RSI 23.7 has entered oversold territory, Bollinger lower band 0.1486 is close to current price, MA5 0.1507 and MA20 0.1552 still in bearish alignment, but MACD histogram shrinks to -0.00022, indicating a slowdown in the downtrend. Fear and greed index at 51 neutral, the probability of a rebound from a wick is greater than continuing to short. Direction is bullish, entry at 0.1470-0.1500, take profit 1 at 0.1552 (MA20), take profit 2 at 0.1619 (Bollinger upper band), stop loss at 0.1450, exit if breaking lower band. Also watch: $VANA, $SHELL for relative resilience.
(Personal opinion for reference only, not investment advice. Contract trading carries high risk, please strictly control position size.)
【Data】
Coin: FETUSDT
Direction: Long
Entry: 0.1470-0.1500
Take Profit 1: 0.1552
Take Profit 2: 0.1619
Stop Loss: 0.1450Senate vote ended: 49:50.
The bill fell far short of the 60-vote threshold. In theory, with 53 Republican seats, a little bipartisan effort should have passed it.
But throughout the entire vote, the real sticking point wasn’t the technical details of crypto regulation.
The sticking point was one person—Trump.
First, look at some numbers.
In 2025, Trump declared over $1.4 billion in income from crypto businesses.
What does that mean? It’s more than the revenue of any publicly listed crypto company in the U.S. last year.
How did he make it?
Trump Coin: sold about $635 million
World Freedom Financial: took nearly $800 million, including over $520 million from crypto token sales and over $250 million from business equity sales
And this World Freedom Financial is run by his two sons, Donald Jr. and Eric.
The president personally pushes policies, and his two sons personally collect the money.
Then before the vote, the Republicans came up with a "final compromise plan."
Core content: The president must transfer "large" crypto assets into a blind trust and is prohibited from issuing or promoting digital assets while in office.
Trump agreed.
Sounds tough? Look at the exemption clauses and you won’t be laughing.
The restrictions cover the president, vice president, members of Congress—and their spouses.
But not their children.
To translate: Trump has to put his crypto assets in a blind trust. But World Freedom Financial, held by his two sons, doesn’t have to move a muscle—and this company already got a banking license earlier this year.
The bill’s ethics clause restricts the president but not the president’s sons. This is the essence of Washington-style compromise: it looks like something is done, but actually nothing is done.
It’s not just people in the crypto community who are angry.
Warren directly called this ethics clause a "weak fig leaf" before the vote.
She was even harsher—this clause seems to ban the president from issuing coins, but the enforcement switch is controlled by the attorney general appointed by the president himself. State attorneys general have no authority over the president, vice president, members of Congress, or federal judges.
Having the president’s people enforce laws that constrain the president.
This design itself is already dark humor.
Warren added another jab: Trump and his family profit $1.4 billion from crypto in 2025, while buyers of his crypto projects lost tens of billions—meme coin buyers alone lost nearly $4 billion.
Who makes money and who loses—it’s crystal clear.
Even law enforcement isn’t buying it.
The day before the vote, the New York Attorney General led a coalition of 17 states and the District of Columbia attorneys general to jointly send a letter to the Senate, explicitly opposing the CLARITY Act in its current text.
Reason: The bill would weaken states’ enforcement power against crypto fraud, preventing states from continuing to serve as the first line of defense against crypto scams.
The letter cited numbers: crypto-related fraud losses reached $11.4 billion in 2025, a 22% year-over-year increase.
Crypto scammers are harvesting profits, and the bill is about to loosen the reins around their necks.
After the vote failed, the market voted with its feet.
Bitcoin plunged as much as 5.3%, falling below $75,000; Ethereum dropped over 8%, both marking the largest single-day declines since June. Coinbase plummeted 10%, Circle crashed over 11%.
Globally, 115,716 people were liquidated within 24 hours.
The "regulatory clarity" the industry spent years pushing was paused by a single exemption clause.
What’s the most ironic?
Before the vote, Trump said he agreed to the concession because "this will be the strongest arrangement in federal ethics law."
The strongest arrangement—the clause doesn’t cover his sons, enforcement power is in his appointee’s hands, and it expires on January 20, 2029.
Just coincidentally, it ends on the last day of his term.
A person who made $1.4 billion from crypto in 2025 rolled out a "regulatory framework." The core ethics clause of this framework precisely avoids the actual operators of his family’s crypto business.
Then the Senate said: No.
The 49 senators present upheld a basic common sense: you can’t be the referee, the player, and have the goalposts in your own backyard.
$BTC $ETH $SOL The failed CLARITY Act vote added another layer of uncertainty, pushing traders further into risk-off mode. In the last 24H: 💥 $664M liquidated 📉 $571M in longs wiped out ⚡ 114.7K traders hit $BTC slipped back below $76K, while $ETH also lost momentum. Now the bigger catalyst is the FOMC. 👀 The question isn’t simply bullish or bearish: 👉 Can buyers defend the lower levels and force a short squeeze? 👉 Or does another wave of long liquidations hit if support breaks? I’m watching BTC price act0.0281310 is a very delicate position. Looking at the on-chain chip distribution, there are obvious signs of large whales accumulating around 0.028, but the volume hasn't kept up, indicating the main force is still probing. The area from 0.0295 to 0.0302 above is a previously dense trapped zone, with heavy selling pressure.
Just finished my shift, put my thermos on the desk, and stared at the screen without moving.
The 4-hour MACD fast and slow lines are converging, with no clear direction chosen. The Bollinger Bands are narrowing, and the turning window is approaching. The key is whether the 0.0275 support level can hold—if it holds, bulls still have a chance to counterattack; if broken, it will directly seek support at 0.0262.
In terms of operation, my idea is very clear:
For long positions, accumulate in batches between 0.0278 and 0.0282, set stop loss at 0.0272, don't hold losing positions. The first take profit target is 0.0298, the second target is 0.0305. For short positions, if there is a rebound and stagnation near 0.0296, you can try light short positions, targeting a pullback to 0.0285, with stop loss at 0.0303.
Right now, this position is neither up nor down, so don't heavily bet on direction. Wait for volume to pick up before following. I'll keep watching the gate, will update if anything happens.
$AKE
#10年期美债收益率突破5%
@OKX星球 ⚠️ Reminder, BTC is now at 75622, the direction is bearish, don't rush to bottom-fish!
Resistance above is 78054, support below is 74896. The price is above support but the trend is downward; this position is the most deceptive: it looks cheap and you want to buy in, but the more you buy, the lower it goes.
I used to lose 200,000 U, half of it was because I "thought the drop was enough." Bought at 77000, bought at 76000, still bought at 75000, kept getting trapped all the way, and finally couldn't hold and sold at the bottom.
My rule now: in a bearish trend, don't catch falling knives. Either wait for the price to stabilize near the 74896 support level and then lightly try going long, or wait for a rebound near the resistance level before considering shorting. Small position of 5000 U, always with stop loss, no holding through losses.
Remember: follow the trend, don't fight against it. $BTC #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议
BlackRock withdrew 1,698 BTC from Coinbase yesterday, worth 130 million USD.
This was not a routine ETF subscription transfer, but a direct withdrawal from the custody account.
At the same time, an old investor who had been silent for eight months bought 1,075 BTC through THORC at an average price of 79,412, totaling 85.42 million USD. His last move was selling 50,000 ETH at the end of 2025, making 19 million, then disappearing. After eight months, he returned and bought BTC.
The bill was rejected, and the probability of a rate hike is 92.4%. Everyone is bearish.
But BlackRock is withdrawing coins, and the old investor is scooping up. It's not a small buy, but at the level of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Don't you find it strange?
If CLARITY passing is the biggest positive for crypto, why doesn't BlackRock wait for the bill to be enacted before buying? If rate hikes will pressure all assets, why would someone be willing to buy at 79,000?
The answer is simple—institutions look three years ahead, retail investors look at tomorrow.
The bill rejection is short-term sentiment, the rate hike is an expectation, but on-chain purchases are real money already spent. BlackRock won't change its allocation logic just because a bill failed, and the old investor won't liquidate just because the rate hike probability increased.
Those who panic are selling at a loss; the determined are rotating holdings.
$BTC $ETH
#本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ $ZEC Bullish bias: Retrace to 1122-1145 or break through 1224 to enter Trading plan｜Short-term direction: Bullish Entry zone: 1122.7577–1145.8478; Trigger: 1224.46; Invalid: 1088.1226; Take profit: 1203.5731, 1249.7533. Mid-term observation: Trend oscillates with a bullish bias, key is whether it can hold above EMA20 and break previous high 1224. Basis: Volume increased 2.1 times, MACD histogram turned positive; open interest high, intensified speculation, watch out for wick risk. #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ 🚨 The Fed's rate hike expectations may have already been priced in by the market!
Currently, the market pricing for this rate hike is very high. Mainstream market tools show nearly a 90% probability of a 25 basis point hike, with some markets reaching as high as 94%.
My view:
👉 What truly deserves attention is no longer "whether to hike rates," but rather "what will be said after the hike."
If the Fed hikes by 25 basis points as expected by the market:
📌 The hike itself may be the "boot dropping"
📌 Further changes in the US dollar and 10-year Treasury yields are more important
📌 For risk assets like BTC and ETH, focus on whether there is a "rebound after the bad news has been priced in"
📌 If the Chair's tone is less hawkish than the market expects, it could trigger a short-term rebound in risk assets
Conversely, if the hike is accompanied by signals of continued hikes or prolonged high rates, market pressure may intensify again.
Core logic:
Expectations themselves are not the biggest risk,
Surprises are.
So now, don't just focus on the words "rate hike," but pay attention to:
The dot plot + Fed Chair's speech + Treasury yields + key BTC support.
⚠️ For market opinion sharing only, not investment advice. Rocket Lab's acquisition of Iridium funding fully in place!
Breaking｜RKLB officially announced on September 15: Funding for the Iridium acquisition has been fully secured ✅
Rocket Lab completed a $1.944 billion ATM equity issuance, combined with its own liquidity, the cash consideration for acquiring Iridium is fully prepared.
Key points:
▫️ Completed $1.944 billion ATM placement, issuing 29.3 million shares, funds raised for acquiring Iridium
▫️ Finalized amendment of Iridium's original $1.775 billion credit agreement, obtained control change consent
▫️ Terminated the original $3.6 billion bridge loan, removing acquisition capital structure risk
▫️ Acquisition expected to complete by mid-2027, pending regulatory approval
This is a very critical milestone on the acquisition path.
Once the merger is completed, Rocket Lab will directly acquire Iridium's massive low-earth orbit satellite constellation, ground network, and communication customers, upgrading from a pure launch provider to a full space communication service provider.
Short-term equity dilution may cause volatility, but long-term this is a major move to build space infrastructure.
Yesterday the price dipped to around 61.8 yuan, close to the previous low of 57.1 yuan, then rebounded to 65.7 yuan. The stock price is expected to fluctuate later, but the upside potential is large enough to buy in batches on dips.
#RKLB$xRKLB 1292 coins, 98.64 million USD, MARA has made a move again.
The average price is about 76,000 per coin. Buying at this level shows that the mining company itself thinks it's not expensive. But from another perspective, whose coins is it buying?
FalconX is an OTC channel, not an exchange order book. That means someone sold this many coins to it all at once. Who is selling? Why are they willing to sell at this price?
This is the point I want to make. Retail investors watch the K-line every day guessing the direction, but the real counterparties have already exchanged the coins off-exchange. The price you see hasn't moved, but the chips have changed owners.
Mining companies hoarding coins is not news, but every time they hoard, the short-term outlook isn't good. Because they are buying cheap coins, not trying to pump the price.
So don't rush to follow. First think, if even the sellers are not optimistic, whose position are you taking over by rushing in?
#美战略比特币储备法案进入委员会审议
#BTC现货ETF三日流出近4.5亿美元 #Strategy回购约1.39亿美元STRC $MARA After the sharp drop, the sideways consolidation is a continuation of the downtrend
Bitcoin $BTC is currently around 75700, rebounding from the low of 74909. The candlesticks mostly show small-bodied alternating bullish and bearish candles, with the center of gravity unable to rise. This is a very typical low-volume sideways consolidation after a sharp drop.
This pattern means the buying power cannot sustain, and even slight selling pressure can push the price down again. Moreover, the longer the sideways consolidation lasts, the stronger the downward breakout tends to be.
The moving averages still show a complete bearish alignment, and the large-scale downtrend structure remains unchanged. The current rebound can only be considered a technical correction, not a trend reversal.
Trading strategy:
If the rebound reaches around 76500 and the 15-minute chart shows signs of stalling, you can try a light short position.
First target: 75200, second target: 74200.
Counter-trend short-term long positions are only suitable for light entries on pullbacks to support, with quick entries and exits. Avoid holding on too long.
#本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？ #AI发展焦虑升温，芯片股集体走弱 #CLARITY法案投票受阻引争议 $ETH $BTC $ZEC Time tag | 2026.09.16 09:43 (Beijing time) $BTC Currently quoted at about $75,800, down about 2.83% in 24 hours, operating within a range of 74,956–78,086. $ETH Currently quoted at about $2,400, down about 4.48% in 24 hours, operating in a range of 2,358–2,520. BTC Real-time Data | ETH Real-Time Data What really needs attention is relative strength: ETH/BTC dropped from about 0.0322 to 0.0317. Although both rebounded from their lows, ETH still underperformed BTC, indicating that market risk appetite has not truly recovered. This round of decline is not just a technical correction but also involves two layers of pressure: the U.S. Senate failed to advance the crypto regulatory bill, and the procedural vote only received 50 votes, falling short of the required 60, disappointing regulatory positive expectations. Reuters reports that the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield remains close to 5%, with the market pricing in a 25 basis point Fed rate hike by more than 90%. Global Market Dynamics In the short term, only three positions are considered: BTC will only begin to recover after it rises above 76,500; Only after it climbs above 78,000 will the rebound structure significantly improve. ETH must first reclaim 2,425 before qualifying to test 2,510–2,520. BTC falling below 74,956 and ETH falling below 2,358 cannot quickly recover, indicating the downward structure is still ongoing. The Federal Reserve's decision will be announced at 2:00 a.m. Beijing time on September 17, and the meeting will be held at 2:30 a.mThe most dangerous move on the chessboard is not the opponent sacrificing the queen, but you yourself starting to count moves as if the endgame is already won when you have the advantage. HSBC raised SpaceX's target price from $117 to $150, and the market is already close to that number—this is not a rally, but an acknowledgment that the situation is better than previously assessed, rather than conceding room above. Anyone who treats "raising the target price" as an offensive signal is misreading the opponent's slow move in the midgame as a threat.
Vy Capital revealed a 40 billion holding and projected a rise to 10 trillion in five to seven years. This is a long-distance sacrifice to change momentum: giving up current cash flow to exchange for an open path not yet priced in. Wall Street's $150 to $300 range is essentially two notations of the same game—one reads it based on capital expenditure and profit realization, the other revalues it based on platform attributes. The question is not who is right, but which notation should be used to settle this move: Is SpaceX a hybrid of aerospace and telecommunications, or the foundation of AI infrastructure? If the latter, then the pawn structure in the midgame is completely different, and the scale of exchanged value is also entirely different.
What concerns me more is that linkage. The resonance of US stock Token targets with it indicates the market is betting on the same expectation on two fronts simultaneously. This approach is very much like the pincers advance in the double elephant opening: two lines seemingly cover each other but actually share the same center of gravity; once the center is removed, both wings collapse simultaneously. When valuation is anchored in a five to seven-year narrative, but trading rhythm follows quarters or even days, time and structure become mismatched—this is not calculation, but placing moves by feel.
A true master, in such a situation, does not first increase positions but first confirms whether their king's wing has been opened. To realize the open path of fundamentals, you have to push pawns quarter by quarter through earnings reports, not drive the car to the eighth horizontal line with a single "10 trillion" statement. Treating platform attributes as a get-out-of-jail-free card is like believing the opponent will voluntarily offer a draw in the endgame. I won't. I will first position my pawns properly, then see if the opponent is willing to exchange a queen for two minor pieces. And the market now hasn't even decided which opening it is playing.Cracks in load-bearing walls never start from the top. In my eyes, Oracle's earnings report is like a super high-rise building undergoing frantic expansion—AI cloud revenue surged 121% year-over-year, unfulfilled contracts piled up to $664 billion, and new AI orders in Q1 broke $30 billion. Outsiders see the skyline; I see the foundation grouting volume: capital expenditure slammed down $28.5 billion, free cash flow turned negative $5.4 billion, and it still relies on a $2 billion market issuance to stay alive. This is not expansion; this is driving piles into soft soil—the deeper the piles, the taller the building, the greater the rebound risk.
On September 12, the co-founder withdrew a $7.5 billion sell-off plan. To the builders, this is called "the general contractor dares not withdraw funds before topping out"—the posture is steady, but structural stress hasn't disappeared, only delayed. Adobe beat expectations and raised guidance yet was still sold off; this marks a shift in industry acceptance standards: previously, it was about how pretty the blueprints looked; now it's about the amount of rebar used and cash flow stress tests. The problem is, when the whole industry is using debt and issuance to pour the computing power foundation, whose geological survey report is real?
Shifting focus to tokenized US stock targets, the linkage logic is clear. These assets are essentially "prefabricated modules"—deforming synchronously with the structural stress of the parent entity. The parent entity maintains computing power foundation through debt and ATM; every increase in financing cost transmits along the steel beams to the load-bearing surface of token holders. The true shear-resistant components are not in the revenue growth column but in the cash reserves at the bottom left of the balance sheet and the dilution ratio at the top right.
I've dealt with too many unfinished buildings. Their common traits are: stunning facade renderings, beautiful construction schedules, but the foundation's reinforcement ratio can't withstand scrutiny. 121% is the reflection on curtain wall glass, 664 billion is an unpoured aerial castle, and negative 5.4 billion is the underground diaphragm wall downstairs that is leaking water. When rating agencies' flaw detectors start scanning AI credit spreads, acceptance standards shift from "is there growth" to "can it bear its own weight."
Capital expenditure is not concrete; it is prestressed reinforcement that requires a return cycle. The tighter it is pulled, the more lethal the rebound upon fracture. Projects using issuance funds to buy GPUs are essentially using owners' prepayments to build scaffolding—the scaffold can hold people, but only on dismantling day will you know if the floor can bear weight.
The linkage of mirror-like targets such as $xHOOD essentially doubles the structural defects of the parent entity. The parent entity's free cash flow gap is the suspended cradle overhead, swaying in strong winds.
When judging whether a building can stand, I never look at its opening price; I look at its settlement monitoring points. #oracleaicloudup121%