Orbit Post Sitemap
BTC surged sharply late at night, and he went against the trend to increase his short position, becoming the top short seller.
Tonight's market felt like stepping on the gas pedal. BTC rallied from around 65,000 to 69,000, and a large number of short positions across the network were liquidated within half an hour. In the past 24 hours, liquidations surged to $1.905 billion, with short positions accounting for $1.733 billion. Over 120,000 people worldwide were wiped out. Normally, no one dares to go against the trend in such a market, but on-chain monitoring identified someone doing exactly that.
TradingBeats data shows that an address starting with 0x66 increased its short position by 800 BTC right as BTC was rapidly rising. Including previous positions, his 40x leveraged short position has accumulated to 1,200 BTC, with a notional value close to $80 million at current prices, instantly making him the largest BTC short seller on Hyperliquid.
This address is not a novice. On-chain labels mark it as a big winner and a whale, with total historical profits exceeding $1 million. The net value of his perpetual account ranges between $1 million and $5 million, and his completed trades have a 55% win rate. His average entry price is $66,891, essentially betting that BTC’s rally will end here. The problem is the market hasn’t cooperated; this position is currently at an unrealized loss of $2.39 million, with a liquidation price of $70,039, just two or three points away from the current price. A slight further rise will trigger liquidation.
Interestingly, a few hours ago another whale posted a 5x leveraged long position of 3,425 BTC, with an unrealized profit of over $13 million. One is enjoying gains in the car, the other is blocking the way at the front, making them the most prominent opposing players in this rally. The same market is seen by some as the start of a bull run, and by others as the final surge.
This contrarian short position hanging overhead serves as a reference point for short-term traders. If the liquidation price near $70,039 is hit, the short squeeze could fuel the bulls and push prices even higher; conversely, if he holds, the $70,000 barrier will be harder to break in the short term. Grid and swing traders can watch this as a barometer, but definitely don’t copy his position—40x leverage is not for everyone.
In the short term, this rally tonight is driven by short covering and regulatory sentiment, with sentiment-driven trades retreating at a frightening speed. Historically, there are plenty of examples of such sharp rallies followed by pullbacks. Looking longer term, the Federal Reserve’s July minutes have just been released, and the White House will hold a crypto executive meeting tomorrow. Policy variables are more worth watching than technicals; any surprises in these two events could reshuffle the market direction.
Here’s the question: why would a veteran with a 55% historical win rate dare to increase his short position against the market frenzy? Do you think he might be holding something we haven’t seen?After renaming to BUSD, all authorizations of old users became invalid
Berachain renamed its native stablecoin HONEY to a new name, Bera USD, using the symbol BUSD directly.
According to the announcement, this is just a brand makeover. The foundation said the rename is to let institutional users immediately recognize it as a USD stablecoin, making it appear more professional and trustworthy. The contract address did not change, and the token itself remains the same, just a different name, which sounds like a harmless minor change.
HONEY is not a niche token. It is the native USD stablecoin on the Berachain blockchain, heavily relied upon by the lending market, trading pairs, and various vaults on the chain. A single rename affects the entire financial layer that is already operational, not just a simple rebranding.
But the trouble lies in the technical details. In Ethereum's signature standard EIP-712, the token name is part of the domain separator. All permits, off-chain authorizations, and various allowance permissions previously signed based on the name HONEY will automatically become invalid once the name changes. Those who have authorized protocols, vaults, or swap routes to use their stablecoins will suddenly find their authorizations gone after some time and must re-sign. Especially for those who deposited HONEY into lending protocols or opened revolving loans, once the authorization expires, the available credit of their positions will immediately drop to zero, and in severe cases, may trigger unexpected repayments or liquidation processes.
This contrasts sharply with the project team's claim of better serving institutions and being more standardized. Old users' authorizations quietly became void without any prior notice. Many people do not understand what EIP-712 is, nor do they check daily whether their permits are still valid. When they actually need to use it, they find their credit gone, which is truly troublesome. Integrators also have to update their code to adapt again; the so-called quick full launch involves a series of unnoticed manual tasks. For ordinary users, the most realistic risk is not understanding the technology but suddenly finding previously usable functions in their wallets no longer work one day.
More intriguingly are the three letters BUSD. It was once the stablecoin issued by Binance, halted by the New York Department of Financial Services in 2023, and eventually quietly exited the market. Now a chain project picks up this symbol to use—whether because the name sounds catchy or they simply do not mind that regulatory history—is hard for outsiders to judge. At least from the appearance, this move is far more than just a brand upgrade.
The rename sounds light and casual, but on-chain it affects everything. If you hold authorizations for this type of stablecoin, it's time to check whether your permits are still valid. Two century-old banks complete their first on-chain deposit settlement
HSBC and Standard Chartered, two banks with a combined history of over three hundred years, have just completed their first real-time tokenized deposit transaction on Swift's blockchain ledger. The news was reported by CoinDesk, stating that this transaction marks a substantial step for traditional financial institutions in using blockchain to handle deposit tokens. The old money is finally not just discussing in meetings but actually settling transactions.
Let's clarify what this is about. Swift is the messaging and clearing network between international banks, through which most global bank transfers are processed. This time, instead of sending messages, it turned the deposits themselves into tokens, transferring and settling them in real time on a distributed ledger. Previously, cross-border transfers required multiple intermediaries and could take days to complete; now, with on-chain processing, the speed and transparency are entirely different.
For the crypto community, the significance of this news lies in the identities of the participants. HSBC, Standard Chartered, and Swift—any one of these names alone is enough to spark extensive industry discussion, and now the three have come together. This indicates that banks' attitudes toward on-chain settlement have shifted from experimentation to serious implementation. Previously, we often said traditional finance needed to embrace blockchain; this time, banks themselves are moving their core business onto the chain.
On the practical side, tokenized deposits by banks are somewhat similar to the stablecoin logic we use—they are both on-chain accounting certificates—but there are clear differences. Stablecoins are issued by companies like Circle and Tether, whereas bank tokenized deposits are backed by licensed banks themselves, with deposit insurance and regulatory support, making their compliance attributes completely different. In the future, enterprise-level cross-border settlements may first be realized on these bank-affiliated chains.
The short-term direct impact on the market is limited since this does not involve retail funds nor create new buying demand. But in the medium to long term, this is a significant piece in the RWA (Real World Asset) narrative. When banks move deposits, bonds, and settlements onto the chain, the on-chain capital pools and liquidity foundations will grow stronger, opening up more possibilities for stablecoins and on-chain wealth management. The investable pool of RWA assets is being built brick by brick by these major players.
What I personally find more interesting is another angle. Two major banks doing on-chain settlement shows that the compliance path is viable, which reassures other traditional institutions. Once the demonstration effect takes hold, more banks will follow, further blurring the boundaries between on-chain assets and traditional finance. By then, products like on-chain interest rates and on-chain credit may no longer be niche toys.
Finally, a question: if one day your bank deposits can be directly transferred and settled on-chain, would you still keep most of your money in traditional accounts? August 20
Gold Evening
Core Influencing Factors Analysis
The core driver of this round of strong gold price rally comes from the U.S. Treasury's expansion of the long-term bond repurchase program, raising the single repurchase limit for 10–30 year long bonds to 4 billion, effective September 9. This directly suppresses the 30-year U.S. Treasury yield and weakens the dollar simultaneously, pushing gold prices up to 4527.
Key distinction: This tool is a liquidity adjustment measure, not QE, and can only temporarily ease the pressure from long bond sell-offs. It cannot solve the long-term fundamentals of the U.S.'s high deficit and huge debt; caution is needed in the evening for concentrated profit-taking by bulls. Once long bond yields rebound, gold prices are prone to rapid pullback.
On the geopolitical front, the shipping game in the Strait of Hormuz continues, and U.S.-Iran tensions remain, providing inherent safe-haven support. However, oil price volatility will act as a hedge: rising oil prices will lift inflation expectations again, constraining gold's upside.
Tonight, focus on U.S. initial jobless claims data. Strong data will cause U.S. Treasury yields to rebound and pressure gold prices; weak data will continue to support gold holding its high level.
Technical Analysis
4-hour chart: After consecutive bullish candles, there is high-level oscillation correction. RSI has fallen back from the overbought zone, short-term upward momentum is weakening. The preferred approach tonight is oscillation, avoid chasing highs, wait for a pullback to support and stabilization before positioning.
Strategy: Range 4482-4465, defense at 4450, target 4527-4550
Disclaimer: Investment involves risks, enter the market cautiously
#美联储7月FOMC纪要9比3，官员加息分歧仍在 $XAU Revenue surged 62 times, but cash only lasts 9 days
A legendary meme coin on Solana, the listed company behind it only has $214,000 in cash on hand, which at the current burn rate is enough to last just 9 days. This is not a joke; it’s the half-year report just released by the Nasdaq-listed company Bonk, Inc. (ticker BNKK). The BONK coin itself still has a market cap of about $22 million, but the company behind it is on the brink.
First, look at the most contrasting numbers. This company’s revenue in the first half of the year was $5.5 million, a year-on-year surge of 6218%, sounds like it’s about to take off, right? But the net loss for the same period was $7.88 million, and cash on hand burned down from $2.28 million at the end of 2025 to $214,000, a 90% evaporation in half a year. The auditing firm M&K CPAS and management themselves wrote in the report: there are significant doubts about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern. In plain language, at this rate, the company could shut down at any time.
What’s more worth pondering is the revenue structure. Of the $5.5 million, $3.92 million comes from revenue sharing with the affiliated platform LetsBonk.fun, accounting for 71%, and the owner behind this platform and the founder of the listed company is the same person, Mitchell Rudy. He holds about 40.2% of the common shares and all the Series C preferred shares through Lucky Dog Holdings. The Series C preferred shares can independently elect half of the company’s board. The revenue source is him, the board is him, the lifeline is all in one person’s hands.
There are also two very typical transactions. The company used $50 million worth of BONK tokens to buy back its own stock, but what it received was not cash but the same tokens from its own treasury. These tokens are recorded at fair value, and in the first half of the year, an unrealized loss of $8.17 million was recognized, directly hitting the income statement. Paying salaries with its own tokens and buying its own stock with its own tokens—this cycle looks lively but is actually just moving money from one hand to the other.
For holders of BONK, two things need to be distinguished here. BONK is a meme coin that started as a community airdrop and has no corporate entity; the coin’s survival depends on exchanges and community enthusiasm. But BNKK, this shell company, packages the BONK ecosystem’s cash flow into a listed company story. Its financial report reflects the monetization ability of this ecosystem, not the coin price itself. Don’t assume the coin will immediately go to zero just because the company is dying, nor assume the coin will take off just because the company’s revenue surged.
On the operational level, this structure reminds us to first check if there is a real company in the chain before buying meme coins. If the founder-related income accounts for more than 70%, if shares are paid with tokens, or if cash coverage is less than ten days, any one of these should raise a red flag. Hype can deceive, but financial reports won’t.
Finally, a question: if this company really can’t survive, do you think the BONK community will take over and keep it alive, or watch it delist and dissolve?US Treasury's Buyback Doubles, BTC Returns to 11-Week High
BTC's surge overnight isn't rooted in the crypto space. The US Treasury stepped in, doubling the scale of long-term bond buybacks, raising the single buyback cap from $2 billion to at least $4 billion, effective from September 9 to November 4. Once the news broke, the 30-year US Treasury yield fell about 9 basis points from a nearly 20-year high. BTC followed suit, soaring to $69,749, marking a new high since June 2, with a daily gain of about 6%, reclaiming the 11-week peak.
It's worth breaking down the transmission chain here. The Treasury's buyback of long bonds essentially injects liquidity into the bond market, absorbing long bonds that no one wants to buy, easing selling pressure in the bond market. As yields drop, valuation pressure on global risk assets eases, and BTC, as a high-beta asset, naturally reacts most strongly. Even Standard Chartered analysts have commented that this move is exactly the type BTC favors, mentioning $65,500 as a key level.
For swing traders, the key is to grasp the timing window. The Treasury's buyback isn't a one-off action; it will continue from September 9 to November 4, nearly two months, with each buyback announcement potentially acting as a liquidity pulse. In the short term, during the bond market stabilization window, risk assets generally have tailwinds, but be mindful of the rhythm of buying on expectations and selling on facts—rallies before announcements tend to be stronger than after.
Looking deeper, the background of this rally is that long-term rates surged too aggressively. The 30-year Treasury yield once hit a new high since 2007, squeezing the market. The Fed's rate hike expectations and the Treasury's debt issuance pressure combined to weigh on risk assets across the board. Now, with the Treasury actively buying back bonds, it's effectively hedging on the supply side—a move far more concrete than verbal assurances.
From a medium- to long-term perspective, a few more words. Liquidity conditions are the fundamental variable for BTC pricing. The Treasury's willingness to maintain long bond market stability indicates a declining tolerance in policy for economic damage caused by high interest rates. For crypto, as long as the US dollar liquidity tap isn't tightened further, the return of funds to risk assets is just a matter of time. BTC's bull market narrative essentially remains a liquidity story; this underlying logic hasn't changed.
Of course, don't mistake a single bullish candle for everything. The buyback plan starts in September, with variables like Fed minutes and 20-year Treasury auctions in between. The early morning Treasury auction is the first hurdle. Risk management on positions is still necessary; don't forget your original stop-loss just because of one bullish candle.
Finally, a question: with the Treasury deploying such a major buyback move, how long do you think this liquidity spring can last?Two FTX executives banned for 10 years and 8 years respectively
FTX's accounts are still not settled. The U.S. CFTC officially announced an enforcement settlement with former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison and FTX co-founder Gary Wang. Ellison received a 5-year trading ban plus a 10-year registration ban, while Wang got a 5-year trading ban plus an 8-year registration ban. Both must continue cooperating with the CFTC's investigation. Note, this is a settlement, not a clearance—it's a plea deal in exchange for leniency.
The most striking figure is $11.02 billion. The CFTC explicitly stated it will not pursue recovery, restitution, or fines this time, partly because the related criminal case has already issued a forfeiture order for $11.02 billion, and both individuals have been highly cooperative. In plain terms, the people who needed to be caught have been caught, the money that needed to be pursued has been pursued, and this ban is more like a closing chapter for this saga.
Recall the scale of the FTX collapse. In the week of November 2022, FTX went from the world's second-largest exchange to filing for bankruptcy in just a few days, owing creditors over $3 billion at the time. The liquidators have since pursued about $1.3 billion. SBF himself was sentenced to over twenty years, and now his two key lieutenants have also been given time limits. The legal closure of this case is nearly complete.
For the industry, the value of this news is not in the punishment itself but in the signal it sends: U.S. regulators are completing the liquidation of crypto fraud according to procedure. From the Lehman moment in 2022 until now, the SEC and CFTC have enforced on multiple fronts, targeting exchanges, market makers, and executives alike. This round of regulatory catch-up is good in the long run, clearing out the bad actors and leaving room for compliant players to survive.
But from the perspective of us traders, I want to highlight another layer. What the FTX collapse taught everyone back then is that an exchange’s exposure can’t be seen from candlestick charts; money is safer in your own wallet than anywhere else. Now with increasingly advanced on-chain contracts, platforms like Hyperliquid move matching onto the chain, with cold wallets, self-custody, and on-chain audits. There are many more tools than three years ago, but hundreds of millions in hacks still happen every year. The lesson on security awareness is one we can never graduate from.
The short-term market impact is actually limited; this news is a procedural closure of an old case, with limited emotional shock. What really matters is the capital game behind tonight’s $1.9 billion liquidation wave. From a medium- to long-term perspective, the full closure of the FTX case removes a dark cloud hanging over the industry, giving the compliance narrative new material to talk about.
One last question: It’s been almost four years since the FTX collapse. Do you think retail investors’ trust in exchanges has truly been restored? Fidelity clients have aggressively bought nearly 2,000 BTC in two days
Arkham's monitoring data went viral today. Fidelity's clients have purchased about $134 million worth of BTC in the past two days, which translates to nearly 2,000 BTC at current prices. This is the most active two-day net buying by the institution's clients since early July. When the news came out, many people's first reaction was, aren't institutions all running away? Why the sudden turnaround?
Here is an interesting contrast. Last week, the US spot ETF still saw a net outflow of $390 million, with Fidelity's own FBTC having the largest weekly net outflow of $153 million. In other words, for the same Fidelity, money through the ETF channel is flowing out, while custodial clients' money is flowing in—two completely opposite trends. ETFs involve on-exchange chip rotation, while custodial accounts represent real incremental buying; these two have different natures.
Arkham put it plainly: Fidelity clients' BTC allocation trends have always been used as a reference for traditional financial institutions' capital flows. $134 million may not seem huge, but combined with the timing, it is intriguing. Just in these two days, the US Treasury announced doubling the scale of long-term bond repurchases, long-term yields fell, and BTC surged from around 65,000 to above 69,000. The institutional clients' moves are very likely not a coincidence.
For ordinary players like us, this data can be interpreted on two levels in terms of operations. In the short term, institutional custodial buying is a positive sentiment indicator, showing that large funds are willing to buy in the 60,000 to 65,000 range, which is meaningful for support; but don't take two days of buying as sufficient evidence of a trend reversal. ETF capital flows have fluctuated repeatedly over the past few months, and looking at just one or two days' numbers can lead to misjudgment.
On the long-term level, what is more worth pondering is that the paths for institutional entry are broadening. ETFs have premiums and discounts, management fees, and redemption timing differences, while custodial accounts are closer to traditional large capital's habit of building positions. More paths mean the structural support at the bottom is becoming thicker. This is also why key levels like the 200-day moving average cost line always have large funds willing to hold there.
Let me add a personal view. The fiercest debate in the market now is the bull vs. bear argument, but the data is quietly speaking: volatility is suppressed to historically low percentiles, the profit supply ratio is stuck at 52%, and institutional clients are starting to build positions against the trend. These signals combined resemble characteristics of the late bear market phase rather than the start of a new downtrend. Of course, position judgment is one thing, and position management is another.
Finally, a question: with ETFs flowing out and custodial accounts buying, these two forces are hedging each other. Who do you think the market will listen to first next?A whale with an unrealized profit of 13 million has revealed all their cards
Tonight's market is lively, and on-chain there is no shortage of people showing off their positions. But one whale showed off particularly boldly, openly revealing a 5x leveraged long position of 3,425 BTC, with a margin of about 46.52 million USD. The unrealized profit now exceeds 13.04 million USD, a return of 28%. This user goes by the name "Contract player who sets 10 big goals first," essentially laying all their cards on the table for the entire network to see, causing the comment section to explode.
Don't rush to envy just yet; let's do the math calmly. With 46.52 million USD margin at 5x leverage, the actual nominal position value exceeds 230 million USD. This position size is whale-level on any exchange. The 13.04 million USD unrealized profit sounds large, but the drawdown can be fast too—just a 2% adverse price move means several million USD in paper losses. Behind the thrill of showing off is a ton of risk exposure.
What's interesting is the timing. When this guy added to his long position, the whole network was experiencing a historic short squeeze. In the past 24 hours, liquidations totaled 1.9 billion USD, with short liquidations at 1.733 billion USD, and BTC surged from 65,000 to above 69,000. In other words, he placed a heavy bet at the start of the rally and only dared to show off because the direction was right. Such open position reveals on-chain often carry signaling properties—either genuine confidence or an attempt to influence sentiment. Which it is will depend on how the market unfolds.
For ordinary traders like us, it's best to just observe these whale show-offs without getting carried away. First, their 46.52 million USD margin is just a drop in the bucket; our positions can't withstand 5x leverage volatility. Second, publicly showing positions is itself a game tactic; only the person knows their true intent. The takeaway is that whales willing to heavily long at this level indicate that big money isn't too bearish on the downside, which is a positive sentiment signal.
Looking at the market, tonight's rally is rooted in improved US Treasury liquidity. The Treasury's expanded buyback program pushed down long-term yields, benefiting risk assets collectively. Short-term momentum remains, but above 69,000 lies the 200-day moving average, the bull-bear dividing line. Previously, BTC hit around 69,500 and faced resistance, pulling back once. The battle between bulls and bears will be intense here, so chasing highs requires extra caution.
From a long-term perspective, I lean toward this view: as long as US dollar liquidity does not tighten further, the bottom for risk assets will gradually rise. Ultimately, BTC's pricing power returns to the liquidity narrative. But short-term volatility is unpredictable; whale show-offs don't change the importance of position management. The higher the leverage, the smaller the margin for error—this is ironclad.
One last question: if you had 46.52 million USD, would you dare to go all-in with 5x leverage and publicly show your position?50x Leverage Comes to Coinbase, Retail Traders Are Really Tempted This Time
What Coinbase is doing this time is worth a look for anyone trading contracts: it has directly integrated perpetual contracts into the Base App, offering up to 50x leverage, with over 290 contract markets available, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, and even stocks and commodities.
The executor is Hyperliquid, with Coinbase handling the front-end access, so users don’t have to leave their existing wallets. In other words, Americans can finally trade the crypto market’s most popular derivatives right inside Coinbase’s app—though U.S. domestic users are excluded this time, as are countries that restrict leverage.
Coinbase’s engineering lead said something quite striking: perpetual contracts account for 75% of total crypto market trading volume and are the feature Base App’s high-frequency users want most. To translate, the most active users want exactly this.
The background here is Base App’s transformation. Previously, it bet on social and creator features, which were lukewarm at best, and even the founder admitted it didn’t meet expectations. Now the focus shifts to trading, payments, and AI Agent, with perpetual contracts being the heaviest piece of this transformation puzzle.
For ordinary players, this feature actually opens Pandora’s box. What does 50x leverage mean? Anyone who’s traded contracts knows—if the market moves 2% against you, your principal is gone. Coinbase itself includes a risk warning: losses beyond a threshold will trigger liquidation. But honestly, warnings or not, those tempted won’t stop just because of a small line of text.
I did the math myself: with the same $1000, 10x leverage versus 50x leverage means the stop-loss space differs by five times. High leverage isn’t unplayable, but it cuts the margin for error to zero—if you’re right, it’s great; if you’re wrong, it’s a wipeout overnight.
The current reality is clear: perpetual contracts making up 75% means everyone loves to play, but loving to play and playing wisely are two different things. Base App opening this gateway to tens of millions of users is like handing a gun without a safety lock to beginners.
One more background note: Coinbase clearly states this feature is currently not available to users in the U.S., U.K., Canada, and other regions that restrict leveraged crypto derivatives trading. So, the first to use it won’t be the most experienced players but users in relatively lax regulatory areas. Judging by product rhythm, Base App is playing perpetual contracts as its third card after prediction markets and stablecoins; the first two have proven effective, and whether this one can succeed will determine the ceiling of Base’s current transformation.
Do you think this is Coinbase’s super growth engine, or a new pitfall dug for retail traders? Liquidity is starting to talk.
On August 19, the U.S. Treasury announced a $4B reverse repurchase operation, and the market quickly reacted.
Over the following two days:
$ETH : +20%
$BTC : +10%
$XAU : +2.8%
The bigger question isn’t the move itself. It’s what happens next.
From September 9, increased repurchases of 10–30 year U.S. Treasuries, with a single-transaction limit of $4B, could keep liquidity expectations in focus.
But markets are cruel: once the bullish headline becomes consensus, the trade can start pricing the opposite.
So I’m not chasing the green candles.
Liquidity can fuel the move. Positioning decides who gets trapped.
The bears don’t become exit liquidity that easily.
#BTCBreaks72K #StorageValuationSplit #TreasuryUpsBuybacks Yushu is basically a big toy company with maxed-out administrative and media resources.
Is the person at the front really the boss? They’re just put forward, but all the accusations about Yushu’s exploitation have to be borne by the front person. How could he possibly be smiling?
Some data points:
Yushu’s R&D expenses were 50 million in 2023, 70 million in 2024, and 90 million in the first three quarters of 2025.
Compared to its marketing expenses, this is pitifully low.
Industry comparison:
UBTech 478 million
Xpeng 9.49 billion
And with this level of R&D spending, Yushu claims 22 times in its prospectus that it is fully self-developed. Where does the confidence come from? Do they think everyone is a fool?
Performing at the Spring Festival Gala for three consecutive years— the money spent and the relationships coordinated behind this are not something an ordinary company can achieve.
DJI, a truly powerful player, has revenue of 84 billion but is valued at only so much, while this toy company?
How could Wang Xingxing be smiling? He’s smart, an entrepreneur, and surely knows what real tech peers look like.
But once you’re on someone else’s ship, how can you easily get off?
As @captain_kent said, unlocking gradually over 7 years—if you can’t raise money at a high valuation, you become the scapegoat and can only do some off-balance-sheet operations while the company runs.
Once the founders can’t get the big profits, the real big players behind this party become obvious.
Today Yushu had a big bearish candle, plunging 17%, comparable to a meme stock.
#宇树科技科创板首日开盘暴涨629%，高估值如何兑现？ BTC and ETH suddenly launched a violent surge without any warning, with bulls charging wildly and shorts instantly liquidated. The entire network is searching for excuses in macro policies and liquidity, but if you delve into the core "liquidity lifeline" of the crypto world, you'll discover a shocking truth that leaves everyone dumbfounded — this surge is purely forced by the insane bloodsucking of the US stock token $SNDK (SanDisk)! ⚠️ The bottom line for crypto bigwigs: when "SanDisk" starts provoking BTC and ETH Recently, the TradFi (traditional finance tokenization) sectors on OKX and Binance have gone completely mad. Due to SanDisk's official frequent releases of AI storage chip wafer fabrication benefits, global crypto funds and quant whales have flooded in like sharks smelling blood. According to the latest market data, $SNDK (SanDisk) single-day perpetual contract trading volume on Binance soared to a terrifying $8.479 billion USD, and on OKX it achieved a staggering 28.1 billion RMB turnover. What does this mean? The trading volume of a single US stock token SanDisk has completely surpassed the second brother $ETH, and is even directly approaching and challenging the dominance of the big brother $BTC! For the true power holders, top market makers, and exchange tycoons in the crypto world, this situation is absolutely intolerable. The native liquidity of the crypto market is limited; all funds running to speculate on white-labeled US stock RWA assets is tantamount to tailoring clothes for traditional finance, directly shaking the foundation of BTC and ETH as the industry's faith! ------------------------------ Brothers, I could hear the shorts screaming all the way from the east side of the city last night.
$BTC surged from 64,100 all the way up, rising over 4,700 dollars in one day, up more than 7% in 24 hours, hitting a new high since early June. The most brutal part was that over 1 billion dollars worth of shorts were liquidated within one hour, the largest short squeeze since 2021. In 24 hours, 175,000 people were liquidated across the entire network, and 2.9 billion dollars vanished into thin air. Bloomberg even used the term "epic short squeeze"; shorts had been building positions for months, and overnight they all turned into fuel, delivered right to the doorstep.
1. This rally is not a low-volume short squeeze. BTC spot ETFs saw a net inflow of 486 million dollars in two days, real money buying in.
2. The trigger was the US Treasury stepping in personally: long bond repos doubled to 4 billion dollars per transaction, the 30-year yield plunged 10 basis points intraday, and the dollar index fell below 99. Money is losing value, so assets have to gain value; the logic is that simple and straightforward.
Some traders suggest that a pullback to 66,500-67,000 is a good entry zone, and if it holds, look for 72,000-73,500. My view: the short squeeze is thrilling, but after the short fuel burns out, it needs real buying to take over. Tonight, we’ll see if the 70,000 level is a "milestone" or just a "photo op".
#BTC突破72000美元，本轮上涨能否延续？
#白宫峰会：特朗普称曾讨论购入BTC Everyone says rate cuts are certain, but inside there's debate about whether to raise rates.
The market currently assumes one thing: the Fed's current cycle is nearing its end, and rate cuts are coming next. But some have noticed the noise in the corner—inside the Fed, some want to raise rates.
Tim Duy, Chief U.S. Economist at SGH Macro Advisors, reminds everyone to watch the upcoming meeting minutes—not the conclusions, but the dissenting votes.
He puts it bluntly: in recent years, more Fed officials have voted against rate decisions, especially when economic pressure is high and policy direction is unclear, internal conflicts get fiercer. This time, the disagreement centers on inflation. Inflation was clearly above target, and some officials worried it wouldn't fall obediently. Coupled with a seemingly stable labor market, these people strongly believe inflation should be suppressed through rate hikes.
So what really matters in the minutes is how many officials agree that "inflation is the main threat." If dissenting votes and hawkish statements cluster, the market's "rate cut narrative" will be questioned.
What does this have to do with us? A lot. Crypto assets are among the most sensitive risk assets; when rate expectations change, capital flows follow. Last night, BTC surged to 69,000 partly because the Treasury expanded bond repurchases to ease liquidity—liquidity is water, crypto prices are boats; when water rises, boats rise. Conversely, if the minutes signal rate hikes, this water might be pulled back.
The market is now in a strange state: the bond market bets on easing, but inside the Fed there's debate about tightening. One side must be wrong; we'll see which side backs down after the minutes are released.
My own view is: don't rush to take sides. Volatility around the minutes release is usually significant; rather than betting on direction, better to see if your positions can withstand two-way swings.
Here's a detail worth pondering: Duy especially emphasizes that the market should watch "how widespread officials' concerns about inflation are." Note he uses the word "widespread," not "strong." This means individual hawks calling for hikes aren't scary; what's scary is if hawkish views form a consensus among decision-makers. If the minutes show multiple officials listing inflation as the top risk, that's the real signal. Conversely, if dissenting votes are just a few isolated ones, it's basically noise, and the market will continue as usual.
Do you think the minutes will extend this rally or pour cold water on it? CFTC to Launch Futures on Computing Power, Chairman Gets Anxious
The US regulator's recent statement caught me off guard.
The CFTC issued a request for comments to set rules for "computing power derivative contracts." What are computing power derivatives? Simply put, it's turning mining computing power itself into a tradable futures asset, similar to how futures were introduced for commodities back in the day. This concept itself isn't new; what's new is the CFTC Chairman Selig's exact words: "Without a robust computing power derivatives market, the US cannot win the AI race."
It's rare for the head of a regulatory agency to endorse a new category by saying "we can't win the race" without it. He also added: back then, the US promoted the industrial economy by establishing trading standards for commodities; now it aims to build rules for computing power to drive the "intelligent economy."
In other words: regulators are preparing to introduce trading tools for computing power as a commodity, including perpetual futures on computing power.
The scope of the request for comments is very specific: the size of the computing power spot market, liquidity, market characteristics, manipulation risks, and customer protection are all covered. The comment period is 60 days, starting from the publication in the Federal Register.
The significance of this move lies in its direction. The scale of spending in the AI sector is evident by the numbers—Alphabet has started issuing Australian dollar bonds, and global AI debt reportedly has reached $489 billion. Computing power is the most tangible resource; whoever can price computing power and offer computing power futures controls the pricing power of AI infrastructure. The US is eager to launch this tool essentially to seize financial discourse power in the AI era.
For us crypto traders, is this good news? After computing power derivatives go live, miners will have more hedging tools, theoretically smoothing out computing power price volatility. But new derivatives also mean new leverage and new liquidation risks. Every time a new futures product launches, there's a familiar pattern.
The 60-day comment period gives the market time to digest. What really matters are the follow-up rules: margin ratios, position limits—these will determine whether this market goes wild or not.
Ultimately, regulators willing to establish exchange standards for a new category is an acknowledgment that it's big enough and unavoidable. It took over a hundred years for commodities to evolve from spot to futures; computing power might only take a few years to go from concept to derivatives. This speed difference is what truly makes this AI race frightening.
Do you think the launch of computing power futures will cool down AI infrastructure or just open another casino? Let's discuss in the comments.When will this US debt storm be out of danger? Keep an eye on this number
The alarm bell has rung. Recently, the yield on the US 10-year Treasury has remained above 4.7, which is a very serious signal, sounding the alarm for global asset pricing.
According to economic principles, the long-term US Treasury yield is linked to long-term inflation expectations. If inflation comes down, Treasury yields should decrease. But we see that since the Federal Reserve's July meeting, the US 10-year Treasury yield has been uncontrollable, continuously breaking through 4.5, 4.6, and 4.7.
Why is this happening? This involves what investors are currently worried about—not actually long-term US inflation, but that the long-end yield reflects term premium.
What is term premium? Taking the 10-year Treasury yield as an example, it means that if I buy this bond and hold it for ten years, various risks will occur over the next ten years. The higher the uncertainty, the cheaper I will demand the bond to be sold to me.
What uncertainties is the US facing?
First, the new Fed Chair, Waller, has lost credibility with the market. At the July meeting, Waller verbally signaled rate hikes, although he vocally opposed inflation, in fact, he did not take any rate hike action and even mockingly said the Treasury market was hiking rates for him. This basically angered Treasury investors, who voted with their feet by selling off long-term Treasuries.
Additionally, Waller introduced a so-called "no forward guidance, no signaling" communication mechanism. Under this situation, investors have to blindly guess whether the Fed will be dovish or hawkish on new economic data. This has caused the bond market, dominated by cautious institutional investors, to be insensitive to good news and more pessimistic about bad news. No matter how favorable the nonfarm payroll and inflation data are, bond investors believe that since the Fed does not provide forward guidance, it likely does not care much about short-term data.
We see a very split reaction after data releases—US stocks surge, even gold rises, but only Treasuries fall.
This reflects the increasingly worsening US fiscal situation. The total US debt has exceeded 40 trillion, and the fiscal deficit has surpassed 2 trillion. How will these holes be filled? The market does not want to answer this for Treasury Secretary Yellen. The market uses term premium to represent investors’ true feelings, which translates to: I don’t know if the US fiscal situation will improve in the future or if Fed Chair Waller’s words are reliable. I only know that I want more interest today to buy more Treasuries.
Worse than the 10-year Treasury is the longer 30-year Treasury, whose yield has reached 5.27, significantly surpassing the historically important 5% threshold. Historically, whenever Treasury yields break 5%, investors could buy with eyes closed. But this time, the yield has broken above 5% to 5.27 and shows no signs of stopping. Investors no longer believe US Treasuries will return to a bull market in the short term.
In the recent public statement on US Treasury financing, Yellen changed the wording from "potential future increase in issuance" to "potential future no increase," which can be seen as a small reassurance to the market. What was the effect? It had a slight effect; the 10-year Treasury yield only fell from 4.27 back to about 4.65, while the 30-year Treasury yield remains firmly above 5.2%.
What impact will this have on ordinary investors? The most important is the link between global carry trades and US Treasuries mentioned earlier. If Treasury yields remain high, it will drive up global bond markets including Japanese, European, and UK government bonds. The rise in bonds will cause another problem—the financing difficulties for US AI corporate bonds, which may cause the current cycle of financing, investment, and stock price increases in AI stocks to collapse, thereby transmitting financial liquidity crises from the bond market to US stocks. The tech sectors of US stocks and our A-shares are fully linked, so this will spread from US stocks to A-shares, affecting everyone’s accounts.
Therefore, I suggest everyone closely watch the US 10-year Treasury yield. Only when the 10-year Treasury yield can return below 4.6 or even 4.5 will it represent a release of short-term financial risks, allowing everyone to expect the bull market to go higher and further.
The above is only a personal opinion and does not represent investment advice. Please be aware of risks. Standard Chartered predicts 100,000 by year-end, but the Treasury Department has already taken action
The hottest topic in today's market isn't how much prices have risen, but who's making the calls and who's taking action.
Standard Chartered analyst Geoff Kendrick boldly stated: Bitcoin could reach $100,000 by the end of 2026. His basis isn't technical charts but liquidity—the U.S. Treasury announced it would double the cap on long-term bond repurchases, raising the single transaction limit from $2 billion to at least $4 billion, effective from September 9 to November 4. Once the announcement was made, the 30-year U.S. Treasury yield immediately dropped. He commented: this kind of operation is "exactly the type Bitcoin likes."
Let's break down this statement. The Treasury expanding repurchase scale essentially injects liquidity into the long-term bond market, easing bond sell-off pressure. Historically, once the government intervenes in liquidity, risk assets are often the first beneficiaries. Behind Bitcoin's past major rallies, this pattern has been evident.
Standard Chartered also gave a technical level: $65,500, saying that breaking through would confirm a cycle low. Coincidentally, last night BTC already touched around $69,700, getting closer to his mentioned level. But to be fair, the $100,000 call comes from a bank analyst, not a prophet. Many who predicted $100,000 this year have quietly revised their forecasts.
More intriguingly is the timing. Kendrick says "now is the time to position," yet on-chain data shows long-term holders' wallets haven't moved much—the loudest callers and the most steadfast holders are often not the same group.
Reviewing my own records, every time this combination of "institutional target price calls + liquidity easing" appears, the short-term is often not the most comfortable buying point but rather the start of increased volatility. Because once the target price is announced, some rush to get ahead, and when many rush, the market tends to jump around.
By the way, the most critical variable in Kendrick's logic isn't actually in the crypto space. The U.S. Treasury this time targets the 10- to 20-year and 20- to 30-year long-term bonds, raising the single repurchase limit from $2 billion to at least $4 billion. Lower long-term yields open up the valuation ceiling for risk assets. The key $65,500 level he mentioned was briefly surpassed by BTC last night at $69,749, leaving that line behind, but whether it can hold depends on the upcoming pullback.
So the real question isn't whether BTC hits 100,000 by year-end, but who can catch it after this liquidity ammunition is spent? The Treasury's repurchase round only starts in September; what will support the market during the vacuum period before then?
Leave a comment: do you believe Standard Chartered's 100,000 call, or do you think it's just another analyst painting a pie in the sky? $BTC ETF single-day explosive buying of $517 million! Institutional funds massively entering to boost BTC short squeeze rally
Behind this round of Bitcoin's violent surge, the large inflow of funds into spot ETFs is the solid core driving force. Data shows that on August 19, the US Bitcoin spot ETF saw the strongest single-day net inflow since May, totaling $517.19 million, with BlackRock's IBIT product alone accounting for $285 million. Institutions are continuously increasing their real money investment in Bitcoin.
From a quarterly holding perspective, institutional ETF total holdings continued to grow by 7.5% in Q2, reaching a total of 535,723 BTC. The continuous rise in institutional positions indicates that Wall Street's trend of allocating Bitcoin remains unchanged. This round of price increase is not merely speculative trading; it has formal institutional funds as the underlying support.
Multiple conditions resonate, spawning this epic short squeeze
1. Improvement in US Treasury liquidity
The US Treasury increased long-term bond repurchase scale from $2 billion to $4 billion, directly suppressing long-term Treasury yields and raising market expectations for liquidity easing. Pressure on risk assets is relieved, allowing Bitcoin to break out of a multi-month consolidation range and open up space for the rally.
2. Epic short squeeze liquidation
BTC surged toward the $70,000 mark, triggering unprecedented large-scale short liquidations. Over $1 billion liquidated in one hour, and a total of $2.99 billion liquidated in 24 hours. Massive short positions were closed in a chain reaction, further pushing prices upward, creating a positive feedback loop of "rising prices forcing short covering, which in turn pushes prices higher." Analysts from BlackRock, VanEck, Fidelity, and others simultaneously noted that BTC's long-term volatility compression had accumulated many bullish positions, making the rally extremely explosive once triggered.
3. Continuous expansion of corporate institutional adoption
Institutions are not only buying ETFs; corporate treasuries are also increasing BTC allocations. Zhibao Technology completed a $154.7 million PIPE financing, directly injecting 2,380 BTC into its treasury; MSTR data shows that among the top 15 institutional holders, 12 increased their holdings in Q2, while continuously promoting Bitcoin treasury assets' inclusion in mainstream MSCI indices.
Objective risk reminders
1. Large single-day inflows are positive, but ETF funds can also turn into net outflows at any time. Single-day data should not be linearly extrapolated as a perpetual signal.
2. After concentrated short liquidations, the market now holds a large amount of unrealized long profits, with severe short-term overbought conditions, making a significant pullback possible at any time.
3. Continuous institutional optimism does not mean the market will only rise without falling; macro factors like US Treasury and Federal Reserve policies remain variables hanging overhead.
$BTC #BTC breaks through $69,000, how far can this rally go? The tenant doesn't want to rent anymore; Circle wants to build its own chain
In the past few years, when we used USDC, we hardly ever thought about which blockchain it was running on. It was on Ethereum, Solana, Base—anywhere you could pay and transfer. Circle, the issuer of USDC, has always been like a tenant, running a thriving business by renting someone else's property.
But this tenant no longer wants to keep renting. Circle announced that their own blockchain network, Arc, will officially launch its mainnet on September 16. This is not just a concept stuck in a PPT; the testnet has already processed over 500 million transactions, nearly 3 million wallet addresses have participated, and more than 100 partners have been actively involved on the private mainnet. The road isn’t officially open yet, but the vehicle has been running for a long time.
The move from tenant to landlord is intriguing. USDC’s growth to its current scale relied precisely on neutrality—not being tied to any single chain, going wherever the chain is popular. Now Circle is building the road itself, effectively taking back the most lucrative layer of settlement. In the future, when you transfer USDC on Arc, both the money and the road belong to the same owner, and the fees and experience are controlled by them.
Arc is positioned as foundational infrastructure for the global financial market, focusing on asset settlement scenarios. Circle has already declared its intention to continuously promote Arc as the underlying road for financial markets. But the problem is, this narrative conflicts with the multi-chain neutrality logic that USDC’s growth depends on.
Behind this lies an anxiety that is rarely mentioned. Stablecoin issuers earn interest on reserves, but once transfers and settlements happen on someone else’s chain, the rule-making power, user access, and even the rhythm of life and death are not in their hands. Circle clearly does not want to be just the money printer. Interestingly, the biggest competitor, Tether, has no plans to build its own chain, but Circle insists on being the one to build the road.
The timing is also noteworthy. After the US GENIUS Act was enacted, stablecoin issuance gained a clearer compliance framework, and the battle for the moat among giants has just begun. Building their own chain means preemptively securing territory, bringing issuance, transfer, and settlement all under one roof.
But trouble comes with it. Once Arc officially launches, will USDC’s weight on Ethereum and Solana quietly be shifted away? Will those public chains that rely on USDC liquidity be happy to watch the issuer move the business back to their own yard? They claim to be building public infrastructure, but the underlying layer has never been claimed just by shouting.
A coin-issuing company starting to build a chain looks like just adding another public chain on the surface. What’s really worth pondering is that power is flowing from the chain to the issuer. Once the road is built right at their doorstep, who can still afford to leave, it’s hard to say.Coinbase's social dream shattered, starting with high-leverage contracts
Remember when Base just launched? Jesse Pollak described the Base App as a space for creators and social players, where everyone could issue tokens and interact—sounding like a crypto version of a social circle. His story was that on-chain social would bring in the next billion users. But more than a year later, the buzz never took off, user growth fell short of expectations, and that beautiful social narrative gradually faded away.
Just these past couple of days, Coinbase quietly inserted perpetual contracts into the Base App. They partnered with Hyperliquid for the underlying execution, allowing users to open long and short positions directly within Base without leaving their wallets. This launch included over 290 perpetual markets covering Bitcoin, Ethereum, as well as stock- and commodity-linked products, with leverage up to 50x. In other words, you originally came to browse a social circle, but now you can easily jump into high-leverage contracts.
The contrast is striking. Previously, Base repeatedly emphasized social and creator tokens, with posters highlighting community, interaction, and belonging. Now, it has turned to embrace high-frequency trading and derivatives. Pollak himself admitted that the social approach didn’t bring the desired growth; instead, prediction markets, perpetual contracts, and stablecoins became more practical adoption drivers. The promised community story was ultimately convinced by trading data.
Choosing Hyperliquid instead of their own system also says a lot. Hyperliquid is a leading on-chain derivatives platform, with matching and clearing running on its own chain. Coinbase outsourced execution, only handling the entry point and traffic, effectively admitting that for perpetuals, they still need to borrow someone else’s blade. A major exchange giant preferring to be a traffic gateway rather than building its own wheel is quite telling.
For ordinary users, being able to tap a few buttons in the wallet to access 50x leverage is a bit scary due to the low threshold. Coinbase left a loophole, saying this feature is not available in restricted regions like the US, UK, and Canada. But on-chain products are naturally cross-border, and those who really want to use it will find a way around. When trading and social are mixed into the same entry point, you might not even be sure if you came to chat or to place orders.
I’m actually more curious about another layer. Base has always wanted to be the super gateway of the crypto world, an app that integrates payments, social, and trading. But if the only reason people remember it is leverage and contracts, then how is it different from a regular exchange app? What do you think—after the social dream is shattered, can Coinbase’s bet really keep people around? Or will it ultimately just become another exchange disguised in social skin?The team that helps write the Ethereum client quietly dismantled this bridge
On Wednesday, Nethermind posted a brief announcement saying it has ceased operating LayerZero's DVN, migrating the entire cross-chain infrastructure to Chainlink, while joining the latter's network as a node operator and strategic technology provider.
The announcement itself was polite and uncontroversial, only mentioning that this was a decision made after a comprehensive review.
But you need to know who Nethermind is. It is one of the main developers of Ethereum's execution clients and one of the core technical contributors to this chain. When such a team chooses infrastructure, it’s usually not a snap decision and rarely changes. Publicly withdrawing from a cross-chain protocol's validation network is like putting their technical judgment on display for everyone to see.
What’s even more worth pondering is the acronym DVN. It is the trust source for LayerZero’s cross-chain messages—who validates and how reliable the validation is all depends on this layer. Nethermind was originally one of the most influential names in this layer, and now it has stepped away.
The timeline is also delicate. In April this year, Kelp DAO’s rsETH cross-chain bridge was attacked, losing about 116,500 rsETH, which was roughly $292 million at the time. After that, several companies gradually moved their cross-chain operations from LayerZero to Chainlink. Just a few days ago, Wyoming’s official stablecoin FRNT made the same move, citing security concerns quite frankly.
Nethermind didn’t mention any of this. No mention of Kelp DAO, no specific technical issues with LayerZero, nor any changes in commercial terms. They only said the review was complete, then they left. The more silent this is, the more it invites speculation.
When we usually look at cross-chain bridges, we check TVL, fees, and how many chains are supported. But what truly determines a bridge’s security is how many teams are willing to stake their names on the validation layer. Whether this list is shrinking or growing reveals more than any TVL chart ever could.
What’s even more unsettling for most people is that when you click to cross-chain in your wallet, the screen only shows a progress bar. Which channel is being used, who is validating, whether the validators have recently changed—this information is never presented to you. Only when something goes wrong will someone tell you how that bridge was actually built.
There’s another uncomfortable issue. The migration wave is also concentrating. Everyone is moving in the same direction, so the multi-validator architecture originally designed to avoid single points of trust might ironically be circling back to a single point again.
What do you think Nethermind’s phrase "comprehensive review" really hides—something it’s unwilling to openly disclose?#BTC broke through $72,000, can this rally continue?
$BTC has been going crazy these past two days, shooting up from 69,000 all the way to 72,000. Many are shouting "bull comeback." But guys, don’t get carried away. We've seen this kind of straight-line surge before, and it doesn’t always end well.
A 12% rebound in a bear market is very normal. Looking back at history: in April 2018, it rose 17%, then dropped 60% before bottoming out; in February 2022, it rose 10.5%, then fell 63%; from June to July 2022, it rebounded 40%, only to drop 37% before hitting bottom. Every wave looked like a reversal, but in the end, they were all fakeouts. I’m not saying this will definitely happen again, but at least don’t go all in just because you see a few green candles. I was too impulsive before, made 60x in a week and lost it all back, now I’ve learned my lesson. When managing clients’ funds, the biggest fear is emotional chasing of highs. It’s fine to play small with your own account, but big positions must wait for confirmation.
$BTC is now around 72,000 with significant resistance above. Whether it can hold depends on whether ETF funds follow. I’ll keep a small position and watch the show, not guessing tops or bottoms. Did you chase this wave? Let’s talk in the comments, don’t get carried away.
#美联储7月FOMC纪要9比3，官员加息分歧仍在
#白宫峰会：特朗普称曾讨论购入BTC Banks supporting crypto legislation suddenly target the small interest on stablecoins
Last night, a statement from the American Bankers Association (ABA) was quite thought-provoking. Their President and CEO Rob Nichols publicly said the goal is to strengthen, not block, the passage of the CLARITY Act, emphasizing that the digital asset industry indeed needs clear rules. However, he then singled out a key provision in the bill regarding stablecoin rewards, saying it must be tightened further.
The issue is actually quite clear. The GENIUS Act passed last year already prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest or yields to holders. The current debate is whether related parties like crypto exchanges can provide similar interest-like rewards indirectly. Nichols’ concern is straightforward: if stablecoin wallets use this mechanism to siphon deposits away from banks, how will banks fund small business loans, mortgages, and agricultural financing?
So the ABA came up with a solution to amend the relevant wording to prohibit stablecoin rewards that are essentially similar to interest payments, and to remove a few potentially ambiguous phrases. They emphasize they are not trying to block crypto companies from offering other types of rewards, just that they don’t want rewards to gradually become disguised deposit interest.
Behind this is a naked turf war. Banks verbally welcome regulatory clarity but are very honest in their stance—they fear that the small yields on stablecoins will really pull depositor money away. As stablecoin scale grows, it increasingly resembles bank demand deposits: users can transfer anytime and earn some rewards, which raises banks’ cost of deposit funding. When USDC and USDT were discussed as cash equivalents by institutions before, traditional banks were already uneasy. Now with the bill voting scheduled for September, the ABA is pushing senators to amend the provisions before the vote.
Interestingly, Nichols ended by saying that the U.S. can be both the global banking center and the global crypto center, provided the rules are clear and consistent. This sounds respectable, but combined with the earlier stance, it reads like "let crypto comply first, then secure our own moat." The September vote will be a critical juncture. Crypto lobbying has grown stronger over the past two years, and banks are no pushovers either. The final version will likely be a compromise, but such compromises often end up being least friendly to ordinary token holders.
For those of us holding stablecoins, this matter concerns our wallets. If the reward provisions are truly cut, the extra yield from stablecoins on platforms might disappear, and whether funds will flow back to banks or push up on-chain capital costs remains unknown. HSBC and Standard Chartered have moved deposits onto the blockchain
There’s something quite worth pondering these days. HSBC and Standard Chartered, two long-established British banks, quietly completed the first real-time tokenized deposit transaction on Swift’s blockchain ledger. This wasn’t a concept demo in a PPT, but real tokenized deposits, transferred and settled in real time between the two banks.
Many people still associate Swift with that old network that sent telegram-style messages for most of its life. But now it has built its own distributed ledger, allowing member banks to handle the transfer and clearing of tokenized deposits on-chain. This validation by HSBC and Standard Chartered shows that traditional finance using blockchain to handle tokenized assets has stepped out of the lab and found the most practical path to implementation.
The most striking contrast is here. In the past, crypto traders often said banks are conservative and Web3 is the future, with neither side respecting the other. But now, the most compliance-focused and risk-averse players have moved deposits onto the chain. For them, this is not about chasing trends but a calculated move: cross-border and institutional fund transfers with real-time on-chain settlement can cut out many intermediaries and waiting times, so money no longer gets stuck overnight in layers of correspondent banks.
Thinking deeper, this development is actually in sync with stablecoins and RWA (Real World Assets). When major banks seriously start tokenizing deposits, the clearing logic on-chain ceases to be a secret code exclusive to the crypto world and gradually becomes part of the financial infrastructure. Behind Swift is a global network of banks; once it opens up its ledger capabilities, the speed of adoption could far outpace that of a few niche public chains. We often say decentralization will disrupt banks, but now it seems banks are incorporating this technology in their own way.
What’s even more intriguing is the mindset. Blockchain has been shouting disruption for years, yet the first to actually move core business onto the chain are those institutions least likely to take risks. They don’t issue tokens or call for revolution; they quietly improve efficiency. This reminds us: the winning move of technology isn’t necessarily who shouts the loudest, but who truly balances the books.
Of course, this is just the first transaction, and the scale is small, far from putting ordinary people’s accounts on-chain. But the signal is clear: traditional finance, often seen as the opponent by many, is incorporating blockchain in its own way. What we really need to watch next is whether other major banks follow suit, and whether this on-chain ledger will grow beyond deposits to more use cases.Trump says SEC is pushing Hyperliquid into the US: The era of DeFi derivatives amnesty, what is Wall Street eyeing?
A piece of news just exploded on social media, shaking the entire DeFi circle profoundly: Trump publicly stated that the chairman of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is actively promoting the introduction of the on-chain perpetual contract leader Hyperliquid into the US domestic market.
Once the news broke, the entire crypto secondary market and derivatives trader community instantly erupted.
It should be noted that in recent years, almost all top on-chain derivatives protocols, including Hyperliquid, have implemented extremely strict physical blocks on US domestic IPs at the front end to avoid the overwhelming regulatory crackdown from the SEC and CFTC.
Now, the plot has taken a 180-degree turn; regulators are no longer hostile but are instead proactively reaching out for amnesty.
Many find it unbelievable: why would the traditionally conservative and strict US financial regulatory system suddenly extend an olive branch to a purely on-chain high-performance decentralized exchange?
The answer lies in Wall Street’s battle for the pricing power of the "next-generation on-chain CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange)."
First, it’s about domestically consolidating trillions in offshore liquidity.
Over the past year, Hyperliquid, leveraging its self-developed high-performance dedicated L1 public chain and millisecond-level pure on-chain order book architecture, has repeatedly approached or even surpassed the daily trading volume and liquidity depth of leading centralized exchanges (CEX). Top think tanks in Washington and Wall Street clearly understand that the rise of on-chain derivatives trading is unstoppable. Continuing to use old strategies of blocking and expelling will only hand over this trillion-dollar financial cake to offshore gray markets. Rather than letting it run wild, it’s better to bring it in through compliant channels and directly build it into a US-led on-chain Nasdaq.
Second, it’s the rigid demand from traditional quant giants for transparent on-chain clearing.
Top traditional market makers like Jane Street, Citadel, and Jump have long been secretly heavily invested in on-chain high-frequency market making. The black-box operations, asset misappropriation, and single-point failure risks of centralized exchanges have left Wall Street wary after the FTX collapse. Hyperliquid’s entire ledger, clearing engine, and collateralization ratios are all verifiable on-chain in real time. Once paired with a compliant front-end access framework, traditional trillion-dollar pension funds and compliant hedge funds can enter the market en masse under institutional protection.
This means DeFi derivatives are transforming from marginalized gray-area revelry into sought-after mainstream financial infrastructure assets.
However, as investors cheer for compliant amnesty, we must also face an underlying native conflict:
Once decentralized protocols are incorporated into the US regulatory system, they will inevitably face real compromises such as front-end KYC tiering, specific asset reviews, and token listing compliance. How to embrace Wall Street’s trillion-dollar incremental capital while preserving the native permissionless and high-efficiency nature of the chain will be the core issue determining Hyperliquid’s long-term valuation ceiling.
From resisting regulation to being embraced by regulators, the power structure of on-chain finance is being completely rewritten.
Trump says the SEC is pushing Hyperliquid into the US. Do you think this will usher in a new era of full compliance for DeFi derivatives? Facing the scrutiny compromises and institutional liquidity influx that compliance may bring, are you more optimistic about its token value explosion or worried about losing its fundamental spirit?
---
The above content represents personal views only and does not constitute any investment advice. DYOR, NFA.
#白宫峰会：特朗普称曾讨论购入BTC A platform specializing in lending to crypto institutions suddenly lost over ten million this quarter
Antalpha, which usually quietly does funding business for crypto whales, released its Q2 report tonight. The numbers don't look good: a net loss of $12.5 million, revenue down 28% year-over-year, only $12.2 million left. A company that makes money by providing crypto asset financing and liquidity services to institutional clients has itself fallen into losses.
Many may not have heard of Antalpha, but its business is actually quite typical: lending money to institutional players to help them maintain liquidity in volatile markets, earning interest spreads and service fees. In a bull market, this business is rock solid; as long as the collateral coins don't crash, it’s almost guaranteed income. Platforms like Antalpha profit from institutions' willingness to pay high interest to maintain positions during bull and bear transitions—the bigger the scale, the better. But this quarter, the problem came from its own books.
The company said its performance was dragged down by one thing: a fair value loss on tokenized gold it holds. Tokenized gold is usually treated as a safe-haven asset, pegged to physical gold prices, with volatility far less than Bitcoin or Ethereum. Products like PAXG and XAUT, which bring physical gold on-chain, are inherently stable. Yet even this most stable reserve dealt it a blow this quarter. A platform specializing in managing crypto liquidity for others was itself bitten by floating losses on reserve assets—somewhat ironic. Simply put, it manages risk for others but couldn’t avoid reserve volatility itself.
What’s more worth pondering is the overall atmosphere in the crypto institutional circle in Q2. ETFs saw continuous net inflows, Wall Street banks kept increasing positions, and money seemed to be everywhere on the surface. Yet lending platforms at the end of the chain saw revenue shrink and turned from profit to loss. The market’s sense of division is growing stronger: top institutions are buying up assets, while service providers at the bottom are under pressure in the shadows.
Zooming out a bit, the heat or cold of the lending business is often a lagging indicator of market sentiment. When the market is hot, institutions scramble to leverage up, and platforms collect interest; when the market cools, collateral shrinks, demand contracts, and the books look bad. Antalpha’s loss feels like a cold splash of water on those still partying.
Why would a funding intermediary platform hoard tokenized gold? Ultimately, it’s to keep some maneuvering room for itself; when gold prices move, its books fluctuate accordingly. This quarterly report serves as a reminder that when lending scale doesn’t keep up and reserves suffer floating losses, the supposedly sure-thing interest spread business can turn sour. And Antalpha is not alone—several CeFi lending and asset management institutions slowed growth in Q2.
What do you think? Is a company doing funding business for institutions a bottom-fishing opportunity or a warning sign? The White House is giving crypto the green light, but public opinion is voting in the opposite direction
Reuters and Ipsos just released a poll with some striking numbers. 69% of American respondents believe that Trump's private business interests will influence his decisions while in office. Another 63% think it is inappropriate for him and his family to profit from crypto business after returning to the White House.
These two figures are especially interesting when viewed in the context of this year's policy environment.
The past few months have probably been the friendliest regulatory period in crypto industry memory. The new CFTC chairman openly criticized the anti-crypto camp, the SEC just proposed a new set of regulations for crypto assets that provide a safe harbor exemption for small startup projects to raise funds, and the Treasury Department is also laying out implementation details for stablecoin legislation. The White House even organized a meeting inviting tech and crypto leaders. Things the industry has waited two years for have almost all been implemented in this half-year.
But at the same time, public opinion is moving in the opposite direction.
The reason is not hard to guess. This presidential family has a very strong presence in crypto, from issuing coins to stablecoins to mining companies, with names in almost every sector. Every policy benefit the industry receives can be interpreted by ordinary voters as something else: Is this deregulation for the industry, or a path paved for insiders?
I know many people are not interested in polls and think they have nothing to do with their positions. But what really matters is not the moral judgment, but the timeline. November is the midterm election. This kind of sentiment in polls is the easiest material for campaign ads and the easiest reason for opposing parties in Congress to stall bills.
The signals have actually appeared. The CLARITY Act, which the industry has been waiting for, has long since dropped to about a 20% chance of passing this year, while the SEC is moving faster on its own exemption rules. The regulators' preference to bypass the legislature itself shows how blocked the legislative path is. What the executive branch provides comes quickly and is withdrawn quickly, without needing Congress's approval.
The industry has been used to a simple logic in the past two years: as long as the White House is friendly, everything else is manageable. But policy is not an asset; it is more like a lease. Rules obtained today through administrative preference can be put back on the table with a change of government or even just a change in the seat structure after the midterm elections.
More subtly, friendliness itself is being labeled. When 60% of people believe this friendliness is driven by private interests, the industry will have to endure a motivation audit every time it gets good news in the future. This cost is not reflected in the market but will be reflected in the difficulty of the next round of legislation.
So, do you think this current regulatory warm breeze is a win the industry earned itself, or just a temporary loan?Cantor is about to put prediction markets into the pockets of Wall Street institutions
Yesterday afternoon, there was a piece of news that not many people noticed. Bloomberg reported that Cantor Fitzgerald plans to directly offer Kalshi's prediction markets to its roughly three thousand institutional clients, including family offices and hedge funds. You probably know Kalshi as the U.S. prediction market platform licensed by the CFTC to legally operate event contracts.
Cantor is not an ordinary brokerage. Behind it stands Howard Lutnick, now the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. More importantly, Cantor has long been a key partner in USDT reserves and has deep roots in the crypto space. It's quite interesting to see an old Wall Street firm so tightly linked to stablecoins turning around to sell prediction markets to institutions. Over the past few years, Cantor has been active in crypto, from facilitating Bitcoin financing to managing stablecoin reserves, making it one of the most daring traditional institutions to dive into crypto.
How does it work specifically? Clients will be able to trade event contracts on weather, commodities, and even the performance of certain companies. Susquehanna, a veteran market maker, will provide quotes and liquidity. What's most intriguing is that some hedge funds have said they prefer trading contracts linked directly to iPhone sales rather than indirectly betting through Apple’s stock price; family offices focus on weather, crop yields, and oil prices to hedge risks. In short, people want to bet not on stock price movements but on whether specific events happen or not.
Susquehanna also added that AI supply chain risks and computing power prices could become new contracts on the prediction market in the future, and institutions might even propose themes they want the platform to list. You see, even computing power and AI are about to become bettable events.
Kalshi has recently been aggressively targeting institutional clients, having just completed its first large trade and partnered with Interactive Brokers. Now, bringing Cantor’s three thousand institutional clients onboard means turning prediction markets from a crypto toy for retail investors into a tool in the hands of traditional asset managers.
This contrasts with the crypto space’s Polymarket. Polymarket is extremely popular overseas but has been blocked from the U.S. market; Kalshi, by relying on regulatory compliance, has captured institutional benefits. The same prediction market story is taking two paths: one towards decentralization, the other towards regulation, but they may ultimately converge.
We need to think clearly about one thing. When Wall Street starts seriously selling event contracts, is the prediction market truly a tool for information discovery, or just another form of packaged gambling? After three thousand institutions enter, will this market become more price-efficient, or just another legal betting venue? DeFi star Fluid's active users dropped by 40%
A few months ago, Fluid was still the new darling of DeFi insiders. Backed by the Instadapp team, it focused on blending lending and trading liquidity, with its TVL once soaring very high, often compared alongside Aave and Maker. At that time, whenever the community talked about DeFi revival, Fluid was almost always mentioned, with many in the community calling for it to take over from the old protocols.
But the latest Q2 report shows a sudden change in tone. Fluid's average TVL dropped to $3.4 billion, down 21% quarter-over-quarter. Although it still rose nearly 85% compared to the same period last year, the upward momentum clearly faded. More importantly, its profitability took a hit: protocol revenue fell to only $1.8 million, nearly a 30% drop in one quarter, marking the first significant decline of this kind for Fluid.
The most striking is the user base. Monthly active users fell directly by 43.8% from the previous quarter, meaning about four out of every ten old users did not return. Trading volume was $18.1 billion, down 37% quarter-over-quarter; fee income dropped 21.5%, and the protocol’s own revenue was even worse, down nearly 30%. These numbers together show that it’s not just one weak area, but both user activity and trading income are retreating.
The money hasn’t disappeared; it just moved elsewhere. The report points out that capital is increasingly flowing toward Jupiter Lend. This is a lending deployment on Solana, which already accounts for nearly half of Fluid’s TVL and is still growing quarter-over-quarter, becoming the largest lending pool. In short, users and funds are voting with their feet, moving from Ethereum’s old line to Solana. The fact that one chain is poaching users from another is quite intriguing.
There was actually an outflow early on, triggered by third-party incidents like Resolv, but Fluid’s contracts themselves were not hacked, and bad debts were covered by the treasury, so users didn’t lose money. Yet even with no security issues, users still left, which actually highlights the problem more. People aren’t running away out of fear of losing money; they just found a more attractive place to go.
The team says they plan to push institutional-grade deployments, integrate Jupiter DEX, expand onto Sui, and have included moves like Bitwise managing USDe and onboarding about $100 million in sUSDai liquidity in their report. That’s what they say, but when a protocol’s strongest growth story starts to falter, no one can be sure if just a roadmap can bring users back. Whether institutions can fill the gap left by retail users is also a big question.
Our community is too used to hyping a project to the skies and then quickly forgetting it. Fluid is not the first, nor will it be the last. The real question is, when DeFi traffic starts to follow chains instead of products, who will be the next quietly siphoned off?Japan's 10-year government bond yield surges to a 30-year high
On Tuesday, Japan's 10-year government bond yield once surged to 2.945%, reaching the highest level since the mid-1990s. Although it slightly retreated on Wednesday, it still hovered around 2.89% without dropping. For a market long accustomed to zero interest rates, this figure is quite striking.
What’s even more painful is the underlying debt. The Japanese government currently has a debt repayment plan of about ¥31 trillion, and every bit the yield rises, the future interest bill thickens. The Ministry of Finance itself has estimated that if the 10-year yield climbs to 3.6%, the annual debt servicing cost alone could soar to ¥41 trillion by fiscal year 2029. This is not a small amount; it’s the lifeline of Japan’s finances. Japan is also the world’s largest creditor nation, so if its interest rates falter, the spillover effects will spread through capital flows to every corner.
The contrast appears in policy. The Kishida administration wants to stimulate the economy through tax cuts and investment, but the reduction in food taxes has already shrunk fiscal revenue. The market is beginning to worry that the government will have to keep issuing bonds to fill the gap, and the more bonds issued, the harder it is to suppress yields—a tightening noose. If the central bank steps in to buy heavily to rescue the market, it will undermine the tightening credibility it just established; neither option is good.
The Bank of Japan is also under pressure. Inflation is rising, the yen is weakening, and traders now bet the central bank will raise rates twice more around January next year, each by 25 basis points, potentially pushing the policy rate to 1.5%. Some former board members have even suggested this rate hike cycle could end at 1.75%, with more aggressive views nearing 2%.
What chills global markets is the 2027 window. The board members supporting rate hikes will gradually leave by summer 2027, and the central bank wants to complete the main rate hikes before this personnel change. In other words, tightening is not a question of if, but a race against the clock.
Japan’s situation is not isolated. Long-term yields in the US and Europe are also approaching multi-decade highs, and the global bond market is quietly cracking like a wall. When borrowing costs rise simultaneously in major economies, risk assets propped up by cheap money, including Bitcoin, must reassess their levels. The yen carry trade has been one of the sources of global liquidity in recent years, borrowing yen to buy high-yield assets. Now that source is tightening, can the crypto market’s limited liquidity really withstand several rounds of shocks?#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 Over the years in the crypto space, since the ICO frenzy of 2017 until now, I've seen too many people liquidated and forced out just because they only looked at data or only at the K-line. If I have to answer this question, my answer is that data determines which direction I look at, and price trends determine when I take action. These two are not a choice but a dual-factor authentication for trend initiation, both indispensable. First, let's talk about data. Although the crypto market operates 24/7 globally, the power of macro data is no less than that of the US stock market. Non-farm payroll data, CPI, Federal Reserve interest rate decisions—these events are the hammer that breaks market equilibrium. Especially in a bear market with low volatility, Bitcoin can grind within a range for months, with all technical indicators dulled. Without macro catalysts at this time, any breakout could be a false breakout. I remember when Silicon Valley Bank collapsed in 2023, the market was already lifeless, but once the expectation of emergency liquidity from the Fed came out, BTC surged 40% in three days. That is the power of data. It answers the question of why to act now and gives me a reason to take a position. Data has a fatal trap: the market may have already priced it in. If the data only meets expectations, the price often spikes up and then falls back, trapping all the long-chasers. I've seen too many beginners who, once the non-farm data comes out positive, immediately chase longs at market price, only to be stopped out by a reverse sweep within three minutes. Why? Because data is just the ignition, the fire canI believe this US market correction is nearing its end. The storage sector’s resilience confirmed my view, so I was preparing to buy $SNDK when the Treasury announced plans to at least double long-term bond buybacks.
To me, this looks like “hidden QE”: more buybacks → lower yields → easing real rates → liquidity flowing back into gold, BTC, and stocks. All three rallied after the news, reinforcing my conviction.
I’m staying bullish rather than shorting.
#BTCBreaks72K
#FOMC9To3Split $SNDK SanDisk's current trend is very strong, with multiple pullbacks failing to effectively break below 1540, which is considered an important support level in this round. The bottom of the previous major pullback was in the 900-970 range, and personally, I feel it’s unlikely to retest that low this time.
I have already placed staggered buy orders at 1380 and 1450, but the current price hasn't reached those levels yet, so no trades have been executed.
Looks like it’s hard to get filled...
Watching the market changes after the US stock market opens tonight,
Let’s see if the Americans will dump the market, 😂
Hopefully, there will be a pullback at the open to provide an ideal opportunity to add long positions #海力士40万亿回购，扩产与回报如何平衡 #宇树科技科创板首日开盘暴涨629%，高估值如何兑现？ #闪迪高位波动，存储股估值分歧加剧 $SNDK $SNDK #海力士40万亿回购，扩产与回报如何平衡
40 trillion won cancellation + 50% FCF return, this is the largest shareholder return in the history of Korean listed companies. At the peak of the storage cycle, SK Hynix chooses to support the stock price with the largest buyback in history. But buybacks can only support temporarily; the real direction depends on how long HBM demand can hold.
Announced on August 19, repurchasing 24.07 million shares (3.3% of total shares) within three months starting August 20, all to be canceled. Based on Monday's closing price of 1.662 million KRW, the total amount is 40 trillion KRW (about 28.3 billion USD). At the same time, shareholder returns for 2025-2027 are raised from "within 50% of cumulative FCF" to "above 50%". Net cash at the end of Q2 is about 69 trillion KRW, 1.7 times the total buyback amount.
Why now? The stock price fell from the June high of 2.987 million KRW to 1.5 million KRW, halving in less than two months. The company frankly states "the current stock price does not fully reflect intrinsic value." In July, it just raised about 3.99 trillion KRW through Nasdaq ADR, clearly directed towards the Yongin wafer fab and Cheongju packaging facilities. Expansion relies on equity financing, returns rely on operating cash flow—dual tracks running in parallel. Woke up from a sleep, and $BTC directly topped above 72000, this surge is indeed quite fierce. A while ago it was still hovering around 69000, then suddenly it pulled up, like it was on drugs.
This rally isn't driven by a single piece of news, but by three forces combined. On the policy side, Trump held a meeting discussing large-scale allocation of BTC as a national reserve, treating it as digital gold to hedge against dollar risk; on the macro side, the Treasury expanded bond repurchases, long-term bond yields dropped, lowering funding costs; on the capital side, ETFs continue to see inflows, exchange inventories decrease, and whales are still accumulating. Multiple factors resonate, forcing shorts to line up for liquidation, and $BTC naturally surged.
But the higher it goes, the more cautious you have to be. Greed is heating up, leverage is piling up, and the reserve plan is still just a discussion, not implemented yet, so the positive news might be priced in early. Technically, there are many profit-taking and trapped positions above 72000, and if no new funds come in to buy, selling pressure will quickly emerge.
I'll keep a small position and watch the show, not chasing the highs. How far this $BTC rally can go depends on whether $BTC can hold on the pullback. Have you chased it? Let's talk in the comments. $ETH
#BTC突破72000美元，本轮上涨能否延续？
#美财政部扩大长债回购，30年美债高位回落
#白宫峰会：特朗普称曾讨论购入BTC 📊 Latest Market Update: $BTC around $72,360, +5.1% $ETH around $2,275, +9.0% The market looks lively, but a closer look reveals that the real leaders are still BTC and ETH, with the vast majority of altcoins lagging significantly. This is actually not surprising. At the early stage of each rebound, funds usually concentrate first on the most liquid mainstream assets, then gradually spread to mid- and small-cap tokens. Right now, it feels more like the big coins are moving first, while altcoins are waiting; it’s too early to define this as a full altcoin season. Currently, you can continue to watch BEAT, BICO, KAITO, LAB, SNDK, H, and other tokens. Among them, KAITO is approaching token unlock, and the increase in circulating supply in the future may bring some selling pressure, so it’s not suitable to blindly chase the price up in the short term. SNDK is related to tokenized stock narratives and has high volatility, which can indeed lead to rapid surges, but activity in a single sector or individual tokens does not prove that the entire altcoin market has completed a capital inflow. 📌 On the macro side, there are also several noteworthy changes: The Federal Reserve’s July meeting minutes show that there are still significant disagreements among policymakers; a 9-to-3 vote result means the path to rate cuts remains uncertain, and market expectations for future monetary policy may continue to impact risk assets. Meanwhile, the U.S. Treasury has expanded long-term Treasury repurchase operations, and the 30-year U.S. Treasury yield has recently pulled back from highs. If long-term rates continue to decline"$BTC Surge: Can It Hold? — After $70,000, The Bull-Bear Divide Reaches Its Fiercest Moment"
From August 19 to 20, Bitcoin experienced an "epic" short squeeze rally — the price violently surged from around $64,000 to above $72,000, with a 24-hour increase exceeding 11% at one point. Nearly $3 billion in liquidations occurred across the network within 24 hours, with shorts accounting for 92% of that, liquidating 170,000 traders. In just one hour, over $1 billion in short positions were forcibly closed.
The rise is real. But the question is — can it hold?
---
📈 The Triple Drivers Behind the Surge
First, the short squeeze is the core driver of this rally. Bitcoin consolidated around $60,000 for weeks, with short positions steadily accumulating. When the price broke out, shorts were forced to buy to cover, creating "passive buying" that further amplified the rally. This is not a rise driven by new demand but a short squeeze.
Second, macro and policy factors resonated. The U.S. Treasury announced it would "at least double" the scale of long-term Treasury buybacks, lowering yields and weakening the dollar; Trump met with crypto industry executives, stating the U.S. aims to be the "world crypto capital" and urged Congress to pass the Clarity Act.
Third, "whales" have been quietly positioning. Over the past 60 days, large Bitcoin holders have accumulated about 43,000 BTC, worth approximately $2.75 billion. The 30-day apparent spot demand indicator is approaching the critical point of turning from negative to positive.
⚠️ Can It Hold? Four Risk Signals Not to Ignore
Signal 1: Technicals show severe overbought conditions. The 1-hour and 4-hour RSI have surged above 85, an extreme overbought zone. After such a sharp rise, profit-taking is almost inevitable.
Signal 2: Coinbase premium remains negative. This is the key hidden risk — Coinbase prices are lower than other exchanges, indicating that U.S. spot market demand has not substantially recovered. This rally is mainly driven by leverage, not genuine buying support.
Signal 3: On-chain data characterizes this as a "rebound, not a reversal." Glassnode classifies the current market as a short-term bounce rather than a trend reversal. Bitcoin price remains pressured by the short-term holder cost basis at $68,500 and the realized market average price at $75,800. The 90-day realized profit-loss ratio is only 0.75, while historical experience shows this ratio needs to be below 0.5 to indicate selling pressure exhaustion.
Signal 4: Volatility risk. Fundstrat warns Bitcoin volatility is at historic lows, with potential for about 30% sharp swings in the next 60 days — direction uncertain.
🤔 Bull-Bear Divide: Who’s Speaking?
Bullish side:
· Standard Chartered analyst Geoff Kendrick predicts Bitcoin could reach $100,000 by the end of 2026, calling the Treasury’s measures "exactly what Bitcoin favors."
· Bitwise CIO says Bitcoin is near the bottom and is "quite optimistic" about the rest of the year.
· Technically, if BTC can hold above the descending trendline, the upper channel points to about $80,000.
Bearish/Cautious side:
· Glassnode emphasizes that until the realized profit-loss ratio surpasses 2, any rebound should be seen as a local bounce.
· Fundstrat’s Sean Farrell warns that previous short squeeze rebounds in early June and July eventually faded.
· VanEck data shows 8 out of 12 Bitcoin capitulation indicators have triggered.
💎 Summary
$70,000 is the focal point of the short-term bull-bear showdown. Strong resistance lies between $72,000 and $75,000, with the first support zone at $68,200–$66,800.
The core contradiction is that this rally is driven by "shorts forced to buy," not "bulls actively buying." The rise built on forced liquidations lacks real demand support, so correction risk cannot be ignored.
Chasing the top carries great risk. A safer strategy is to wait for the price to pull back to key support with reduced volume and stabilize, or to break above $70,000 with strong volume before making a judgment.
In the face of extreme sentiment and leverage, risk control is always paramount. #BTC突破72000美元，本轮上涨能否延续？
---
The above content is for market information sharing only and does not constitute any investment advice. Trading involves risks; decisions should be made cautiously.I am Brother Ci. BTC broke through 72000, rising 11.8% in 24 hours, with a total liquidation of 2.99 billion USD across the network, shorts were swept away in one wave. This is not a mild rebound; it is a self-reinforcing short squeeze. Every time the price surges to a new level, more shorts get liquidated, and the buying from these liquidations pushes the price higher, until all the most stubborn shorts are completely cleared.
There are three core drivers. The Treasury Department expanded the scale of long-term government bond repurchases, causing the 30-year US Treasury yield to plunge sharply from 5.33% to 5.19%, loosening the tightest constraint on BTC from long-term interest rates. Short positions are too full, and the market has been consolidating in low volatility for too long. Once the price breaks a key level, all shorts are on the same boat. ETFs have continuous net inflows; BlackRock's IBIT saw over 200 million USD inflow in a single day, indicating allocation funds are entering.
72000 is the new key level; holding above it requires sustained spot trading and ETF capital relay. If incremental funds continue to enter, the short squeeze may shift into a trending rally. If spot support is insufficient, high-level pullbacks and leverage rebuilding will amplify volatility. The cost-performance of chasing highs is not good; wait for a pullback to 66500-67000 to stabilize before considering. Brother Ci has finished speaking; savor this carefully. #BTC突破72000美元，本轮上涨能否延续？ $BTC $ETH $SNDK Last night's rebound, many only saw the price, but what I saw was two groups on-chain betting against each other.
On one side, a new address first took profit on a long HYPE position last night, then immediately went 4x long on ETH, with 20,000 long contracts and unrealized gains exceeding $6 million. The average entry price was 1936, so precise it doesn't seem like a retail trader.
On the other side, a whale address bc1qsy took advantage of the rebound liquidity and sold another 2,000 BTC in the early morning — totaling 9,513 BTC sold within a month, cashing out $623.4 million.
This is the most realistic portrayal of this rebound: some are rushing in with 4x leverage, while others are using the rebound to sell. In a short squeeze market, the stronger the price rises, the better the liquidity, and the smoother the whale's selling — the short-covering buy orders perfectly absorb the whale's sell orders.
So don't just ask "Can the rebound continue?" but ask "Has the $620 million selling pressure been absorbed?" If it has, this wave is a shakeout; if not, whoever chases above 70,000 is the one at the exit.Not easy, [Hyperliquid's largest long position leader] has gone from a floating loss of $120 million to breaking even now!
He has held long positions worth $487 million in BTC and ETH through 11 addresses for almost 4 months, enduring the losses for 4 months because he got stuck after opening the longs.
In total, he opened longs for 3,000 BTC ($216 million) + 120,000 ETH ($271 million), with an average BTC price of $72,000 and an average ETH price of $2,260.
After two days of explosive gains, he has gone from a peak floating loss of $120 million at the beginning of July to fully breaking even.
Some addresses:
0xa5b0edf6b55128e0ddae8e51ac538c3188401d41
0x8ea85cbd59affca28162fc286d5c093dd0f8edbc 📊 Just updated market data: $BTC around $71,420 (+4.35%) $ETH around $2,245 (+8.72%) $HYPE +16.84% / $TRUMP +14.63% This round is clearly driven by ETH boosting market risk appetite, with the ETH/BTC ratio also strengthening rapidly. Funds are starting to rotate from BTC to ETH and some high-volatility assets. But note: fund rotation ≠ new funds fully entering the market. The recent market rise is more driven by short squeeze, improved sentiment, and fund reallocation among mainstream assets. The fund flow into US spot crypto ETFs remains a key focus; without sustained net inflows, a rally driven solely by leverage is unlikely to evolve into a full bull market. ETH is currently at a dense trading zone near $2,240–$2,260, with 4-hour momentum clearly overheated. The risk/reward ratio for chasing gains now is not attractive. 📝 My response plan: BTC: If it continues to test around $71,800–$72,000, I will consider reducing some positions; if it falls back to $69,500–$69,800 and volume shrinks with stabilization, I will consider re-entering. ETH: Focus on support at $2,160–$2,190. If it holds and volume picks up again, continue to observe; if support fails, do not rush to buy. Altcoins: #BTC突破72000美元，本轮上涨能否延续？ BTC strongly broke through 72000 USD, reaching a new high since June. This round of rally is driven by the combined positive effects of policy, macroeconomics, and capital, but there is significant divergence regarding the sustainability of the rise.
The core upward support is divided into three layers. On the policy side, Trump expressed at the White House crypto meeting the discussion of large-scale BTC national reserve deployment, continuing the strategic Bitcoin reserve executive order, defining BTC as digital gold to hedge against USD debt risk, strengthening global institutional confidence, triggering concentrated long positions to squeeze shorts, with short-term liquidation exceeding 1.4 billion USD in shorts. On the macro level, the US Treasury expanded long-term bond repurchases, long-term US bonds declined, lowering the opportunity cost of holding crypto assets and warming risk appetite. On the capital side, spot BTC ETFs continue stable net inflows, exchange BTC holdings keep decreasing, and whale hoarding behavior consolidates bottom support.
However, there are multiple suppressive risks to the continuation of the rally. Greed sentiment is heating up, contract leverage continues to rise, easily triggering concentrated profit-taking corrections. On the policy front, expanding BTC reserves is only a discussion plan and has not yet been legislated, so the positive effects may be prematurely priced in. Technically, a large amount of short-term profit-taking positions accumulate above 72000; without continuous new capital inflows, selling pressure above will gradually emerge.
In the medium to long term, the US sovereign crypto reserve narrative has sustainability, and institutional long-term allocation logic remains intact; short-term market highly depends on ETF funds and US bond interest rate trends, and only after digesting floating profits through consolidation can upward space open. $BTC $ETH $SNDK Name: SanDisk
Direction: Short
Entry: Around 1650, 3-5 points are acceptable
Take Profit: [REDACTED-GW-BankCard_cn]
Stop Loss: 1680
Switch to long position when it drops below 1500 in a few days
Reason for short: It has consecutively broken the important support level at 1650 in the past two days
$SNDK abnormal volume and price; after the drop, the daily chart level starts to initiate an upward trend $BTC $ETH $XAU Gold entered a narrow consolidation at a high level after a sharp surge on Wednesday
Spot gold closed sharply up 4.35% on Wednesday, once breaking through $4,530 intraday, closing with a large bullish candle.
It has currently slightly pulled back about 0.92% to around $4,480, which is a normal profit-taking and technical correction after the sharp rise.
Intraday support to watch is in the $4,440-4,450 area; if not broken, light long positions can be tried.
Intraday resistance is near $4,550, around the 200-day and 250-day moving averages.
News is mostly bullish
1. U.S. Treasury expands bond repurchase—core catalyst for this surge
On the evening of August 19, the U.S. Treasury announced it would at least double the maximum single operation size of liquidity support repurchases for 10-30 year long-term nominal Treasury bonds to $4 billion, effective September 9. By issuing short-term bonds and buying back long-term bonds to suppress long-end yields, the U.S. dollar index immediately fell below 99, and U.S. Treasury yields dropped significantly, becoming the core driver of the gold price surge.
TD Securities pointed out that the combination of Treasury liquidity support, the Fed’s willingness to overlook energy shocks, and the intensifying stagflation narrative strengthens the rationale for precious metals to rise again.
2. Fed minutes: hawkishness less than expected
The FOMC July meeting minutes released early today show that although the Fed kept rates unchanged by a 9-3 vote and there were hawkish voices internally, only "a few" members supported a direct rate hike in July, far from a majority, weaker than the market’s prior expectation of widespread hawkishness. After the minutes were released, the market interpreted the hawkishness as less than expected, combined with Treasury repurchases suppressing long-end yields, gold and silver continued to rise.
3. Dollar continues to weaken—core support for gold prices
The U.S. dollar index has been weakening recently, dipping to 99.28 on August 17, a new low since early June. The root cause is the U.S. July nonfarm payrolls unexpectedly "cold" (employment decreased by 23,000), July retail sales fell for the first time in nine months, and both CPI and PPI cooled down. CFTC data shows the dollar net long positions remain high, and speculative longs closing positions further amplified the decline.
4. Geopolitics: U.S.-Iran stalemate continues
The 60-day U.S.-Iran ceasefire memorandum officially expired on August 17, with neither side intending to extend it. Trump clearly stated no talks with Iran have taken place and none are planned; Iran has shifted to a "fully offensive" military posture. Shipping volume in the Strait of Hormuz dropped to a standstill, and Brent crude oil rose above $90.
However, it is worth noting that the oil price surge is a double-edged sword for gold—rising oil prices push inflation up, which may force the Fed to tighten monetary policy again, suppressing gold through the chain "oil price rise → inflation rebound → rate hike expectations rise → dollar strengthens." Currently, Treasury support for long-end bonds has temporarily weakened this transmission.
5. Global central banks continue gold purchases—long-term structural support
As of the end of July, the People's Bank of China has increased gold holdings for 21 consecutive months, raising gold reserves to 76.08 million ounces (about 2,366 tons), with nearly 20 tons added in July alone, the largest monthly increase since gold purchases resumed in November 2024. In Q2, global central banks net purchased 288.9 tons of gold, a 411% increase quarter-on-quarter. 45% of surveyed central banks expect to increase gold reserves within the next year.
The above analysis is personal opinion for reference only.
#美联储7月FOMC纪要9比3，官员加息分歧仍在 #黄金重回4500美元，机构分歧加剧 #成品油价差破百，能源通胀会否回升 #财报观察员：小米Q2财报出炉，是汽车救场还是手机拖后腿？
The institutional consensus is more fragile than expected; today's big surge has pushed expectations even higher.
Market page: In the past 90 days, 12 investment banks have a buy rating with an average target price of 42; CCB International only gives 37 with a neutral rating, and the target price range spans nearly 60%—HSBC 53.4, Huaxing 44, Goldman Sachs 41, showing huge divergence.
The "buy consensus" is based on two assumptions: automotive delivery + AI monetization. But Q2 profits have already halved, and the automotive segment still lost 2.6 billion; if either assumption fails, the consensus collapses.
Today's rise is sentiment, not validation of assumptions. I am bearish on this fragile pricing.
$XIAOMI $SKHYNIX is caught in a dense entanglement of moving averages around 163, with valuation reshaping driven by a 40 trillion KRW buyback and cancellation, alongside concerns about pressure on advanced process expenditures forming the core contradiction in the current market.
The price is currently converging and oscillating within the Bollinger Bands channel, with short-term moving averages converging indicating an imminent directional decision. The union wage agreement has eliminated short-term operational concerns on the fundamentals, while the commitment to allocate over 50% of free cash flow over three years to shareholder returns has raised the valuation floor of the chips.
Market driving factors show divergence: supply-side restraint on capacity expansion and the raising of the earnings per share ceiling dominate short-term support, followed by implicit concerns about cash flow being heavily locked up, squeezing next-generation HBM R&D expenditures.
On the upside scenario, if bulls push the price to break above the 166.16 resistance level with increased volume, it will confirm the momentum of valuation reshaping driven by the buyback. This scenario requires volume to expand synchronously; volume-less upward probes will reduce the effectiveness of the breakout.
On the downside scenario, if bears suppress the price below the 161.09 moving average defense level, market risk aversion regarding limited capacity expansion flexibility will dominate. This will trigger phased selling pressure and increase the probability of retesting the 156 support level.
The invalidation point is at the key defense level of 161.09. When semiconductor sector sentiment diverges from dividend expectations, or advanced process certification experiences delayed disturbances, the current valuation support logic will fail.
The most important variables to observe in the next 7 days are whether the price can maintain the chip concentration above the 161.09 moving average and whether volume can continue to expand during the push toward 166.16.
#美财政部扩大长债回购，30年美债高位回落 #OpenAI二季度营收67亿美元，亏损扩大 #宇树科技科创板首日开盘暴涨629%，高估值如何兑现？Don't lose your head in the euphoria of longs: $BTC #BTCBreaks72K is awaiting a pullback, $ETH needs confirmation, shorts shouldn't rush for a "revenge" yet. The main feature of this move is one word: fast. BTC quickly rose from minimal levels to about 70,000 dollars, with a daily increase exceeding 8%; ETH even more so — at one point it broke 2,300 dollars, gaining almost 18%. Market sentiment instantly shifted from "could the bear market really not be over yet" to "could the next stop really be 80,000 and 3,000 d🚨 Dormant Bitcoin Wallet Wakes Up After 15 Years
A wallet that received 8.54 BTC in 2011, when BTC was around $14, has suddenly moved its coins.
💰 The stash is now worth roughly $538K.
This may be repositioning rather than profit-taking, as long-term holders could simply be moving their BTC to new wallets. 👀$BTC surged to 72,059 after breaking through 70,000 today, then pulled back to around 71,730. The market is strong, but what truly deserves attention is not just this big bullish candle, but the changes in chip distribution behind the rise. According to CryptoQuant data, excluding exchange and mining pool addresses, large holders have net increased their BTC holdings by about 43,000 coins over the past 60 days, ending months of continuous net selling. Calculated at the time of the news release at about $64,000 per BTC, this batch of BTC is worth approximately $2.75 billion; at current prices, the value has exceeded $3 billion. However, it should be clarified here: an increase in on-chain balances does not mean all 43,000 BTC were directly bought on the spot market; it may also include OTC trades, custody adjustments, and address reclassification. The real signal it conveys is that large funds have increased their Bitcoin exposure again around $60,000, and the mid-term chip structure is improving. Whale accumulation can raise the market bottom but does not mean there won’t be short-term pullbacks. From the latest 5-minute chart, after BTC hit 72,059, it did not continue to accelerate and has now fallen below VWMA5, VWMA10, and VWMA20; RSI dropped from the overbought zone to around 61, BBP momentum is near zero, and volume has been decreasing from the peak at the breakout. This indicates that the first round of acceleration caused by short squeeze has slowed, and the market is waiting for new spot buying to take over. The divergence on the order book is also obvious: sell orders are concentrated around 71,900 to 72,100, which is currently