Orbit Post Sitemap
$1.3 billion in trading volume, what does it really indicate?
$ZEC's 24-hour trading volume is about $1.36 billion, so there are definitely people trading, but this number alone cannot be directly interpreted as an equivalent scale of net capital inflow.
Every trade has both a buyer and a seller, and the same funds can be traded repeatedly.
So what I want to see more is, after so many trades, where does the price actually go? If trading remains active but the price fails to rise, it at least indicates that the willingness to sell is not low.
The buzz is worth paying attention to, but the direction still needs to be answered by the price. Judging solely by trading volume to claim a large amount of new funds have stayed is not enough evidence.
$SLX's unit price is only a few cents, which easily makes people think there is huge room for growth.
But cheap per token does not mean the entire project is cheap; total supply and market cap must be considered together. Being able to buy many tokens only changes the holding quantity and does not automatically increase yield.
I would first study whether demand can grow before discussing if the price has room for imagination.
$NEAR has risen about 75% in the past month, which I think raises the bar for subsequent positive news.
The existing increase may already include some expectations. What’s worth asking next is whether new developments exceed those expectations, rather than just adding another piece of good news.
$DOGE is close to 0.08, a memorable number, but it is not a level the market has agreed to hold.
Whole number levels can be observed, but support requires actual trading proof. Simply because the price looks familiar and treating it as reliable support can lead to premature conclusions.The monitor on the operating table just reported a number: 486,532 heartbeats, stronger than expected but 2.1% fewer beats year-over-year—this is not resuscitation, this is compensation.
Tesla's Q3 earnings report in front of us is like a heart barely maintaining its ejection fraction. On the surface, delivery volume exceeding expectations is like a temporary rise in blood pressure, but every cardiac surgeon knows: blood pressure returning doesn’t mean the myocardium isn’t damaged. What truly determines prognosis is the gross margin of the automotive business—that is the heart’s ejection fraction, how much effective blood is pumped out with each contraction. If the gross margin continues to be eroded by price wars and subsidies, no matter how impressive the delivery numbers are, it’s just compensatory tachycardia that will eventually lead to decompensation.
Cash flow is the coronary perfusion of this heart. Without perfusion, myocardial cells become hypoxic; technology reserves, capacity expansion, and R&D investment all become ischemic necrotic tissue. Can the Q3 delivery data that exceeded expectations translate into actual improvements in gross margin and free cash flow? This is the most critical coronary angiogram in the preoperative assessment.
As for Robotaxi and Optimus, those are experimental heart transplants and artificial hearts. Patient families always like to ask about these future therapies, but the surgeon’s duty is to stabilize the current hemodynamics first. Long-term options cannot be used as a remedial bypass for current gross margin.
The linkage with $xAAPL is essentially a cross-blood-type transfusion. The US stock market itself is the donor heart, the token market is the recipient circulation, and the immune rejection reaction between the two is often amplified by emotions—the donor is still preparing for surgery, while the recipient side has already developed atrial fibrillation. The price plunge is just a symptom; emotional treatment is useless. What must be found is the root cause of the market’s illness: is it insufficient liquidity perfusion, valuation myocardial hypertrophy, or narrative valve stenosis?
After the market closes on October 21, it will be the moment this surgery opens the chest cavity. Delivery volume is the preoperative vital sign, gross margin is the intraoperative observation, humanoid robot progress is the intraoperative frozen pathology, and cash flow direction is the perfusion flow of extracorporeal circulation. Any link failing will cause a crisis in the recovery room requiring emergency thoracotomy.
I don’t give preoperative-style investment advice. I only do one thing—wait for the curve on the monitor to tell me whether this heart is recovering or heading toward end-stage heart failure. #teslaq3profitandmarginsOrder Book Strength Ranking
5-minute median slippage, estimated by order book
After amplifying orders for BASED and TIA, both buy and sell slippage increased significantly, with BASED showing the highest simulated slippage for 100,000 scale trades.
$ZIL large sell cost decreased, buy cost increased. Simulated buy/sell slippage for 100,000 scale changed from 1.24%/1.32% to 1.51%/1.16%. One side gets more expensive while the other gets cheaper.
$BASED simulated buy/sell slippage for 10,000 scale is 0.11%/0.14%, and for 100,000 scale is 0.74%/0.78%. Depth is not continuous by scale; the 100,000 level is the real execution constraint.
$TIA simulated buy/sell slippage for 10,000 scale is 0.06%/0.06%, and for 100,000 scale is 0.29%/0.28%. Do not linearly extrapolate 10,000-level slippage to 100,000-level; read levels according to actual order sizes.The reading of the pressure gradient just exploded—the producer price index year-on-year for September surged to 6.3%, a full hectopascal higher than the forecast; month-on-month it was 1.3%, as the warm and humid air mass directly pierced through the tropopause on the cloud map. The core gauge also simultaneously exceeded the limit, with consumer prices rising to 3.7%. Two heat waves stacked together should have triggered a city-wide high-temperature red alert.
But on October 16, our chief forecaster Walsh stood in front of the radar screen and said only one sentence: no preset pressure adjustment actions. Dali and Goolsby followed closely, with the typical tone of "temporarily postponing the warning issuance." So the market’s supercomputer immediately began recalculating probabilities—the revised forecast for an October rate hike collapsed from over 50% to about 15%, and the remaining pressure adjustment windows for the year were all pushed back to "pending observation."
This is the most critical part: meteorological data is all trending hot, but decision-makers refuse to write the heat wave as a frontal passage. Wind shear has not formed, cumulonimbus clouds hover in the troposphere without falling, radar echoes are visible but do not reach the ground. Capital feels most uncomfortable in this "upper-level trough lag" weather—neither daring to open the umbrella nor to close the net.
Look again at that cross-market target, which is highly coupled with the atmospheric circulation of the US stock market. Interest rate expectations are the subtropical high pressure above it: if the high pressure continues to extend westward, valuations are suppressed, air flows descend, and the target can only crawl close to the ground; once the high pressure retreats eastward and the probability of rate hikes continues to be revised downward, the warm ridge immediately moves north, and the target gains conditions for short-term explosive convection. But remember, all current models have large divergences, and the forecast confidence intervals are as wide as the 72-hour typhoon track error circle.
What really deserves attention is the pressure field itself, not just single-point readings. The greater the temperature difference at both ends, the more intense the front—the inflation data is the surface heat source, the Fed’s stance is the upper-level cold vortex; if the two do not converge, it means no precipitation; but once the cold vortex suddenly presses south one day, convection will release with intensity beyond expectations. At that time, the target’s volatility will jump from level three directly to level ten, like gusts at coastal stations.
I just refreshed the latest detection data here: the heat wave is still accumulating, thunderstorms have not yet ignited, and the convergence of all indicators is declining. #USCPIAndPPITopForecasts The probability of Netflix Q3 GAAP EPS exceeding $0.84 is low, leaning towards a No vote.
$0.84 was the old consensus from July; the current market consensus is about $0.823, and the company guidance is only $0.82. To get a Yes, it would need to beat consensus by about 2%, which is unrealistic for a company whose revenue growth has already slowed to 11.7%.
The core issue is the lack of flexibility on the revenue side. Q3 revenue guidance is only up 11.7% year-over-year, the slowest in nearly three years. Viewing time growth stalled in the first half of the year, with no breakout hits driving growth; profits can only come from cost-cutting, which clearly sets a ceiling.
Layoff benefits won’t be realized in Q3. The announcement of 1,000 layoffs was only made on October 14, and severance costs will drag on current period expenses; real savings will come in Q4. Management stated they will "complete the full-year forecast as planned," basically ruling out the possibility of raising guidance.
Historical patterns also don’t support a jump. Netflix’s beat is usually only about one cent (Q2 guidance was $0.79, actual $0.80). Projecting Q3 actual EPS will most likely fall between $0.82 and $0.835, unless advertising suddenly surges or exchange rates reverse, it’s hard to fill the two-cent gap.
Conclusion: Vote No, with about 70% confidence. $0.84 corresponds to optimistic expectations from three months ago, not the current business reality. But note, even if EPS misses the mark, as long as advertising data looks good, the stock price could still rebound, though I think this is a low-probability event.
#奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 $BTC early Saturday morning, four coins in three colors
$BTC 82169, the 82000 level is interesting 📈
The midweek drop from 83600 was expected to test 80000, but it was caught at 81000. Weekend volume shrank, yet the price stayed stable above 82000. ETF funds are flowing out, but spot orders are placed below, two forces locked at this price level.
$ENA 0.1963, took a big hit the day before yesterday but recovered a bit today 🌬️ That day a bearish candle dropped over 5 points, from 0.21 straight down to 0.197. It operates as on-chain USD interest-bearing, and as US Treasury yields rise, its interest advantage thins. The recent small rebound looks more like a technical correction after overselling.
$ASTER is the strongest performer among the four today 🚀
Jumped from 0.69 to 0.706 in one go. Weekend liquidity is thin, a few buy orders can push it up over 2 points. Decentralized contract DEX volume rises with market volatility, and shorts covering these days also helped. This kind of bounce comes fast and goes fast.
$HYPE 80.88, the most stubborn one 📊
Other coins jump around, but it moves sideways between 80 and 81. It is itself an on-chain exchange; the longer the market oscillates, the steadier its fees, with 97% of profits used for buybacks to support the price. No surprises, no shocks.
This article is for market analysis only and does not constitute investment advice
#US CPI and PPI both exceeded expectations, can it last within the year The most vulnerable point has never been the price, but the people who rush to chase highs as soon as emotions warm up 🫧 After BTC stands above 80000, do you really dare to chase? I've been watching the cross-market line these days. Both CPI and PPI exceeded expectations, risk assets took a hit first, then climbed back. BTC held 80000, ETH slowly recovered after liquidations, while ZEC strengthened independently relying on its own halving story. On the surface, it looks like a rebound, but underneath it's a tug of war in crowd psychology: fear of missing out, yet afraid of being swept again. First, look at the funds. In the past 30 days, BTC spot ETFs had a net inflow of about 2.09 billion USD, which is not bad, indicating allocation funds haven't turned away. But ETH ETFs are still seeing continuous outflows, which is critical. Both are mainstream assets, one is being steadily supported, the other is still being reduced, indicating the market is not trading broad gains but selective picks. Money prefers to stay where certainty is higher, rather than spreading across the entire sector. The sentiment index has reached 63, sliding from fear to greed. This position is where people are most likely to let their guard down. The wounds left by leveraged liquidations haven't fully healed, many people's positions on paper are more fragile than their mindset. Once the price consolidates too long, impatience will replace patience, and chasing highs and cutting losses may happen in the same week. Cross-market linkage is also sending signals. The US stock CPI and PPI exceeded expectations, which should have suppressed risk appetite, but BTC did not crash along, indicating that part of the crypto buying is independent, notJust after 3 a.m., I glanced at $INJ and the unrealized profit number popped up. Honestly, my hands were a bit shaky at that moment. Short position, 50x leverage, opened at 9.08, now the mark price is 8.687, unrealized profit +216.40%. I originally expected to take profits after a few dozen points, but 50x leverage literally turned the actual price drop into more than double the gains. Incredible, this time I made a big profit.
From 9.08 to 8.687, the underlying price only dropped about 4.33%. If it bounces up just 4.5%, my profit is gone, and a little more upward movement would turn it into a loss. The 8.687 level is showing short-term support; chasing shorts here is very poor value, with limited downside space and a single upward spike could trigger liquidation.
The plan is clear: withdraw the principal to secure profits, set a stop loss for the base position at the 9.08 entry price to break even, and let the rest float freely. If you haven't entered, don't envy; chasing here is not about making profits but catching a falling knife. High leverage unrealized profits are fragile and come and go fast. Today I earned enough and will stop; the money secured is truly mine. Contract trading carries very high risk, and high leverage easily leads to liquidation; this is not investment advice. If you missed this, wait for the next opportunity. $BTC $ETH #渣打开放BTC与ETH交易，银行加密业务扩展 Recently, I saw a set of position data from a large trader known as "爆姐" and found it quite interesting. The same account was shorting BTC and ETH while going long on JTO at the same time. So what happened? Both short positions made profits, but the single long position on JTO wiped out all the previous gains and even caused a significant loss. 😂 Honestly, this kind of situation is not uncommon in the futures market. 📊 Let's first look at the three positions. 🔴 ETH: 10x leverage short Open price $2497.68, mark price $2453.97. Floating profit 9624.59 USDT, return +17.49%. 🔴 BTC: 10x leverage short Open price $82708.7, mark price $82225.9. Floating profit 7879.07 USDT, return +5.83%. 🟢 JTO: 5x leverage long Holding 384,658 JTO. Floating loss 33950.20 USDT, return -78.71%. The combined floating loss of the three positions is about 16446.54 USDT. In other words, the two short positions on BTC and ETH earned about $17,500 together, but it couldn't cover the $34,000 loss from the single JTO long position. 💰 Why did the trader lose money despite being right on two directions? Here is a particularly worthy issue to study: portfolio risk exposure. Many traders believe that going long and short on different coins simultaneously diversifies risk. But in reality, price movements of different coins are not completely synchronized. Especially some altcoinsToday's Review｜How I Turned "Being Right Three Times" into "All Losses"
Trump1 took a small profit and ran, then surged wildly. The ambush on Chinese Nervous Frog was flat with no movement, sold it and it took off minutes later. Made some profit and cut it, Trading Cat rose tenfold, I wanted to do a second phase but got trapped, then recklessly opened dozens of orders trying to make it back.
Reasons:
1. No holding logic, wanted to cash out at every small rise
When entering, I only thought "this narrative can rise," never considered how high is right or how long to hold. Without a target, selling relies on emotion, so I always sold at the starting point.
2. No failure conditions written, doubted myself during consolidation
Nervous Frog was flat for a long time, I started thinking "is no one coming?" But consolidation doesn’t mean the narrative failed, I didn’t set in advance "what situation counts as being wrong," so I only used "no movement" as an excuse. When the market quieted, confidence collapsed first.
3. Splitting the same narrative into multiple trades, I was gambling not judging
The same narrative produces several trades, I didn’t judge which was the leader, just picked one by feeling. Chose wrong and didn’t stop loss timely, dragged it to cutting losses. In this situation, picking right is luck, picking wrong is normal.
4. Mistaking "missed profits" for "lost money"
This is the most fatal. Watching Trading Cat rise tenfold, I was unwilling to accept it, chased in at the peak emotion point, then opened dozens of orders recklessly to make up. Missing out is just less profit, the compensation mentality is the real loss.
Countermeasures:
1. Before entering, write down holding reasons, targets, and failure conditions
2. For ambush orders, decide how long you’re willing to wait first, consolidation is not a reason to sell
3. For splitting trades of the same narrative, confirm the leader before entering#奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 Ansem views this round of pullback as a "deleveraging" rather than a trend reversal. 🧹 CoinGlass data: As of October 15, about $920 million liquidated in 24 hours, longs about $800 million; $BTC dipped to 80230 then pulled back to 82000. 📊
But the trigger is often overlooked: CPI is hotter than expected, US Treasury yields reached 5.31%, crude oil surpassed 105, and rate hike expectations are being repriced. 🌡️ Therefore, deleveraging only eases crowding; the macro headwinds remain. Many liquidations do not necessarily mean positions are lightened; open interest still needs confirmation. 🔍
Short term may continue to range between 80000–87500: breaking above 87500 makes Ansem's logic more credible; if yields continue rising and 80000 fails to hold, deleveraging is not complete. ⚖️ The above is a personal opinion record and does not constitute any investment advice. #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 🚨 Justin Sun throws cold water: Quantum computers haven't arrived yet, but Bitcoin is already stuck on upgrades
Many fear quantum computing will break $BTC, but Justin Sun points the blade elsewhere: When that day comes, can Bitcoin complete a full network upgrade within two years? He says, almost impossible. Those who joined the community in 2012 know how slow the progress is.
📊 History has already played out:
▪️ SegWit: Argued for two years, and in the end, it wasn't an upgrade completion but a fork — $BCH was born.
▪️ Taproot: Relatively smooth, but still took 3 years.
▪️ Consensus is not just about changing code; it requires miners, nodes, exchanges, and users all to agree.
🔍 What's the key?
The time quantum cracking will take is unknown, but "how slow Bitcoin upgrades" doesn't need quantum computers to prove; the past decade has repeatedly shown it. Most people overestimate urgent mobilization and underestimate governance friction.
💡 My judgment:
This doesn't mean BTC is in danger tomorrow, but its defense upgrades may not keep pace with external variables. Quantum is a distant worry; consensus delays are a near concern.
📌 The real question: If the threat countdown starts, will BTC have time to change its locks?
Do you think this is alarmist or a real hidden danger?
#BTC #BCH #QuantumComputing #Cryptocurrency Currently, near the US stock market close at midnight, the prices of $BZ and $CL crude oil continue to rise
Crypto and US stocks are both under pressure
On the US stock side, Nasdaq fell 1.5%, S&P 500 fell 0.66%
Tech stocks were hit the hardest, SK Hynix, Intel, Arm fell over 5%, AMD and Micron fell over 4%
$BTC dropped below 81,000, ETH also fell below 2,400, with a slight rebound by the time of posting
CPI and PPI have just consecutively exceeded expectations, oil prices surged again, pushing inflation expectations higher
The 10-year US Treasury yield remains above 5.1%, when oil prices and yields rise together, stocks and crypto both face liquidity outflows
BTC has defended 80,000 several times in the past month, but this time with rising oil prices and persistently high US Treasury yields, the pressure at the 80,000 level is greater than before
The buy orders at 78,000 below are the last line of defense‼️‼️
#CrudeOilContinuesToRiseBTCUnderPressure #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins Don't be fooled by the recovery: this rebound, the bulls haven't entered the market
It's evening now, and the market is much calmer than this morning. After the PPI spike last night, the day was all about recovery, but don't be fooled by this rebound; the structure hasn't been repaired.
Starting with $BTC, current price 82240, last night’s low was 79725. The price has recovered, but open interest dropped from 2.58 billion to 2.45 billion, the long-short ratio fell from 1.88 to 1.63, and the funding rate is hovering around zero, with no one willing to pay. What does this mean? Shorts are covering to push the price up, not new longs entering. There's heavy resistance between 83000 and 84000; don't chase without volume.
$ETH is stronger than BTC, current price 2457, up 3.57%. The long-short ratio dropped from 2.73 to 1.95, and a lot of leverage has been cleared, which is good. The 4-hour MACD shows a golden cross below zero, indicating short-term rebound momentum, but there are many trapped positions above 2500, so chasing longs has low cost-effectiveness.
$SOL still needs close attention, current price 106.76, low was 100.82, the 100 level held. But the long-short ratio at 2.46 is still high, funding rate fluctuates between positive and negative, bulls remain crowded. There's resistance near 110 on the rebound, and it's hard to break through without volume.
Summary: This is a recovery, not a reversal. BTC at 80000, ETH at 2400, and SOL at 100 are the bottom lines. Expect consolidation before these break; if broken, it signals a new round of decline. I have no positions, waiting for clearer signals.
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？
#BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ US stocks opened for an hour, coins rebounded, but position data hides signals
2.45 billion, this open interest value is worth noting📌. After the US stock market opened, several major mainstream coins quickly recovered their losses, and the market looked to be warming up. However, derivative positions declined simultaneously, and the long-short ratio collectively dropped.
This indicates that the current rise is driven by short covering, not new funds entering from outside. US tech stocks stabilized, giving the crypto market a brief breather, which is a corrective rebound, not a trend reversal.
The resistance levels above are very clear: 83000-84000, 2500, 110—these thresholds hold a lot of trapped positions. Before breaking through, this rebound is more suitable for reducing positions, not for chasing higher or adding positions.
You can wait for the US stock market close tomorrow to observe ETF capital flows before making a judgment.
If volume expands and stabilizes above the mentioned resistance zones, the observation logic in this article will become invalid. What do you all think about this short-term rebound?
$SOL $BTC $ETH TSMC's Q3 net profit smashed records hitting an all-time high, but the real signal to watch isn't in the US stock market—it's in the tentative buying quietly warming up in the crypto market. $BTC has returned near 82200, $ETH has reclaimed 2440, sentiment remains neutral, yet capital is beginning to cautiously test positions—this kind of "exponential positive news + moderate crypto follow-up" mismatch is often overinterpreted as weakness. What I pay more attention to is the independent rhythm of the $NEAR and $SUI blockchains. $NEAR's rebound today is significant, approaching the 5.2-5.3 range. The short-term logic is clear: if it holds above 5.3, the next target is 5.5-5.6; if it breaks below 5.0, it will likely return to consolidation. $SUI is rising in sync to around 1.03, with 1.00 support still effective; if volume breaks above 1.05, upward space could open; otherwise, it will oscillate between 1.00-1.05. The key insight is: this rebound is not a full return of risk appetite but a directional probe by capital toward high Beta blockchains after mainstream coins stabilize. TSMC's profit record strengthens the AI and computing power narrative, and $NEAR and $SUI happen to be on the extension of this narrative. The market generally underestimates that when macro tailwinds cannot directly transmit to crypto, capital chooses "narrative-adjacent assets" as the first landing point. The confirmation signal is simple: if $NEAR holds above 5.3 and $SUI breaks 1.05 with volume, rotation is confirmed; otherwise, if both give back gains, it indicates this is just an emotional repair, not a trend start. Personally $XAU vs $XAG : Are Bears Walking Into a Trap?
Both gold and silver remain heavily shorted, but fresh buying suggests the pressure may be shifting
My view: Silver looks more interesting for a potential short squeeze. Profitable shorts may start closing positions if buyers keep pushing.
Gold could follow
The biggest risk for bears isn't the current buying. It's what happens if short sellers start taking profits at the same time.
Still, if buying fades, both markets could resume their declineMeta's AI investment also includes a significant account that has not yet been fully reflected in the current expenses, which is truly concerning.
Reviewing the Q2 10-Q, the company's construction in progress reached about $80.3 billion, mainly involving data centers, servers, and network infrastructure. These will gradually convert into usable assets, which will then bear corresponding depreciation and operating costs. The profits reported in the financial statements and the money already spent in the accounts do not occur at the same time.
This does not mean that more construction is inherently riskier. Meta has a mature advertising business, and if the new computing power makes recommendations more accurate and ads more likely to drive purchases, the initial investment could very well pay off. What I dislike is that discussions only count future incremental revenue but treat the subsequent ongoing costs as if they do not exist.
To test AI returns going forward, the company should be allowed to provide a timeline and should be required to clarify whether the business earnings after the new facilities come online can grow faster than the cost increases. The hype on the day the model was released cannot answer this question.
My stance is cautious but not dismissive of the investment. What truly justifies a high valuation is the ability of the new equipment to continuously generate returns. If revenue growth depends on increasingly heavy capital investment to sustain, shareholders should recalculate the payback period. Especially when many projects are still under construction, a good profit in the current quarter does not automatically mean the toughest cost challenges are over.
#Meta巨额AI投入进入回报检验期 Writing
#KR200 Korean Stocks Rebound — Has Foreign Selling Pressure Eased?
Don’t mistake a sharp rebound for a confirmed recovery.
After the KOSPI’s heavy sell-off, the latest bounce may reflect short covering and bargain hunting rather than a genuine return of foreign capital. Until foreign selling pressure eases and semiconductor stocks show sustained strength, caution remains necessary.
#DailyOrbit #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 CPI and PPI both exceeded expectations! BTC slightly dipped at noon, 82000 tug-of-war 🤔
Last night PPI was released, BTC first dropped then pulled back, now grinding around 82000. CPI and PPI both exceeded expectations, inflation hasn't eased, the Fed remains tough, but the futures market predicts an 83% chance of no rate hike this month, with possibly one more hike later this year.
No rate hike this month means a temporary relief for the crypto space. Note, it's temporary. Slightly less pressure doesn't mean the alarm is off. The real factor deciding whether 80k holds is still the capital: ETFs haven't reversed, institutions remain closed; whales are slowly accumulating spot, on-chain selling pressure is easing. One side is withdrawing, the other buying, a clear divergence.
So 82000 is not the end, it's a tug-of-war. Some defend 80k, but it's tough. Next, watch if ETFs can flow back in and if BTC can stabilize above 83000. Without these two signals, the rebound will lack momentum.
Brothers, what do you think about the slight dip at noon? With no rate hike this month, can BTC rebound? Can 80k still hold? Let's discuss in the comments 👇
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #ETF与巨鲸资金分化，BTC能否守住8万美元？ $BTC #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高
ETFs continue to bleed, BlackRock becomes a "hardest hit area"
In the past two weeks, Ethereum spot ETFs have seen a cumulative net outflow of over $885 million, with almost continuous outflows since September 29. On October 15 alone, the net outflow was $60.22 million, of which BlackRock's ETHA accounted for $44.38 million, nearly three-quarters. BlackRock saw about $500 million outflow over five days, while Grayscale's ETHE had a concurrent outflow of $101 million.
Why is ETH more "unpopular" than BTC? The core lies in the ambiguity of the narrative anchor. Bitcoin has the consensus label of "digital gold," while Ethereum's valuation logic is pulled by three variables simultaneously: competition among smart contracts, value dilution of the main chain by L2 solutions, and fluctuations in staking yields. In times of macro uncertainty, institutions prioritize cutting ETH, which is logically consistent.Stop treating whale positions as directional signals; I almost fell into this trap too. Holding both long and short positions, what exactly is being traded? When I saw that on-chain data, my first reaction was also the impulse to copy the trade. 243.96 BTC shorts were liquidated, nominally 20,039,500 U, but the same account held ETH longs and HYPE shorts, three leveraged positions combined into a hedging structure. The real interesting point isn’t whether they are bearish or bullish, but that they are betting on relative strength across markets. First, look at the ledger. BTC shorts at 40x leverage, unrealized profit 470,700 U, funding fees actually earned 68,400; ETH longs at 25x leverage, unrealized loss 324,300 U, funding fees paid 21,200; HYPE shorts at 5x leverage, unrealized loss directly 4,179,800 U, funding fees earned 1,047,000. Meanwhile, BTC only rose 1.49%. What does this indicate? The same directional judgment, applied to different assets, can result in profit and loss differing by an order of magnitude. I later realized one layer: they are profiting from basis and funding fees, not price movements. BTC shorts earn funding fees, meaning longs are paying; HYPE shorts are losing so much but still held, either due to poor liquidity preventing exit or betting on narrative decline. ETH longs losing money seem to hedge the beta exposure of BTC shorts. These three legs tied together essentially trade BTC relative to ETH strength and the sustainability of HYPE’s independent market. CrossThe recent market in the crypto space has become increasingly difficult to predict day by day. Originally, everyone was hoping that after the inflation data was released, the market might see a rebound. However, the CPI just exceeded expectations, and the PPI also came in hotter than expected. Now the question arises: Is US inflation starting to rise again? Will the Federal Reserve continue to raise interest rates this year? 🤔 📊 Let's first look at the two sets of data mentioned. 🔴 US September CPI year-over-year: 3.7%, higher than the market expectation of 3.6%, indicating that the price pressure consumers face is still worth attention. 🔴 US September PPI year-over-year: 6.3%, the market originally expected 5.3%, actual data exceeded expectations by 1 percentage point. Additionally, PPI month-over-month rose by 1.3%, also higher than the expected 0.5%. If these data are officially confirmed, it means that price pressure on the production side is also stronger than the market anticipated. 💰 Why is this important for BTC and ETH? The logic is actually not complicated. CPI reflects changes in consumer prices, while PPI reflects changes in producer prices. If both sets of data remain high, the market may believe that the process of inflation easing is not going smoothly. Subsequently, a series of reactions may occur: Increased inflation pressure → Rising expectations of interest rate hikes → US Treasury yields may rise → Risk assets like BTC and ETH come under pressure. However, this is just a possible macro transmission path and does not mean that cryptocurrency prices will necessarily move in this direction. 📉 There is another detail worth noting. Community analysis mentioned, regarding the related Federal Reserve#SpaceXQ3Earnings Pressure on the stock price comes from capital sources: the company is negotiating a financing package of about 40 billion USD to buy Nvidia chips (about 10 billion bank loans + 30 billion investment bonds), and starting from October 9, the first batch of about 328 million shares will be unlocked; after the Q3 report, there will be an even larger batch.
Fundamentals are accelerating, the circulating shares are increasing, so now is not the time to chase high prices, only buy when the price adjusts. #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 As of the week of October 14, fund flow statistics show that U.S. stock funds saw an inflow of $39 billion, while cryptocurrency experienced an outflow of about $600 million. The simultaneous inflow into U.S. stocks and outflow from crypto indicates that the risk appetite of the week did not translate to the crypto space. If crypto funds continue to flow out, even a hot U.S. stock market will hardly be considered a positive for crypto; next week, the focus will be on whether the fund directions on both sides begin to converge. #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ The partnership has been established, so what is the coin price still waiting for?
$BEAT rose about 2.8% in the past 24 hours in the evening, but just turning positive alone cannot determine whether the attention has expanded.
I will pay more attention to the trading volume and the bid-ask spread. If the price goes up but the trading volume cannot keep up, making entry and exit more difficult, then this increase should be discounted.
$BICO rose about 6% in the past 24 hours in the evening, but still fell about 10% over the week, showing both short-term rebound and lagging phases.
The question here is whether the rebound can change the subsequent performance. If every rise quickly falls back, no matter how many rebounds there are, it is hard to accumulate an advantage.
The contrast for $HYPE is even more specific: Ripple Prime already supports institutional trading linked to Hyperliquid contract traditional asset products, indeed broadening the business channel.
But the coin price was still around 79 at dawn, down about 8% over the week.
My understanding is that the market still needs to see how much actual incremental volume this channel can bring. The partnership proves the business is moving forward, but whether it can increase token demand still needs further verification.
What is worth following later is the usage; the partnership list itself already provides limited information.
There is also an easy-to-overthink point about $XRP: this business supports using Ripple’s USD stablecoin as collateral, and the announcement did not state that purchasing XRP is mandatory.
So when seeing the company expanding business, first clarify what assets customers actually need to hold. The company has progress, but for it to translate into coin price, a specific demand relationship is still needed.1. September 2023 → Mid-2024: Low point surges to 69.708 (AI semiconductor bull market) This is an epic semiconductor bull market, driven by a triple resonance of AI industry explosion + cycle bottoming + interest rate cut expectations: 1. AI computing power demand explosion: After ChatGPT went viral, global large model training and inference demand exploded in 2023-2024. AI chips like Nvidia H100 are in short supply. The entire semiconductor industry chain including TSMC, AMD, Micron, and semiconductor equipment manufacturers benefits. High-performance computing becomes the primary growth curve for semiconductors. 2. Industry cycle bottom reversal: The semiconductor industry experienced inventory destocking winter in 2022 to the first half of 2023. Inventory bottomed in the second half of 2023, with memory prices and wafer foundry capacity utilization rising simultaneously. The industry entered a recovery cycle. 3. Fed rate cut expectations heat up: The Federal Reserve completed its last rate hike in July 2023. The market began trading on 2024 rate cut expectations. U.S. Treasury yields fell, and high-valuation growth stocks (semiconductors being typical) saw valuation recovery, with capital flooding into the tech sector. With 3x leverage amplification, SOXL rose from under $10 to nearly $70, an increase of over 600%. 2. Mid-2024 → End of January 2025: Peak plunges to 7.054 (nearly 90% drop, sector bear market) This plunge is a double whammy of high interest rates killing valuations + AI expectation fade + geopolitical risks, further amplified by leverage: 1. Rate cut expectations completely dashed: 2024#NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins $CP Important advice: Never invest any funds in this project, even if you see a "temporary, sudden rise," because such a rise is usually the final trap set by the project creators to dump the remaining funds before the project ends (pump and dump). $BTC was tested 4 times this week, last night it dipped to 79,775 then pulled back to 82.4K, with clear support below. But after the dip, each high point is lower than the last, volume shrank to a quarter, and the price is squeezed within a triangle between 81.7K-82.6K, so it can't be called a bottom yet.
We need to wait for two signals: a 4-hour volume breakout above 82,600, plus Coinbase premium stabilizing in positive territory (currently +0.008%, just turned positive). Once confirmed, watch for 84K; if the 4-hour closes below 79,700, it becomes invalid. Warsh gave no rate signal today, the probability of a rate hike in October dropped to 13.5%, Brent returned to 102, so the macro situation has eased. Therefore, we still need to wait quietly for the final outcome. #ETF与巨鲸资金分化，BTC能否守住8万美元？ Storage has crashed for three days, but the landlord remains standing
$SLX 0.05194, tonight's main character 🏚️
The storage manufacturing side has taken three rounds of hits in the past three days: SK Hynix dropped more than 7 points in a single day, SanDisk fell from 1430 to 1364, and Micron slid from 935 to 913. Only SLX is in the green, rising 1.15% to 0.05194. The reason is straightforward: it is the landlord, not the factory operator. ChangXin's breakthrough hit the manufacturing side's prices and profit margins, while SLX holds long-term leases; rent is decoupled from chip spot prices, so factories must pay rent monthly regardless of profit or loss. When the market panics, capital begins to distinguish between "chip manufacturing" and "rent collection" businesses, and there are buyers when prices fall. But the market cap is thin; if there is a systemic risk asset sell-off, it can't avoid it either—today it just wasn't caught up.
$BTC 82169, weekend volume shrinks, hovering around 82000 📈
The midweek drop to 81888 was bought up, and weekend trading volume decreased, with the price holding steady above 82000. ETF funds are still flowing out, but there are buy orders below the spot price; these two forces are battling at this price level.
$xMU 913.82, manufacturing side still searching for a bottom 🏭
Micron is a bit more resilient than SanDisk, sliding from 935 to 913. The HBM4 narrative is temporarily overshadowed by panic over China's capacity breakthrough. 913 is not far from the recent low; whether it can stop falling depends on the overall sentiment in the storage sector next week.
This article is for market analysis only and does not constitute investment advice.
#韩股修复反弹，外资卖压能否缓解？ PPI hits the largest increase in four years, BTC approaches 80,000 for the first time this month — bulls surprisingly haven't fled
Thursday's PPI is quite shocking: September's month-on-month increase is the largest in over four years. Wednesday's CPI just exceeded expectations, with these two data points hitting together, traditionally a sign of bloodshed.
There was indeed a moment past 80,000 in the early morning; I checked several exchanges and the lowest was 80,780, just one step short. But over 24 hours, it only dropped 0.85%, from 82,900 back to 81,400. Just that? The biggest bearish news in four years, yet only a 1% drop.
The futures side is even quieter. Liquidations across the entire network in 4 hours were only 157 million, with BTC accounting for 45.9 million, completely different magnitude compared to the previous two days. The fee rate is nailed at the base value of 0.01%, and open interest remains steady at 2.47 billion USD. The money hasn't fled, and bulls aren't rushing to buy at higher prices.
Two off-exchange details worth noting: Strategy's stock price fell 9.7% to 136.55, with financial treasury companies getting hit alongside crypto; mining difficulty actually increased by 5.92% to 140.58T, miners are taking advantage of the chaos to increase their positions.
The most contradictory thing is macroeconomics fighting itself — PPI pushes up rate hike expectations, but then the Fed's October rate hike expectations weaken, the dollar is set for its worst single week in six weeks, and the S&P is also moving downward. Three winds blowing in three different directions.
Such a big bearish event only causes a 1% drop — do you see this as exhaustion of selling pressure, or a false calm caused by no one daring to place orders before and after the data?
$BTC $ETH $ZEC #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins
Looking at Netflix’s recent trajectory, tighter password-sharing rules, international growth and the fast-scaling ad tier have driven solid momentum. The guided 12% revenue rise and 33.2% margin already show strong leverage, with more room as ads scale and content costs stay disciplined.
So YES - both subscription and ad revenue should keep growing, and profitability can improve further.SanDisk's hit is about premium, not the cycle 📉
$SNDK has slid down from the phase high.
The bulls are still waiting for NAND to recover.
What the bulls think:
AI phones and AI PCs will both need to stack capacity; demand will return sooner or later.
The drop is not a risk, it's a discount.
Looking from another angle:
Stock price is never bought on "demand exists," but on "demand exceeds expectations."
Domestic manufacturers are accelerating their catch-up; once supply loosens, SanDisk's scarcity premium will be taken away.
CPI at 3.7%, interest rates are suppressing valuations.
Earnings upgrades can't keep up with discount rates; rebounds can easily turn into panic waves.
Between 1200 and 1250, shorts repeatedly test.
After stop-losses above are triggered, the chips become lighter and more fragile.
It's not that storage is unwanted, but that the "stronger than expected" factor is gone.🧠⚠️#NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins Today's market is characterized by existing funds moving from one hand to another, with almost no new funds entering from outside.
Institutions only hold BTC spot, avoiding altcoins, with ETH having only a small amount of residual funds. Retail funds switch back and forth; when BTC rallies, they rush to chase $SOL, and when it stagnates, they immediately seek safety and flow back; contract longs and shorts offset each other, and stablecoins see no increase.
Key levels:
$BTC: Resistance at 82000, 80000 is the critical line; breaking below looks toward 75000
$ETH: Liquidation price near 2406, breaking 2400 targets 2300; failing to hold above 2600 is a weak rebound
$SOL: Highly volatile with rapid ups and downs, suitable only for short-term quick trades; holding long-term risks sudden drops
Summary: This is a game of existing funds; don't get carried away when prices rise.
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #ETF与巨鲸资金分化，BTC能否守住8万美元？ #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins Midterm election prediction market open order: Democrats take the House Yes, entry at 94¢, currently floating a loss of 8.5%, with results on November 3.
Polls and historical patterns both point to a blue comeback; a dip is a buying opportunity. What do you all think? "When the index closes the door, the treasury flywheel runs out of fuel"
If MSCI removes Strategy-type "coin-hoarding companies" from the index, the real fatal blow is not the coin price, but the rule-based sell-off. The treasury model used to rely on a cycle: stock price higher than net coin holdings, issuing more shares to exchange for BTC, more coins pushing up valuation, then issuing more shares to buy again. The invisible fuel for this cycle is that index funds must buy in.
Once removed, passive funds are not bearish but sell according to rules. Stock prices come under pressure, premiums shrink, issuing shares to buy coins turns into a loss-making trade, the flywheel reverses, and the only option is to sell coins to support the price. Recent slowdown in accumulation, preferred stock dividends, and high-interest financing bottom-fishing all expose the same problem: the model is starting to lack buyers.
BTC 82114 itself may not be critically damaged, but what is hurt is the path of listed companies buying coins. Saylor's position is real money, but position size does not equal a perpetual model. Faith can hold for a while, but cash flow sustains a cycle.
Therefore, the treasury model may not end but will evolve: from "index premium-driven 1.0" to "cash flow, low-cost financing, real shareholder return-driven 2.0." Once passive funds leave, faith must prove itself with cash. Otherwise, no matter how beautiful the flywheel is, it’s just a machine running out of fuel. $BTC
#MSCI新规或将Strategy等BTC财库公司移出指数
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ Practical threat of quantum computers breaking elliptic curve cryptography (current signatures of BTC/ETH), with mainstream academia estimating it may only be possible earliest around 2030–2035; meanwhile, STRK (Starknet)'s quantum-resistant roadmap shows the proof layer is already natively quantum-resistant, and the full-chain quantum-resistant account goal is planned for implementation in 2027. In other words: STRK technology deployment is ahead of the arrival of quantum threats.
1. How far is the quantum computing threat?
1. Current (2026): Existing quantum computers are noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices, completely incapable of running Shor's algorithm to break 256-bit elliptic curves, thus unable to obtain BTC, ETH, or STRK account private keys.
2. 2027–2030: Research institutions continue iterating on error-corrected qubits, but fault-tolerant quantum computers capable of reliably breaking blockchain elliptic curve private keys are unlikely to appear.
3. 2030–2035: Industry consensus estimates that fault-tolerant quantum computers (CRQC) with cryptographic attack capabilities may emerge earliest; NIST requires major systems to complete post-quantum cryptography migration by 2035.
Key point: Quantum threat does not arrive overnight; there is a "Harvest now, decrypt later" risk—"collect public keys now, decrypt assets years later when quantum machines mature"—which is the core motivation for the industry to proactively upgrade to post-quantum cryptography.
2. STRK quantum-resistant technology implementation progress (two layers viewed separately, very critical)
✅ Layer 1: STARK proof layer [already quantum-resistant]
STARK zero-knowledge proofs rely solely on hash functions, not elliptic curves.
Grover's quantum algorithm can only accelerate brute-force search on hashes, which can be offset by increasing hash length; thus, the proof layer is inherently quantum-resistant and already live on mainnet, not a distant concept.
However! Account transaction signatures still use elliptic curve ECDSA, which is not yet quantum-resistant at this layer.
✅ Layer 2: Account signature layer (full-chain quantum resistance planned for 2027)
Starknet's unique advantage: native account abstraction, no need for a full network hard fork; individual accounts can independently switch to NIST-standard Falcon post-quantum signatures, keeping addresses unchanged and assets unmigrated. BTC/ETH upgrades require full network hard forks with huge consensus difficulty.
- Currently: Falcon post-quantum signature experimental transfer tests have been completed on mainnet, in the technical verification stage (contracts not yet widely audited or adopted).
- 2027 goal (roadmap):
Phase 1: New accounts default to post-quantum signatures;
Phase 2: Complete support for existing contracts and wallet tools;
Phase 3: If an independent L1 upgrade occurs in 2027, also address cryptographic dependencies of cross-Ethereum bridges (currently as ETH L2, cross-chain bridges inherit Ethereum elliptic curve risks).
3. Timeline comparison: Quantum threat VS STRK quantum-resistant deployment
- 2027: STRK plans to complete full post-quantum upgrade at the account layer (long-term plan, subject to delay risk), achieving full-stack quantum resistance.
- 2030–2035: Quantum computers capable of breaking elliptic curves may appear.
👉 From a timeline perspective: STRK's roadmap is designed to complete network cryptography upgrades 5–8 years in advance, ahead of the quantum threat.
4. Unignorable shortcomings (do not idealize)
1. The 2027 independent L1 and full account post-quantum upgrade are roadmap goals, not yet delivered products, with risks of development, audit, and ecosystem adaptation delays.
2. While still operating as Ethereum L2, cross-chain bridge assets and message channels depend on Ethereum's cryptography, so this quantum risk cannot be eliminated by STRK alone; Ethereum must also complete post-quantum upgrades.
3. Even after network cryptography upgrades, wallets, browsers, cross-chain tools, and third-party contracts require corresponding modifications; full ecosystem migration will take a long time—protocol upgrade alone is not a cure-all.
4. Quantum computer R&D progress is variable; major breakthroughs could accelerate threat arrival, or conversely, delay it.
Summary
1. In the near future, quantum computers cannot break blockchain account private keys, but the long-term risk of "collecting public keys now, decrypting later" already exists.
2. STRK's STARK proof layer is already quantum-resistant; the full-chain quantum-resistant account goal is planned for 2027, ahead of the estimated quantum attack window (2030–2035).
3. Advantages include account abstraction architecture without full network hard forks; shortcomings include the 2027 goal still being a plan, plus engineering challenges like cross-chain bridges and ecosystem support.320,000 people liquidated, $932 million vanished into thin air! Is BTC's sharp drop and rebound a trap or an opportunity?
In 24 hours, $932 million liquidated, with longs accounting for $796 million, 320,000 people were devoured by leverage. After BTC fell below 80,000 and then pulled back to 82,000, don't rush to call a reversal — this looks more like a technical breather after overselling.
🔶$BTC: 80,000–81,500 is the short-term lifeline. If the daily candle can't close back above 81,500, the rebound is just a window to escape; only a valid break below 80,000 will truly release selling pressure.
🔶$ETH: 2,500 is the psychological defense line, 2,650 is the rebound ceiling. Buyers are absent, capital is flowing out, weakness is hard to reverse.
🔶$SOL: hovering near 102, with 107 acting as strong resistance. A break below 99 targets 96.
Next week's FOMC is the main event. Interest rate expectations are jittery; whether BTC can hold 80,000 and ETH, SOL can stabilize simultaneously will determine if this round is a recovery or a continuation of the downtrend.
In the leveraged market, one rebound does not equal a reversal. If the direction is wrong, the cost is not just a stop loss, but liquidation. Don't rush; wait for confirmation signals before acting — staying alive means having a next chance.
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？
#ETF与巨鲸资金分化，BTC能否守住8万美元？ Large inflows into ETFs, yet $BTC remains unmoved? 🤔
I previously underestimated the accumulation power of spot ETFs; this data set directly corrected my bias. The US Bitcoin spot ETF saw a single-day net inflow of $1.1 billion, marking the largest record since April and ending five consecutive days of net outflows. Strangely, BTC barely reacted around $82,171.
Price unchanged, funds rushing in—what does this indicate? 📌 It's not that the bullish signal failed, but that chips are quietly being taken over. Whatever the sell orders, large funds are absorbing them, making the market seem like it's being held down.
My assessment:
Level 1 → $1.1 billion is just the first-day signal; whether funds continue to net inflow tomorrow is the first test 🔍
Level 2 → If BTC holds above $84,250, accumulation may be complete, and I will shift to trend-following and buying 🚀
Level 3 → If fund flows turn positive again, it indicates a failed absorption and is likely a bull trap; I will decisively cut losses 🛑
Now is not the time to get excited, but to wait for the market to give its own answer. ⏳#特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 10.17 Sister Three is still hanging on the tree.
Interestingly, $ETH has been flat at 2444 for two days, as if it's out of steam. Resistance above, support below, neither side moves first.
But on-chain activity moved first. The batch of addresses from 2017 started moving coins to exchanges. Cost was 14, current price 2400+, a 170x gain. Those holding for nine years rely not on slogans but on exit discipline. Moving to exchanges is clearly not for nostalgia.
2400 is "cheaper than 2800" for retail investors, but "much more expensive than 14" for old addresses. Different reference points lead to different reaction speeds.
The chart is straightforward: after rising from 2322 to 2448, growth stalled and volume shrank. The 2480-2500 range is a resistance zone with trapped positions. On the contract side, 43.8 billion open interest remains, with about 1 billion long positions below 2316 pending liquidation.
Should I close my long positions or not?
No advice, no calls, judge for yourself.
$BTC $ETH $ZEC
#韩股修复反弹，外资卖压能否缓解？
#特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高
#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 Bull and Bear Signal: The "50-day Moving Average Prelude" that $BTC, $ETH, and $SOL can't avoid 🐂📈
Looking back at old charts of BTC, ETH, and SOL climbing out of deep bear markets, a recurring pattern emerges: first reclaiming the 50-day moving average, then slowly rising along it. About 6–8 weeks later, the price suddenly retests this line, like a "final checkup" before the main upward wave. From reclaiming to retesting, the range is usually around 30%, as if measured by the same ruler in both time and magnitude. ⏳
The real watershed moment comes after the retest. In the 2015 and 2019 cycles, the 50-day moving average was repeatedly tested but not broken, with buying pressure taking over, leading to rallies expanding over 50%, upgrading the rebound into a reversal. If the retest fails and volume shrinks, it’s just a breather within the bear market. 🔍
BTC, ETH, and SOL don’t simply replicate each other; they share the structure but differ in capital and narrative. The 50-day moving average isn’t a crystal ball but a threshold that filters out noise: stand above it, wait, retest, confirm. Understanding it might give you a bit more patience before the noise kicks in. 🌊
(Not investment advice) #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 Yesterday's article said $TIA's 0.65 is the first barrier. Overnight, volume surged and broke through, reaching a high of 0.7233, now pulling back to 0.69.
Looking at the 4H structure: 0.52-0.55 formed a base for two days with an average volume of 6-7M tokens. On the morning of the 10th-16th, that 4H candle directly rose from 0.601 to 0.667 with a volume of 42.6M tokens, six times the baseline — this was the candle that broke 0.65. Then at 12:00, volume surged again to 81.6M tokens pushing the price to 0.72.
Now look at two numbers:
1. Funding rate is 0.005%, basically neutral, not a leverage short squeeze;
2. Contract open interest is only 9.3 million USD, 24h trading volume is 155 million, turnover rate is ridiculously high, driven by spot.
My judgment: this is not an emotional impulse, but a "breakout-pullback-reaccumulation" two-stage advance. Breaking 0.65 turns it into support; if the pullback holds, the next target is 0.72-0.75; if it falls below 0.65 and fails to recover, that’s a false breakout, and I will first watch 0.58.
Do you think 0.65 can hold? $TIA